(02-26-2023 03:56 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 03:55 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 03:52 PM)TerryD Wrote:  They all will be paying the legal fees of "the ACC" in that litigation.

How many of those schools would rather pay those legal fees to preserve the GoR if they have an option to move to the SEC, B1G or Big XII?

They don't have any choice unless they join FSU in suing "the ACC".

Or they could gather eight votes and decide to dissolve the conference.

An "end around" of the GoR if you will.

I get it. Some folks believe at least half of the ACC's schools will have nowhere acceptable to go if their current conference goes belly-up.

I just happen to disagree.

(02-26-2023 04:01 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 03:55 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  How many of those schools would rather pay those legal fees to preserve the GoR if they have an option to move to the SEC, B1G or Big XII?

when I was a kid, Sesame Street had a recurring segment where they sang

one if these things us not like the others
one of these things does not belong

The Big XII doesn't need to match the SEC or B1G.

Simply being an equal paying and more stable option will be just fine for about half the ACC and Pac-12

(02-26-2023 04:05 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 03:56 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 03:55 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 03:52 PM)TerryD Wrote:  They all will be paying the legal fees of "the ACC" in that litigation.

How many of those schools would rather pay those legal fees to preserve the GoR if they have an option to move to the SEC, B1G or Big XII?

They don't have any choice unless they join FSU in suing "the ACC".

Or they could gather eight votes and decide to dissolve the conference.

And "end around" of the GoR if you will.

I get it. Some folks think any at least half of the ACC's schools will have nowhere acceptable to go if their current conference goes belly-up.

I just happen to disagree.

Reasons this is a fantasy:

1- Dissolving the ACC would piss off ESPN and you think they would pay those schools as much (or more) to go to the Big XII?

2- They would be giving up their own, quite profitable network.

3- They would be giving up guaranteed paychecks larger than the Big XII.

4- They would be giving up games with historic rivals and great draws for schools they did not want to invite into the ACC.

5- The Big XII is capped out. Adding 8 ACC schools isn't going to increase their payment.

I get it. You're passionate about the destruction of the ACC for reasons I don't understand. But passion doesn't equate to reality, which is something you continuously ignore. Creating Yormark overlord scenarios that don't make any money? He would laugh in your face.

(02-26-2023 10:52 AM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 09:52 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 09:16 AM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 08:52 AM)CFBLurker Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 08:49 AM)Soobahk40050 Wrote:  https://thespun.com/.amp/more/top-storie...acc-rumors

Multiple sites reporting this. $120 million seems very low to me especially given OUTs numbers for one year.

FSU can take.it to court and risk it and potentially win, but if they lose they're gonna be broke.

Nope.

FSU has little to lose taking it to court.

Well, that's not true. First of all, legal fees in the millions, maybe tens of millions, exit fees in the tens of millions.

Second of all, if they lose the case, the ACC is still going to own FSU TV rights. But FSU isn't still going to be a member of the conference -- this only goes to court if FSU has left the ACC.

So either the new 18 or 20 team SEC all take a haircut to give FSU a share, or FSU doesn't collect for their TV rights.

Quote:They can spend up to the cost of being in the ACC rather than SEC before it was a mistake to challenge.

The ACC schools trying to hold up the GOR, particularly the BC types? A lot to lose. An unfavorable ruling, and they lose the one thing keeping the P2 from taking 4-6 schools.

Espn likely wants to avoid this going to court.

That's easily arranged. In the last 2 rounds of SEC expansion, the SEC office was crystal clear that they were not getting involved in the internal politics of another conference. Prospective SEC members have to get themselves clear of their previous conference.

So the SEC's habit is not going to be to move forward. And if their ESPN paymaster doesn't want this to happen, how does it happen? FSU is fighting not just the ACC in court, but ESPN.

ESPN doesn't want to nuke the value of the half-dozen big-time ACC games they have. Sure you'd gain 9 new SEC games with FSU and Clemson, but SEC + FSU, Clemson isn't adding new SEC markets the way Mizzou (St Louis, Kansas City) and A&M (all of Texas) did. And FSU and Clemson are not Oklahoma / Texas level brands.

From ESPN's perspective, they'd rather keep the money rolling in from the ACC and ACC Network as long as they can, and if FSU and Clemson bleed out, that's not really ESPN's problem.

A problem ten years out isn't really a problem for corporate executives. They're likely to be long gone by then.

People who really want FSU and Clemson in the SEC come up with complicated scenarios where, theoretically, P5 schools with 40,000 people in the stands "secure their future" past 2036.

The reality is there is nothing those schools can do that secures their 25 year future. The only security is in having a big whopping fanbase that tunes in to your games in the millions. Even the Illinois's and Mississippi State's aren't *secure*. They're only secure as long as Alabama and Ohio STate tolerate sharing the pie with them.

you're presuming that espn is against this move.

I think they'd be for a structured move that otherwise keeps the ACC intact.

Imagine that the loudest schools get to move to the SEC - FSU, Clemson, NC, and VT.

Yes, they'll be paying them more in the SEC, but it's worth it. And not just for all the reasons JRsec and others have noted. But this prevents a GOR court challenge - something espn likely does not want. And depending on backfill, likely stabilizes the ACC.

And also sets up the dominoes out west, which could lead to espn not spending on the PAC.

There are lots more reasons for espn to favor this as a structured move.

Not the least of which, is that if this turns messy, Fox could end up with FSU's media rights.

You play to win, or you might as well leave the field.

Why would ESPN facilitate this? They hold the monopoly on schools in the SE. Letting FOX or the Big 10 get in does to ESPN/SEC what Notre Dame has done for decades to the Big 10, namely it gives advertisers not wanting to pay the Network full rates to advertise on a Saturday to college sports fans in their region a cheaper backdoor with which to do it than paying the top contracted product in the region's full price.

I cannot foresee ESPN letting either Miami or Florida State go to the Big 10/FOX for that reason, and damn sure won't now that the Big 10 also airs on NBC and CBS.

This is the leverage for the ACC / SEC / and schools to come to a mutually beneficial arrangement with ESPN. This is why ESPN created some gyrations to keep Notre Dame as a partial. This is why a merger is the solution Occam's razor would suggest as it accomplishes for all what is most beneficial with the least obvious disruption to them.

The GORs were slapped in place by networks more than conferences following failed and successful raids in 2010-2. Alarmed conferences (ACC & Big 12) were complicit in seeing the need. What nobody could have foreseen then was the chasm in revenue earnings that would appear like a Florida sinkhole after a big rain separating the landscape between the Big 10/SEC and everyone else. Basketball schools can survive this better than football first schools can. It's natural that USC, Texas, Oklahoma, Washington, Oregon, Florida State, Miami, Virginia Tech, and Clemson should be alarmed. Contracts and associations are handcuffing them to a pipe in the security office of the Titanic and Rose ain't comin' with an axe to take the plunge with them. It has to be a groundhogs day nightmare where every morning they wake up in the same conference with the same options.

The GORs will be tested, and everyone thinks it is too costly to the schools. Well in 2012 there was what, maybe 5 million in TV revenue separating the P5? So no, nobody was spending 7 to 10 million to try to get out of one. Now the gap could range between 30 million to 40 million or perhaps more in the PAC 12. The schools may not risk 10 million in legal fees to get 30 million more, but I dang sure promise you there are boosters who give that much to buy out unpopular coaches salaries and they will spend it, especially if several boosters pool their commitment to it.

Therein resides the challenge to the GOR and its coming. If ESPN has a good reason to dodge that possibility it means dealing is coming and since it costs little to deal that will happen soon, before the lawyering up gets started in earnest.

People here forget that in 2011 Clemson and FSU were announced on the ESPN crawler as heading to the SEC. That got pulled to supposedly cover Notre Dame's acceptance of a partial membership and the myth of bringing them in full time floated as Clemson and FSU were cajoled back into the fold. ESPN could have some obligation to recall that with regard to the present situation, especially if it is now abundantly clear that ND will never join in full.

What happens from here is anyone's guess, but it is clearly the shot FSU and Clemson have to take and will.

The ACC schools made their beds, so they need to sleep in it until 2036.

(02-26-2023 04:29 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 10:52 AM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 09:52 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 09:16 AM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 08:52 AM)CFBLurker Wrote:  FSU can take.it to court and risk it and potentially win, but if they lose they're gonna be broke.

