MEGA Conference Realignment and lawsuits Megathread(Its still personal)

[TooColdToHold]

Every time you think that the ACC Presidents and ADs can't get any dumber, they find a new low.

Yes, let's find a bizarre Rube Goldberg contraption that will pay "successful Clemson" $55 million per year and "desperate SMU" $0 per year. And then let's expect that genius business model to be workable and not create ANY resentment whatsoever. And it will cause everyone to forget about all that deep, deep Big 10/SEC cash, and I'm sure that all of the recruits will HAPPILY choose to play in the Frankenstein ACC instead of the fat-and-happy Big 10 and SEC.

All because, what...ignorance? Hope? Fear of a GOR Planet? Because we get an "automatic qualifier" spot in the Final 12 when the Big 10 and SEC are likely to demand 3 or 4 spots?

At least I realize why none of these Presidents and ADs have jobs in the real business world. They would get eaten alive and **** back out again.

Josh Pate said a lot of people would be shocked at how mediocre a lot of these presidents are. We expect them to be brilliant but he said that is far from being the case.

 

[rascon]

 

[calinative umstudent]

Every time you think that the ACC Presidents and ADs can't get any dumber, they find a new low.

Yes, let's find a bizarre Rube Goldberg contraption that will pay "successful Clemson" $55 million per year and "desperate SMU" $0 per year. And then let's expect that genius business model to be workable and not create ANY resentment whatsoever. And it will cause everyone to forget about all that deep, deep Big 10/SEC cash, and I'm sure that all of the recruits will HAPPILY choose to play in the Frankenstein ACC instead of the fat-and-happy Big 10 and SEC.

All because, what...ignorance? Hope? Fear of a GOR Planet? Because we get an "automatic qualifier" spot in the Final 12 when the Big 10 and SEC are likely to demand 3 or 4 spots?

At least I realize why none of these Presidents and ADs have jobs in the real business world. They would get eaten alive and **** back out again.

Well the ACC and presidents that are fine with ACC staying together are the majority right now. They aren’t going to think long-term cause that would leave a lot of them out of the picture.

From their perspective of course it makes sense to take Stanford, Cal, and SMU - only paying them like <$40M total while ESPN has to pay the ACC like >$90M (If ESPN is obligated to add full revenue for more members that is) for those programs… $50M increase is average of $4M/yr. And if that’s just split among top half (that would have P2 invites) that’s $7M/yr. Which should easily put it above Big12 and likely >50% cut in Big10/SEC at least for a handful more years.

They do t really needs to make us, FSU, Clemson happy. They have to make VTech, NCSt, GTech, Etc happy. Do that and they can get rid of dissolution as an option. From there you force schools to challenge GOR and at minimum pay upfront $120M exit fee - which they will all get a piece of…

 

[hoops156]

Every time you think that the ACC Presidents and ADs can't get any dumber, they find a new low.

Yes, let's find a bizarre Rube Goldberg contraption that will pay "successful Clemson" $55 million per year and "desperate SMU" $0 per year. And then let's expect that genius business model to be workable and not create ANY resentment whatsoever. And it will cause everyone to forget about all that deep, deep Big 10/SEC cash, and I'm sure that all of the recruits will HAPPILY choose to play in the Frankenstein ACC instead of the fat-and-happy Big 10 and SEC.

All because, what...ignorance? Hope? Fear of a GOR Planet? Because we get an "automatic qualifier" spot in the Final 12 when the Big 10 and SEC are likely to demand 3 or 4 spots?

At least I realize why none of these Presidents and ADs have jobs in the real business world. They would get eaten alive and **** back out again.

you including rad in this?

 

[rascon]

So the ACC is going to fight to the bitter end to stay together.
That means its up to a school to backdoor a deal to leave the ACC and either a) pay a negotiated amount or b) challenge the GOR by themselves.

Is there a school that can/would do that?

Would Big 10 only take 1 team, or would they want 2? I assumed Miami would go with either ND or FSU, but if ACC stays together and adds Stanford, I dont see Irish signing up with BIg10 anytime soon (sounds like they are obligated to join ACC if they do join conference).

And FSU has been screaming all over, I can’t see how them and Miami are linked together on any move.

tea leaves don‘t look so good right now… can someone give me some hope that UM to B10 is still alive???

 

[Fluffhead]

you including rad in this?

So far, he seems like a great fundraiser and that’s about it. And based on baseball, you can argue it is to a fault and I wouldn’t question you.

 

[Hold My Beer]

Josh Pate said a lot of people would be shocked at how mediocre a lot of these presidents are. We expect them to be brilliant but he said that is far from being the case.

Yeah, crazy to think a school would have, for example, a public health expert in charge of decisions specifically about intercollegiate athletics

 

[kccanefan]

So the ACC is going to fight to the bitter end to stay together.
That means its up to a school to backdoor a deal to leave the ACC and either a) pay a negotiated amount or b) challenge the GOR by themselves.

Is there a school that can/would do that?

Would Big 10 only take 1 team, or would they want 2? I assumed Miami would go with either ND or FSU, but if ACC stays together and adds Stanford, I dont see Irish signing up with BIg10 anytime soon (sounds like they are obligated to join ACC if they do join conference).

And FSU has been screaming all over, I can’t see how them and Miami are linked together on any move.

tea leaves don‘t look so good right now… can someone give me some hope that UM to B10 is still alive???

 

[Rickd]

You know I respect your posts, but those numbers are simply not happening.

First, ESPN's best offer to the Pac 12 was $30M per school, which the Pac 12 promptly rejected. Then Apple TV offered the Pac 12 $20M per school. Now, you think cash-poor ESPN will pay even more than their highest offer for 2 of the 4 teams that were not even offered by the Big 10 or Big 12? And $35M for SMU, when they get, what, $6M per year now?

Second, I hate to point this out, but the inherent weakness with all of this "ACC gets more money with more teams" theory is that we are going to be on the same TV outlets as the SEC. So I'm not sure how anyone thinks that we will get MORE games on ABC/ESPN simply because we have more teams. We are just going to get more games on ACCN, ESPN+, and The CW. We're not pushing SEC newbies Texas and Oklahoma to streaming so that people can watch Wake-Stanford on OTA.

The beauty of joining the Big 10 deal is that they have THREE separate OTA networks, plus more cable outlets. The Big 10 math works. Jamming more SEC/ACC teams into ABC/ESPN does not work as well as people seem to be dreaming, either from a ratings or a MONEY standpoint.

Finally...the other problem with envisioning this under the current ABC/ESPN arrangement is that it makes WAY MORE SENSE for ESPN to simply redirect this mythical available pool of money towards...oh, I don't know...a transfer of rights for a couple of schools like F$U and Clemson...to jump from the ACC to the SEC. THAT is the much smarter and better use of funds. THEN you have F$U and Clemson playing some high-quality matchups that people actually want to watch. It's like saying "my investment strategy is DIVERSIFICATION, I'm going to spread my money all around to a dozen different stocks". And, sure, from a "risk-averse" standpoint, that's great, you'll get a nice, neet return on investment. But if you really believe strongly in one particular stock, and that belief is based on solid analysis, then you put all of your money into it and make a much larger return. And the Southeastern Conference is one of the safest high-yield investments out there.

Look, who knows if the ACC will throw a Hail Mary here, but it's stupid and it won't change economic reality. So while we try to leverage every trick in the book to fudge a system where the 4 biggest programs in a 17-team conference make more money than anyone else, the Big 10 and SEC will be getting larger payouts EVERY SINGLE YEAR the old-fashioned way. By EARNING it.

What is funny is that people are proposing a Big-East-like unequal distribution, which was the exact system that killed the Big East and led us join the ACC. So, yeah, history is going to repeat itself.

And all because a couple of dopey sportswriters and some "I do assignments" poster on this board have bamboozled everyone into believing that the Grant of Rights is some Gordian knot that we can't solve.

Hilarious.

When the ACC is inventing these genius Big-East solutions to problems, you know it's time to kill the ACC.

Didn't say THOSE numbers were happening .... just that something of that nature might be agreed to by the "ACC" braintrust .... specific numbers aside. Best thing to do long term for everybody is to blow the ACC up and let members find the APPROPRIATE homes for their brands.

 

[thesentinel]

Just ******* kill me if we get stuck in the ACC with cal and SMU

 

[kccanefan]

Just ******* kill me if we get stuck in the ACC with cal and SMU

 

[TheOriginalCane]

Josh Pate said a lot of people would be shocked at how mediocre a lot of these presidents are. We expect them to be brilliant but he said that is far from being the case.

