I don't know if we ever heard what the final numbers were, but due to leaving Cal behind, UCLA had to commit to several things:

https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...conditions

Quote:As part of the board's decision, UCLA will have to increase its expected investment in student-athlete resources and might have to provide a subsidy to the University of California, Berkeley in the range of $2 million to $10 million once a Pac-12 media deal is secured, depending on the amount of the deal. A UCOP spokesperson said the frequency of the subsidy to UC Berkeley is yet to be determined.

The board included other conditions for UCLA to address the impact of the move on athletes, including funds for academic support, nutritional support and mental health services.

So now, it would seem that Cal is actually traveling further overall. And is in a conference that (presumably) is making more than the PAC was making at the time. Though Cal accepted less money to do so.

So my question is, will this affect how much UCLA has to pay to Cal?

And a secondary question: Will Cal have to follow all those other conditions for student athletes that UCLA committed to?

(03-04-2024 06:58 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  I don't know if we ever heard what the final numbers were, but due to leaving Cal behind, UCLA had to commit to several things:

https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...conditions

Quote:As part of the board's decision, UCLA will have to increase its expected investment in student-athlete resources and might have to provide a subsidy to the University of California, Berkeley in the range of $2 million to $10 million once a Pac-12 media deal is secured, depending on the amount of the deal. A UCOP spokesperson said the frequency of the subsidy to UC Berkeley is yet to be determined.

The board included other conditions for UCLA to address the impact of the move on athletes, including funds for academic support, nutritional support and mental health services.

So now, it would seem that Cal is actually traveling further overall. And is in a conference that (presumably) is making more than the PAC was making at the time. Though Cal accepted less money to do so.

So my question is, will this affect how much UCLA has to pay to Cal?

And a secondary question: Will Cal have to follow all those other conditions for student athletes that UCLA committed to?

I was under the impression that one reason Cal agreed to partial ACC shares for 9 years is because UCLA was making up much of the difference...

I think that UCLA is paying $10M regardless of the fact that Cal has acted stupidly.

(03-04-2024 07:09 PM)Aztecgolfer Wrote:  I think that UCLA is paying $10M regardless of the fact that Cal has acted stupidly.

Any links officially confirming UCLA is paying Calimony.

When "UCLA to B1G" controversy was put to bed last year, it seems like there only was speculation UCLA might have to pay Calimony

Since the payments were based on the assumption that CAL would still be in a power conference, the PAC, I would not expect for the payments to cease, as the ACC is similarly situated to where the PAC was presumed to be at the time the payment idea was implemented.

I think the payments are dumb, btw, but that's neither here nor there.

(03-04-2024 07:20 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  I think the payments are dumb, btw, but that's neither here nor there.

USF should demand similar alimony payments from UCF.

Y'know, just to see the reaction from Knights fans

(03-04-2024 07:34 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  

(03-04-2024 07:20 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  I think the payments are dumb, btw, but that's neither here nor there.

USF should demand similar alimony payments from UCF.

Y'know, just to see the reaction from Knights fans

USF won't need that if Florida State bails for the SEC.

(03-04-2024 07:19 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  

(03-04-2024 07:09 PM)Aztecgolfer Wrote:  I think that UCLA is paying $10M regardless of the fact that Cal has acted stupidly.

Any links officially confirming UCLA is paying Calimony.

When "UCLA to B1G" controversy was put to bed last year, it seems like there only was speculation UCLA might have to pay Calimony

The UCBOR met on that and agreed in concept with the idea, but no set numbers - range from $2M-$10M. Most believe the latter now as Cal's situation is much worse given the destruction of the PAC as a power conference.

U.C.L.A. will also be mandated to annually contribute $2 million to $10 million to Cal-Berkeley. The Regents chose not to block U.C.L.A. from leaving the Pac-12. But it attached conditions that could cost the school more than $20 million annually, including some money that would be diverted to U.C. Berkeley.

Link
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/14/sport...of%202023.

(03-04-2024 07:34 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  

(03-04-2024 07:20 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  I think the payments are dumb, btw, but that's neither here nor there.

USF should demand similar alimony payments from UCF.

Y'know, just to see the reaction from Knights fans

LOL ...

But FWIW, I would not want USF to take alimony payments from UCF. That would be humiliating, and I would rather us do without the money than be receiving payments from them.

I thought Cal embarrassed themselves by taking payments from UCLA. Some things, pride for example, should trump money, I think.

(03-05-2024 07:50 AM)GTFletch Wrote:  U.C.L.A. will also be mandated to annually contribute $2 million to $10 million to Cal-Berkeley. The Regents chose not to block U.C.L.A. from leaving the Pac-12. But it attached conditions that could cost the school more than $20 million annually, including some money that would be diverted to U.C. Berkeley.

Link
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/14/sport...of%202023.

