forums

MEGA Conference Realignment and lawsuits Megathread: Stories, Tales, Lies, and Exaggerations

TheOriginalCane said:
As I kind of alluded to in my other post...it's all just money.

Whether we have to "buy out" and then need a full-share...or if someone else buys us out and we take a "vesting share"...

It's all good, baby. Just get me to the Big 10 and I'l settle down. I was there in the days when UM had to make due with Independent money. And we wondered why the old Hecht smelled old and moldy.
Click to expand...
I am just a casual observer of this conversation, so please forgive my ignorance, but…

This makes too much sense to me. Relatively simple actually.
Sometimes I feel like everyone is playing a variation of chess (2D, 4D, 8D, etc), when everything could be done quickly if we all were playing checkers.
 
Advertisement
Rickd said:
I do believe that the FSU 'noise' did serve a purpose and have a beneficial impact. Definitely shook up people at ESPN knowing that the entire ACC conference was, to a degree, in a mild state of panic with programs outside of the "B2 candidates" all of a sudden talking to the B12 to see if landing spots did exist. True there have been talks going on behind the scenes for the past year, but I feel these past two weeks put "the desire & need to exit" in a much clearer perspective for a lot more people. During these NEXT 12 months there will be a real focus not on understanding the GOR, but rather getting the 8 teams needed to dissolve the conference on the same page so there is a cohesive effort this time next year, and it gets done. Been a crazy couple of weeks for sure.
Click to expand...
Sorry for asking something you and @TheOriginalCane I’m sure covered but if Miami, Clemson and FSU left the ACC and the ACC brought in Cal, Stanford and SMU to keep the same number of teams, is ESPN still under an obligation to pay the same amount to the ACC without UM, FSU and Clemson as they were obligated to pay with them so long as there’s the same number of teams left overall in the ACC?
 
MiamiCanesFan77 said:
NC State voted no? That’s hilarious.

Unless they have an iron clad agreement to be a package deal to get UNC.
Click to expand...


1691857199351.png

1691857241855.png
 
RVACane said:
Sorry for asking something you and @TheOriginalCane I’m sure covered but if Miami, Clemson and FSU left the ACC and the ACC brought in Cal, Stanford and SMU to keep the same number of teams, is ESPN still under an obligation to pay the same amount to the ACC without UM, FSU and Clemson as they were obligated to pay with them so long as there’s the same number of teams left overall in the ACC?
Click to expand...
Pretty sure that ESPN / ACC would be negotiating a new media del as the "TV Math" isn't based on "number of teams" but the # of viewers that each program brings. FSU / Clemson / Miami are most likely the 3 most valuable college football brands NOT currently in the B10 or SEC and the combination of Cal / Stanford / SMU doesn't come close to matching that. So revenues and distribution might take a hit.
 
Advertisement
RVACane said:
Sorry for asking something you and @TheOriginalCane I’m sure covered but if Miami, Clemson and FSU left the ACC and the ACC brought in Cal, Stanford and SMU to keep the same number of teams, is ESPN still under an obligation to pay the same amount to the ACC without UM, FSU and Clemson as they were obligated to pay with them so long as there’s the same number of teams left overall in the ACC?
Click to expand...


No, there is a "composition clause" in the contract that would allow the ACC to pay less for a "lesser" ACC, just the same way as they would be expected to pay more if the ACC had added Notre Dame as a replacement after Maryland left.

It is true that in your scenario, the ACC would still provide the same NUMBER of games, but they would not be as highly-rated, or at least projected to be, in the eyes of ESPN.
 
Rickd said:
What @Genetics56 stated last night in his "B10 Conference Realignment Community" thread is "The B10 media partners will acquire the rights".
So if THAT is correct ... then we don't have to concern ourselves with having 8 votes, dissolving the conference, or the GOR and exit fee.
He is saying the B10 media partners are 1). Targeting 4-6 ACC schools 2). And will acquire the rights and cost of those teams switching conferences.

