which of the new schools are you happiest to add?

[PITT 76]

It's the slow season, so I hope this might stimulate some discourse.

I'm glad we added all 3 because we may need them if any of the malcontents are successful in leaving.

In terms of football, I think SMU could become a power in just a couple years. Although a smaller college, SMU alum are somewhat wealthy and very supportive. What they did in the 80's to become one of the best teams in the country is now legal. They are hungry, and they have the money to feed.

Cal and Stanford are 2 of the finest academic schools in the world. Much like college presidents, I think there is value in being associated with outstanding institutions.

When it comes to non-revenue sports, Stanford sets the bar for excellence.

I realize travel will be a hardship, but I think the conference will benefit from these additions.

If I had to choose just one, I'd go with SMU because I believe they will raise the conference profile in football.

 

[ChiefJusticeMarshall]

Stanford. I mean...it's Stanford.

 

[h2p_5150]

About as exciting as when the Big East added USF. If you care about the academic reputation of Pitts conference mates, more power to you, but I'm not going to care how large Stanfords endowment is when Pitt is having 10PM kickoffs.

 

[pittchagg]

I think they were all good adds. It’s very difficult to argue with Stanford…but I think that Cal is a better add than people think. They’re kind of the forgotten school in this - everyone knows that Stanford is Stanford, and SMU was brought in for the financial reasons…but I think Cal is a super high quality addition.

 

[cnorwood9999]

SMU. I have brother that lives in Ft. Worth and a sister that lives just north of Dallas.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Stanford without question. They will be in the Big Ten eventually. I realize they arent very good at football right now but they were a perennial Top 10 team less than 10 years ago. Its a brand name school and brand name program.

 

[New York Panther]

I am happy to add all of them, but also not happy to add any of them. Happy because it keeps the ACC hanging on in response to the juggernaut growth of the SEC and B10. Not happy because conference realignment has run amok.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

I am happy to add all of them, but also not happy to add any of them. Happy because it keeps the ACC hanging on in response to the juggernaut growth of the SEC and B10. Not happy because conference realignment has run amok.

The 3 adds dont allow the ACC to hang on. I like the Cal/Stan add but it does nothing to help ACC stability. All it does is give Pitt a few million extra per year in forfeited TV revenue from the 3.

 

[prez41]

it will be cool to have Stanford and Cal on the schedule, but honestly I’m not excited about any of them long term. They really do nothing for the stability or perception of the conference. It’s just a band aid.

 

[pittchagg]

The 3 adds dont allow the ACC to hang on. I like the Cal/Stan add but it does nothing to help ACC stability. All it does is give Pitt a few million extra per year in forfeited TV revenue from the 3.

I think it’s reasonable to expect for each existing school’s distribution to go up by about $3-5M without including the success formula, just from adding those three schools and not considering the normal annual revenue growth.

It’s not a windfall, but in an era where schools need to find $22M of new money, that’s a pretty solid chunk.

 

[HailToPitt725]

I LOVE that Pitt now gets to associate itself with Cal, Duke, and Stanford.

You know what, heck with it. If Clemson and FSU leave, go all-in on the academic prestige. Invite Tulane and pickup Northwestern and Vanderbilt when they inevitably get dropped by the B1G/SEC.

Edit: I will say that I also don't mind SMU being in the conference, either. We're planning on travelling to Dallas for that game in the fall.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

I think it’s reasonable to expect for each existing school’s distribution to go up by about $3-5M without including the success formula, just from adding those three schools and not considering the normal annual revenue growth.

It’s not a windfall, but in an era where schools need to find $22M of new money, that’s a pretty solid chunk.

Yea, I mean its nice but not all that significant. Obviously if you were to ask me as a Pitt fan if we could add Stan, Cal, SMU + $3 million-$5 million extra per year, you take that every day. I would have taken Cal/Stan without any added revenue. SMU - no way.

 

[upj87]

I LOVE that Pitt now gets to associate itself with Cal, Duke, and Stanford.

You know what, heck with it. If Clemson and FSU leave, go all-in on the academic prestige. Invite Tulane and pickup Northwestern and Vanderbilt when they inevitably get dropped by the B1G/SEC.

Edit: I will say that I also don't mind SMU being in the conference, either. We're planning on travelling to Dallas for that game in the fall.

Considering the goings on of the day on the campus grounds of these "prestigious" universities I'm not sure I would want that association...

 

[Jeffburgh]

It is what it is.

Should have been more proactive and assertive in trying to go big with a concept where they got more western teams and created a pacific coast division, rebranded to the American Coastal Conference.