Now that the politicians have found new things to argue about, I'm curious to see how much UCLA actually ends up losing over this. That Board can do whatever they want. They could let UCLA get off light with just a 1 time, $2m penalty, but then decide to split all revenues 2/3 to Berkeley and 1/3 to UCLA like A&M and Texas split up our PUF. Or, they might decide "Cal is ok in a power conference, we'll let this go and not charge UCLA a dime". I feel like every possible outcome, both good and bad, is on the table for UCLA right now. Which is a TERRIBLE outcome for them. They'd have been better off letting Oregon take their spot and remaining in a rump Pac until 2030 than risking severe penalties to the full University from vindictive Cal-friendly bureaucrats.

How about just putting the Cal vs UCLA back on the schedule and potentially protecting via state law law and then calling it even?

(03-05-2024 04:31 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  How about just putting the Cal vs UCLA back on the schedule and potentially protecting via state law law and then calling it even?

That would be a great, commonsense solution, but it seems highly unlikely in California. I could see it in the South, SE, SW, even the Midwest or Great Lakes, but in Cali they'd be more apt to force a long term soccer scheduling agreement than an American Football one.

(03-05-2024 08:18 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-04-2024 07:34 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  

(03-04-2024 07:20 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  I think the payments are dumb, btw, but that's neither here nor there.

USF should demand similar alimony payments from UCF.

Y'know, just to see the reaction from Knights fans

LOL ...

But FWIW, I would not want USF to take alimony payments from UCF. That would be humiliating, and I would rather us do without the money than be receiving payments from them.

I thought Cal embarrassed themselves by taking payments from UCLA. Some things, pride for example, should trump money, I think.

Given Cal's AD debt they really cannot afford to be embarrassed by begging for money. Still, the move to the ACC will do more to hurt them than had they stayed in the PAC. They get diddly in the ACC media deal and the travel will increase their costs enormously.

(03-05-2024 08:05 PM)Aztecgolfer Wrote:  

(03-05-2024 08:18 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-04-2024 07:34 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  

(03-04-2024 07:20 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  I think the payments are dumb, btw, but that's neither here nor there.

USF should demand similar alimony payments from UCF.

Y'know, just to see the reaction from Knights fans

LOL ...

But FWIW, I would not want USF to take alimony payments from UCF. That would be humiliating, and I would rather us do without the money than be receiving payments from them.

I thought Cal embarrassed themselves by taking payments from UCLA. Some things, pride for example, should trump money, I think.

Given Cal's AD debt they really cannot afford to be embarrassed by begging for money. Still, the move to the ACC will do more to hurt them than had they stayed in the PAC. They get diddly in the ACC media deal and the travel will increase their costs enormously.

The demise of the PAC looks to have been a knee jerk reaction to UCLA and USC leaving. If the other 10 had banded together and stayed, things wouldn't be looking so bleak for the likes of Cal and Stanford.

(03-05-2024 04:31 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  How about just putting the Cal vs UCLA back on the schedule and potentially protecting via state law law and then calling it even?

It is not about playing UCLA, it is the fact that Cal couldn't pay their debt when making $37M in the PAC. Once USCLA left, they saw that their future earning potential dropped significantly to the point they would have to make drastic cuts in their AD. They are not even paying the principle on their stadium remodel and won't until 2032 IIRC. At least had the rest of the PAC stuck together they could expect something close to what they made in 2023 but once it was down to the PAC4 they were now looking at well less a third of what they were getting in the PAC.

(03-05-2024 08:08 PM)andybible1995 Wrote:  

(03-05-2024 08:05 PM)Aztecgolfer Wrote:  

(03-05-2024 08:18 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-04-2024 07:34 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  

(03-04-2024 07:20 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  I think the payments are dumb, btw, but that's neither here nor there.

USF should demand similar alimony payments from UCF.

Y'know, just to see the reaction from Knights fans

LOL ...

But FWIW, I would not want USF to take alimony payments from UCF. That would be humiliating, and I would rather us do without the money than be receiving payments from them.

I thought Cal embarrassed themselves by taking payments from UCLA. Some things, pride for example, should trump money, I think.

Given Cal's AD debt they really cannot afford to be embarrassed by begging for money. Still, the move to the ACC will do more to hurt them than had they stayed in the PAC. They get diddly in the ACC media deal and the travel will increase their costs enormously.

The demise of the PAC looks to have been a knee jerk reaction to UCLA and USC leaving. If the other 10 had banded together and stayed, things wouldn't be look so bleak for the likes of Cal and Stanford.

And it appears that throughout the process Washington was undermining it. Yes, had the PAC stayed together, even losing Colorado, they would have still been a power conference and made roughly what B12 teams are making. The only programs that I think will be happy with their choice 2 or 3 years from now will be USC and Colorado. UW and Oregon is taking half what USCLA is getting in the B1G and Calford a mere pittance from the ACC. Zona seems to have wanted to move to the B12 for basketball but now is facing big budget cuts. Utah and ASU wanted to stay in the PAC as did Calford. I've read that Oregon was happy with the Apple deal but tied themselves to Washington. I also think that missing out in a partnership with Apple, the most valuable business in the history of the word, will be something they regret.