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

[Rickd]

I'll be as direct as I can be.

Quite a few people felt like we had a solid strategy for a long, slow build-up. AAU membership. Greater commitment to coaching staffs and facilities. Nice collegial relationships, including Frenk supporting "let's get back to football" during COVID.

But I've said this before. The Washington/Oregon desperation changed everything. Washington/Oregon were not the preferred partners of USC/UCLA. Washington/Oregon weren't even in the top 2 spots for the Big 10. But their ploy to take half-shares changed EVERYONE'S calculus. It was obvious that the networks would do anything, for the right price. That move ****ed up the expected timeline and the expected pecking order.

I said it then and it is still true. Washington/Oregon changed everything. Moreso than Texas/Oklahoma. Moreso than USC/UCLA. At least with those pairs of teams, you could expect movement, they were the two most desirable teams in their respective conferences.

But no matter how many Grey's Anatomy/Portlandia fans try to convince you that Washington/Oregon are some great programs that everyone covets, it's a load of horse****. On every level. No matter how koool you think Oregon's uniforms are.

Washington is the 13th largest state, with 7.8 million people. Oregon is the 27th largest, with 4.2 million people. For media markets, you've got Sea-Tac at #12 and Portland at #22. After that? Spokane at #67. Outside of California, the Washington-Oregon area is surrounded by Alaska and Canada and Idaho and Nevada (Vegas is in the far southern end of Nevada).

And I know, I know, "population isn't everything". Except, in this case, you have a fairly weak sports market. Those 12 million people are concentrated in two areas with a LOT of land in between, and football is not nearly as big of a deal up there as it is in the southeast. Travel is challenging, both for local fans and rival fans. Three of the four big sports universities in those states are fairly remote from the two big urban areas. So these are not natural and enthusiastic sports markets, at least not nearly as other available schools are in other parts of the country.

But Washington/Oregon took half. And not only cranked up their spots in the pecking order, but fundamentally changed the economics and bargaining positions for everyone else. BEFORE Washington/Oregon, F$U thought that the Big 10 would pay their exit fee. BEFORE Washington/Oregon, nobody thought SMU would take ZERO-POINT-ZERO to get into the ACC.

So while Miami spent a lot of time and political capital to position itself, and has done (almost) as much as it can do, the Washington/Oregon situation screwed everything up on the "expectations" side. Now it is much harder to know how many schools the SEC and Big 10 might take, and what kinds of arrangements might need to be made. ****, if SMU offered to play in the SEC for free, do we honestly believe that a proposal like that would be rejected without discussion? That could be a very tempting offer for the SEC.

Speaking to people who know, there are certain things that are in Miami's favor and/or that Miami can impact. But there are some other factors that are a lot more complicated and are out of our hands.

I still believe that a lot of people feel that "Florida" is too big for the Big 10 to ignore us forever. But how much the Big 10 will pay (and when) were heavily impacted by Washington/Oregon.

And as evidenced by Washington's university budget, a Big 10 half-share will exceed an ACC full-share.


View attachment 292757

Agree 100% .... the implosion of the Pac12 and the subsequent "unscheduled addition" of OR / WA totally changed the conference realignment dynamics. Prior to the demise of the Pac12 the "speculation" was that the B10 would form their southern tier with 4 ACC programs, including Miami, and then add OR / WA potentially in 2030. Now with possibly only 2 slots left for the next expansion and a broad range of "selection criteria", it might be the eventual destination, but when?

 

[Angry Ibis]

Agree 100% .... the implosion of the Pac12 and the subsequent "unscheduled addition" of OR / WA totally changed the conference realignment dynamics. Prior to the demise of the Pac12 the "speculation" was that the B10 would form their southern tier with 4 ACC programs, including Miami, and then add OR / WA potentially in 2030. Now with possibly only 2 slots left for the next expansion and a broad range of "selection criteria", it might be the eventual destination, but when?

NASCAR references are super appropriate as we are circling the track on lap 990 and still talking about Oregon/Washington...

Must have gotten word from the spotter that there was a crash ahead....

Is this an attempt to "keep it real" that things aren't great, Bob?