Nope.

FSU has little to lose taking it to court.

Well, that's not true. First of all, legal fees in the millions, maybe tens of millions, exit fees in the tens of millions.

Second of all, if they lose the case, the ACC is still going to own FSU TV rights. But FSU isn't still going to be a member of the conference -- this only goes to court if FSU has left the ACC.

So either the new 18 or 20 team SEC all take a haircut to give FSU a share, or FSU doesn't collect for their TV rights.

Quote:They can spend up to the cost of being in the ACC rather than SEC before it was a mistake to challenge.

The ACC schools trying to hold up the GOR, particularly the BC types? A lot to lose. An unfavorable ruling, and they lose the one thing keeping the P2 from taking 4-6 schools.

Espn likely wants to avoid this going to court.

That's easily arranged. In the last 2 rounds of SEC expansion, the SEC office was crystal clear that they were not getting involved in the internal politics of another conference. Prospective SEC members have to get themselves clear of their previous conference.

So the SEC's habit is not going to be to move forward. And if their ESPN paymaster doesn't want this to happen, how does it happen? FSU is fighting not just the ACC in court, but ESPN.

ESPN doesn't want to nuke the value of the half-dozen big-time ACC games they have. Sure you'd gain 9 new SEC games with FSU and Clemson, but SEC + FSU, Clemson isn't adding new SEC markets the way Mizzou (St Louis, Kansas City) and A&M (all of Texas) did. And FSU and Clemson are not Oklahoma / Texas level brands.

From ESPN's perspective, they'd rather keep the money rolling in from the ACC and ACC Network as long as they can, and if FSU and Clemson bleed out, that's not really ESPN's problem.

A problem ten years out isn't really a problem for corporate executives. They're likely to be long gone by then.

People who really want FSU and Clemson in the SEC come up with complicated scenarios where, theoretically, P5 schools with 40,000 people in the stands "secure their future" past 2036.

The reality is there is nothing those schools can do that secures their 25 year future. The only security is in having a big whopping fanbase that tunes in to your games in the millions. Even the Illinois's and Mississippi State's aren't *secure*. They're only secure as long as Alabama and Ohio STate tolerate sharing the pie with them.

you're presuming that espn is against this move.

I think they'd be for a structured move that otherwise keeps the ACC intact.

Imagine that the loudest schools get to move to the SEC - FSU, Clemson, NC, and VT.

Yes, they'll be paying them more in the SEC, but it's worth it. And not just for all the reasons JRsec and others have noted. But this prevents a GOR court challenge - something espn likely does not want. And depending on backfill, likely stabilizes the ACC.

And also sets up the dominoes out west, which could lead to espn not spending on the PAC.

There are lots more reasons for espn to favor this as a structured move.

Not the least of which, is that if this turns messy, Fox could end up with FSU's media rights.

You play to win, or you might as well leave the field.

Why would ESPN facilitate this? They hold the monopoly on schools in the SE. Letting FOX or the Big 10 get in does to ESPN/SEC what Notre Dame has done for decades to the Big 10, namely it gives advertisers not wanting to pay the Network full rates to advertise on a Saturday to college sports fans in their region a cheaper backdoor with which to do it than paying the top contracted product in the region's full price.

I cannot foresee ESPN letting either Miami or Florida State go to the Big 10/FOX for that reason, and damn sure won't now that the Big 10 also airs on NBC and CBS.

This is the leverage for the ACC / SEC / and schools to come to a mutually beneficial arrangement with ESPN. This is why ESPN created some gyrations to keep Notre Dame as a partial. This is why a merger is the solution Occam's razor would suggest as it accomplishes for all what is most beneficial with the least obvious disruption to them.

The GORs were slapped in place by networks more than conferences following failed and successful raids in 2010-2. Alarmed conferences (ACC & Big 12) were complicit in seeing the need. What nobody could have foreseen then was the chasm in revenue earnings that would appear like a Florida sinkhole after a big rain separating the landscape between the Big 10/SEC and everyone else. Basketball schools can survive this better than football first schools can. It's natural that USC, Texas, Oklahoma, Washington, Oregon, Florida State, Miami, Virginia Tech, and Clemson should be alarmed. Contracts and associations are handcuffing them to a pipe in the security office of the Titanic and Rose ain't comin' with an axe to take the plunge with them. It has to be a groundhogs day nightmare where every morning they wake up in the same conference with the same options.

The GORs will be tested, and everyone thinks it is too costly to the schools. Well in 2012 there was what, maybe 5 million in TV revenue separating the P5? So no, nobody was spending 7 to 10 million to try to get out of one. Now the gap could range between 30 million to 40 million or perhaps more in the PAC 12. The schools may not risk 10 million in legal fees to get 30 million more, but I dang sure promise you there are boosters who give that much to buy out unpopular coaches salaries and they will spend it, especially if several boosters pool their commitment to it.

Therein resides the challenge to the GOR and its coming. If ESPN has a good reason to dodge that possibility it means dealing is coming and since it costs little to deal that will happen soon, before the lawyering up gets started in earnest.

People here forget that in 2011 Clemson and FSU were announced on the ESPN crawler as heading to the SEC. That got pulled to supposedly cover Notre Dame's acceptance of a partial membership and the myth of bringing them in full time floated as Clemson and FSU were cajoled back into the fold. ESPN could have some obligation to recall that with regard to the present situation, especially if it is now abundantly clear that ND will never join in full.

What happens from here is anyone's guess, but it is clearly the shot FSU and Clemson have to take and will.

Yeah this rumor has been a hot topic within FSU circles for the past decade. "Why did we ever sign the damn thing...and without much of a fuss?" (at least publicly). Conspiracy stuff? Maybe. But whenever I picture Eric Barron grabbing that stinking pen...I hear the Hamilton tune The Room Where It Happens. Wishful thinking, I'm sure, but I sure hope there's a gun still smoking somewhere.

(02-26-2023 04:41 PM)GarnetAndBlue Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 04:29 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 10:52 AM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 09:52 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 09:16 AM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  Nope.

FSU has little to lose taking it to court.

Well, that's not true. First of all, legal fees in the millions, maybe tens of millions, exit fees in the tens of millions.

Second of all, if they lose the case, the ACC is still going to own FSU TV rights. But FSU isn't still going to be a member of the conference -- this only goes to court if FSU has left the ACC.

So either the new 18 or 20 team SEC all take a haircut to give FSU a share, or FSU doesn't collect for their TV rights.

Quote:They can spend up to the cost of being in the ACC rather than SEC before it was a mistake to challenge.

The ACC schools trying to hold up the GOR, particularly the BC types? A lot to lose. An unfavorable ruling, and they lose the one thing keeping the P2 from taking 4-6 schools.

Espn likely wants to avoid this going to court.

That's easily arranged. In the last 2 rounds of SEC expansion, the SEC office was crystal clear that they were not getting involved in the internal politics of another conference. Prospective SEC members have to get themselves clear of their previous conference.

So the SEC's habit is not going to be to move forward. And if their ESPN paymaster doesn't want this to happen, how does it happen? FSU is fighting not just the ACC in court, but ESPN.

ESPN doesn't want to nuke the value of the half-dozen big-time ACC games they have. Sure you'd gain 9 new SEC games with FSU and Clemson, but SEC + FSU, Clemson isn't adding new SEC markets the way Mizzou (St Louis, Kansas City) and A&M (all of Texas) did. And FSU and Clemson are not Oklahoma / Texas level brands.

From ESPN's perspective, they'd rather keep the money rolling in from the ACC and ACC Network as long as they can, and if FSU and Clemson bleed out, that's not really ESPN's problem.

A problem ten years out isn't really a problem for corporate executives. They're likely to be long gone by then.

People who really want FSU and Clemson in the SEC come up with complicated scenarios where, theoretically, P5 schools with 40,000 people in the stands "secure their future" past 2036.

The reality is there is nothing those schools can do that secures their 25 year future. The only security is in having a big whopping fanbase that tunes in to your games in the millions. Even the Illinois's and Mississippi State's aren't *secure*. They're only secure as long as Alabama and Ohio STate tolerate sharing the pie with them.

you're presuming that espn is against this move.

