PonyFans.com

Looks like the three new invites to the ACC are going to go a combined 12-12 in their inaugural year. Very respectable.

Thanks to SMU! Cal and Stanford went 4-12. ouch!

This reminds me: FSU and maybe others singled-out SMU as the the team that is weakening their conference. But I am trying to figure out what Stanford and Cal bring to the table athletically. Somebody educate me please!

highlander wrote:This reminds me: FSU and maybe others singled-out SMU as the the team that is weakening their conference. But I am trying to figure out what Stanford and Cal bring to the table athletically. Somebody educate me please!

baseball...?

highlander wrote:This reminds me: FSU and maybe others singled-out SMU as the the team that is weakening their conference. But I am trying to figure out what Stanford and Cal bring to the table athletically. Somebody educate me please!

Leaving aside that both Cal and Stanford brings high quality, high performing, non-revenue sports results, Stanford at one time had a dominant FB Team in the ‘10s, while Cal’s losses this year were only by seven points or less except for SMU yesterday. Both will be competitive in the future in the ACC.

Recall Armstrong and others valued both of these high academic, Bay Area Universities. The ACC feels like home to us with its identify and makeup of prestigious, nationally recognized universities. SMU’s new peer group reflects who we want to be long term.

highlander wrote:This reminds me: FSU and maybe others singled-out SMU as the the team that is weakening their conference. But I am trying to figure out what Stanford and Cal bring to the table athletically. Somebody educate me please!

Pacific Time Zone and "late night ACC"

highlander wrote:This reminds me: FSU and maybe others singled-out SMU as the the team that is weakening their conference. But I am trying to figure out what Stanford and Cal bring to the table athletically. Somebody educate me please!

One is the flagship university of the largest and most prestigious state university system, the other is the highest-rated university that attempts big-time sports. They are enormously high-value institutions, to the ACC and to the country. They also have fans. 6-5 Cal did not bring as many fans as did local b*tches TCU, but otherwise their numbers were nearly or fully on par with BYU, FSU, and Pitt. These are excellent schools with which to be associated, as already noted above.

And, secondarily but not entirely unimportantly, the US Olympic Committee lobbied for them, especially Stanford. I can’t find a link now but I saw reports of it at the time. Their programs are highly valuable to the USA.

Dukie wrote:

highlander wrote:This reminds me: FSU and maybe others singled-out SMU as the the team that is weakening their conference. But I am trying to figure out what Stanford and Cal bring to the table athletically. Somebody educate me please!

One is the flagship university of the largest and most prestigious state university system, the other is the highest-rated university that attempts big-time sports. They are enormously high-value institutions, to the ACC and to the country. They also have fans. 6-5 Cal did not bring as many fans as did local b*tches TCU, but otherwise their numbers were nearly or fully on par with BYU, FSU, and Pitt. These are excellent schools with which to be associated, as already noted above.

And, secondarily but not entirely unimportantly, the US Olympic Committee lobbied for them, especially Stanford. I can’t find a link now but I saw reports of it at the time. Their programs are highly valuable to the USA.

Prestige-wise, no question. They make the ACC, already the most academically-prestigious FBS conference, even more so. But my question was about athletics, which I thought was the whole point of athletic conferences.

Also, are we sure about "They also have fans"? I saw a near-empty Stanford stadium, with an announced crowd of 19k (no effing way). And this is a school with slightly more undergrads than SMU, that was coming from a P5 conference, that hasn't spent the last 30 years in purgatory (I'll grant that they have a stronger sports history than SMU has had in the last 3 decades, but that's not saying much).

highlander wrote:

Dukie wrote:

highlander wrote:This reminds me: FSU and maybe others singled-out SMU as the the team that is weakening their conference. But I am trying to figure out what Stanford and Cal bring to the table athletically. Somebody educate me please!

One is the flagship university of the largest and most prestigious state university system, the other is the highest-rated university that attempts big-time sports. They are enormously high-value institutions, to the ACC and to the country. They also have fans. 6-5 Cal did not bring as many fans as did local b*tches TCU, but otherwise their numbers were nearly or fully on par with BYU, FSU, and Pitt. These are excellent schools with which to be associated, as already noted above.