Mopes

 

[Rickd]

How probable is it that ESPN and Phillips are discussing a new ACC media agreement that will be an integral part of the "reconfiguring of the ACC" that Josh Pate mentioned? ESPN / SEC grab a couple ACC programs, permitting a couple more to go to the B10, and they offer a revised media deal to "whoever is left" that includes performance based media distribution in addition to bonus payments for certain accomplishments (making the ACC playoff, making the CFP). You know that Wake, Syracuse, BC will approve ANYTHING that gives them some income. That would imply a new GOR that would have to be approved by 2/3rds of the members.

 

[Rickd]

NASCAR references are super appropriate as we are circling the track on lap 990 and still talking about Oregon/Washington...

Must have gotten word from the spotter that there was a crash ahead....

Is this an attempt to "keep it real" that things aren't great, Bob?

Mopes

Face it, we're only on page 990 while Warchant is approaching 2400. We're way behind.

 

[AuoraCane]

Due to a very close family relationship, I have Notre Dame season tickets and donate a little. I get invited to the luncheons and stuff. At one, the AD complained about the travel schedule for the non revenue teams. This is close to a quote, “It’s a real problem for our teams to get to FSU”. They won’t be happy that FSU and Clemson are leaving (but only for football), they won’t mind not having to travel to either place. Now they have to go farther to the Bay area and Dallas, but those are much easier trips.

It was in response to the question are we joining the Big ten? His answer was basically yes, if they would give us the same deal. I believe he also said, there was no indication that would happen.

Getting to Tallahassee is a pain in the *** for sure. I'm wondering if the BIG has considered this. For that reason alone, I believe FSU fits best in SEC. I get there are a ton of Midwest alumni within driving distance. But for the teams and fans located in the Midwest it a logistical nightmare.

 

[AuoraCane]

Thanks. Always interesting to see what other folks are hearing and where they get their info.

I'll say this and put it bold: FSU and Clemson are both going to the SEC. Period.

After FSU and Clemson, UNC and NC State to the SEC will be the next to announce.

Then UVA and VA Tech to the SEC.

Then us and Notre Dame to the Big Ten.

Finally, Duke and GA Tech to the SEC, Cal and Stanford to the Big Ten, Pitt, Louisville, Syracuse and maybe BC to the Big XII and Wake Forest will have to drop down to a G5 level conference

GA tech is not going to the SEC. if they go to a P2 its BIG.

 

[TheOriginalCane]

NASCAR references are super appropriate as we are circling the track on lap 990 and still talking about Oregon/Washington...

Must have gotten word from the spotter that there was a crash ahead....

Is this an attempt to "keep it real" that things aren't great, Bob?

Mopes

You are such a weak and pathetic person. You bring nothing of value to any conversation. You have no information. You have no analysis. All you are is negative and hateful.

Still talking about Washington/Oregon? Yes, because that move changed multiple aspects of realignment, more than any other move did.

You're just behaving like a toxic ****. One minute, you act like things that people said two years ago must always remain the same, they can never change as circumstances change. The next minute you act like when anyone acknowledges any event that is negative, they are a Mope like you.

Don't bother with the ha-ha reaction emojis. You've been exposed for what you are. Someone who knows nothing and adds nothing, but you're oh-so-proud of your 20,000 negative posts. Because you're "keeping it real". Real dumb.

Feel free to ignore reality while you're chasing people and demanding accountability for things said two years ago, before circumstances and events changed. What would the board do without all of your insightful commentary?

Just keep tearing down all of your superiors who know more, share more, and discuss more. But it should be noted that you keep coming back every single day to suck our asses and make your worthless snarky comments.

 

[Ispyin]

Y’all need to relax, I suggest if you live in Florida you vote for the passing of recreational cannabis so you can finally get the good stuff without a dr. note

People over analyzing the part of the iceberg that’s visible.

Fwiw I’m still not stressed when it’s all said and done (and no I’m not telling you why pm @whoopingcane and see if he shares)

 

[Hold My Beer]

I'll be as direct as I can be.

Quite a few people felt like we had a solid strategy for a long, slow build-up. AAU membership. Greater commitment to coaching staffs and facilities. Nice collegial relationships, including Frenk supporting "let's get back to football" during COVID.

But I've said this before. The Washington/Oregon desperation changed everything. Washington/Oregon were not the preferred partners of USC/UCLA. Washington/Oregon weren't even in the top 2 spots for the Big 10. But their ploy to take half-shares changed EVERYONE'S calculus. It was obvious that the networks would do anything, for the right price. That move ****ed up the expected timeline and the expected pecking order.

I said it then and it is still true. Washington/Oregon changed everything. Moreso than Texas/Oklahoma. Moreso than USC/UCLA. At least with those pairs of teams, you could expect movement, they were the two most desirable teams in their respective conferences.

But no matter how many Grey's Anatomy/Portlandia fans try to convince you that Washington/Oregon are some great programs that everyone covets, it's a load of horse****. On every level. No matter how koool you think Oregon's uniforms are.

Washington is the 13th largest state, with 7.8 million people. Oregon is the 27th largest, with 4.2 million people. For media markets, you've got Sea-Tac at #12 and Portland at #22. After that? Spokane at #67. Outside of California, the Washington-Oregon area is surrounded by Alaska and Canada and Idaho and Nevada (Vegas is in the far southern end of Nevada).

And I know, I know, "population isn't everything". Except, in this case, you have a fairly weak sports market. Those 12 million people are concentrated in two areas with a LOT of land in between, and football is not nearly as big of a deal up there as it is in the southeast. Travel is challenging, both for local fans and rival fans. Three of the four big sports universities in those states are fairly remote from the two big urban areas. So these are not natural and enthusiastic sports markets, at least not nearly as other available schools are in other parts of the country.

But Washington/Oregon took half. And not only cranked up their spots in the pecking order, but fundamentally changed the economics and bargaining positions for everyone else. BEFORE Washington/Oregon, F$U thought that the Big 10 would pay their exit fee. BEFORE Washington/Oregon, nobody thought SMU would take ZERO-POINT-ZERO to get into the ACC.

So while Miami spent a lot of time and political capital to position itself, and has done (almost) as much as it can do, the Washington/Oregon situation screwed everything up on the "expectations" side. Now it is much harder to know how many schools the SEC and Big 10 might take, and what kinds of arrangements might need to be made. ****, if SMU offered to play in the SEC for free, do we honestly believe that a proposal like that would be rejected without discussion? That could be a very tempting offer for the SEC.

Speaking to people who know, there are certain things that are in Miami's favor and/or that Miami can impact. But there are some other factors that are a lot more complicated and are out of our hands.

I still believe that a lot of people feel that "Florida" is too big for the Big 10 to ignore us forever. But how much the Big 10 will pay (and when) were heavily impacted by Washington/Oregon.

And as evidenced by Washington's university budget, a Big 10 half-share will exceed an ACC full-share.

Great post TOC, enjoyed reading it!

A LOT to digest there.

 

[TheOriginalCane]

Great post TOC, enjoyed reading it!

A LOT to digest there.

What? No smarmy comments about how Miami and Clemson are "joined at the hip"? Oh, sorry, you're not a crybaby like @Angry Ibis ...

 

[JD08]

I'll be as direct as I can be.

Quite a few people felt like we had a solid strategy for a long, slow build-up. AAU membership. Greater commitment to coaching staffs and facilities. Nice collegial relationships, including Frenk supporting "let's get back to football" during COVID.

But I've said this before. The Washington/Oregon desperation changed everything. Washington/Oregon were not the preferred partners of USC/UCLA. Washington/Oregon weren't even in the top 2 spots for the Big 10. But their ploy to take half-shares changed EVERYONE'S calculus. It was obvious that the networks would do anything, for the right price. That move ****ed up the expected timeline and the expected pecking order.

I said it then and it is still true. Washington/Oregon changed everything. Moreso than Texas/Oklahoma. Moreso than USC/UCLA. At least with those pairs of teams, you could expect movement, they were the two most desirable teams in their respective conferences.

But no matter how many Grey's Anatomy/Portlandia fans try to convince you that Washington/Oregon are some great programs that everyone covets, it's a load of horse****. On every level. No matter how koool you think Oregon's uniforms are.

Washington is the 13th largest state, with 7.8 million people. Oregon is the 27th largest, with 4.2 million people. For media markets, you've got Sea-Tac at #12 and Portland at #22. After that? Spokane at #67. Outside of California, the Washington-Oregon area is surrounded by Alaska and Canada and Idaho and Nevada (Vegas is in the far southern end of Nevada).

And I know, I know, "population isn't everything". Except, in this case, you have a fairly weak sports market. Those 12 million people are concentrated in two areas with a LOT of land in between, and football is not nearly as big of a deal up there as it is in the southeast. Travel is challenging, both for local fans and rival fans. Three of the four big sports universities in those states are fairly remote from the two big urban areas. So these are not natural and enthusiastic sports markets, at least not nearly as other available schools are in other parts of the country.

But Washington/Oregon took half. And not only cranked up their spots in the pecking order, but fundamentally changed the economics and bargaining positions for everyone else. BEFORE Washington/Oregon, F$U thought that the Big 10 would pay their exit fee. BEFORE Washington/Oregon, nobody thought SMU would take ZERO-POINT-ZERO to get into the ACC.

So while Miami spent a lot of time and political capital to position itself, and has done (almost) as much as it can do, the Washington/Oregon situation screwed everything up on the "expectations" side. Now it is much harder to know how many schools the SEC and Big 10 might take, and what kinds of arrangements might need to be made. ****, if SMU offered to play in the SEC for free, do we honestly believe that a proposal like that would be rejected without discussion? That could be a very tempting offer for the SEC.

Speaking to people who know, there are certain things that are in Miami's favor and/or that Miami can impact. But there are some other factors that are a lot more complicated and are out of our hands.

I still believe that a lot of people feel that "Florida" is too big for the Big 10 to ignore us forever. But how much the Big 10 will pay (and when) were heavily impacted by Washington/Oregon.

And as evidenced by Washington's university budget, a Big 10 half-share will exceed an ACC full-share.


View attachment 292757

There will be those who call this a convenient excuse for changing positions, but it's the truth and they're idiots, which is also the truth.

 

[TheOriginalCane]

There will be those who call this a convenient excuse for changing positions, but it's the truth and they're idiots, which is also the truth.

Well, I haven't changed positions, for one thing. I still think Miami fits with the Big 10 and represents a synergistic Big 10 expansion candidate that brings in the State of Florida. The timing of the process and the amount of money we are able to command has become complicated due to Washington/Oregon. I think we will eventually join with the Big 10, but the process does not pay for itself as quickly if we have to take a half-share instead of a full-share.

And, yes, the truth is that there are a lot of moving parts that have evolved over the last 2 years. Acknowledging that truth will not make any of the idiot mopey porsters happy, they are just miserable by nature.

 

[kccanefan]

I'll be as direct as I can be.

Quite a few people felt like we had a solid strategy for a long, slow build-up. AAU membership. Greater commitment to coaching staffs and facilities. Nice collegial relationships, including Frenk supporting "let's get back to football" during COVID.

But I've said this before. The Washington/Oregon desperation changed everything. Washington/Oregon were not the preferred partners of USC/UCLA. Washington/Oregon weren't even in the top 2 spots for the Big 10. But their ploy to take half-shares changed EVERYONE'S calculus. It was obvious that the networks would do anything, for the right price. That move ****ed up the expected timeline and the expected pecking order.

I said it then and it is still true. Washington/Oregon changed everything. Moreso than Texas/Oklahoma. Moreso than USC/UCLA. At least with those pairs of teams, you could expect movement, they were the two most desirable teams in their respective conferences.

But no matter how many Grey's Anatomy/Portlandia fans try to convince you that Washington/Oregon are some great programs that everyone covets, it's a load of horse****. On every level. No matter how koool you think Oregon's uniforms are.

Washington is the 13th largest state, with 7.8 million people. Oregon is the 27th largest, with 4.2 million people. For media markets, you've got Sea-Tac at #12 and Portland at #22. After that? Spokane at #67. Outside of California, the Washington-Oregon area is surrounded by Alaska and Canada and Idaho and Nevada (Vegas is in the far southern end of Nevada).

And I know, I know, "population isn't everything". Except, in this case, you have a fairly weak sports market. Those 12 million people are concentrated in two areas with a LOT of land in between, and football is not nearly as big of a deal up there as it is in the southeast. Travel is challenging, both for local fans and rival fans. Three of the four big sports universities in those states are fairly remote from the two big urban areas. So these are not natural and enthusiastic sports markets, at least not nearly as other available schools are in other parts of the country.

But Washington/Oregon took half. And not only cranked up their spots in the pecking order, but fundamentally changed the economics and bargaining positions for everyone else. BEFORE Washington/Oregon, F$U thought that the Big 10 would pay their exit fee. BEFORE Washington/Oregon, nobody thought SMU would take ZERO-POINT-ZERO to get into the ACC.