I think they'd be for a structured move that otherwise keeps the ACC intact.

Imagine that the loudest schools get to move to the SEC - FSU, Clemson, NC, and VT.

Yes, they'll be paying them more in the SEC, but it's worth it. And not just for all the reasons JRsec and others have noted. But this prevents a GOR court challenge - something espn likely does not want. And depending on backfill, likely stabilizes the ACC.

And also sets up the dominoes out west, which could lead to espn not spending on the PAC.

There are lots more reasons for espn to favor this as a structured move.

Not the least of which, is that if this turns messy, Fox could end up with FSU's media rights.

You play to win, or you might as well leave the field.

Why would ESPN facilitate this? They hold the monopoly on schools in the SE. Letting FOX or the Big 10 get in does to ESPN/SEC what Notre Dame has done for decades to the Big 10, namely it gives advertisers not wanting to pay the Network full rates to advertise on a Saturday to college sports fans in their region a cheaper backdoor with which to do it than paying the top contracted product in the region's full price.

I cannot foresee ESPN letting either Miami or Florida State go to the Big 10/FOX for that reason, and damn sure won't now that the Big 10 also airs on NBC and CBS.

This is the leverage for the ACC / SEC / and schools to come to a mutually beneficial arrangement with ESPN. This is why ESPN created some gyrations to keep Notre Dame as a partial. This is why a merger is the solution Occam's razor would suggest as it accomplishes for all what is most beneficial with the least obvious disruption to them.

The GORs were slapped in place by networks more than conferences following failed and successful raids in 2010-2. Alarmed conferences (ACC & Big 12) were complicit in seeing the need. What nobody could have foreseen then was the chasm in revenue earnings that would appear like a Florida sinkhole after a big rain separating the landscape between the Big 10/SEC and everyone else. Basketball schools can survive this better than football first schools can. It's natural that USC, Texas, Oklahoma, Washington, Oregon, Florida State, Miami, Virginia Tech, and Clemson should be alarmed. Contracts and associations are handcuffing them to a pipe in the security office of the Titanic and Rose ain't comin' with an axe to take the plunge with them. It has to be a groundhogs day nightmare where every morning they wake up in the same conference with the same options.

The GORs will be tested, and everyone thinks it is too costly to the schools. Well in 2012 there was what, maybe 5 million in TV revenue separating the P5? So no, nobody was spending 7 to 10 million to try to get out of one. Now the gap could range between 30 million to 40 million or perhaps more in the PAC 12. The schools may not risk 10 million in legal fees to get 30 million more, but I dang sure promise you there are boosters who give that much to buy out unpopular coaches salaries and they will spend it, especially if several boosters pool their commitment to it.

Therein resides the challenge to the GOR and its coming. If ESPN has a good reason to dodge that possibility it means dealing is coming and since it costs little to deal that will happen soon, before the lawyering up gets started in earnest.

People here forget that in 2011 Clemson and FSU were announced on the ESPN crawler as heading to the SEC. That got pulled to supposedly cover Notre Dame's acceptance of a partial membership and the myth of bringing them in full time floated as Clemson and FSU were cajoled back into the fold. ESPN could have some obligation to recall that with regard to the present situation, especially if it is now abundantly clear that ND will never join in full.

What happens from here is anyone's guess, but it is clearly the shot FSU and Clemson have to take and will.

Yeah this rumor has been a hot topic within FSU circles for the past decade. "Why did we ever sign the damn thing...and without much of a fuss?" (at least publicly). Conspiracy stuff? Maybe. But whenever I picture Alex Barron grabbing that stinking pen...I hear the Hamilton tune The Room Where It Happens. Wishful thinking, I'm sure, but I sure hope there's a gun still smoking somewhere.

Barron was an academic and looked down on the SEC and Big 12. Same for the Virginia Tech president at the time. Both were pretty public about their attitudes.
Clemson was afraid of recruiting as a Big 12 member, but might have been happy in the SEC.

the FSU/Clemson to Big 12 rumors generated some board discussion at FSU and Clemson. They never publicly discussed the SEC to my knowledge. But Clemson talked about the Big 12 in at least two public board meetings. Barron had a presentation on it at his board meeting. The Warchant people were there and had some screen shots.

(02-26-2023 12:45 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  In this forum there's a great deal of faith placed in a magical document that NONE of us has seen. Credit where credit is due, our federal government certainly should be studying ACC methods regarding keeping classified materials secure and secret.

On the other hand, we have AD Alford from FSU who didn't mention the GoR when the Board asked about the cost of leaving the ACC. Now if this man hasn't seen the GoR or at least dispatched trusted underlings to do so and report back to him, then he has utterly failed to do the due diligence required by his position and should be removed. Prior to taking the job at FSU, Alford was AD at Central Michigan for 3 years and prior to that was an Associate AD at Oklahoma for 5.

I find it unlikely that just over a year into this job, someone with his background has so utterly failed to look into the relevant contracts OR misled the BoT. Either would, and should, place his job in extreme jeopardy. I think it is far more likely that he knows something we don't know, at least not yet.

Alford did not answer the question. He deferred to FSU's legal counsel.

She likely followed the lawyer's code of practice: Don't answer questions that are not asked.

They may not want to discuss the consequences of breaching contracts in open session.

Here is the video of the FSU BOT meeting. The AD's presentation is from 1:04 to 1:49.

Florida State Board of Trustees, February 24, 2023 (youtube)

(02-26-2023 03:41 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 03:22 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 02:35 PM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  Which can better afford to ride through a bad Covid-like pause in play more- schools with no P2 on the other side or those challenging the GOR to make half a billion more over 10 years? There’s a reason why it was leaked that several schools legally challenging would be end of ACC

Yeah, it's interesting athletic directors from FSU and Clemson would speak to their thus far fruitless effort to move the ACC toward an unequal revenue-sharing model (which, Alford and Neff also acknowledge, is much closer to a Band-Aid than a cure for the financial handicap ACC schools face compared to their SEC counterparts that also prioritize football success)

One thing that seems odd is seemingly every mention of "breaking the GoR" includes only the potential massive financial risk to the institution making the challenge.

Not mentioned is the financial challenge and risk to the ACC itself if/when these disputes becomes a legal matter as opposed to just a verbal threat. Those legal bills will mount up for Jim Phillips and his office as well.

One difference: The ACC itself doesn't have the deep pockets or millionaire boosters of an FSU and a Clemson

No, the ACC legal fees get paid before distributions to the schools. so they have an almost unlimited legal budget.

As much as I personally despise the Tobacco Road cartel, johnbragg is not referring to media distributions, IMO, Pete the Chop. Rather he's referring to the ACC office skimming a percentage of the NCAA basketball distributions before sending them to the teams that earned them.

The only way I see an FSU challenge work:

1) ESPN has to be okay with paying FSU more money per game and every other team in the SEC more. This is probably the easiest to realize. The matchups for FSU are better, more abundant matchups, especially if Clemson comes along. It would be worth it to ESPN for FSU to move, at least looking at the scenario superficially.

The problem is that ESPN is using the ACC contract in negotiations to lower both B12 and PAC amount. It's hard to see ESPN okay with letting FSU/Clemson out because of this.

2) ACC would absorb Cal/Stanford to replace under the same contract. This would be tricky because other defections could be likely. It would be hard to keep football focused schools to stay without FSU/Clemson, but they might be enticed with the academic additions. ESPN would be happy with another option for late night content.

It's hard for me to see it happening right now, but in the other side of 2030 it is more likely. ESPN/ACC will not want to take the GoR to court and could negotiate an early out.

Unequal revenue sharing will go the way of the B12 if it happens. The difference between ACC and B12 payout is not enough to see the middle class okay with it enough to not defect to B12. I don't see the schools desperate enough to vote for it, especially with the B12 being "open for business" and willing to take ACC schools.

(02-26-2023 04:41 PM)GarnetAndBlue Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 04:29 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 10:52 AM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 09:52 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 09:16 AM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  Nope.

FSU has little to lose taking it to court.

Well, that's not true. First of all, legal fees in the millions, maybe tens of millions, exit fees in the tens of millions.

Second of all, if they lose the case, the ACC is still going to own FSU TV rights. But FSU isn't still going to be a member of the conference -- this only goes to court if FSU has left the ACC.