Complete truth. Might be good "academics", but they are TERRIBLE at "real world business". The probably make their secretaries set up their utility deposits and pick up their dry cleaning.

******* university presidents are as useless at business as a newborn baby is. And people want to give Donna Shalala **** for overpaying for UHealth. ****, she purchased a better and more useful asset (long-term) than most of these university presidents EVER do in their careers. And UHealth got cleaned up nicely by JOE ECHEVARRIA, the former head of Deloitte US, NOT by Shirtless Julio.

 

[TheOriginalCane]

Well the ACC and presidents that are fine with ACC staying together are the majority right now. They aren’t going to think long-term cause that would leave a lot of them out of the picture.

From their perspective of course it makes sense to take Stanford, Cal, and SMU - only paying them like <$40M total while ESPN has to pay the ACC like >$90M (If ESPN is obligated to add full revenue for more members that is) for those programs… $50M increase is average of $4M/yr. And if that’s just split among top half (that would have P2 invites) that’s $7M/yr. Which should easily put it above Big12 and likely >50% cut in Big10/SEC at least for a handful more years.

They do t really needs to make us, FSU, Clemson happy. They have to make VTech, NCSt, GTech, Etc happy. Do that and they can get rid of dissolution as an option. From there you force schools to challenge GOR and at minimum pay upfront $120M exit fee - which they will all get a piece of…

The reported number is $72M of revenue against $40M of payout.

Yay, an extra $32M that will mostly go to Clemson...

 

[TheOriginalCane]

you including rad in this?

I know you've got a hard-on for Dan, so I'm not going to get into the weeds on that post.

Dan is being outvoted here (regardless of how much you want to blame him for past GOR sins).

Not in a million years do I think that Dan thinks this is a good and prudent decision that will ensure the future success of the ACC, or an easy way out of the ACC for Miami.

 

[TheOriginalCane]

Didn't say THOSE numbers were happening .... just that something of that nature might be agreed to by the "ACC" braintrust .... specific numbers aside. Best thing to do long term for everybody is to blow the ACC up and let members find the APPROPRIATE homes for their brands.

You are correct, it was Debbie Downer @NorthernVirginiaCane who acted like your hypothetical was likely to happen.

My sincerest apologies...

 

[Fluffhead]

I know you've got a hard-on for Dan, so I'm not going to get into the weeds on that post.

Dan is being outvoted here (regardless of how much you want to blame him for past GOR sins).

Not in a million years do I think that Dan thinks this is a good and prudent decision that will ensure the future success of the ACC, or an easy way out of the ACC for Miami.

Outvoted as in by Julio and the academics at UM or the conference as a whole?

 

[Gsugradcanefan]

Everytime i hear about SMU's boosters being willing and able to cover the revenue gap it blows my f*cking mind. They really do have f*ck you money.

 

[Yoyo82]

I know you've got a hard-on for Dan, so I'm not going to get into the weeds on that post.

Dan is being outvoted here (regardless of how much you want to blame him for past GOR sins).

Not in a million years do I think that Dan thinks this is a good and prudent decision that will ensure the future success of the ACC, or an easy way out of the ACC for Miami.

What do you mean Dan is being outvoted? By the other schools in the conference or by people at his own school?

 

[JG14]

Complete truth. Might be good "academics", but they are TERRIBLE at "real world business". The probably make their secretaries set up their utility deposits and pick up their dry cleaning.

******* university presidents are as useless at business as a newborn baby is. And people want to give Donna Shalala **** for overpaying for UHealth. ****, she purchased a better and more useful asset (long-term) than most of these university presidents EVER do in their careers. And UHealth got cleaned up nicely by JOE ECHEVARRIA, the former head of Deloitte US, NOT by Shirtless Julio.

Sometimes it is in the business world too. Board members get a chubby because somebody is excellent in their field or craft and gets an MBA so they must make a great CEO.

 

[CaneinBroward]

Yeah, crazy to think a school would have, for example, a public health expert in charge of decisions specifically about intercollegiate athletics

Another reminder these are all non-profit, educational institutions with sports programs, not sports programs with educational institutions. The for-profit business world, including TV networks, is totally foreign to the majority of them and it is showing as they have allowed these TV networks to own them instead of the universities dictating control of their own sports programs, specifically football.

Doesn't the Board of Trustees have the final say on all of these decisions anyway?