forums

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

TheOriginalCane said:
Look, NOBODY has the capacity to know everything. NOBODY. Even Genetics, who has plenty of sources and is very wired in, has a blind spot over how much Clemson and F$U would prefer the SEC over the Big 10.

It's not the end of the world, and it's nothing personal. But there are plenty of people who have a lot (not all) information on what is happening.

I'm not assuming anything. I know who I talk to. I know where people I talk to are getting their information from. As an example, I had the Washington-Oregon information BEFORE it broke as a news story. But I didn't tell anyone. And I knew what was about to happen, that the "half-share" was going to become an unwanted option in the various negotiations.

And to be clear, I have always provided context in my comments. When speaking about half-shares, I made it very clear that the Big 10 would be "interested" in USF if USF offered to play for free for a decade. Yes, anything is possible.

What was stated about Washington-Oregon ALL ALONG was accurate. The Big 10 was not interested in them the way they were interested in USC-UCLA, or at the same price.

Everyone does due diligence. I've analyzed WAY more "acquisition targets" than my employer has ever actually acquired. I get it.

But in your Big 12 example (hypothetical or not), you can tell the difference between the TRUE insiders and the gossips. The true insiders **** well know that Miami is never ever ever ever going to choose to join the Big 12. And anyone who "reports" that Miami is in conversations with the Big 12 is just proving the point, that they do not KNOW what is actually happening.

We can compare notes when it all goes down. My intel is solid.
Click to expand...

It's all good, I'm not trying to suggest that your intel isn't solid or trying to start a disagreement. I don't know who you talk to so that would be unfounded on my part. I'm also not saying we're not going to the Big 10 or that we are going to the SEC. I'm just saying let's not count any chickens. People seem to be building elaborate theories on top of speculative facts, and I was just wanting to point that part out.
 
Advertisement
wspcane said:
The ACC briefly considered it when they went to Charlotte. I heard something a few years back that they were talking about it around the time the College Football HoF moved to Atlanta (which is great, if you have not been).
Click to expand...


I have not been to the CFHOF yet. I think I get free tickets from my Chick Fil-A app.
 
RightSaidFred said:
It's all good, I'm not trying to suggest that your intel isn't solid or trying to start a disagreement. I don't know who you talk to so that would be unfounded on my part. I'm also not saying we're not going to the Big 10 or that we are going to the SEC. I'm just saying let's not count any chickens. People seem to be building elaborate theories on top of speculative facts, and I was just wanting to point that part out.
Click to expand...


I agree with you. The limited info that IS KNOWN then turns into a lot of extra speculation, you are right about that.
 
TheOriginalCane said:
True.

But the food (money) starts to get thin when the herd gets too big...
Click to expand...

Agree, but I kinda think something else is at work -- for ESPN in particular (but really all the media companies).

That is to consolidate all the best brands into basically two super conferences (B1G/SEC) and their junior partner (Big 12) and thus control all the valuable inventory.

It sure seems likely Apple and/or Amazon are gonna go full-speed ahead on streaming at some point in the near future. ESPN and FOX (along with CBS and NBC) could turn over their inventory for a nice fat check.

I don't think "overpaying" for College Football is the big problem some suggest.

It's by far the second-most viewed entity (behind only the NFL) in American sports.

Those media rights are only going to get more and more valuable (and not to mention March Madness, too, when that contract gets up for bid in the early 2030's
 
Advertisement
AirCane said:
The SEC does not want or need Miami. So many SEC teams like to come recruit in SoFla to get them to come play in the SEC. The SEC teams lose a great recruiting strategy against us if they bring us into the conference. The SEC wants FSU much more than us for this reason. They get a big name without losing a recruiting base.

Our best bet is FSU goes to SEC and then B1G comes calling for the Florida market with the last big name remaining in the state. I would be very worried if FSU goes to B1G and then the SEC shuns us.
Click to expand...
I disagree with your point of the SEC recruiting outside of us. A school like Kentucky could come to Miami and say their family can still see them play here every other year were Miami an SEC team. They can’t say that now. You can look at it from any direction. At the end of the day, it’s UF that wants the exclusive SEC title for the state of Florida. No one else does.
 
Brickell said:
The SEC is not turning us down when it means more money for them.

Even UF is not petty enough to forsake millions of dollars in extra money just to be a ****. A&M did not want Texas to join the SEC, but when it came time to vote for their admission voted yes.

I refuse to think the SEC will do nothing if the B1G decides to accept FSU and Clemson, encroaching on their territory and viewer base.
Click to expand...

The SEC would probably prefer that all of this was going down in the year 2034, rather than now. That's when their contract with ESPN is up and I think it's a fair bet that they ditch ESPN at that time if the current landscape stays the same. I think the SEC feels that if they had the same TV contract as the Big 10 does, they would absolutely like to expand.

People talk about the ACC being weighed down by a terrible contract with ESPN and it's true, but what doesn't get said really is that the SEC is also being tied down to a bad deal at the moment which makes it hard for them to expand and match the Big 10. They have better brands than the Big 10 but are being paid less, and, maybe more importantly, they're tied to a network partner who is in financial trouble and who has no appetite to spend for additional content, even if that spending means more revenue.

They wouldn't even pay more for the SEC to add a conference game.

So I think that's where the "everybody to the big 10" folks are coming from, and there's sound logic and reasoning behind it. And it could be exactly the way it plays out.

But that all being said, the SEC is still free to add teams, even with a bad network partner. ESPN might make their lives difficult, but the SEC are still free to do whatever they want. If you're Greg Sankey, you might just decide that it's worth it to take a hit per school for a few years to make sure that the Big 10 doesn't walk away with all the valuable brands from the ACC. They may have a decision to make as far as what is more important - long term strategy or medium term profit for individual schools.