That would have smoothed out the travel issues, but provided all the schools that built in regular opportunity to experience that, and put meat on the bone prior to FSU, Clemson and whoever else bolts.

SMU has a longer way to go than Stanford and Cal, but with the right coach any school can bump into top 25 status for a period of time.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

Stanford without question. They will be in the Big Ten eventually. I realize they arent very good at football right now but they were a perennial Top 10 team less than 10 years ago. Its a brand name school and brand name program.

I mean, that was a very small sliver of their history driven by a specific coach and maintained by his Jamie Dixon-esque successor. They're probably closer to not having a program than they are to getting back to that status.

 

[cashisking884]

SMU because I live in Dallas so already can go to the game in year 1.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

I voted none of the above. Not because I didn't want to add these programs, but because:

1) One doesn't really stick out more than the other two, and

2) I'm not sure any will move the needle enough to prevent the ACC's inevitable collapse anyway, so I'm a bit jaded with all of this

No disrespect intended to any of the three. It's always pretty cool to play some new teams in college football. In fact, I wish they would mandate playing 11 P4 teams so we could squeeze in a rivalry game and get to do some series with unique teams we haven't played before. As a fan of college football, that's always a cool experience. Just doesn't make sense to do that when most other teams are not.

 

[pittchagg]

Yea, I mean its nice but not all that significant. Obviously if you were to ask me as a Pitt fan if we could add Stan, Cal, SMU + $3 million-$5 million extra per year, you take that every day. I would have taken Cal/Stan without any added revenue. SMU - no way.

Sure, and I understand that this doesn’t necessarily move the needle for you…but an expansion infusion of $3-5M or more might be the difference between whether or not Pitt (and other similarly situated schools in the conference) is forced to cut sports. I think avoiding that is a significant victory for the school and the conference.

 

[cashisking884]

It is what it is.


SMU has a longer way to go than Stanford and Cal, but with the right coach any school can bump into top 25 status for a period of time.

I don’t think so.
Cal and Stanford just have academic standards that make it impossible to compete consistently at a Top 40 level in today’s game. What can you do when you basically can’t take transfers? Transfers stop the bottom from falling out for 3* programs and not have to wait for the recruiting cycles to catch up the depth. You’re playing with one arm tied behind your back compared to everybody else. Even compared to the 3* teams.

SMU has no such limitations. And they have big money boosters willing to spend.

Looking at their incoming transfer class, they brought in 10 guys that have at least a .88 rating as a college player by 247. So pretty established college players across the board.

The just lost a big time QB commit to Alabama, but even that says something. They have commits that Bama wants. 247 has them as already having 6 commits with a .88+ rating, even with the decommit.
For frame of reference, Pitt had 5 commits with that rating in last year’s class.

 

[Jeffburgh]

I don’t think so.
Cal and Stanford just have academic standards that make it impossible to compete consistently at a Top 40 level in today’s game. What can you do when you basically can’t take transfers? Transfers stop the bottom from falling out for 3* programs and not have to wait for the recruiting cycles to catch up the depth. You’re playing with one arm tied behind your back compared to everybody else. Even compared to the 3* teams.

SMU has no such limitations. And they have big money boosters willing to spend.

Looking at their incoming transfer class, they brought in 10 guys that have at least a .88 rating as a college player by 247. So pretty established college players across the board.

The just lost a big time QB commit to Alabama, but even that says something. They have commits that Bama wants. 247 has them as already having 6 commits with a .88+ rating, even with the decommit.
For frame of reference, Pitt had 5 commits with that rating in last year’s class.

The transfer point is a good one. I'm just saying, SMU has been down a long time, Cal and Stanford don't have as far to go.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

I mean, that was a very small sliver of their history driven by a specific coach and maintained by his Jamie Dixon-esque successor. They're probably closer to not having a program than they are to getting back to that status.

Yea, I understand that. I dont want to make Stanford out to be USC but its a football brand. I get more excited about Stanford coming to Acrisure than UVa, GT, BC, etc and not just because they are new.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

I don’t think so.
Cal and Stanford just have academic standards that make it impossible to compete consistently at a Top 40 level in today’s game. What can you do when you basically can’t take transfers? Transfers stop the bottom from falling out for 3* programs and not have to wait for the recruiting cycles to catch up the depth. You’re playing with one arm tied behind your back compared to everybody else. Even compared to the 3* teams.

SMU has no such limitations. And they have big money boosters willing to spend.

