if stanford comes, hope cal comes along as well. that’s a great rivalry. and cal has top notch olympic sports, and has had decent stretches with football (plus there’s a ton of talent in the east bay area, such as de la salle)
It makes no financial sense to take both Stanford and Cal, and it might not make financial sense to take either one of them. But here are some reasons to include Cal.
1. The Big Ten presidents and chancellors care a lot about academics. Every public university in the B1G – with the exceptions of Iowa, Rutgers and Nebraska – ranks among the top public research universities in the US. UCLA adds one of the very best public research universities. Cal would add another, including the public university with the most Nobel laureates and the most members of the National Academy of Sciences.
2. The Big Ten cares about non-revenue sports. Cal football stinks, and has for much of the past 90 years. One reason for this is a lack of investment. But Cal does invest in a broad range of athletic programs, and is overall really good. For example, over the past 20 years, Cal has finished in the top ten in the Directors' Cup rankings eight times, and finished third in 2010-2011. For comparison, Nebraska has never finished in the top ten over the past 20 years (although they were in the top ten five times in the ten years before that).
3. Reduced travel for UCLA and USC. Plus, it maintains some rivalries (Cal-Stanford if Stanford joins, Cal-UCLA).
Again, I know that it doesn’t make financial sense for the Big Ten. It’s probably even more likely that Cal, and maybe Stanford, decide that NIL, and making players employees, are steps too far, leading them to drop big time athletics. I'm sure that both faculties would favor the latter. But one can dream.
Edit: number 1 is potentially important because the ultimate decision will be made by the presidents and chancellors.
Last edited: