(04-13-2012 05:14 PM)Bull Wrote:  

(04-13-2012 03:51 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  

(04-13-2012 03:48 PM)EerMeNow Wrote:  

(04-13-2012 03:37 PM)ecuacc4ever Wrote:  

(04-13-2012 03:28 PM)Bull Wrote:  Been reading the boards all day, the vast majority seem to believe ACC teams to the B12 is not going to happen. Remember, the B12 itself was on life support just a year ago.

That's because the Big Texas XII WAS (and to some extent, continues to be) instable. Instable enough for a stalwart like Texas A&M to leave, along with Missouri.

The ACC, however, is stable, and the despite the rantings of a few CU fans and a few hopeful WVU fans, Clemson and FSU are going nowhere.

Do stable conferences raise their exit fees? What is the SEC and Big 10 exit fee?

SEC, nothing. B1G, a 25 year grant of rights.

I don't think anyone would argue that the B10 and SEC are at the 'top' of the mountain. I fail to see how that has anything at all to do with the question: would ACC teams consider moving to the B12? Clearly the ACC is the more stable of the two, exit fees not withstanding. The B12 may put on some lipstick and try to lure a few ACC teams, but consensus seems to be 'ain't gonna happen!'. lol

I am not saying that the Big 12 is a picture of stability. But I am not sure that the ACC is either. Why did they raise the exit fee?



What seems more stable: a $20 million dollar exit fee that some schools were rumored to only reluctantly agree to or a 6 year (rumored to soon be 13 year) grant of rights?

Pitt and Syracuse asked the ACC to raise their exit fee as a sign that all the schools were committed to the conference as a condition of them joining. There was a short discussion about the amount and a vote was taken to raise the exit fee to $20 million dollars.

(04-13-2012 05:51 PM)WakeForestRanger Wrote:  Pitt and Syracuse asked the ACC to raise their exit fee as a sign that all the schools were committed to the conference as a condition of them joining. There was a short discussion about the amount and a vote was taken to raise the exit fee to $20 million dollars.

Thank you, WFRanger.

</discussion>

Increase of exit fees to put stability on paper is an obvious sign of instability guys

(04-13-2012 07:01 PM)ecuacc4ever Wrote:  

(04-13-2012 05:51 PM)WakeForestRanger Wrote:  Pitt and Syracuse asked the ACC to raise their exit fee as a sign that all the schools were committed to the conference as a condition of them joining. There was a short discussion about the amount and a vote was taken to raise the exit fee to $20 million dollars.

Thank you, WFRanger.

</discussion>

The most stable conferences do not need exit fees. People have a misguided belief that exit fees demonstrate a commitment. A $20 million buy-out did not stop WVU from leaving. If a team wants to leave a conference badly enough and a better offer is on the table, no buy-out is going to stop them.

(04-13-2012 07:14 PM)EerMeNow Wrote:  

(04-13-2012 07:01 PM)ecuacc4ever Wrote:  

(04-13-2012 05:51 PM)WakeForestRanger Wrote:  Pitt and Syracuse asked the ACC to raise their exit fee as a sign that all the schools were committed to the conference as a condition of them joining. There was a short discussion about the amount and a vote was taken to raise the exit fee to $20 million dollars.

Thank you, WFRanger.

</discussion>

The most stable conferences do not need exit fees. People have a misguided belief that exit fees demonstrate a commitment. A $20 million buy-out did not stop WVU from leaving. If a team wants to leave a conference badly enough and a better offer is on the table, no buy-out is going to stop them.

You're comparing West Virginia wanting out of the Big East, to teams (possibly) wanting out of the ACC? West Virginia was told "no" by two different conferences, and the XII just had an exodus of teams. Both were desperate. The XII acted because they had too, West Virginia acted because they had too. I think if it wasn't necessary for the XII to get to 10, that WVU wouldn't be there. Neither would TCU. They would have stayed at 8, and explore options close by, but outside of the state of Texas.

Also, the B1G doesn't have an exit fee. They have a contract where you sell them your soul for 25years. With the way you're interpreting "exit fees" it must mean the B1G is ridiculously unstable.