Looking at their incoming transfer class, they brought in 10 guys that have at least a .88 rating as a college player by 247. So pretty established college players across the board.

The just lost a big time QB commit to Alabama, but even that says something. They have commits that Bama wants. 247 has them as already having 6 commits with a .88+ rating, even with the decommit.
For frame of reference, Pitt had 5 commits with that rating in last year’s class.

FWIW, Cal take any minumum qualifer and do. Stanford has the limitations.

SMU is going to be ACC Top 5 very very quick.

FSU, Clem, NC St, Miami, SMU - top programs but Miami usually cant get it right.

 

[cashisking884]

The transfer point is a good one. I'm just saying, SMU has been down a long time, Cal and Stanford don't have as far to go.

I think Clemson is a good example of how far Stanford has to go.

Clemson can take transfers, but refuses. And within the world of transfer portal as we currently know it, they have fallen compared to their peers. Their peers being the other teams that bring in big time high school recruiting.

Stanford has also collapsed during that time period relative to their peers. And who are their peers? If’s 3* teams that generally just produce “nice” seasons.

Stanford has a major mountain to climb to even get back to the level of a 3* “nice” program. Forget the mountain ahead of them to being a legit Top 25 program.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

I think Clemson is a good example of how far Stanford has to go.

Clemson can take transfers, but refuses. And within the world of transfer portal as we currently know it, they have fallen compared to their peers. Their peers being the other teams that bring in big time high school recruiting.

Stanford has also collapsed during that time period relative to their peers. And who are their peers? If’s 3* teams that generally just produce “nice” seasons.

Stanford has a major mountain to climb to even get back to the level of a 3* “nice” program. Forget the mountain ahead of them to being a legit Top 25 program.

Listen to the new Stanford basketball coach talk about Stanford being the best bball job in the country. We can disagree on that but he basically laughs off NIL and all that. What Stanford (and every school) needs are offensive linemen. Get Stanford a great recruiter and they go into an OL's home, who are statistically the smartest position group by NFL Wunderlich scores, and you tell them to screw that offer by Alabama because you can get to the NFL from Stanford too and also get a degree that has much more value than NIL. And its not like they'll make $0 at Stanford.

 

[pittdan77]

Stanford is cool because of the history. Cal is cool and all but SMU brings a lot of potential to the table in many of the same ways as Pitt but with a much bigger bank roll.

 

[cashisking884]

Listen to the new Stanford basketball coach talk about Stanford being the best bball job in the country. We can disagree on that but he basically laughs off NIL and all that. What Stanford (and every school) needs are offensive linemen. Get Stanford a great recruiter and they go into an OL's home, who are statistically the smartest position group by NFL Wunderlich scores, and you tell them to screw that offer by Alabama because you can get to the NFL from Stanford too and also get a degree that has much more value than NIL. And its not like they'll make $0 at Stanford.

What else would the head coach of a team say? “Man, this job sucks”?

All you need to know about the Stanford football job is, when it came open in 203, the best they could get was somebody named Troy Taylor.

What other P4 program do you think wanted Troy Taylor?

The other finalist for the Stanford job was Jason Garrett.

Yikes

 

[pittchagg]

I don’t think so.
Cal and Stanford just have academic standards that make it impossible to compete consistently at a Top 40 level in today’s game. What can you do when you basically can’t take transfers? Transfers stop the bottom from falling out for 3* programs and not have to wait for the recruiting cycles to catch up the depth. You’re playing with one arm tied behind your back compared to everybody else. Even compared to the 3* teams.

SMU has no such limitations. And they have big money boosters willing to spend.

Looking at their incoming transfer class, they brought in 10 guys that have at least a .88 rating as a college player by 247. So pretty established college players across the board.

The just lost a big time QB commit to Alabama, but even that says something. They have commits that Bama wants. 247 has them as already having 6 commits with a .88+ rating, even with the decommit.
For frame of reference, Pitt had 5 commits with that rating in last year’s class.

I get what you’re saying about the transfer aspect, but I also think that a school like Stanford is probably more immune from outgoing transfers, too, just because most kids who commit to Stanford in the first place probably don’t want to leave without a Stanford degree.

And…I think Stanford’s probably gonna have a top 5 class in the ACC for 2025. They’re about to land Andrew Babalola, the top 25 overall offensive tackle.

 

[cashisking884]

I get what you’re saying about the transfer aspect, but I also think that a school like Stanford is probably more immune from outgoing transfers, too, just because most kids who commit to Stanford in the first place probably don’t want to leave without a Stanford degree.

