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

[Empirical Cane]

Two reasons:

1. FSU and Clemson got what they (and the Canes, too) wanted.

It's gonna cost the schools with a P2 ticket roughly $120M — give or take $10M if they leave in the 2027-28 range with media rights intact. They'll make up a good chunk of that change with increased ticket sales and other income in a major-leagie conference.

That the ACC accepted this pennies-on-the-dollar deal says plenty about how weak Jim Phillips' hand was and ultimately how the GoR was severely weakened once the schools trying to leave put their cases in front of a friendly judges.

2. No doubt in my mind Sankey and Petitti relayed to leadership at Clemson and especially FSU to pipe down and quit trying their cases in the court of public opinion. There's a reason why the two schools have been pretty much silent for the last 6 months or so -- even as clueless ACC homers were taking a victory lap last month after ESPN's (toothless) opt-in on the media agreement.

The last thing any commissioner wants is his member schools raising **** and suing the conference

I need to think through this a bit more....

I don't disagree with what you have above....

 

[caneingville]

Yes, and thank you FSU (and Clemson to a lesser extent) for spending hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees so that Miami could get the same benefits are opportunities as you get.......for FREE. LOL

I don’t care as much about the legal fees. Bud is just dumb. And that’s not the point. The point (in my mind, as a former litigator and in-house counsel) wasn’t to NEVER litigate, it was to wait a bit and see what happens. There were a few ways it could have gone, for example, if they were going to settle quickly, if it was going to get dirty, etc. I thought it would be advantageous to see the ACC’s hand, particularly since Florida State already filed in Florida. I understand why other attorneys disagree, and respect their opinion. But that was my personal opinion.

Edit: other, not although

 

[CaneinBroward]

Yes, actually the landscape was very different then. You can cherry-pick quotes all you want, but we all know that the conferences we’re looking to expand then.

We did? You have much better radar than I did. Texas and Oklahoma was a surprise when it was announced and when USC and UCLA were announced, even more so.

I agree with you that it doesn't look like anyone is in the mood for expanding now, but would I ever say "no way"? Not after those examples.

Btw, Fox and ESPN wanted them to expand more than the conferences themselves did IMO.

 

[Hold My Beer]

Yes, actually the landscape was very different then. You can cherry-pick quotes all you want, but we all know that the conferences we’re looking to expand then.

Plenty of folks think the top ACC brands don't have anywhere to go for roughly the next 5 years. More power to 'em.

I happen to strongly disagree.

Time will tell.

 

[caneingville]

We did? You have much better radar than I did. Texas and Oklahoma was a surprise when it was announced and when USC and UCLA were announced, even more so.

I agree with you that it doesn't look like anyone is in the mood for expanding now, but would I ever say "no way"? Not after those examples.

Btw, Fox and ESPN wanted them to expand more than the conferences themselves did IMO.

There had been constant talk of expansion, and rumors here and there if lots of teams. Did we all know the exact day about Texas/OU and USC/UCLA? No, but it wasn’t the shock heard ‘round the world because the rumors had been out there for a long time about them and practically every other realistic team out there.

Plenty of folks think the top ACC brands don't have anywhere to go for roughly the next 5 years. More power to 'em.

I happen to strongly disagree.

Time will tell.

But that’s not what we are saying. We are saying TODAY. March 2025.

Over the next five years is a different story. I don’t think we are arguing that with you.

 

[cway313]

You got all that from what I said? Are you visiting from Warchant? Your logic is on par with the Noles over there.

The ACC is at the end of the road. Idk what point you are trying to make, but that is indisputable.

 

[caneingville]

The ACC is at the end of the road. Idk what point you are trying to make, but that is indisputable.

Good Lord. I suppose in internet terms, I must explain things to you like you are five.

I find the hyperbole to be ridiculous. The settlement agreement isn’t even dry yet (probably hasn’t even been signed). Some of you are speaking in very black and white language, when none of us know what discussions have been happening behind the scenes - particularly with the new president at the helm. I personally believe we are in a better position to move to a different conference sooner given that we did not sue, and run our mouths off like FSU did. And we have always been in a better financial position than FSU to pay any potential exit fees.

However, I am glad that in the meantime, if we do our job, we will be (somewhat) rewarded based on merit, while we can CONTINUE to explore our options. I also am cautiously optimistic that the new president won’t **** around with making sure the athletic department and academic integrity of the university are both appropriately aligned.

Hope that helps.

 

[cway313]

Good Lord. I suppose in internet terms, I must explain things to you like you are five.

