what did they win?

it really comes down to which teams get the most eyeballs. The only reason we think of Minnesota or Mississippi as top teams is because they historically played against top teams. Let’s play around with creating a top league. Can you fill the top league of 40 teams?

Stanford won two Rose Bowls and one Orange Bowl. Cal had first and goal to beat one of the best teams this century, on their turf, in 2004. They never got over that hump but they were right there that day.

2004 was 20 years ago. The Tedford years were fun.

2015 last conf championship. Stanford has a noble history but it never really wins anything. Last national championship 1940.

This is my point, we vastly overrate Stanford and Cal when it comes to football. They are great schools but nothing spectacular.

I agree the market can probably support about 40 national caliber teams and that the blue blood conferences have some historical members that wouldn’t belong in a super conference. Not sure if we are headed toward a recession or just a new (worse) normal thanks to crypto and private equity. Those top teams don’t have a revenue issue, though they do have a spending issue. And for any getting ready to tango with PE, get ready for the cost buzzsaw. Everyone else will get squeezed on what’s left. At our level, any prospective suggesting G6 football will be a cash cow and drive nearly a billion dollars of regional economic impact is nonsense. At best, one could argue FBS football helps build national name recognition for a fee.

I agree that Cal and Stanford haven’t been particularly revant lately.

What is spectacular athletically, especially about Stanford is the donor support. For example, the head women’s basketball coach, as well as 4 of the 5 assistant coach positions are endowed positions, which means that position is funded in perpetuity. Costs the university/athletic department nothing. The head FB coach and 2 assistants as well. More in other sports. And few of those funding the various endowments have names that I associate with Stanford athletics.

That’s financial resources on a scale far beyond anything UCD can hope to compete with now, or in any foreseeable future. Not even the TOP Big10 or SEC schools have that. I don’t think Stanford has scratched the surface of what they could do. I expect that Andrew Luck will be a far more active and effective presence than Shaq has been. So I’d hesitate to be dismissive of the potential there.