forums

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

Advertisement
TheOriginalCane said:
Oh, yeah. The fraud with all the easy, vague, overly simplistic answers.

Strengthen the ACC...sure. HOW? By adding 3 schools for 2 sports? Oh, what an act of strength...

Increase the payout in the interim? HOW? By giving whatever blood we can squeeze from the stone to (predominantly) one school like Clemson who may end up leaving anyhow? Brilliant.

See how things look in 7-8 years? Yep, they'll look even worse when nothing is done to fix the problem. How did Miami's facilities look when we waited for decades to do what other schools were doing? How does it work out when schools retain bad coaches because they are afraid to pay buyouts? I'll wait until you can produce some rousing success stories based on "waiting 7-8 years to see how things look".

Oh, sure, "athletic budgets are moving into the $150M to $200M range and getting higher". Really? Maybe for the Big 10 and SEC, but not for the ACC, WHICH IS EXACTLY THE POINT. Here, I'll even prove my accurate point (and your exaggeration) by providing real numbers from June 2023, not just your crazy guesstimates (keep in mind that the private schools are not listed, such as Miami, Duke, Wake, BC, Pitt, and Syracuse).

A couple of points to note, two of the three "biggest budgets" in the ACC belong to teams with the largest stadiums, thus they have more revenue AND ALSO more corresponding expense due to the on-campus stadium costs. And there is no way in **** that ANY of those private schools would be in the top half of ACC athletic budgets, with the possible exception of Miami. Meaning, that ACC BUDGETS are more likely to be in the $75M to $150M range, outside of Clemson and F$U.

View attachment 252604

As for your nonsense about a MERE "$20M shortfall", it's actually $25M and will grow on an annual basis while we "wait to see how things look".

Maybe you field less sports? Brilliant. I'm sure that has no impact on Title IX or anything else, right? And maybe you're unaware that if we join the Big 10 we will be ADDING sports.

Be smarter with coaching hires? Wow, why did nobody think of this before? And it's so easy to do. Yeah, just "be smarter". Works every time.

Raise money from the alums? Yeah, that one is bound to work. Again, I wish we would have thought of this about 100 years ago when UM was founded. "Raise money from the alums". Yep. Hey, when Miami is working to fill in a "$20M shortfall" (or, more accurately, $25M and growing), what is your suggestion for posters who think that our alums should ALSO be spending $25M per year on NIL?

And sell more tickets? What? THAT is how we raise more money? Selling more tickets? It's so elementary. So which is your preferred suggestion, should we sell more tickets in Hard Rock which reduced capacity, or the on-campus arena for which Coral Gables has never approved our additional seating capacity, or Mark Light which has infinite space to build more bleachers? Or should we raise ticket prices? I'm eager to hear all of your ideas now that Beta Blake isn't around to say no (because he was the ticket-selling king).

"Lower the delta!" "Push inequal distributions!" "It's doable!" You should make up some t-shirts and sell them on CIS or DymeLyfe. "LOWER THE DELTA!" What a great slogan for doing a fat lot of NOTHING! You are so amazing, you should have gone into marketing.

And your cherry on top is to compare college sports entire-program budgets to professional sports payroll budgets.

Chef's kiss!
Click to expand...
Speaking of fake insiders. Lol. Clown.

You still in touch with the law firm that knows how to invalidate the GOR? Sure.
 
Advertisement
Midlo Cane Fan said:
I'm not very familiar with Swaim. What's his track record?
Click to expand...
track running GIF by RunnerSpace.com
 
Advertisement
grover said:
Sorry, not going to go back over the last 610 pages. Does the vote need to be unanimous? Hope so. We need this conference to DIE.
Click to expand...
no. 12-15 have to say yes. it was before 4 no votes (UNC, NCSU, FSU, Clemson) at least painted by media.
 
blah124 said:
no. 12-15 have to say yes. it was before 4 no votes (UNC, NCSU, FSU, Clemson) at least painted by media.
Click to expand...
With Stanford and Cal making a combined $17M/yr and SMU making $0M/yr, but it raising ESPNs payout to ACC by $72M/yr, it's a NET +$55M/yr to current conference members. Assuming they strategically distribute that, I can't imagine NCSt would vote against any longer. Same with UVA/VTech/etc. And it's not like this money would be going to ND. The only 4 schools that really still wouldn't likely want this is FSU, Clemson, UNC, and Miami because those are the 4 that can actually make more money elsewhere. The rest will make as much or more by remaining in the ACC, especially with an additional $55M to distribute.

