forums

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

Atom Atlas said:
From what I read it was more to protect from having ESPN renegotiate the GOR with the ACC.... The conference needs at least 15 members for the deal to stay in their favor... If it falls under - By way of various teams leaving - then ESPN has rights to squash the deal as is and renegotiate a new one which would certainly be for way less money then is already on the table.... ACC is in desperation mode it seems....
Not saying you're wrong at all, everyone is still screwed by the GOR exit fee ....
Click to expand...
There is no "GOR exit fee". They are TWO DIFFERENT ITEMS. The GOR is the Grant of Rights and the exit fee is a fixed $120M to the ACC. The expansion is to keep at least 15 members in the ACC conference so that the COMPOSITION CLAUSE of the ESPN media agreement is not activated. THAT permits ESPN to modify (ie lower) the media payout DUE TO WHO IS IN THE CONFERENCE. It is totally separate from the GOR.
 
Advertisement
As I understand, adding these three teams will require ESPN to pay the ACC in the area of $50 million a year more. With the 3 schools taking reduced or zero shares there will be about $30ish million to fund a "performance" bonus pool to pay to schools that do well in football.......IF we do well we could benefit from that pool. Still it is not B1G money.............................
 
Canedude08 said:
SMU wanted out of the American, and was willing to pay to do it. That Oil/RE money is long enough to where they can eat the lack of TV revenue, if it means that once that period passes, they are getting significantly more than they did in the AAC.

I'll never get why the Big XII didn't take SMU in their last expansion, they are a perfect fit. I think that underneath it all, schools like Oklahoma State, Kansas State, etc. know that SMU in the Big XII would wipe the floor with them. I'm the son of an SMU alum, grew up around the program, they've been prepping for this day for 30+ years. I'm happy we are getting SMU at a discount in the ACC, because it adds another city school, a school in an area we recruit well from, and it's a school that is going to be firmly in the "Football School" camp. If the ACC starts falling apart once FSU, Clemson, and Miami bails, don't be shocked if SMU finally gets the call from the Big XII. It's a lot easier to sell SMU coming from another major conference, compared to the AAC.
Click to expand...
I hear ya... My braindead comment was more focused on the whole of the deal not particularly SMU.... I'm just dumbfounded by the decisions the ACC is making lately.... So annoying...
 
Advertisement
Rickd said:
There is no "GOR exit fee". They are TWO DIFFERENT ITEMS. The GOR is the Grant of Rights and the exit fee is a fixed $120M to the ACC. The expansion is to keep at least 15 members in the ACC conference so that the COMPOSITION CLAUSE of the ESPN media agreement is not activated. THAT permits ESPN to modify (ie lower) the media payout DUE TO WHO IS IN THE CONFERENCE. It is totally separate from the GOR.
Click to expand...
Understand... The article I read had the wording very vanilla so that's what I went with.... but appreciate you clearing it up...
 
There’s no spinning this. People can hypothesize that a yes vote was an exchange for an easier or cheaper departure. If that were the case then FSU and Clemson would have voted that way. Miami, once again, is showing its *** and finding new ways to drop the ball, this time courtesy of an ineffectual leadership that won’t even be in the seat to see the detriment of this decision.
 
Happy Season 9 GIF by The Office
 
Advertisement
Empirical Cane said:
Click to expand...

Is UM actually taking the path of playing nice with ACC, so once FSU, UNC, Clem bounce, we're the flagship program of the ACC??? and at that point, the ACC would be the 4th strongest conference behind BIG, SEC, and Big12..... and won't matter, because if you aren't in the big 2 conferences, you are a dead program.... reallyyyy hope they know what they are doing.....
 
Rickd said:
Certainly does. With 15 members it takes 8 votes to dissolve the ACC, and by adding 3 new members it will take 10 votes to dissolve. So if we want to dissolve the ACC it needs to happen BEFORE the 3 new programs are added.
Click to expand...
If were not getting 8 votes now we weren't going to get them later. Miami was and still is stuck either paying the exit fee or winning a legal battle. Voting for expansion doesn’t change that
 
Advertisement
Advertisement
Baba Yaga said:
View attachment 254141
Click to expand...

The fact that our fanbase still thinks Miami is just sitting by and doing nothing is hilarious. Rad isn't Blake James, he just isn't flapping his gums like a desperate idiot. Move in silence, let Clemson and FSU take the brunt of the abuse for trying to break up the conference. Miami is in a tough spot, we can't force the B1G to take us(The SEC isn't taking us under any circumstances), so we have to sit by and play the waiting game. Whatever happens will happen, whining accomplishes nothing.
 
Atom Atlas said:
I hear ya... My braindead comment was more focused on the whole of the deal not particularly SMU.... I'm just dumbfounded by the decisions the ACC is making lately.... So annoying...
Click to expand...

The ACC knows that eventually, they will have to let FSU and Clemson walk, they are just backfilling those spots early. Makes sense when you think about it. Odds are Miami will be in that exodus, because if the SEC adds FSU and Clemson, the B1G will want to add us and UNC.
 
wspcane said:
There’s no spinning this. People can hypothesize that a yes vote was an exchange for an easier or cheaper departure. If that were the case then FSU and Clemson would have voted that way. Miami, once again, is showing its *** and finding new ways to drop the ball, this time courtesy of an ineffectual leadership that won’t even be in the seat to see the detriment of this decision.
Click to expand...
Its CIS, we already have our made up conclusions and then fit the facts as we see to fit said conclusion. Maybe its ineffectual leadership or a scarier possibility, we werent wanted by either the BIG or SEC as so many suggested. Why is it being reported that Miami was vehemetely against this?
 
Advertisement
Back
Top