So either the new 18 or 20 team SEC all take a haircut to give FSU a share, or FSU doesn't collect for their TV rights.

Quote:They can spend up to the cost of being in the ACC rather than SEC before it was a mistake to challenge.

The ACC schools trying to hold up the GOR, particularly the BC types? A lot to lose. An unfavorable ruling, and they lose the one thing keeping the P2 from taking 4-6 schools.

Espn likely wants to avoid this going to court.

That's easily arranged. In the last 2 rounds of SEC expansion, the SEC office was crystal clear that they were not getting involved in the internal politics of another conference. Prospective SEC members have to get themselves clear of their previous conference.

So the SEC's habit is not going to be to move forward. And if their ESPN paymaster doesn't want this to happen, how does it happen? FSU is fighting not just the ACC in court, but ESPN.

ESPN doesn't want to nuke the value of the half-dozen big-time ACC games they have. Sure you'd gain 9 new SEC games with FSU and Clemson, but SEC + FSU, Clemson isn't adding new SEC markets the way Mizzou (St Louis, Kansas City) and A&M (all of Texas) did. And FSU and Clemson are not Oklahoma / Texas level brands.

From ESPN's perspective, they'd rather keep the money rolling in from the ACC and ACC Network as long as they can, and if FSU and Clemson bleed out, that's not really ESPN's problem.

A problem ten years out isn't really a problem for corporate executives. They're likely to be long gone by then.

People who really want FSU and Clemson in the SEC come up with complicated scenarios where, theoretically, P5 schools with 40,000 people in the stands "secure their future" past 2036.

The reality is there is nothing those schools can do that secures their 25 year future. The only security is in having a big whopping fanbase that tunes in to your games in the millions. Even the Illinois's and Mississippi State's aren't *secure*. They're only secure as long as Alabama and Ohio STate tolerate sharing the pie with them.

you're presuming that espn is against this move.

I think they'd be for a structured move that otherwise keeps the ACC intact.

Imagine that the loudest schools get to move to the SEC - FSU, Clemson, NC, and VT.

Yes, they'll be paying them more in the SEC, but it's worth it. And not just for all the reasons JRsec and others have noted. But this prevents a GOR court challenge - something espn likely does not want. And depending on backfill, likely stabilizes the ACC.

And also sets up the dominoes out west, which could lead to espn not spending on the PAC.

There are lots more reasons for espn to favor this as a structured move.

Not the least of which, is that if this turns messy, Fox could end up with FSU's media rights.

You play to win, or you might as well leave the field.

Why would ESPN facilitate this? They hold the monopoly on schools in the SE. Letting FOX or the Big 10 get in does to ESPN/SEC what Notre Dame has done for decades to the Big 10, namely it gives advertisers not wanting to pay the Network full rates to advertise on a Saturday to college sports fans in their region a cheaper backdoor with which to do it than paying the top contracted product in the region's full price.

I cannot foresee ESPN letting either Miami or Florida State go to the Big 10/FOX for that reason, and damn sure won't now that the Big 10 also airs on NBC and CBS.

This is the leverage for the ACC / SEC / and schools to come to a mutually beneficial arrangement with ESPN. This is why ESPN created some gyrations to keep Notre Dame as a partial. This is why a merger is the solution Occam's razor would suggest as it accomplishes for all what is most beneficial with the least obvious disruption to them.

The GORs were slapped in place by networks more than conferences following failed and successful raids in 2010-2. Alarmed conferences (ACC & Big 12) were complicit in seeing the need. What nobody could have foreseen then was the chasm in revenue earnings that would appear like a Florida sinkhole after a big rain separating the landscape between the Big 10/SEC and everyone else. Basketball schools can survive this better than football first schools can. It's natural that USC, Texas, Oklahoma, Washington, Oregon, Florida State, Miami, Virginia Tech, and Clemson should be alarmed. Contracts and associations are handcuffing them to a pipe in the security office of the Titanic and Rose ain't comin' with an axe to take the plunge with them. It has to be a groundhogs day nightmare where every morning they wake up in the same conference with the same options.

The GORs will be tested, and everyone thinks it is too costly to the schools. Well in 2012 there was what, maybe 5 million in TV revenue separating the P5? So no, nobody was spending 7 to 10 million to try to get out of one. Now the gap could range between 30 million to 40 million or perhaps more in the PAC 12. The schools may not risk 10 million in legal fees to get 30 million more, but I dang sure promise you there are boosters who give that much to buy out unpopular coaches salaries and they will spend it, especially if several boosters pool their commitment to it.

Therein resides the challenge to the GOR and its coming. If ESPN has a good reason to dodge that possibility it means dealing is coming and since it costs little to deal that will happen soon, before the lawyering up gets started in earnest.

People here forget that in 2011 Clemson and FSU were announced on the ESPN crawler as heading to the SEC. That got pulled to supposedly cover Notre Dame's acceptance of a partial membership and the myth of bringing them in full time floated as Clemson and FSU were cajoled back into the fold. ESPN could have some obligation to recall that with regard to the present situation, especially if it is now abundantly clear that ND will never join in full.

What happens from here is anyone's guess, but it is clearly the shot FSU and Clemson have to take and will.

Yeah this rumor has been a hot topic within FSU circles for the past decade. "Why did we ever sign the damn thing...and without much of a fuss?" (at least publicly). Conspiracy stuff? Maybe. But whenever I picture Alex Barron grabbing that stinking pen...I hear the Hamilton tune The Room Where It Happens. Wishful thinking, I'm sure, but I sure hope there's a gun still smoking somewhere.

Alex Barron was an FSU football player. Maybe you're thinking of Eric Barron?? I read Eric Barron's comments, and they didn't seem anti-SEC to me. Just more like, "our hands are tied." This would validate JRSec's contention about ND, the ACC, FSU, Clemson, and the SEC.

(02-26-2023 04:05 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 03:56 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 03:55 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 03:52 PM)TerryD Wrote:  They all will be paying the legal fees of "the ACC" in that litigation.

How many of those schools would rather pay those legal fees to preserve the GoR if they have an option to move to the SEC, B1G or Big XII?

They don't have any choice unless they join FSU in suing "the ACC".

Or they could gather eight votes and decide to dissolve the conference.

An "end around" of the GoR if you will.

I get it. Some folks believe at least half of the ACC's schools will have nowhere acceptable to go if their current conference goes belly-up.

I just happen to disagree.

I would agree with you, believe it or not. Those desiring to join the B1G could probably get behind dissolving the ACC as well as those wishing to join the SEC. There might be a contigent that would prefer the Big 12 to the ACC, odd as that may sound. Those who have no hope of any of the above leagues are going to have to make some tough choices, IMO.

(02-26-2023 11:12 PM)Mean Green Alum Wrote:  The only way I see an FSU challenge work:

1) ESPN has to be okay with paying FSU more money per game and every other team in the SEC more. This is probably the easiest to realize. The matchups for FSU are better, more abundant matchups, especially if Clemson comes along. It would be worth it to ESPN for FSU to move, at least looking at the scenario superficially.

The problem is that ESPN is using the ACC contract in negotiations to lower both B12 and PAC amount. It's hard to see ESPN okay with letting FSU/Clemson out because of this.

2) ACC would absorb Cal/Stanford to replace under the same contract. This would be tricky because other defections could be likely. It would be hard to keep football focused schools to stay without FSU/Clemson, but they might be enticed with the academic additions. ESPN would be happy with another option for late night content.

It's hard for me to see it happening right now, but in the other side of 2030 it is more likely. ESPN/ACC will not want to take the GoR to court and could negotiate an early out.

Unequal revenue sharing will go the way of the B12 if it happens. The difference between ACC and B12 payout is not enough to see the middle class okay with it enough to not defect to B12. I don't see the schools desperate enough to vote for it, especially with the B12 being "open for business" and willing to take ACC schools.

Don't forget about U of O (Oregon) & Washington out there waiting. Those two programs could very well be what could at least pause an ACC exodus.

(02-26-2023 04:41 PM)GarnetAndBlue Wrote:  Yeah this rumor has been a hot topic within FSU circles for the past decade. "Why did we ever sign the damn thing...and without much of a fuss?" (at least publicly). Conspiracy stuff? Maybe. But whenever I picture Alex Barron grabbing that stinking pen...I hear the Hamilton tune The Room Where It Happens. Wishful thinking, I'm sure, but I sure hope there's a gun still smoking somewhere.