(04-13-2012 07:14 PM)EerMeNow Wrote:  

(04-13-2012 07:01 PM)ecuacc4ever Wrote:  

(04-13-2012 05:51 PM)WakeForestRanger Wrote:  Pitt and Syracuse asked the ACC to raise their exit fee as a sign that all the schools were committed to the conference as a condition of them joining. There was a short discussion about the amount and a vote was taken to raise the exit fee to $20 million dollars.

Thank you, WFRanger.

</discussion>

The most stable conferences do not need exit fees. People have a misguided belief that exit fees demonstrate a commitment. A $20 million buy-out did not stop WVU from leaving. If a team wants to leave a conference badly enough and a better offer is on the table, no buy-out is going to stop them.

A 7 year deal just to keep the Big XII together just reeks of stability.

#JustSayin

(04-13-2012 08:22 PM)ClairtonPanther Wrote:  

(04-13-2012 07:14 PM)EerMeNow Wrote:  

(04-13-2012 07:01 PM)ecuacc4ever Wrote:  

(04-13-2012 05:51 PM)WakeForestRanger Wrote:  Pitt and Syracuse asked the ACC to raise their exit fee as a sign that all the schools were committed to the conference as a condition of them joining. There was a short discussion about the amount and a vote was taken to raise the exit fee to $20 million dollars.

Thank you, WFRanger.

</discussion>

The most stable conferences do not need exit fees. People have a misguided belief that exit fees demonstrate a commitment. A $20 million buy-out did not stop WVU from leaving. If a team wants to leave a conference badly enough and a better offer is on the table, no buy-out is going to stop them.

A 7 year deal just to keep the Big XII together just reeks of stability.

#JustSayin

But wouldnt you feel more comfortable with the ACC engaging in a similar deal rather than raising a buy-out? Just sayin too.....

(04-13-2012 08:33 PM)EerMeNow Wrote:  

(04-13-2012 08:22 PM)ClairtonPanther Wrote:  

(04-13-2012 07:14 PM)EerMeNow Wrote:  

(04-13-2012 07:01 PM)ecuacc4ever Wrote:  

(04-13-2012 05:51 PM)WakeForestRanger Wrote:  Pitt and Syracuse asked the ACC to raise their exit fee as a sign that all the schools were committed to the conference as a condition of them joining. There was a short discussion about the amount and a vote was taken to raise the exit fee to $20 million dollars.

Thank you, WFRanger.

</discussion>

The most stable conferences do not need exit fees. People have a misguided belief that exit fees demonstrate a commitment. A $20 million buy-out did not stop WVU from leaving. If a team wants to leave a conference badly enough and a better offer is on the table, no buy-out is going to stop them.

A 7 year deal just to keep the Big XII together just reeks of stability.

#JustSayin

But wouldnt you feel more comfortable with the ACC engaging in a similar deal rather than raising a buy-out? Just sayin too.....

Nah, we actually trust each other.

(04-13-2012 05:23 PM)EerMeNow Wrote:  

(04-13-2012 05:14 PM)Bull Wrote:  

(04-13-2012 03:51 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  

(04-13-2012 03:48 PM)EerMeNow Wrote:  

(04-13-2012 03:37 PM)ecuacc4ever Wrote:  That's because the Big Texas XII WAS (and to some extent, continues to be) instable. Instable enough for a stalwart like Texas A&M to leave, along with Missouri.

The ACC, however, is stable, and the despite the rantings of a few CU fans and a few hopeful WVU fans, Clemson and FSU are going nowhere.

Do stable conferences raise their exit fees? What is the SEC and Big 10 exit fee?

SEC, nothing. B1G, a 25 year grant of rights.

I don't think anyone would argue that the B10 and SEC are at the 'top' of the mountain. I fail to see how that has anything at all to do with the question: would ACC teams consider moving to the B12? Clearly the ACC is the more stable of the two, exit fees not withstanding. The B12 may put on some lipstick and try to lure a few ACC teams, but consensus seems to be 'ain't gonna happen!'. lol

I am not saying that the Big 12 is a picture of stability. But I am not sure that the ACC is either. Why did they raise the exit fee?



What seems more stable: a $20 million dollar exit fee that some schools were rumored to only reluctantly agree to or a 6 year (rumored to soon be 13 year) grant of rights?