If I'm a betting man, I'm probably betting Big 10. But I wouldn't say it's a sure thing. And I can almost guarantee that things like "cultural fit" have absolutely nothing to do with the SEC's calculus. As you say, the people writing the checks don't give a **** about that kind of thing. It just comes down to how much more will the networks pay us under our current contract and possibly under future contracts.
 
Advertisement
TheOriginalCane said:
Look, NOBODY has the capacity to know everything. NOBODY. Even Genetics, who has plenty of sources and is very wired in, has a blind spot over how much Clemson and F$U would prefer the SEC over the Big 10.

It's not the end of the world, and it's nothing personal. But there are plenty of people who have a lot (not all) information on what is happening.

I'm not assuming anything. I know who I talk to. I know where people I talk to are getting their information from. As an example, I had the Washington-Oregon information BEFORE it broke as a news story. But I didn't tell anyone. And I knew what was about to happen, that the "half-share" was going to become an unwanted option in the various negotiations.

And to be clear, I have always provided context in my comments. When speaking about half-shares, I made it very clear that the Big 10 would be "interested" in USF if USF offered to play for free for a decade. Yes, anything is possible.

What was stated about Washington-Oregon ALL ALONG was accurate. The Big 10 was not interested in them the way they were interested in USC-UCLA, or at the same price.

Everyone does due diligence. I've analyzed WAY more "acquisition targets" than my employer has ever actually acquired. I get it.

But in your Big 12 example (hypothetical or not), you can tell the difference between the TRUE insiders and the gossips. The true insiders **** well know that Miami is never ever ever ever going to choose to join the Big 12. And anyone who "reports" that Miami is in conversations with the Big 12 is just proving the point, that they do not KNOW what is actually happening.

We can compare notes when it all goes down. My intel is solid.
Click to expand...
Would they just hurry up already!!!!!!!
 
RightSaidFred said:
The SEC would probably prefer that all of this was going down in the year 2034, rather than now. That's when their contract with ESPN is up and I think it's a fair bet that they ditch ESPN at that time if the current landscape stays the same. I think the SEC feels that if they had the same TV contract as the Big 10 does, they would absolutely like to expand.

People talk about the ACC being weighed down by a terrible contract with ESPN and it's true, but what doesn't get said really is that the SEC is also being tied down to a bad deal at the moment which makes it hard for them to expand and match the Big 10. They have better brands than the Big 10 but are being paid less, and, maybe more importantly, they're tied to a network partner who is in financial trouble and who has no appetite to spend for additional content, even if that spending means more revenue.

They wouldn't even pay more for the SEC to add a conference game.
Click to expand...

That seems like more of a checkers vs. chess thing, where ESPN knows the moment it agreed to pay the SEC schools more for a ninth conference games, here comes Gomer Phillips of the ACC — with his numerous worthess schools — demanding the same thing.

ESPN already shows it doesn't mind kicking in extra dollars if it sees fit, e.g the non-contractual payoffs it's low-key giving Oklahoma and Texas beginning next fall.

RightSaidFred said:
But that all being said, the SEC is still free to add teams, even with a bad network partner. ESPN might make their lives difficult, but the SEC are still free to do whatever they want. If you're Greg Sankey, you might just decide that it's worth it to take a hit per school for a few years to make sure that the Big 10 doesn't walk away with all the valuable brands from the ACC. They may have a decision to make as far as what is more important - long term strategy or medium term profit for individual schools.
Click to expand...

Sankey has a pro-rata agreement written into the ESPN contract.

Just as when OU and UT come aboard next year, none of the current SEC schools will be out a penny when if/any of the ACC schools join
 
I guarantee nobody who matters at the sec gives a flying **** what any school does or doesnt do. They are 100% driven by money and will take any school or schools that makes their pile of money bigger. All the bull**** talk about "gentlemens agreements" didnt mean **** the last few rounds of expansion and wont this time around either
 
Advertisement
Hold My Beer said:
Quick summary from Flugauer's show yesterday (he ask and then answers the following in the wake of the this week's rumblings out of Daboville):

Q: Why did Clemson send the message and to whom did they send the message to?

A: There's strength in numbers. FSU, Clemson and UNC have made their intentions clear. "Miami of Florida" (as the Minny-soda bumpkin calls us) continues to seem reluctant to rock the boat, but Clemson with its connection to DanRad can hopefully assist in getting things moving. Again, there is strength in numbers for when the malcontents begin to bum-rush Jim Phillips and the ACC lawyers.

Also, Flugauer either mentioned (or parroted what one of his viewers relayed) that Brett McMurphy said FSU, Clemson and UNC will be out of the ACC in three years (so 2026). I couldn't find confirmation of McMurphy saying that, so take it for what it is (or isn't) worth.

I do think it'll turn out that way, though. Makes complete sen$e for the SEC, B1G and Big 12 to have their membership fully in place by time the 2026 playoff and its media contract(s) are put in place. Create the format, control the vast majority of the revenue

I still expect us to announce for the B1G in conjunction with ND as well as fellow AAU members Stanford and Cal no later that 2025.
Click to expand...
Growing up Miami was referred to as “Miami of Florida” quite a bit. I always thought it was cool. I am old, so, it probably is not cool but just my .02 cents.
 
Macca said:
Up the Irons baby!
Click to expand...
Heavy Metal Samurai GIF by Iron Maiden
 
Advertisement
Advertisement
Back
Top