And…I think Stanford’s probably gonna have a top 5 class in the ACC for 2025. They’re about to land Andrew Babalola, the top 25 overall offensive tackle.

They have 14 commits right now. So let’s say half their class is finished.
They have an average recruit ranking of 86.83. That puts them somewhere outside the Top 30 in recruiting class rankings, depending on how big their class is.

They just don’t recruit well enough to overcome the recruiting misses, when everybody else they play is able to mitigate the misses.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

Listen to the new Stanford basketball coach talk about Stanford being the best bball job in the country. We can disagree on that but he basically laughs off NIL and all that. What Stanford (and every school) needs are offensive linemen. Get Stanford a great recruiter and they go into an OL's home, who are statistically the smartest position group by NFL Wunderlich scores, and you tell them to screw that offer by Alabama because you can get to the NFL from Stanford too and also get a degree that has much more value than NIL. And its not like they'll make $0 at Stanford.

Yeah, that was a huge advantage for them pre-NIL, because their degree was much more valuable than the competition. So they could better attract the people who actually cared about school, which happened to include many offensive linemen. Some USC affiliates actually came out and complained about it.

Not sure if it matters as much anymore, though. Nothin' beats cold hard cash.

 

[thebadby2]

I LOVE that Pitt now gets to associate itself with Cal, Duke, and Stanford.

You know what, heck with it. If Clemson and FSU leave, go all-in on the academic prestige. Invite Tulane and pickup Northwestern and Vanderbilt when they inevitably get dropped by the B1G/SEC.

Edit: I will say that I also don't mind SMU being in the conference, either. We're planning on travelling to Dallas for that game in the fall.

you're lumping Tulane in with Nwestern and Vandy academically???

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

What else would the head coach of a team say? “Man, this job sucks”?

All you need to know about the Stanford football job is, when it came open in 203, the best they could get was somebody named Troy Taylor.

What other P4 program do you think wanted Troy Taylor?

The other finalist for the Stanford job was Jason Garrett.

Yikes

Stanford basketball got one of the best coaches in the country. A guy who spent a lot of time coaching in the Bay Area and viewed Stanford as a dream job. While I agree that every coach says the things he said, I truly believe he meant it. He even went so far as to say something like "if you dont believe I mean that Stanford is the best job in the country, go ask So and So, who I would always tell that to." Not an exact quote obviously but apparently he's been saying it for years. Even went so far as to say something like no disrespect to Duke but this is the best job. Stanford may have a Coach K.

 

[ChiefJusticeMarshall]

While it is nice for Presidents and AD's to hobnob over Chardonnay, Brie and Caviar and take pride on being the academic powerhouse league.....it is all about television. No one is paying millions for Quiz Bowl. And it isn't even about market size anymore as these conferences and networks realize it is about fanbase sizes and their engagement (loyalty).

 

[Pitt2009]

you're lumping Tulane in with Nwestern and Vandy academically???

Isn’t Tulane’s acceptance rate in the single digits?

 

[pittdan77]

Isn’t Tulane’s acceptance rate in the single digits?

Looked it up. 11% so, close enough.

 

[Zeldas Open Roof]

smu just to see if endless donor money can buy success.

 

[Pitt2009]

smu just to see if endless donor money can buy success.

Hasn’t done much for Texas A&M.

 

[Pitt79]

I'm indifferent to the whole thing, they say it's all about the DOLLAR$, but how will they stay out of the red if they have to pay every athlete and then fly the woman's cross country team to California?

 

[thebadby2]

Isn’t Tulane’s acceptance rate in the single digits?

It's 11.5%, but--So what? Their academic ranking is high double digits, I know that much. They do not get the same quality of applicant as a national top 20 school.

Tulane is not in the same universe as Nwestern or Vandy academically. Nwestern is essentially Ivy level.

 

[Pitt2009]

I'm indifferent to the whole thing, they say it's all about the DOLLAR$, but how will they stay out of the red if they have to pay every athlete and then fly the woman's cross country team to California?

Most olympic sports only require schools to participate in the conference championships. Schools also need to play a minimum number of contests, but they don’t need to be against conference teams. I’d guess Stanford and Cal would play mostly west coast schools.

 

[Pitt79]

Most olympic sports only require schools to participate in the conference championships. Schools also need to play a minimum number of contests, but they don’t need to be against conference teams. I’d guess Stanford and Cal would play mostly west coast schools.

I don't know all these details, I guess we'll see if it actually happens.