This post is beneath you. Sorry.

Eric J Barron was Florida State University' s president. Dr Barron set the university on its present course of academic rise, warded off a downgrade threat to Florida's public universities from the statehouse, got Florida State recognised as a preeminent research university in the state, and set AAU membership as a goal.

Between Maryland's ACC departure, athletes' self-made fiascos, and local yahoos clamouring to join the B12 because DudeWV disinfo, Dr Barron had plenty of sport-related headaches to deal with. You can rest assured that any agreements he made with ACC partners were for Florida State University's benefit and based upon the best options available at the time.

Gentlemen's agreements among presidents don't exist everywhere fans think they do, but they do exist. If Dr Barron agreed to a grant of rights because of a singular opportunity to create a conference network thanks to the participation of Notre Dame, it could well be that another agreement is understood: If ND ever wants out of the deal early, ND helps Florida State get out, too. That's conjecture, but plausible. University presidents occupy a small club where much depends on building relationships with each other. Reciprocity is an operating principle.

Dr Barron went on to become president of Penn State and last time I looked he's still on the faculty there. Florida State has high academic rankings today and it has a friend in the B1G Ten.

FYI. To all.

(02-26-2023 11:41 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 04:41 PM)GarnetAndBlue Wrote:  Yeah this rumor has been a hot topic within FSU circles for the past decade. "Why did we ever sign the damn thing...and without much of a fuss?" (at least publicly). Conspiracy stuff? Maybe. But whenever I picture Alex Barron grabbing that stinking pen...I hear the Hamilton tune The Room Where It Happens. Wishful thinking, I'm sure, but I sure hope there's a gun still smoking somewhere.

This post is beneath you. Sorry.

Eric J Barron was Florida State University' s president. Dr Barron set the university on its present course of academic rise, warded off a downgrade threat to Florida's public universities from the statehouse, got Florida State recognised as on one then two preeminent universities, and set AAU membership as a goal.

Between Maryland's ACC departure, athletes' self-made fiascos, and local yahoos clamouring to join the B12 because Dude WV rumours, Dr Barron had plenty of headaches to deal with. You can rest assured that any agreements he made with ACC partners were for Florida State University's benefit and based upon the best options available at the time.

Gentlemen's agreements among presidents don't exist everywhere fans think they do, but they do exist. If Dr Barron agreed to a grant of rights because of a singular opportunity to create a conference network thanks to the participation of Notre Dame, it could well be that another agreement is understood: If ND ever wants out of the deal early, ND helps Florida State get out, too. That's conjecture, but plausible. University presidents occupy a small club where much depends on building relationships with each other. Reciprocity is an operating principle.

Dr Barron went on to become president of Penn State and last time I looked he's still on the faculty there. Florida State has high academic rankings today and a friend in the B1G Ten.

FYI to all.

There are a variety of ways to play this. Notre Dame departing to the Big 10 could be the go-between for FSU communications with them and could recommend them if a member.

ESPN would be damned reticent to accept that and would drop the hammer on both, so it could be that Notre Dame does all of this to make FSU's threat to leave serious and that leverage gets FSU into the SEC and Notre Dame cover to settle their issues for less. Or it could be that both of their collective knowledge of the events of 2010-2 paint the whole thing in a light unfavorable for ESPN so they do what is necessary to simply get Notre Dame and FSU out without complaint. Markers accepted and cashed in. And that's as far as ESPN goes to assist anything, and that is only if they weren't entirely kosher in their dealings with FSU in the 2010-2 realignment. Or it could be that ND is out or soon to be and simply looks after ND. Florida State plays the marker for leverage to head to the SEC and get GOR cover and everyone else fends for themselves in the ACC. There are likely a few more permutations to work through as well.

Other dots that were hanging in the air are also connecting in my mind so I'll have some things to take care of soon.

As Lucky Jack Aubrey would say, "To the lesser of two weevils!"

Now to the serious side of things, Oklahoma and Texas had options and chose to play closer to home and appease fans. Now more than ever college sports are about to be a wholly consumer driven entity and the most loyal consumers are alumni and the loyal alumni who attend games live locally. The AD and school would be truly in alien corn in the Big 10 and as much as you feel on track for AAU, you aren't there, and Nebraska is an excellent example of a school who found out what being the red headed stepchild in an academic elite is like. They lost their mojo because they lost recruiting grounds, their rivals, and of course their partial qualifiers in state.

So, my question is if you choose the Big 10 are you prepared to go it alone, and be the least among them? Are you prepared to lose games with local rivals and explain to recruits' parents why their travel will be extensive? Texas wasn't prepared for that, and neither was Oklahoma.

I'd like to see you in the SEC but if you head North, it won't be easy, and it absolutely will be less popular outside the academic offices in Tallahassee.

I don't rule this out, and we are at a point where frankly nothing would surprise me either.

(02-27-2023 12:09 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 11:41 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 04:41 PM)GarnetAndBlue Wrote:  Yeah this rumor has been a hot topic within FSU circles for the past decade. "Why did we ever sign the damn thing...and without much of a fuss?" (at least publicly). Conspiracy stuff? Maybe. But whenever I picture Alex Barron grabbing that stinking pen...I hear the Hamilton tune The Room Where It Happens. Wishful thinking, I'm sure, but I sure hope there's a gun still smoking somewhere.

This post is beneath you. Sorry.

Eric J Barron was Florida State University' s president. Dr Barron set the university on its present course of academic rise, warded off a downgrade threat to Florida's public universities from the statehouse, got Florida State recognised as on one then two preeminent universities, and set AAU membership as a goal.

Between Maryland's ACC departure, athletes' self-made fiascos, and local yahoos clamouring to join the B12 because Dude WV rumours, Dr Barron had plenty of headaches to deal with. You can rest assured that any agreements he made with ACC partners were for Florida State University's benefit and based upon the best options available at the time.

Gentlemen's agreements among presidents don't exist everywhere fans think they do, but they do exist. If Dr Barron agreed to a grant of rights because of a singular opportunity to create a conference network thanks to the participation of Notre Dame, it could well be that another agreement is understood: If ND ever wants out of the deal early, ND helps Florida State get out, too. That's conjecture, but plausible. University presidents occupy a small club where much depends on building relationships with each other. Reciprocity is an operating principle.

Dr Barron went on to become president of Penn State and last time I looked he's still on the faculty there. Florida State has high academic rankings today and a friend in the B1G Ten.

FYI to all.

There are a variety of ways to play this. Notre Dame departing to the Big 10 could be the go-between for FSU communications with them and could recommend them if a member.

ESPN would be damned reticent to accept that and would drop the hammer on both, so it could be that Notre Dame does all of this to make FSU's threat to leave serious and that leverage gets FSU into the SEC and Notre Dame cover to settle their issues for less. Or it could be that both of their collective knowledge of the events of 2010-2 paint the whole thing in a light unfavorable for ESPN so they do what is necessary to simply get Notre Dame and FSU out without complaint. Markers accepted and cashed in. And that's as far as ESPN goes to assist anything, and that is only if they weren't entirely kosher in their dealings with FSU in the 2010-2 realignment. Or it could be that ND is out or soon to be and simply looks after ND. Florida State plays the marker for leverage to head to the SEC and get GOR cover and everyone else fends for themselves in the ACC. There are likely a few more permutations to work through as well.

Other dots that were hanging in the air are also connecting in my mind so I'll have some things to take care of soon.

As Lucky Jack Aubrey would say, "To the lesser of two weevils!"

Now to the serious side of things, Oklahoma and Texas had options and chose to play closer to home and appease fans. Now more than ever college sports are about to be a wholly consumer driven entity and the most loyal consumers are alumni and the loyal alumni who attend games live locally. The AD and school would be truly in alien corn in the Big 10 and as much as you feel on track for AAU, you aren't there, and Nebraska is an excellent example of a school who found out what being the red headed stepchild in an academic elite is like. They lost their mojo because they lost recruiting grounds, their rivals, and of course their partial qualifiers in state.

So, my question is if you choose the Big 10 are you prepared to go it alone, and be the least among them? Are you prepared to lose games with local rivals and explain to recruits' parents why their travel will be extensive? Texas wasn't prepared for that, and neither was Oklahoma.