WV has already demonstrated that exit contracts and exit fees do not contribute anything to stability, so it's irrelevant. So why would a grant of rights be any 'more' binding? When schools choose to ignore their 'binding' agreements... well, you get the idea. As has been pointed out on other threads, if the PAC 16 forms, it's next 4 schools could very well be the heart of the B12. Ouch. Or not... time will tell. Anything else is useless crystal ball time.

(04-13-2012 05:23 PM)EerMeNow Wrote:  

(04-13-2012 05:14 PM)Bull Wrote:  

(04-13-2012 03:51 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  

(04-13-2012 03:48 PM)EerMeNow Wrote:  

(04-13-2012 03:37 PM)ecuacc4ever Wrote:  That's because the Big Texas XII WAS (and to some extent, continues to be) instable. Instable enough for a stalwart like Texas A&M to leave, along with Missouri.

The ACC, however, is stable, and the despite the rantings of a few CU fans and a few hopeful WVU fans, Clemson and FSU are going nowhere.

Do stable conferences raise their exit fees? What is the SEC and Big 10 exit fee?

SEC, nothing. B1G, a 25 year grant of rights.

I don't think anyone would argue that the B10 and SEC are at the 'top' of the mountain. I fail to see how that has anything at all to do with the question: would ACC teams consider moving to the B12? Clearly the ACC is the more stable of the two, exit fees not withstanding. The B12 may put on some lipstick and try to lure a few ACC teams, but consensus seems to be 'ain't gonna happen!'. lol

I am not saying that the Big 12 is a picture of stability. But I am not sure that the ACC is either. Why did they raise the exit fee?



What seems more stable: a $20 million dollar exit fee that some schools were rumored to only reluctantly agree to or a 6 year (rumored to soon be 13 year) grant of rights?

WakeForestRanger has already answered your question but I just wanted to elaborate a little. When the Acc was inviting Pitt and SU, during that time, there were reports that the SEC was negotiating with VT, then Clemson etc... Increasing the exit fees was a way to reassure any new candidate that the conference was stable and that no one was leaving.

When the SEC and the Big 10 come calling, pretty much every other conference in the country will get nervous. That is not the case with the Big 12.

(04-13-2012 01:39 PM)Cn2147237 Wrote:  It all comes down to money -- either ACC or Big 12 -- and if The Big 12 has a substantial difference in annual tv rev.

This is what most people seem to ignore. This is the whole crux of the issue imo. And nobody on here has any idea what the money will actually be.

(04-13-2012 05:51 PM)WakeForestRanger Wrote:  Pitt and Syracuse asked the ACC to raise their exit fee as a sign that all the schools were committed to the conference as a condition of them joining. There was a short discussion about the amount and a vote was taken to raise the exit fee to $20 million dollars.

The ACC wanted to raise it to $34M. FSU's President, along with Maryland, talked everyone down from the $34M figure to "only" $20M, or a $4M increase.

One area where FSU did play a larger role in the conference was negotiating down the new exit fee recently voted on by the school presidents. Even though Florida State president Eric Barron was part of the unanimous vote to increase the penalty to $20 million, he was the driving force behind making sure the fee wasn't too high.

"There was a lot of discussion on it and Eric (Barron) really handled that brilliantly," Haggard said. "There was talk of a $34 million penalty and it was at $16 (million). Eric made some outstanding comments to the committee, to the ACC to explain this and that and did a great job for us. He brought that (penalty) down. He and I think Maryland and another school, they all had a problem with it being that much and brought it down to $20 (million) which is only an increase of four (million)."

I don't see any SEC possibilities. But hey, we'll listen."

- FSU Board of Trustees Chairman, Andy Haggard, September 20, 2011

Interesting read although there's not really anything most don't already know - aside from the exit fee stuff. Talks about his happiness with the ACC, the ACC's options to get to 16 and SEC interest. Basically, I think a lot hinges on ND. Because a lot of money hinges on ND and more national respect football-wise, even if they haven't been winning national titles lately. Money, increased national perception and intriguing matchups. That's what most FSU fans who are entertaining expansion thoughts are looking for.