The short term "cost" might be several of the ACC programs that switch, might therefore have to take a less than full share for several years (but THEY are not covering the GOR buyback costs).

IF that is accurate ... beer is on me at the Titanic (fights allowed).
Click to expand...
So we are behind FSU in the pecking order for the BIG 10 it seems though I shouldn’t be surprised. Them being announced hurts our recruiting IMO if there is a significant lag time. I think we’re better off with FSU in the BIG as opposed to the SEC in some ways.

Interesting that you had mentioned that the BIG media partners have no interest in UVA. I think they could have a spot in the SEC eventually though knowing UVA people they probably don’t want the SEC ahead of the BIG. So VT could actually have a spot in the BIG and UVA not have a landing place which is the opposite of the issue I thought we’d see.
 
Advertisement
Rickd said:
Pretty sure that ESPN / ACC would be negotiating a new media del as the "TV Math" isn't based on "number of teams" but the # of viewers that each program brings. FSU / Clemson / Miami are most likely the 3 most valuable college football brands NOT currently in the B10 or SEC and the combination of Cal / Stanford / SMU doesn't come close to matching that. So revenues and distribution might take a hit.
Click to expand...
That would explain NC State voting no and talking to the BIG 12.They know if the three teams mentioned go that the ACC payout will be less than the B12 so they might as well get a spot now.
 
RVACane said:
So we are behind FSU in the pecking order for the BIG 10 it seems though I shouldn’t be surprised. Them being announced hurts our recruiting IMO if there is a significant lag time. I think we’re better off with FSU in the BIG as opposed to the SEC in some ways.

Interesting that you had mentioned that the BIG media partners have no interest in UVA. I think they could have a spot in the SEC eventually though knowing UVA people they probably don’t want the SEC ahead of the BIG. So VT could actually have a spot in the BIG and UVA not have a landing place which is the opposite of the issue I thought we’d see.
Click to expand...


Yeah, UVa is in a rough spot. They are soooo good academically and soooo mediocre in football. And a fairly large distance from the DMV area.

Not a great combo, and with better choices ahead of them in the pecking order.
 
RVACane said:
That would explain NC State voting no and talking to the BIG 12.They know if the three teams mentioned go that the ACC payout will be less than the B12 so they might as well get a spot now.
Click to expand...
Think it is more likely they are talking in the event the ACC conference implodes and is dissolved, then they will have a home in the B12 if they can't get into the SEC. Doesn't make sense to leave the ACC ... paying the $120 million exit fee + a huge GOR buyback. Don't think the B12 would take them without media rights and don't see the B12 media partner (ESPN + FOX) paying their GOR to move to that conference.
 
Advertisement
TheOriginalCane said:
Yeah, UVa is in a rough spot. They are soooo good academically and soooo mediocre in football. And a fairly large distance from the DMV area.

Not a great combo, and with better choices ahead of them in the pecking order.
Click to expand...
UVA athletics has very little draw in the DMV. VT is way bigger as far as sports go. Penn State, UMD, VT are all much bigger than UVA in the area.
 
I am mildly surprised that for all of the commentary justified as it is about the FSU athletic Director going off the rails publicly while at least showing his cards, there has been less attention paid to the fact that the North Carolina athletic Director went against FSU publicly a week ago, then voted against expansion. I guess that would play against the narrative here they just because Dan/Miami is doing one thing right now it means that it the ultimate automatic official course of action.

They’re all full of ****, some just spin it differently
 
Last edited:
Ispyin said:
I am mildly surprised that for all of the commentary justified as it is about the FSU athletic Director going off the rails publicly while at least, showing his cards, that there has been less attention paid to the fact that the North Carolina athletic Director went against FSU publicly a week ago, then voted against expansion, but I guess that would play against the narrative here they just because Dan is doing one thing right now it means that’s his official course of action.

They’re all full of ****, some just spin it differently
Click to expand...


Agreed.

But of the schools with "options"...Miami and Clemson have been the most quiet.
 
Advertisement
Advertisement
Back
Top