forums

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

Advertisement
rascon said:
They will get other ACC payouts from things other than media rights, yes? Bowl money, ncaa tourney money and that type of stuff?
Click to expand...


I'd imagine that they get any post-season revenue that they earn. Just not any regular season TV money.
 
Advertisement
canesdude said:
Do you still think we will be going to the Big 10 in 2026 or before?
Click to expand...


Yes.

I'm beginning to think that Clemson/F$U may jump in 2025 and we jump in 2026 or 2027.

Which, of course, brings back my argument that we should FIRST challenge the EXTENSION of the GOR, not the original GOR.

Why did we give another 9 years? What NEW AND ADDITIONAL consideration was given for the extra 9 years?

Because if we can successfully challenge the consideration-free EXTENSION of time, then the ORIGINAL Grant of Rights will expire in 2027.
 
TheOriginalCane said:
I really like and respect Genetics, but this is where he goes wrong.

He is SUCH a Big 10 homer that he is blind to the fact that Clemson and F$U would prefer to be in the SEC. He just doesn't comprehend that. He is so invested in the Big 10 being a massive coast-to-coast behemoth that he can't realize why two schools whose IN-STATE RIVALS are in the SEC...would actually see the SEC as a co-equal choice, let alone superior, to the Big 10.

Ultimately, this is about who moves first. If the SEC takes Clemson, F$U, and UNC tomorrow, their SMARTEST Team #4 is Miami. NOT because Miami is sooooo wonderful and perfect and ideal, but because it would be a defensive move against the Big 10 which would largely shut them out of Florida.

And anyone putting UVa and Duke and others ahead of Miami FOR CONFERENCE REALIGNMENT CONSIDERATIONS is just selling you a bunch of hot air.
Click to expand...

yup maybe you are correct. He seems a bit beffudled by Miami'a approach.
I am assuming he believes FSU and Clemson are locks for the Big 10

 
TheOriginalCane said:
I really like and respect Genetics, but this is where he goes wrong.

He is SUCH a Big 10 homer that he is blind to the fact that Clemson and F$U would prefer to be in the SEC. He just doesn't comprehend that. He is so invested in the Big 10 being a massive coast-to-coast behemoth that he can't realize why two schools whose IN-STATE RIVALS are in the SEC...would actually see the SEC as a co-equal choice, let alone superior, to the Big 10.

Ultimately, this is about who moves first. If the SEC takes Clemson, F$U, and UNC tomorrow, their SMARTEST Team #4 is Miami. NOT because Miami is sooooo wonderful and perfect and ideal, but because it would be a defensive move against the Big 10 which would largely shut them out of Florida.

And anyone putting UVa and Duke and others ahead of Miami FOR CONFERENCE REALIGNMENT CONSIDERATIONS is just selling you a bunch of hot air.
Click to expand...
I mean can we not say the same thing about us and Miami? It’s clear that even if we’ve had conversations for a year, something or things have changed in recent months.
 
Advertisement
Udynasty said:
yup maybe you are correct. He seems a bit beffudled by Miami'a approach.
I am assuming he believes FSU and Clemson are locks for the Big 10

Click to expand...



Yes.

AND THEY ARE NOT LOCKS FOR THE BIG 10. They would both rather go to the SEC.

Which is why I said that the ball is in the SEC's court now.

There are MORE schools that would "make sense" in the Big 10 (given that they want to be a coast-to-coast-to-coast super behemoth) than there are schools that would "make sense" in the SEC's Confederate States of America footprint.

Thus, if the SEC doesn't get busy expandin', they will get busy dyin' (yeah, they're never gonna die, I just wanted to quote Shawshank).
 
Advertisement
wspcane said:
I mean can we not say the same thing about us and Miami? It’s clear that even if we’ve had conversations for a year, something or things have changed in recent months.
Click to expand...


What has changed? What?

We originally wanted to move 2026. Still on-track if we want it.

We have wanted to go to the Big 10, and that's still the strongest likelihood.

I'm not sure what has changed. What, Washington and Oregon wanted to introduce the concept of reverse-eBay to the negotiation of conference payouts?

You and I have discussed this, but what I believe is the biggest ***** move of all (by at least 7 ACC teams) is the failure to file suit to challenge the GOR (or AT LEAST the extension of the GOR) prior to leaving the ACC. WE SHOULD BE DOING IT NOW, REGARDLESS OF ANYTHING ELSE.

