My view is that the school would still get paid. The problem is that once you factor in exit fees, likely .5-2mm increases in travel cost, and the low amount of money their road games would generate.... it really kills incentive for both parties.

Broken down.

The league taking them in gets:

- Increased value of road games... maybe.... depending on the team. Now ND's road football and all games in other sports is rumored to be worth 14mm to the ACC (a 1mm per team bump) so a school without even it's home hoops rights won't do any better than that and frankly will be very lucky to match that.

- Getting out of the B1G, PAC, or B12 for less than 5-10mm is not likely now. So it's a 4-9mm loss right there.

- Nebraska's costs increased by 1mm per year jumping from the regional Big 12 north to a farther flung Big Ten. TCU's costs jumped 500k when they first joined the MWC from CUSA. That adds to it.

So it may not be perfect but unless the raiding league wants less cash upfront to "invest" in an addition I simply don't see it making sense. They get little value and the moving team loses money.

(03-04-2013 02:29 PM)BewareThePhog Wrote:  ...but it also seems likely that if the departing school could continue to collect TV money from the conference that they've left that it would have been reported.

That assumes many things. First, that sports reporters are intelligent. Two, that sports reporters care about convoluted details. Three, that sports reporters believe their audiences will tune in long enough for them to explain a convoluted detail like the anticipated function of a creative liquidated damages clause.

You can't get this level of detail on CNBC, much less on ESPN.

(03-04-2013 02:36 PM)S11 Wrote:  - Increased value of road games... maybe.... depending on the team. Now ND's road football and all games in other sports is rumored to be worth 14mm to the ACC (a 1mm per team bump) so a school without even it's home hoops rights won't do any better than that and frankly will be very lucky to match that.

What that means is it might be worth it to a raider like Delany to swipe a super-high value program like Texas (especially in the long term after the GOR agreement has expired), but might not be worth it (especially in the short-term) to bring in a middle-value program like Kansas.

IMO the bottom line is that if Texas or Notre Dame or North Carolina decides they want to move, they'll find a way to make it happen no matter what anyone's contract says, but if they don't want to move, that ends the discussion for now.

Very simply... the failure to get a GOR. Same can be said about the current BE.

The reason why these conferences are unstable is because there is no way to guarantee that the other members will not stab a member in the back. A GOR limits to some extent, but does to competently kill, the tenets of a game theory approach to realignment. The problem is that without one, the possibility exists that someone will move and therefore those in a weaker position may move first.

This was true with the B12, when they had to worst TV deal in cfb when Neb and then A&M/Mizzou started looking around, it was true with Maryland and will be true with any other members that may potentially leave the ACC and is being demonstrated right now with the negotiations regarding fees and BE name with the leftover football schools.

If you have a way to make sure that your neighbor won't screw you, then it is easy to show solidarity. The GOR, at least so far, gives that illusion. Those schools who are not at the top of the food chain, that do not have a GOR, have to worry that their neighbor will make the move, thus they think about making the move first.

(03-04-2013 02:57 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(03-04-2013 02:36 PM)S11 Wrote:  - Increased value of road games... maybe.... depending on the team. Now ND's road football and all games in other sports is rumored to be worth 14mm to the ACC (a 1mm per team bump) so a school without even it's home hoops rights won't do any better than that and frankly will be very lucky to match that.

What that means is it might be worth it to a raider like Delany to swipe a super-high value program like Texas (especially in the long term after the GOR agreement has expired), but might not be worth it (especially in the short-term) to bring in a middle-value program like Kansas.

IMO the bottom line is that if Texas or Notre Dame or North Carolina decides they want to move, they'll find a way to make it happen no matter what anyone's contract says, but if they don't want to move, that ends the discussion for now.

Texas could probably pull it off if they wanted it bad enough but between the LHN, their ability to have their cake and eat it too right now, and other considerations it's not wise to hold your breath on it. So not foolproof but enough of a deterrent that the window for getting around it is relatively small.

Something else to consider is that if a Big 12 team that leaves does still get its share of the GOR revenue, then that is money the new conference won't have to pay. So a team leaving could still be better off. Basically they take a half cut from the Big 12 GOR and then a half cut from the new conference.

I don't think any of this crap is very likely in the near term. But that GOR is not going to stop a Big 12 team from going to the Big Ten or the SEC if either conference wants a Big 12 team.

A "grant-of-rights" won't stop Texas from leaving if it wants to do so. Heck, a GOR wouldn't have prevented this Maryland departure. What would have prevented it was an ability to manage money.

(03-04-2013 03:00 PM)S11 Wrote:  

(03-04-2013 02:57 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(03-04-2013 02:36 PM)S11 Wrote:  - Increased value of road games... maybe.... depending on the team. Now ND's road football and all games in other sports is rumored to be worth 14mm to the ACC (a 1mm per team bump) so a school without even it's home hoops rights won't do any better than that and frankly will be very lucky to match that.

What that means is it might be worth it to a raider like Delany to swipe a super-high value program like Texas (especially in the long term after the GOR agreement has expired), but might not be worth it (especially in the short-term) to bring in a middle-value program like Kansas.

IMO the bottom line is that if Texas or Notre Dame or North Carolina decides they want to move, they'll find a way to make it happen no matter what anyone's contract says, but if they don't want to move, that ends the discussion for now.

Texas could probably pull it off if they wanted it bad enough but between the LHN, their ability to have their cake and eat it too right now, and other considerations it's not wise to hold your breath on it. So not foolproof but enough of a deterrent that the window for getting around it is relatively small.

Yeah, UT doesn't want to move, and that's why it's not happening. A lot of people here argue as if almost every school wants to switch leagues and would do so in a heartbeat.

(03-04-2013 03:01 PM)JunkYardCard Wrote:  Something else to consider is that if a Big 12 team that leaves does still get its share of the GOR revenue, then that is money the new conference won't have to pay. So a team leaving could still be better off. Basically they take a half cut from the Big 12 GOR and then a half cut from the new conference.

I don't think any of this crap is very likely in the near term. But that GOR is not going to stop a Big 12 team from going to the Big Ten or the SEC if either conference wants a Big 12 team.

If NOTRE DAME is only worth 1mm per school to the ACC how is anyone else worth a HALF SHARE? At some point the money isn't there. Even if the Big 12 payed a full share it's gotta pay enough to justify the move.

So let's just apples to apples it:

Big 12 payout - Getting it either way
New league pays 1mm to the departee. This is likely a high figure considering ND is THE BRAND in college athletics and contributes it's home rights to hoops that a GOR team wouldn't.
Exit fee of 5-10 times that additional money
Increased travel that could eclipse that money

Not a good move. The team loses money.

If you raise their payout the new league likely loses money.

(03-04-2013 02:44 PM)JunkYardCard Wrote:  

(03-04-2013 02:29 PM)BewareThePhog Wrote:  ...but it also seems likely that if the departing school could continue to collect TV money from the conference that they've left that it would have been reported.

That assumes many things. First, that sports reporters are intelligent. Two, that sports reporters care about convoluted details. Three, that sports reporters believe their audiences will tune in long enough for them to explain a convoluted detail like the anticipated function of a creative liquidated damages clause.

You can't get this level of detail on CNBC, much less on ESPN.

Appealing to my skepticism of journalists will definitely score points.

(03-04-2013 03:18 PM)S11 Wrote:  

(03-04-2013 03:01 PM)JunkYardCard Wrote:  Something else to consider is that if a Big 12 team that leaves does still get its share of the GOR revenue, then that is money the new conference won't have to pay. So a team leaving could still be better off. Basically they take a half cut from the Big 12 GOR and then a half cut from the new conference.

I don't think any of this crap is very likely in the near term. But that GOR is not going to stop a Big 12 team from going to the Big Ten or the SEC if either conference wants a Big 12 team.

If NOTRE DAME is only worth 1mm per school to the ACC how is anyone else worth a HALF SHARE? At some point the money isn't there. Even if the Big 12 payed a full share it's gotta pay enough to justify the move.

ND isn't playing football in a conference, so I don't see how that fits into the discussion. At least three of the five ACC games they have agreed to play were basically already factored into TV deals as OOC games anyway, so they don't really move the needle much at all for the ACC.

(03-04-2013 04:53 PM)JunkYardCard Wrote:  

(03-04-2013 03:18 PM)S11 Wrote:  

(03-04-2013 03:01 PM)JunkYardCard Wrote:  Something else to consider is that if a Big 12 team that leaves does still get its share of the GOR revenue, then that is money the new conference won't have to pay. So a team leaving could still be better off. Basically they take a half cut from the Big 12 GOR and then a half cut from the new conference.

I don't think any of this crap is very likely in the near term. But that GOR is not going to stop a Big 12 team from going to the Big Ten or the SEC if either conference wants a Big 12 team.

If NOTRE DAME is only worth 1mm per school to the ACC how is anyone else worth a HALF SHARE? At some point the money isn't there. Even if the Big 12 payed a full share it's gotta pay enough to justify the move.

ND isn't playing football in a conference, so I don't see how that fits into the discussion. At least three of the five ACC games they have agreed to play were basically already factored into TV deals as OOC games anyway, so they don't really move the needle much at all for the ACC.

So 2.5 games + non-fb home games is worth 1mm? Yes ND isn't "IN" the acc as a football member but they are 1.5 games per year short of what a typical road schedule does in that league to the TV deal. So how is 4 road games with no BB going to do exponentially more than ND's other sports and 2.5 road games?

You raise a good point about the # of football games not being equal but it's still such a low # I see any additional pay getting eaten up by travel and exit fees.

(03-03-2013 11:39 PM)baggerbob Wrote:  Maryland and Rutgers don't do anything for the Big 10, but bring dead weight. New York City, Baltimore, and Washington DC are pro sports towns always have, and always will be. Maryland has seldom been a champion in football or basketball their entire time in the ACC. Rutgers has maybe 2 ties for the football title in 22 years and in basketball they are a never was. St Johns has a better chance of selling TV then Rutgers ever will, Georgetown has a bigger following the Maryland. The Big 10 Reacted to Notre Dame making their move, this was the first time they didn't make a calculated planned move. The previous 2 expansions Penn State and Nebraska not only bought fans ,and viewers, but name brands.

Those 2 programs bring the Big 10 into metro NYC, Baltimore & DC tv markets and they will get the cable companies to jack subscribers for more $ per household multiplied by the thousands. I agree they don't add much on the field but for a TV network that needs to fill up 168 hours a week of programming, they do add lots of subscribers.

(03-04-2013 06:34 AM)allthatyoucantleavebehind Wrote:  Maryland football might not "deliver" DC/Baltimore...but when you add in the fans of PSU/OSU/Michigan and the other Big Ten schools...now Maryland football in the Big Ten delivers DC/Baltimore. That metro area has scores of Big Ten fans (again, these are far more rabid football fan bases than, let's say UNC/UVA/Syracuse...so the combo of UMD football plus the area's other ACC schools is far inferior to UMD football plus Big Ten schools).

Yep MD will no longer have football attendance problems. The Terps also have a championship Lacrosse program(with them & Rutgers the B10 0nly needs 1 more Lacrosse program to form a conference) and won the men's 08 National Soccer title giving the Big 10 another championship calibre sports team.

A shame the BTN is an extremely boring channel every time I try to watch it. I'm sure I'm not alone on this one. Could be put together for much better use.

How's all that Big 10 expansion coming along? Is UNC in yet? No?

(03-04-2013 05:53 PM)CardFan1 Wrote:  A shame the BTN is an extremely boring channel every time I try to watch it. I'm sure I'm not alone on this one. Could be put together for much better use.

I have to take your word for it. I have never watched it.

I don't even know what channel it is on with DirecTV. I have never bothered to check.

I would pay DirecTV five bucks a month to delete the BTN from my TV and not send my ten cents a month to the Big Ten Network.

(03-02-2013 01:23 PM)S11 Wrote:  

(03-02-2013 12:20 PM)gocards#1 Wrote:  Who's to say the Big 10 and/or Pac 12 aren't looking at some combination or all of Kansas, Missouri, Texas, and Oklahoma? Missouri obviously doesn't fit in well with the SEC and wanted the Big 10 in the first place. The Big 10 is a research powerhouse and virtually prints money to its teams and could double what the Big 12 schools make over time.

What strikes me as odd in the Big 10 adding Maryland is that they could've gone after anybody - ANYBODY - in the ACC but they chose Maryland. Why get Maryland first when you can get UNC or Virginia instead? The lawsuit is a nasty deal and could come down on either side. But if it comes down on the ACC's side and the $50 million buyout is upheld why would the Big 10 risk it on Maryland instead of one of the other two schools? Delaney has shown to be the most shrewd and cunning commissioner in the business and it doesn't sit well with me he'd make a gamble on Maryland instead of a bigger school.

I know I know the GoR is supposedly infallible. But is it really? If the Big 10 were to offer the Big 12 schools don't you think they would all pool their resources to find a way out of it? Wasn't there some clause that if a certain number of teams all left at once the GoR is voided?