(04-13-2012 07:13 PM)fsugrad99 Wrote:  Increase of exit fees to put stability on paper is an obvious sign of instability guys

It hasn't helped The BEast any, and neither will their increase, unless they get one hell of a TV offer...

(04-14-2012 03:18 AM)JustAnotherName Wrote:  

(04-13-2012 05:51 PM)WakeForestRanger Wrote:  Pitt and Syracuse asked the ACC to raise their exit fee as a sign that all the schools were committed to the conference as a condition of them joining. There was a short discussion about the amount and a vote was taken to raise the exit fee to $20 million dollars.

The ACC wanted to raise it to $34M. FSU's President, along with Maryland, talked everyone down from the $34M figure to "only" $20M, or a $4M increase.

One area where FSU did play a larger role in the conference was negotiating down the new exit fee recently voted on by the school presidents. Even though Florida State president Eric Barron was part of the unanimous vote to increase the penalty to $20 million, he was the driving force behind making sure the fee wasn't too high.

"There was a lot of discussion on it and Eric (Barron) really handled that brilliantly," Haggard said. "There was talk of a $34 million penalty and it was at $16 (million). Eric made some outstanding comments to the committee, to the ACC to explain this and that and did a great job for us. He brought that (penalty) down. He and I think Maryland and another school, they all had a problem with it being that much and brought it down to $20 (million) which is only an increase of four (million)."

I don't see any SEC possibilities. But hey, we'll listen."

- FSU Board of Trustees Chairman, Andy Haggard, September 20, 2011

Interesting read although there's not really anything most don't already know - aside from the exit fee stuff. Talks about his happiness with the ACC, the ACC's options to get to 16 and SEC interest. Basically, I think a lot hinges on ND. Because a lot of money hinges on ND and more national respect football-wise, even if they haven't been winning national titles lately. Money, increased national perception and intriguing matchups. That's what most FSU fans who are entertaining expansion thoughts are looking for.

Exactly Maryland and FSU know that they could get too good to turn down offers elsewhere and don't want to get stuck paying a gazillion dollars to get out.

Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk 2

Funny thing is, if the ACC were to forego its senses, hold the door open for West Virginia and actually extend them an invite, the academically driven decision-makers would be all over that in a NY minute.

(04-13-2012 02:23 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  

(04-13-2012 02:06 PM)stever20 Wrote:  One thing to remember- Chip nailed the TCU to the Big 12 story 6 months ago. Absolutely nailed it. So if he were to say something about Clemson and FSU going to the Big 12- I'd believe it in a second.

IIRC, he also had Texas in the PAC as a done deal prior to that. So, there's that.

And he wasn't the only one so what does that tell you?

The Big 12 will become desperate because the next move for the SEC will be to pluck two Big 12 schools. It will be some combination of Oklahoma/Oklahoma St.-Oklahoma/Texas....The future SEC WEST will look something like.

Miss.
Miss St.
LSU
Texas A&M
Arkansas
Missouri
Oklahoma
Oklahoma St./Texas


The SEC is not stupid and will go back to being what made it great...Geography. That West lineup would be a monster for the SEC....Oh looks like Alabama & Auburn will be in the SEC EAST....Im sure this sounds real good to Florida State & Clemson...They will be rushing right over to the Big 12!

(04-14-2012 06:50 PM)cardshouse Wrote:  The Big 12 will become desperate because the next move for the SEC will be to pluck two Big 12 schools. It will be some combination of Oklahoma/Oklahoma St.-Oklahoma/Texas....The future SEC WEST will look something like.

Miss.
Miss St.
LSU
Texas A&M
Arkansas
Missouri
Oklahoma
Oklahoma St./Texas


The SEC is not stupid and will go back to being what made it great...Geography. That West lineup would be a monster for the SEC....Oh looks like Alabama & Auburn will be in the SEC EAST....Im sure this sounds real good to Florida State & Clemson...They will be rushing right over to the Big 12!

The SEC is not going to use it's last two spots for Oklahoma and Oklahoma State. Oklahoma and Texas will not be able to divorce their significant others in order to do such.

You speak as if this speculation is a done deal. At least you can speak of such as only one possibility of many like the rest of us do.

The Big XII teams have signed their media rights over to the conference......no one going anywhere.