There was no new consideration given for the non-essential and worthless extension of 9 years. That's just a legal reality. We were already under GOR for ELEVEN MORE YEARS at the time we agreed on the ACCN.

Those are the facts.
 
Question... does anyone have any real idea why we voted yes on this? I'm hoping there's a plan/rationale why this was determined the right play at this time.
 
Advertisement
And in case I'm not saying this loud enough...

FRENK SHOULD HAVE BEEN FIRED YEARS AGO, AND MIGHT JUST NEED TO BE FIRED IMMEDIATELY.

I've fought against porsters who said "but but but Beta Blake just built the IPF".

And I've fought against porsters who said "but but but Julio just gave power to Joe/Rudy and they fired Beta Blake and they hired Dan and Mario".

Yes. And Julio Frenk is still a terrible UM President who is not fit for the job.

But, the "look what he just did crowd" is always hanging around to claim that some guy just SAAAAAVED our program. Which is untrue.

I've said that Julio is poison for 6 or 7 years now, but some people are going to keep eating the poison because it has a sweet taste.

Right before we break the GOR contract, we need to break the Julio Frenk contract. Pay him his severance. Take the cap hit. Just get rid of this poison.
 
Canesrule230 said:
Question... does anyone have any real idea why we voted yes on this?
Click to expand...

theclemsoninsider.com

ACC Network is a reality

It’s finally here. After talk, talk and more talk the last several years, the Atlantic Coast Conference seems to be finally getting its own cable television network. Multiple Sources around the ACC…
theclemsoninsider.com theclemsoninsider.com

“I will put my bet on the really smart people on ESPN to understand how to monetize live sports television because it is not a weekly serial sitcom or something else that it is easily DVR and watched at another point in time or movie,” Clemson athletic director Dan Radakovich told TCI on April 28. “Live sports are really a unique situation as it relates to television. They are at the forefront of owning rights and being able to create those types of monetization of those rights.

“How are we going to gather it in five years? I have no idea. But will it be paid for? Probably, in some way shape or form. It goes a little beyond the cord cutting. You can cut the cord, but you better have some type of line that brings the information to you. Even in your own house with WiFi, you have to able to have something to bring that in. Then the idea of paying for that particular bundle of service, it moves away from your cable operator and into another way to consume that information. We are putting our dollars on the ESPN horse in this race, knowing they have motivation to go out and monetize this right they have already purchased.”

caneswarning.com

Dan Radakovich tells ESPN its best keeping ACC together

Speaking to ESPN, Miami athletic director Dan Radakovic stated the best option is to continue trying to make the ACC as strong as they can make it and to k...
caneswarning.com caneswarning.com
 
TheOriginalCane said:
What has changed? What?

We originally wanted to move 2026. Still on-track if we want it.

We have wanted to go to the Big 10, and that's still the strongest likelihood.

I'm not sure what has changed. What, Washington and Oregon wanted to introduce the concept of reverse-eBay to the negotiation of conference payouts?

You and I have discussed this, but what I believe is the biggest ***** move of all (by at least 7 ACC teams) is the failure to file suit to challenge the GOR (or AT LEAST the extension of the GOR) prior to leaving the ACC. WE SHOULD BE DOING IT NOW, REGARDLESS OF ANYTHING ELSE.

There was no new consideration given for the non-essential and worthless extension of 9 years. That's just a legal reality. We were already under GOR for ELEVEN MORE YEARS at the time we agreed on the ACCN.

Those are the facts.
Click to expand...
To me what has changed is 1) where we are in the list, 2) who is acting as the decision maker for the B10, and 3) what those decision makers are prioritizing, and in turn, who.

I think from the B10 perspective, it seems like the TV partners have taken the driver’s seat. By that, I mean AAU is devalued and viewership prioritized. It seems like we went from 1a/1b and tied to Clemson to Clemson aligning with FSU and us moving below both of them, as well as UNC and possibly others.

Understood that we have always targeted 2026, but the PAC teams moving has clearly altered the timeline. And if we’re are still 2026/27, and FSU/Clemson are 2025, we are lower on the pecking order. There’s no reason to stay behind an extra year.

If Clemson and FSU leave in 2025, you have two fewer people rowing in that direction, are even more at the mercy of conferences making additional moves, and I am struggling to find a legitimate reason to wait behind. There is a middle ground between how we have handled it and how FSU has.

At a certain point if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it’s a duck, and right now, it is hard to say that whether it is our choice or the B10’s there is zero intention on the part of Miami to challenge the GOR and leave.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top