If we are being 100% honest, IF Stanford, Cal, and SMU join the ACC, the only thing it actually really changes is that Conference dissolution is likely off the table as an option. So it means paying min $120M in Exit fee, and then getting out of GOR through court or settlement.
 
Advertisement
calinative umstudent said:
With Stanford and Cal making a combined $17M/yr and SMU making $0M/yr, but it raising ESPNs payout to ACC by $72M/yr, it's a NET +$55M/yr to current conference members. Assuming they strategically distribute that, I can't imagine NCSt would vote against any longer. Same with UVA/VTech/etc. And it's not like this money would be going to ND. The only 4 schools that really still wouldn't likely want this is FSU, Clemson, UNC, and Miami because those are the 4 that can actually make more money elsewhere. The rest will make as much or more by remaining in the ACC, especially with an additional $55M to distribute.

If we are being 100% honest, IF Stanford, Cal, and SMU join the ACC, the only thing it actually really changes is that Conference dissolution is likely off the table as an option. So it means paying min $120M in Exit fee, and then getting out of GOR through court or settlement.
Click to expand...
I think the question now is if they can argue against the extension if Swaim Show isn't just full of ****.
 
calinative umstudent said:
With Stanford and Cal making a combined $17M/yr and SMU making $0M/yr, but it raising ESPNs payout to ACC by $72M/yr, it's a NET +$55M/yr to current conference members. Assuming they strategically distribute that, I can't imagine NCSt would vote against any longer. Same with UVA/VTech/etc. And it's not like this money would be going to ND. The only 4 schools that really still wouldn't likely want this is FSU, Clemson, UNC, and Miami because those are the 4 that can actually make more money elsewhere. The rest will make as much or more by remaining in the ACC, especially with an additional $55M to distribute.

If we are being 100% honest, IF Stanford, Cal, and SMU join the ACC, the only thing it actually really changes is that Conference dissolution is likely off the table as an option. So it means paying min $120M in Exit fee, and then getting out of GOR through court or settlement.
Click to expand...

Only way acc schools could allow them to join is if they don’t have a vote to dissolve the conference
 
Advertisement
calinative umstudent said:
With Stanford and Cal making a combined $17M/yr and SMU making $0M/yr, but it raising ESPNs payout to ACC by $72M/yr, it's a NET +$55M/yr to current conference members. Assuming they strategically distribute that, I can't imagine NCSt would vote against any longer. Same with UVA/VTech/etc. And it's not like this money would be going to ND. The only 4 schools that really still wouldn't likely want this is FSU, Clemson, UNC, and Miami because those are the 4 that can actually make more money elsewhere. The rest will make as much or more by remaining in the ACC, especially with an additional $55M to distribute.

If we are being 100% honest, IF Stanford, Cal, and SMU join the ACC, the only thing it actually really changes is that Conference dissolution is likely off the table as an option. So it means paying min $120M in Exit fee, and then getting out of GOR through court or settlement.
Click to expand...

Trying to be 100% honest and also trying to follow the reasoning here:

So NC State, which "voted" against expansion last time, will vote in favor this time for an extra ~$5M (pro rata share + increased Tier 3/ACCN payout) because ... the pot was sweetened just a bit to swing the Wolfpack's vote?

And Miami, which apparently (?) "abstained" last time out of "respect for Stanford" will vote "no" (when it matters) to expansion because it does, in fact, have a P2 conference option or vote "yes" either out of unyielding respect for Stanford or because we really ain't got no place else to go.

Meh Tonight Show GIF by The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon
 
Last edited:
Advertisement
Back
Top