I find the hyperbole to be ridiculous. The settlement agreement isn’t even dry yet (probably hasn’t even been signed). Some of you are speaking in very black and white language, when none of us know what discussions have been happening behind the scenes - particularly with the new president at the helm. I personally believe we are in a better position to move to a different conference sooner given that we did not sue, and run our mouths off like FSU did. And we have always been in a better financial position than FSU to pay any potential exit fees.

However, I am glad that in the meantime, if we do our job, we will be (somewhat) rewarded based on merit, while we can CONTINUE to explore our options. I also am cautiously optimistic that the new president won’t **** around with making sure the athletic department and academic integrity of the university are both appropriately aligned.

Hope that helps.

What does any of this have to do with conference stability? For perspective the B1G and SEC are flourishing. How do you describe the PAC12 and ACC?

 

[Rellyrell]

OK, let me peek my head in for a minute to calm down the overreactions.

Before any future conference expansion begins, it has to make financial sense for both the conference members and the networks. If the BIG contract is re-negotiated and it stays on par with the current contract, they are not expanding b/c it will cut into the revenue pie. We forget that currently UO, & UW r receiving partial payment, but in 2029-30, they will be receiving full payment.

If the networks see it feasible to pay even more $$ to expand, then yes they will.

The SEC is maintaining its brand to remain regional. Clemson is the only team I last checked that is on their radar, and it’s not a certainty they will take them before their contract ends in 2034.

U can’t just leave b/c u want to leave, u have to have an invite. No team in the ACC has a formal invite, but I can tell u that USC, UCLA all had invites prior to their departure, & the PAC-12’s inability to secure a media deal forced their hands to jump ship once the media rights ended. Texas & Oklahoma were in discussions to join the SEC before they announced.

So, here’s the remaining ?’s

-Will the B1G’s upcoming media rights create more revenue increase as is?

-Will the B1G’s brass discuss potentially expanding in new markets that will be advantageous to media partners, thus creating more revenue opportunities for all members?

-Will the SEC expand, and if so, will they expand past 2 teams?

-Will the SEC expand prior to their media rights deal renews?

-With the new distribution model, will schools like Cal, Stanford, or SMU defect to new conferences allowing more $$ to be distributed among remaining schools?

There’s still a **** ton that needs to be sorted out, but at least we now know the $$ that’s involved, & w/o FSU & Clemson challenging the GOR, we would be stuck until 2036, period. The amount of conjecture & false hopes in this thread is quite maddening.

 

[Angry Ibis]

OK, let me peek my head in for a minute to calm down the overreactions.

Before any future conference expansion begins, it has to make financial sense for both the conference members and the networks. If the BIG contract is re-negotiated and it stays on par with the current contract, they are not expanding b/c it will cut into the revenue pie. We forget that currently UO, & UW r receiving partial payment, but in 2029-30, they will be receiving full payment.

If the networks see it feasible to pay even more $$ to expand, then yes they will.

The SEC is maintaining its brand to remain regional. Clemson is the only team I last checked that is on their radar, and it’s not a certainty they will take them before their contract ends in 2034.

U can’t just leave b/c u want to leave, u have to have an invite. No team in the ACC has a formal invite, but I can tell u that USC, UCLA all had invites prior to their departure, & the PAC-12’s inability to secure a media deal forced their hands to jump ship once the media rights ended. Texas & Oklahoma were in discussions to join the SEC before they announced.

So, here’s the remaining ?’s

-Will the B1G’s upcoming media rights create more revenue increase as is?

-Will the B1G’s brass discuss potentially expanding in new markets that will be advantageous to media partners, thus creating more revenue opportunities for all members?

-Will the SEC expand, and if so, will they expand past 2 teams?

-Will the SEC expand prior to their media rights deal renews?

-With the new distribution model, will schools like Cal, Stanford, or SMU defect to new conferences allowing more $$ to be distributed among remaining schools?

There’s still a **** ton that needs to be sorted out, but at least we now know the $$ that’s involved, & w/o FSU & Clemson challenging the GOR, we would be stuck until 2036, period. The amount of conjecture & false hopes in this thread is quite maddening.

This thread was much more fun when we were guaranteed to the SEC..... the B1G.... even the XII discussions were more fun than the real world.

 

[canesbaby]

WE got the money… do we have the DANCE partner?

if FSU goes to the B10 in the next 2 years and we remain in the ACC, feels like that's a HUGE gamble with our entire athletics program's future. Would there be a reason for the B10 to go into Florida twice? Guessing Miami is going to have to come up with the ~$130 mill at the same time FSU does if we want to be part of one of the big conferences.

 

[Hold My Beer]

OK, let me peek my head in for a minute to calm down the overreactions.