I'd like to see you in the SEC but if you head North, it won't be easy, and it absolutely will be less popular outside the academic offices in Tallahassee.

I don't rule this out, and we are at a point where frankly nothing would surprise me either.

Interestingly, if FSU does go to the B10, that's more room for other ACC schools.

I think I read you say that all they need is 8 votes.

Imagine if that's 4 invitees to the SEC and 4 to the B10.

Imagine the following invites:

Big10 - VA, NC, Duke, FSU
SEC - VT, NC state, Clemson, Louisville

And then neither P2 conference needs to go above 20.

Of course this kinda puts the kibosh on PAC schools getting B10 invites, but that was iffy anyway...

(02-27-2023 12:45 AM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(02-27-2023 12:09 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 11:41 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 04:41 PM)GarnetAndBlue Wrote:  Yeah this rumor has been a hot topic within FSU circles for the past decade. "Why did we ever sign the damn thing...and without much of a fuss?" (at least publicly). Conspiracy stuff? Maybe. But whenever I picture Alex Barron grabbing that stinking pen...I hear the Hamilton tune The Room Where It Happens. Wishful thinking, I'm sure, but I sure hope there's a gun still smoking somewhere.

This post is beneath you. Sorry.

Eric J Barron was Florida State University' s president. Dr Barron set the university on its present course of academic rise, warded off a downgrade threat to Florida's public universities from the statehouse, got Florida State recognised as on one then two preeminent universities, and set AAU membership as a goal.

Between Maryland's ACC departure, athletes' self-made fiascos, and local yahoos clamouring to join the B12 because Dude WV rumours, Dr Barron had plenty of headaches to deal with. You can rest assured that any agreements he made with ACC partners were for Florida State University's benefit and based upon the best options available at the time.

Gentlemen's agreements among presidents don't exist everywhere fans think they do, but they do exist. If Dr Barron agreed to a grant of rights because of a singular opportunity to create a conference network thanks to the participation of Notre Dame, it could well be that another agreement is understood: If ND ever wants out of the deal early, ND helps Florida State get out, too. That's conjecture, but plausible. University presidents occupy a small club where much depends on building relationships with each other. Reciprocity is an operating principle.

Dr Barron went on to become president of Penn State and last time I looked he's still on the faculty there. Florida State has high academic rankings today and a friend in the B1G Ten.

FYI to all.

There are a variety of ways to play this. Notre Dame departing to the Big 10 could be the go-between for FSU communications with them and could recommend them if a member.

ESPN would be damned reticent to accept that and would drop the hammer on both, so it could be that Notre Dame does all of this to make FSU's threat to leave serious and that leverage gets FSU into the SEC and Notre Dame cover to settle their issues for less. Or it could be that both of their collective knowledge of the events of 2010-2 paint the whole thing in a light unfavorable for ESPN so they do what is necessary to simply get Notre Dame and FSU out without complaint. Markers accepted and cashed in. And that's as far as ESPN goes to assist anything, and that is only if they weren't entirely kosher in their dealings with FSU in the 2010-2 realignment. Or it could be that ND is out or soon to be and simply looks after ND. Florida State plays the marker for leverage to head to the SEC and get GOR cover and everyone else fends for themselves in the ACC. There are likely a few more permutations to work through as well.

Other dots that were hanging in the air are also connecting in my mind so I'll have some things to take care of soon.

As Lucky Jack Aubrey would say, "To the lesser of two weevils!"

Now to the serious side of things, Oklahoma and Texas had options and chose to play closer to home and appease fans. Now more than ever college sports are about to be a wholly consumer driven entity and the most loyal consumers are alumni and the loyal alumni who attend games live locally. The AD and school would be truly in alien corn in the Big 10 and as much as you feel on track for AAU, you aren't there, and Nebraska is an excellent example of a school who found out what being the red headed stepchild in an academic elite is like. They lost their mojo because they lost recruiting grounds, their rivals, and of course their partial qualifiers in state.

So, my question is if you choose the Big 10 are you prepared to go it alone, and be the least among them? Are you prepared to lose games with local rivals and explain to recruits' parents why their travel will be extensive? Texas wasn't prepared for that, and neither was Oklahoma.

I'd like to see you in the SEC but if you head North, it won't be easy, and it absolutely will be less popular outside the academic offices in Tallahassee.

I don't rule this out, and we are at a point where frankly nothing would surprise me either.

Interestingly, if FSU does go to the B10, that's more room for other ACC schools.

I think I read you say that all they need is 8 votes.

Imagine if that's 4 invitees to the SEC and 4 to the B10.

Imagine the following invites:

Big10 - VA, NC, Duke, FSU
SEC - VT, NC state, Clemson, Louisville

And then neither P2 conference needs to go above 20.

Of course this kinda puts the kibosh on PAC schools getting B10 invites, but that was iffy anyway...

Plugging holes Skyhawk isn't about picking brands. It's about relationships. It may make the SEC taking UNC, UVa, Duke, and Georgia Tech more likely than taking Clemson. There are relational strands within the ACC. If Notre Dame and FSU wind up together in the Big 10 that doesn't leave enough room for the collective relationships of the Tobacco Road. It actually clears room for it in the SEC. My concern long range was always that taking F.S.U. especially with Clemson and then trying to land UNC breaks those ties which are important to UNC. Notre Dame is the Big 10 whale. But the Irish want games in Florida Georgia and Texas and it is why they negotiated with Slive for series when they weren't quite sure about the ACC. So the FSU / ND connection passes the sniff test for me. If Notre Dame prefers the Big 10 competition wise they will cover their ass in recruiting exposure.

So the divisions you tossed out quickly need to be rethought because the Big 10 is tugging on a different strand of relations.

(02-27-2023 12:59 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-27-2023 12:45 AM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(02-27-2023 12:09 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 11:41 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 04:41 PM)GarnetAndBlue Wrote:  Yeah this rumor has been a hot topic within FSU circles for the past decade. "Why did we ever sign the damn thing...and without much of a fuss?" (at least publicly). Conspiracy stuff? Maybe. But whenever I picture Alex Barron grabbing that stinking pen...I hear the Hamilton tune The Room Where It Happens. Wishful thinking, I'm sure, but I sure hope there's a gun still smoking somewhere.

This post is beneath you. Sorry.

Eric J Barron was Florida State University' s president. Dr Barron set the university on its present course of academic rise, warded off a downgrade threat to Florida's public universities from the statehouse, got Florida State recognised as on one then two preeminent universities, and set AAU membership as a goal.

Between Maryland's ACC departure, athletes' self-made fiascos, and local yahoos clamouring to join the B12 because Dude WV rumours, Dr Barron had plenty of headaches to deal with. You can rest assured that any agreements he made with ACC partners were for Florida State University's benefit and based upon the best options available at the time.

Gentlemen's agreements among presidents don't exist everywhere fans think they do, but they do exist. If Dr Barron agreed to a grant of rights because of a singular opportunity to create a conference network thanks to the participation of Notre Dame, it could well be that another agreement is understood: If ND ever wants out of the deal early, ND helps Florida State get out, too. That's conjecture, but plausible. University presidents occupy a small club where much depends on building relationships with each other. Reciprocity is an operating principle.

Dr Barron went on to become president of Penn State and last time I looked he's still on the faculty there. Florida State has high academic rankings today and a friend in the B1G Ten.

FYI to all.

There are a variety of ways to play this. Notre Dame departing to the Big 10 could be the go-between for FSU communications with them and could recommend them if a member.

ESPN would be damned reticent to accept that and would drop the hammer on both, so it could be that Notre Dame does all of this to make FSU's threat to leave serious and that leverage gets FSU into the SEC and Notre Dame cover to settle their issues for less. Or it could be that both of their collective knowledge of the events of 2010-2 paint the whole thing in a light unfavorable for ESPN so they do what is necessary to simply get Notre Dame and FSU out without complaint. Markers accepted and cashed in. And that's as far as ESPN goes to assist anything, and that is only if they weren't entirely kosher in their dealings with FSU in the 2010-2 realignment. Or it could be that ND is out or soon to be and simply looks after ND. Florida State plays the marker for leverage to head to the SEC and get GOR cover and everyone else fends for themselves in the ACC. There are likely a few more permutations to work through as well.

Other dots that were hanging in the air are also connecting in my mind so I'll have some things to take care of soon.

As Lucky Jack Aubrey would say, "To the lesser of two weevils!"

Now to the serious side of things, Oklahoma and Texas had options and chose to play closer to home and appease fans. Now more than ever college sports are about to be a wholly consumer driven entity and the most loyal consumers are alumni and the loyal alumni who attend games live locally. The AD and school would be truly in alien corn in the Big 10 and as much as you feel on track for AAU, you aren't there, and Nebraska is an excellent example of a school who found out what being the red headed stepchild in an academic elite is like. They lost their mojo because they lost recruiting grounds, their rivals, and of course their partial qualifiers in state.

So, my question is if you choose the Big 10 are you prepared to go it alone, and be the least among them? Are you prepared to lose games with local rivals and explain to recruits' parents why their travel will be extensive? Texas wasn't prepared for that, and neither was Oklahoma.

I'd like to see you in the SEC but if you head North, it won't be easy, and it absolutely will be less popular outside the academic offices in Tallahassee.

I don't rule this out, and we are at a point where frankly nothing would surprise me either.

Interestingly, if FSU does go to the B10, that's more room for other ACC schools.

I think I read you say that all they need is 8 votes.

Imagine if that's 4 invitees to the SEC and 4 to the B10.

Imagine the following invites:

Big10 - VA, NC, Duke, FSU
SEC - VT, NC state, Clemson, Louisville

And then neither P2 conference needs to go above 20.

Of course this kinda puts the kibosh on PAC schools getting B10 invites, but that was iffy anyway...

Plugging holes Skyhawk isn't about picking brands. It's about relationships. It may make the SEC taking UNC, UVa, Duke, and Georgia Tech more likely than taking Clemson. There are relational strands within the ACC. If Notre Dame and FSU wind up together in the Big 10 that doesn't leave enough room for the collective relationships of the Tobacco Road. It actually clears room for it in the SEC. My concern long range was always that taking F.S.U. especially with Clemson and then trying to land UNC breaks those ties which are important to UNC. Notre Dame is the Big 10 whale. But the Irish want games in Florida Georgia and Texas and it is why they negotiated with Slive for series when they weren't quite sure about the ACC. So the FSU / ND connection passes the sniff test for me. If Notre Dame prefers the Big 10 competition wise they will cover their ass in recruiting exposure.

So the divisions you tossed out quickly need to be rethought because the Big 10 is tugging on a different strand of relations.

I completely agree about relationships between the schools - and not just the athletic departments.

I've talked with you a lot on these boards, so I know you know that I think a lot of these ACC schools could swing in either direction.

I just showed the above example by assigning to the B10 - FSU (due to recent rumors about them nearing an AAU invitation) and three other AAU schools.

It can of course go all sorts of ways.

The point was that if all it takes is 8, I don't think that that's a very difficult threshold to meet.

(02-27-2023 12:09 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 11:41 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 04:41 PM)GarnetAndBlue Wrote:  Yeah this rumor has been a hot topic within FSU circles for the past decade. "Why did we ever sign the damn thing...and without much of a fuss?" (at least publicly). Conspiracy stuff? Maybe. But whenever I picture Alex Barron grabbing that stinking pen...I hear the Hamilton tune The Room Where It Happens. Wishful thinking, I'm sure, but I sure hope there's a gun still smoking somewhere.

This post is beneath you. Sorry.

Eric J Barron was Florida State University' s president. Dr Barron set the university on its present course of academic rise, warded off a downgrade threat to Florida's public universities from the statehouse, got Florida State recognised as on one then two preeminent universities, and set AAU membership as a goal.

Between Maryland's ACC departure, athletes' self-made fiascos, and local yahoos clamouring to join the B12 because Dude WV rumours, Dr Barron had plenty of headaches to deal with. You can rest assured that any agreements he made with ACC partners were for Florida State University's benefit and based upon the best options available at the time.

Gentlemen's agreements among presidents don't exist everywhere fans think they do, but they do exist. If Dr Barron agreed to a grant of rights because of a singular opportunity to create a conference network thanks to the participation of Notre Dame, it could well be that another agreement is understood: If ND ever wants out of the deal early, ND helps Florida State get out, too. That's conjecture, but plausible. University presidents occupy a small club where much depends on building relationships with each other. Reciprocity is an operating principle.

Dr Barron went on to become president of Penn State and last time I looked he's still on the faculty there. Florida State has high academic rankings today and a friend in the B1G Ten.

FYI to all.

There are a variety of ways to play this. Notre Dame departing to the Big 10 could be the go-between for FSU communications with them and could recommend them if a member.

ESPN would be damned reticent to accept that and would drop the hammer on both, so it could be that Notre Dame does all of this to make FSU's threat to leave serious and that leverage gets FSU into the SEC and Notre Dame cover to settle their issues for less. Or it could be that both of their collective knowledge of the events of 2010-2 paint the whole thing in a light unfavorable for ESPN so they do what is necessary to simply get Notre Dame and FSU out without complaint. Markers accepted and cashed in. And that's as far as ESPN goes to assist anything, and that is only if they weren't entirely kosher in their dealings with FSU in the 2010-2 realignment. Or it could be that ND is out or soon to be and simply looks after ND. Florida State plays the marker for leverage to head to the SEC and get GOR cover and everyone else fends for themselves in the ACC. There are likely a few more permutations to work through as well.

Other dots that were hanging in the air are also connecting in my mind so I'll have some things to take care of soon.

As Lucky Jack Aubrey would say, "To the lesser of two weevils!"

Now to the serious side of things, Oklahoma and Texas had options and chose to play closer to home and appease fans. Now more than ever college sports are about to be a wholly consumer driven entity and the most loyal consumers are alumni and the loyal alumni who attend games live locally. The AD and school would be truly in alien corn in the Big 10 and as much as you feel on track for AAU, you aren't there, and Nebraska is an excellent example of a school who found out what being the red headed stepchild in an academic elite is like. They lost their mojo because they lost recruiting grounds, their rivals, and of course their partial qualifiers in state.

So, my question is if you choose the Big 10 are you prepared to go it alone, and be the least among them? Are you prepared to lose games with local rivals and explain to recruits' parents why their travel will be extensive? Texas wasn't prepared for that, and neither was Oklahoma.

I'd like to see you in the SEC but if you head North, it won't be easy, and it absolutely will be less popular outside the academic offices in Tallahassee.

I don't rule this out, and we are at a point where frankly nothing would surprise me either.

Not sure what you are saying here? I'm sure you see the flags flying from the car windows every Saturday throughout the South. Lots of people who don't live in the city come in for games.

(02-27-2023 01:35 AM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(02-27-2023 12:59 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-27-2023 12:45 AM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(02-27-2023 12:09 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 11:41 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  This post is beneath you. Sorry.

Eric J Barron was Florida State University' s president. Dr Barron set the university on its present course of academic rise, warded off a downgrade threat to Florida's public universities from the statehouse, got Florida State recognised as on one then two preeminent universities, and set AAU membership as a goal.

Between Maryland's ACC departure, athletes' self-made fiascos, and local yahoos clamouring to join the B12 because Dude WV rumours, Dr Barron had plenty of headaches to deal with. You can rest assured that any agreements he made with ACC partners were for Florida State University's benefit and based upon the best options available at the time.

Gentlemen's agreements among presidents don't exist everywhere fans think they do, but they do exist. If Dr Barron agreed to a grant of rights because of a singular opportunity to create a conference network thanks to the participation of Notre Dame, it could well be that another agreement is understood: If ND ever wants out of the deal early, ND helps Florida State get out, too. That's conjecture, but plausible. University presidents occupy a small club where much depends on building relationships with each other. Reciprocity is an operating principle.

Dr Barron went on to become president of Penn State and last time I looked he's still on the faculty there. Florida State has high academic rankings today and a friend in the B1G Ten.

FYI to all.

There are a variety of ways to play this. Notre Dame departing to the Big 10 could be the go-between for FSU communications with them and could recommend them if a member.

ESPN would be damned reticent to accept that and would drop the hammer on both, so it could be that Notre Dame does all of this to make FSU's threat to leave serious and that leverage gets FSU into the SEC and Notre Dame cover to settle their issues for less. Or it could be that both of their collective knowledge of the events of 2010-2 paint the whole thing in a light unfavorable for ESPN so they do what is necessary to simply get Notre Dame and FSU out without complaint. Markers accepted and cashed in. And that's as far as ESPN goes to assist anything, and that is only if they weren't entirely kosher in their dealings with FSU in the 2010-2 realignment. Or it could be that ND is out or soon to be and simply looks after ND. Florida State plays the marker for leverage to head to the SEC and get GOR cover and everyone else fends for themselves in the ACC. There are likely a few more permutations to work through as well.

Other dots that were hanging in the air are also connecting in my mind so I'll have some things to take care of soon.

As Lucky Jack Aubrey would say, "To the lesser of two weevils!"

Now to the serious side of things, Oklahoma and Texas had options and chose to play closer to home and appease fans. Now more than ever college sports are about to be a wholly consumer driven entity and the most loyal consumers are alumni and the loyal alumni who attend games live locally. The AD and school would be truly in alien corn in the Big 10 and as much as you feel on track for AAU, you aren't there, and Nebraska is an excellent example of a school who found out what being the red headed stepchild in an academic elite is like. They lost their mojo because they lost recruiting grounds, their rivals, and of course their partial qualifiers in state.

So, my question is if you choose the Big 10 are you prepared to go it alone, and be the least among them? Are you prepared to lose games with local rivals and explain to recruits' parents why their travel will be extensive? Texas wasn't prepared for that, and neither was Oklahoma.

I'd like to see you in the SEC but if you head North, it won't be easy, and it absolutely will be less popular outside the academic offices in Tallahassee.

I don't rule this out, and we are at a point where frankly nothing would surprise me either.

Interestingly, if FSU does go to the B10, that's more room for other ACC schools.

I think I read you say that all they need is 8 votes.

Imagine if that's 4 invitees to the SEC and 4 to the B10.

Imagine the following invites:

Big10 - VA, NC, Duke, FSU
SEC - VT, NC state, Clemson, Louisville

And then neither P2 conference needs to go above 20.

Of course this kinda puts the kibosh on PAC schools getting B10 invites, but that was iffy anyway...

Plugging holes Skyhawk isn't about picking brands. It's about relationships. It may make the SEC taking UNC, UVa, Duke, and Georgia Tech more likely than taking Clemson. There are relational strands within the ACC. If Notre Dame and FSU wind up together in the Big 10 that doesn't leave enough room for the collective relationships of the Tobacco Road. It actually clears room for it in the SEC. My concern long range was always that taking F.S.U. especially with Clemson and then trying to land UNC breaks those ties which are important to UNC. Notre Dame is the Big 10 whale. But the Irish want games in Florida Georgia and Texas and it is why they negotiated with Slive for series when they weren't quite sure about the ACC. So the FSU / ND connection passes the sniff test for me. If Notre Dame prefers the Big 10 competition wise they will cover their ass in recruiting exposure.

So the divisions you tossed out quickly need to be rethought because the Big 10 is tugging on a different strand of relations.

I completely agree about relationships between the schools - and not just the athletic departments.

I've talked with you a lot on these boards, so I know you know that I think a lot of these ACC schools could swing in either direction.

I just showed the above example by assigning to the B10 - FSU (due to recent rumors about them nearing an AAU invitation) and three other AAU schools.

It can of course go all sorts of ways.

The point was that if all it takes is 8, I don't think that that's a very difficult threshold to meet.

If the purpose is to take 8 the SEC could do that on its own, the first 4 would add, the second 4 would subtract. That applies for the Big 10. For both of us to dig that ground and come up with 8 isn't as likely, at least not profitably.

I wasn't selling your play with this short, it's just the mix hit me as awkward.

Let's go back to a previous one I played with. UNC, UVa, Duke, Kansas. Now the SEC covers hoops. What would the Big 10 get? I doubt you take Clemson, FSU, Notre Dame, Georgia Tech, and Pitt? If you are going outside of AAU lines do you make a play for T.C.U.? I don't think so. That's too much deviation from the AAU norm. So you see that mix doesn't work. UNC, Va Tech, Miami, Clemson for the SEC? Notre Dame, UVa, Duke, FSU for the Big 10? Possibilities.

But this has no benefit for ESPN and destroys how they've built their value, so I say it doesn't happen. Yes you'll get Notre Dame, but ESPN's face saving and much more importantly, business model saving move is UNC, FSU, Duke, Virginia to the SEC in a merger but with SEC money for 3, SEC money for Clemson and a bump for Miami and Virginia Tech. It can be handled in house without GOR entanglement, and in whole.

Occam's razor leaves 2 options that make sense. Cut Notre Dame loose. Cut Florida State loose but where the GOR binds them, merge the two, hold your gains if you are ESPN, and pick up anything else you want total control over to the West.

It doesn't require buyouts, keeps both conferences under GOR's, violates no revenue to the SEC or the ACC and adds to those who are demanding remedy, and covers part of that with consolidation of overhead. The answer to any problem is what works best and simplest. This is it.

The other option is to cut both loose and keep the ACC as is, but ESPN looses valuable control over Florida markets if FSU doesn't head to the SEC. I can't see them opting for that unless the Noles have some really good leverage. I think they are due a favor, but not one that size.

And what will Sankey want? The SEC's best defense of the region in terms of efficacy and cost efficiency has been the ACC.

But for the sake of argument let's say ESPN and FOX have conspired to blow up the present conference system, in that case blowing apart the PAC 12 and ACC would be a damn good start to get the Big 10 to abandon its academic adherence and the SEC its regionality. If they did that how long would they hold any trust from any of us?

So after kicking this around for an hour and a bit I think in order these are the likelihoods:

1. ESPN owed FOX a kindness for the 20 million buyout of OU and UT's last year. Finding away to cut the Irish loose more economically could be in the cards. I don't think ESPN gives up control of the Florida market for it.

2. Moving FSU and anyone else from the ACC to the SEC could make excusing N.D. for less more likely, so this is feasible.

3. The SEC has no major movement into the ACC beyond FSU and a travel companion and ESPN backfills and makes some economic adjustments there. Duke, North Carolina and Virginia remain and rebuild their conference. Perhaps they pick up Big East all but football members buiding on their strength rather than trying to find awkard fits to cover their weaknesses. Miami and Clemson move over to the SEC when the rebuilding begins in earnest and hoops are enhanced.

4. The SEC stops at 20 with continued emphasis on brand on brand football but with more money in which to invest in hoops.

5. With Notre Dame in house its value covers the completion of the Big 10 move West. Logic tells me USC and UCLA are not lone additions. Stanford, Washington, and perhaps Cal join the Irish. The Big 10 stays coast to coast in an enhanced way. Notre Dame gets to schedule Florida, Florida State, Miami, Georgia, Georgia Tech, Texas, Texas A&M when they desire as do Michigan, Ohio State and Penn State. The two super powers play off one another to build the coming rivalry which will drive interest.

6. The Big 12 continues to be the conference that picks up the PAC 12 diaspora. They too grow all but football additions to beef up hoops, after they pick up the PAC 12 remnant.

FOX and ESPN split the two super conferences and the ACC and Big 12 become joint properties. ESPN doesn't mind because all of Florida and essentially Texas remain under their control. South Carolina and essentially Georgia are solidly theirs as well.

North Carolina, Virginia, and the Old Big East schools are shared.

This takes care of the top California schools, UW, and FOX closes control in the Northern Midwest with ND.

7 Why? It's bad business to cut off Cal as the flagship of their state, bad business to break up the Deep South when scheduling can aid with recruiting, and good business to find two worthy hoops homes for mid majors across the country. And it's good business to drive the North vs South rivalry for all its worth. Intermingle them too much and it won't work. All fans buy into a regional identity. Check out your Malinowski and Durkheim if you think totemism and tribal behavior is dead. The concept here is to restore and include, not destroy and confuse. One builds business and interest and the other pisses fans off and turns them off to the sports where change has angered them.

But hey, kudos Gitanole and Skyhawk, and Gamenole because we had some meat to chew on tonight and that's a welcome departure from chasing blog inuendo and press releases, which are usually filler and spin. Or as we call them out our house, BS Souffle's!