In this case it would leave Kansas State, Iowa State, WVU, Texas Tech, Baylor, TCU, and Oklahoma State out in the cold. The SEC, if it lost Missouri, would add either Oklahoma State, WVU, or maybe an ACC school. If the ACC lost a member it would add Navy for football only or WVU or UConn. The Big 12 would add Cincinnati and the two Florida schools to get back to 9 or 10, and maybe try for Colorado State and BYU or Boise which would make a halfway decent league.

I'm just throwing this situation out there, I have no sources so don't flame me.

The GOR isn't perfect but it's not easy to get out of. Between that, UT's LHN driven commitment to the league, the radioactivity the LHN gives UT to the PAC, the questionable aspects of whether any Big 12 team would have a non-UT offer to the PAC, and the unlikely nature of the B1G wanting KU or MU it leaves not a whole lot of speculation room.

Couple that with Gordon Gee's private comments talking about moving south and east and it's pretty easy to see why the talk is where it is.

Don't let it get to you. I was in the same shoes in 2010 and 2011.

You seem to forget that in that same article, and quoted in that same paragraph that Gee also said "there maybe opportunities for expansion in the midwest."

(03-04-2013 09:35 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(03-02-2013 01:23 PM)S11 Wrote:  

(03-02-2013 12:20 PM)gocards#1 Wrote:  Who's to say the Big 10 and/or Pac 12 aren't looking at some combination or all of Kansas, Missouri, Texas, and Oklahoma? Missouri obviously doesn't fit in well with the SEC and wanted the Big 10 in the first place. The Big 10 is a research powerhouse and virtually prints money to its teams and could double what the Big 12 schools make over time.

What strikes me as odd in the Big 10 adding Maryland is that they could've gone after anybody - ANYBODY - in the ACC but they chose Maryland. Why get Maryland first when you can get UNC or Virginia instead? The lawsuit is a nasty deal and could come down on either side. But if it comes down on the ACC's side and the $50 million buyout is upheld why would the Big 10 risk it on Maryland instead of one of the other two schools? Delaney has shown to be the most shrewd and cunning commissioner in the business and it doesn't sit well with me he'd make a gamble on Maryland instead of a bigger school.

I know I know the GoR is supposedly infallible. But is it really? If the Big 10 were to offer the Big 12 schools don't you think they would all pool their resources to find a way out of it? Wasn't there some clause that if a certain number of teams all left at once the GoR is voided?

In this case it would leave Kansas State, Iowa State, WVU, Texas Tech, Baylor, TCU, and Oklahoma State out in the cold. The SEC, if it lost Missouri, would add either Oklahoma State, WVU, or maybe an ACC school. If the ACC lost a member it would add Navy for football only or WVU or UConn. The Big 12 would add Cincinnati and the two Florida schools to get back to 9 or 10, and maybe try for Colorado State and BYU or Boise which would make a halfway decent league.

I'm just throwing this situation out there, I have no sources so don't flame me.

The GOR isn't perfect but it's not easy to get out of. Between that, UT's LHN driven commitment to the league, the radioactivity the LHN gives UT to the PAC, the questionable aspects of whether any Big 12 team would have a non-UT offer to the PAC, and the unlikely nature of the B1G wanting KU or MU it leaves not a whole lot of speculation room.

Couple that with Gordon Gee's private comments talking about moving south and east and it's pretty easy to see why the talk is where it is.

Don't let it get to you. I was in the same shoes in 2010 and 2011.

You seem to forget that in that same article, and quoted in that same paragraph that Gee also said "there maybe opportunities for expansion in the midwest."

I read that as ND.

Factor in that UMD and Rutgers we're taken for tv footprint it would imply Acc teams. KU's market (primarily KC) is at least partly delivered via Nebraska. Also Mizzou offers much of it without the GOR or KSU issues.

Considering that UT is politically and LHN restricted it limits them. There were rumors that OU and osu looked at the Big Ten before looking at the PAC in 2011 and were rebuffed. Even if that isn't true the politics in that state make it unlikely as it was pretty well established in 2010 and 2011 they will stick together unless forced.

So who else fits the profile that adds footprint?

UVA, GT, UNC, UConn, and possibly schools like BC, Cuse, Duke, or FSU could fit.

Just my read on it but I see more targets they would want, with less impediments, and markets/academics in the Acc. Obviously UConn is the exception.

(03-04-2013 05:53 PM)CardFan1 Wrote:  A shame the BTN is an extremely boring channel every time I try to watch it. I'm sure I'm not alone on this one. Could be put together for much better use.

One of the best posts Ive ever read here on these boards!!