Good luck with dat

Before any future conference expansion begins, it has to make financial sense for both the conference members and the networks. If the BIG contract is re-negotiated and it stays on par with the current contract, they are not expanding b/c it will cut into the revenue pie. We forget that currently UO, & UW r receiving partial payment, but in 2029-30, they will be receiving full payment.

If the networks see it feasible to pay even more $$ to expand, then yes they will.

The SEC is maintaining its brand to remain regional. Clemson is the only team I last checked that is on their radar, and it’s not a certainty they will take them before their contract ends in 2034.

U can’t just leave b/c u want to leave, u have to have an invite. No team in the ACC has a formal invite, but I can tell u that USC, UCLA all had invites prior to their departure, & the PAC-12’s inability to secure a media deal forced their hands to jump ship once the media rights ended. Texas & Oklahoma were in discussions to join the SEC before they announced.

All good points

I happen to think the train is already headed down the track and we outchea in the summer of 2027 or '28.

It behooves both the SEC and B1G to scoop up the remaining "big brands" and freeze out any private equity interlopers, e.g. the Super League folks. The sooner, the better.

The ACC schools can come in at a U-Dub/Oregon discount for a couple years, then be made whole with the new TV deals.

Killing the ACC is gonna shift a significant share of the CFP money to the P2 conferences as well, which, if needed, could be used to "encourage" existing SEC and B1G schools to approve expansion

 

[Empirical Cane]

The ACC is at the end of the road. Idk what point you are trying to make, but that is indisputable.

We'll see.

 

[Empirical Cane]

OK, let me peek my head in for a minute to calm down the overreactions.

Before any future conference expansion begins, it has to make financial sense for both the conference members and the networks. If the BIG contract is re-negotiated and it stays on par with the current contract, they are not expanding b/c it will cut into the revenue pie. We forget that currently UO, & UW r receiving partial payment, but in 2029-30, they will be receiving full payment.

If the networks see it feasible to pay even more $$ to expand, then yes they will.

The SEC is maintaining its brand to remain regional. Clemson is the only team I last checked that is on their radar, and it’s not a certainty they will take them before their contract ends in 2034.

U can’t just leave b/c u want to leave, u have to have an invite. No team in the ACC has a formal invite, but I can tell u that USC, UCLA all had invites prior to their departure, & the PAC-12’s inability to secure a media deal forced their hands to jump ship once the media rights ended. Texas & Oklahoma were in discussions to join the SEC before they announced.

So, here’s the remaining ?’s

-Will the B1G’s upcoming media rights create more revenue increase as is?

-Will the B1G’s brass discuss potentially expanding in new markets that will be advantageous to media partners, thus creating more revenue opportunities for all members?

-Will the SEC expand, and if so, will they expand past 2 teams?

-Will the SEC expand prior to their media rights deal renews?

-With the new distribution model, will schools like Cal, Stanford, or SMU defect to new conferences allowing more $$ to be distributed among remaining schools?

There’s still a **** ton that needs to be sorted out, but at least we now know the $$ that’s involved, & w/o FSU & Clemson challenging the GOR, we would be stuck until 2036, period. The amount of conjecture & false hopes in this thread is quite maddening.

Rutgers, NW, Meeenesota, Iowa, and probably Maryland are getting kicked to the curb like a *****.

#WalkOfShame

 

[3FW]

The program is light years ahead of where we were before Dan and Mario were hired. The rest of the Athletic Dept. is another story and that hurts our overall story. It's time for Dan to fully retire and let us hire our version of Peter Bevacqua.

 

[CANESCANES]

 

[Imukat]

Is it any wonder that FSU isn't known for its business school?

Who is paying for this?

That’s why they go around wishing the Spanx lady a HBD each year thinking she’ll donate some of her billion.

 

[caneingville]

What does any of this have to do with conference stability? For perspective the B1G and SEC are flourishing. How do you describe the PAC12 and ACC?

Holy ****. Do you have any reading comprehension skills whatsoever? How do I describe the PAC12 and ACC?!?

Uh, I don’t know? How do you describe something that doesn’t exist anymore and something that still does, with a future that is uncertain but is temporarily more positive than it was a year ago? What a ridiculous question.

 

[caneingville]

That’s why they go around wishing the Spanx lady a HBD each year thinking she’ll donate some of her billion.

Exactly. And yet Sara is too busy upward failing with her sneaker heels to throw them any dough.

 

[cway313]

Holy ****. Do you have any reading comprehension skills whatsoever? How do I describe the PAC12 and ACC?!?

Uh, I don’t know? How do you describe something that doesn’t exist anymore and something that still does, with a future that is uncertain but is temporarily more positive than it was a year ago? What a ridiculous question.

Yikes!