And, secondarily but not entirely unimportantly, the US Olympic Committee lobbied for them, especially Stanford. I can’t find a link now but I saw reports of it at the time. Their programs are highly valuable to the USA.

Prestige-wise, no question. They make the ACC, already the most academically-prestigious FBS conference, even more so. But my question was about athletics, which I thought was the whole point of athletic conferences.

Also, are we sure about "They also have fans"? I saw a near-empty Stanford stadium, with an announced crowd of 19k (no effing way). And this is a school with slightly more undergrads than SMU, that was coming from a P5 conference, that hasn't spent the last 30 years in purgatory (I'll grant that they have a stronger sports history than SMU has had in the last 3 decades, but that's not saying much).

California Stadium was full for the Big Game last week. They might or might not thrive in an NIL world. Signs are mixed for both (Kal—to use their pejorative names for each other—is maybe doing better at the moment, but Furd is aware of their issues and bringing in Andrew Luck as GM is smart.) We wouldn’t be in the ACC without them. They have long and proud histories and hopefully they, and the ACC, succeed.

We get a trip to the Bay Area every year, so there’s that! I have a Stanford alum friend who has been very upset with the direction of the school and their decision to not do NIL. That decision has now been reversed, and I think the implosion of the PAC has been a huge wake up call for both schools. ACC got them at a discount and is lucky to have them, and we are very fortunate to have them as conference mates.

Hop Sing wrote:We get a trip to the Bay Area every year, so there’s that! I have a Stanford alum friend who has been very upset with the direction of the school and their decision to not do NIL. That decision has now been reversed, and I think the implosion of the PAC has been a huge wake up call for both schools. ACC got them at a discount and is lucky to have them, and we are very fortunate to have them as conference mates.

The ACC got SMU at a MASSIVE discount. Steal of the century.

Charleston Pony wrote:

highlander wrote:This reminds me: FSU and maybe others singled-out SMU as the the team that is weakening their conference. But I am trying to figure out what Stanford and Cal bring to the table athletically. Somebody educate me please!

Pacific Time Zone and "late night ACC"

You ask that "I am trying to figure out what Stanford and Cal bring to the table athletically."

Well, athletics include more than just football.

Stanford has maintained a remarkable streak of winning at least one NCAA team championship for 48 consecutive seasons, culminating in four national titles during the 2023-24 academic year. The women's golf team secured NCAA championships in 2022 and 2024. The women's water polo team clinched NCAA titles in 2022 and 2023, marking the program's ninth national championship. Stanford's men's gymnastics team continued its dominance by winning NCAA championships consecutively in 2022, 2023, and 2024, bringing their total to 11 national titles/

https://gostanford.com/news/2024/08/1/2 ... hatgpt.com

Stanford has arguably the best, or without question one of the best, athletic departments in the country. Football is down at the moment, but they're always good at almost every sport.

SMU and Stanford have arguably the two most popular golfers as alums right now. Tiger and Bryson. Tiger isn't very good anymore, but he still commands a huge following. Stanford and Cal also are huge in Olympic sports. This makes the ACC stronger. Note that Stanford is in the elite 8 in Men's soccer and I think they're in the Volleyball championships as well. So, they improve the ACC in these sports as well.

EastStang wrote:SMU and Stanford have arguably the two most popular golfers as alums right now. Tiger and Bryson. Tiger isn't very good anymore, but he still commands a huge following. Stanford and Cal also are huge in Olympic sports. This makes the ACC stronger. Note that Stanford is in the elite 8 in Men's soccer and I think they're in the Volleyball championships as well. So, they improve the ACC in these sports as well.

Stanford women also clinched a semifinals berth in the NCAA women's soccer tournament with Wake Forest. It's an All-ACC National Semifinal with Duke facing North Carolina in the other set.

The league will earn its 26th women’s soccer national championship and 32nd among current membership. No school outside the ACC has won more than two national titles.