So while Miami spent a lot of time and political capital to position itself, and has done (almost) as much as it can do, the Washington/Oregon situation screwed everything up on the "expectations" side. Now it is much harder to know how many schools the SEC and Big 10 might take, and what kinds of arrangements might need to be made. ****, if SMU offered to play in the SEC for free, do we honestly believe that a proposal like that would be rejected without discussion? That could be a very tempting offer for the SEC.

Speaking to people who know, there are certain things that are in Miami's favor and/or that Miami can impact. But there are some other factors that are a lot more complicated and are out of our hands.

I still believe that a lot of people feel that "Florida" is too big for the Big 10 to ignore us forever. But how much the Big 10 will pay (and when) were heavily impacted by Washington/Oregon.

And as evidenced by Washington's university budget, a Big 10 half-share will exceed an ACC full-share.


View attachment 292757

 

[JD08]

Well, I haven't changed positions, for one thing. I still think Miami fits with the Big 10 and represents a synergistic Big 10 expansion candidate that brings in the State of Florida. The timing of the process and the amount of money we are able to command has become complicated due to Washington/Oregon. I think we will eventually join with the Big 10, but the process does not pay for itself as quickly if we have to take a half-share instead of a full-share.

And, yes, the truth is that there are a lot of moving parts that have evolved over the last 2 years. Acknowledging that truth will not make any of the idiot mopey porsters happy, they are just miserable by nature.

Nor have I, but I'm not as confident as I once was and that's entirely due to the PAC 12 collapse.

 

[DTP]

I’ve been out of this thread for a bit and acknowledge that I know very little about any of the logistics involved here but let me ask a question to those who know something. Washington and Oregon took a 1/2 money short term deal just to get into the BIG and that 1/2 deal would still pay more than the ACC, wouldn’t it be a good idea for Miami to consider something similar? Especially if the only other option would be just collecting the same paltry ACC payout for the foreseeable future?

 

[TheOriginalCane]

Agree 100% .... the implosion of the Pac12 and the subsequent "unscheduled addition" of OR / WA totally changed the conference realignment dynamics. Prior to the demise of the Pac12 the "speculation" was that the B10 would form their southern tier with 4 ACC programs, including Miami, and then add OR / WA potentially in 2030. Now with possibly only 2 slots left for the next expansion and a broad range of "selection criteria", it might be the eventual destination, but when?

My primary hope is that all of these delays cause everyone to think things through, instead of making decisions within 48 hour timeframes.

I still think that F$U and Clemson are far better fits for the SEC than anyone else, though I realize the SEC badly wants UNC and UVA to finally finish representing all 13 stars on the Confederate battle flag.

And I think that Miami and Notre Dame are ideal fits the the Big 10.

After that, the timing and payouts get hazy. Five teams deserve full payouts (Miami, F$U, Clemson, UNC, and Notre Dame if they join a conference). Everyone else is just a place-filler.

 

[TheOriginalCane]

I think that is right. And everything we know, tells us we don’t have anywhere to go at the moment. So control what you can, including supporting the ACC lawsuits and continue to work on your University and Athletic Department. My guess is if they go outside, which I think they definitely will, they try to make a big splash with the President hire.

This would be the perfect time to hire Rice. Right person, right time.

 

[TheOriginalCane]

I’ve been out of this thread for a bit and acknowledge that I know very little about any of the logistics involved here but let me ask a question to those who know something. Washington and Oregon took a 1/2 money short term deal just to get into the BIG and that 1/2 deal would still pay more than the ACC, wouldn’t it be a good idea for Miami to consider something similar? Especially if the only other option would be just collecting the same paltry ACC payout for the foreseeable future?

The differential is this.

The Pac 12 was at the end of their GOR deal (thus no need to file lawsuits to "determine" the size or applicability of the duplicative second penalty), and I'm not even sure if they had to pay the primary exit fee to leave the Pac 12 since the whole conference fell apart.

I guess Washington State and Oregon State can try to demand payment, but either way, I don't think the Pac 12 exit penalty was as steep as the ACC exit penalty.

To pay a $150M exit penalty AND only get a half-share is...challenging...

But I think it should still be done, if that is the way to make a deal.

 

[hurricaneman]

He's 100% their "Q".

 

[FL Cane]

He's 100% their "Q".

Genetics has mad 1200 posts on warchant? Does the guy live on there?