forums

MEGA Conference Realignment and lawsuits Megathread(Its still personal)

Ispyin said:
lol Clemson would not get a full share in the big 10 if Miami wouldn’t regardless of their current ratings - the state is too small for carriage to matter more than the upside of a second shop in a far
Larger state and media market and yes national brand even if fsu already comes in with carriage fees.
Click to expand...
Viewership ... huge number of games with 4 million plus.
 
Advertisement
Would be nice to be a "fly on the wall" at the ACC annual Spring Meeting in Amelia Island. Began today and runs through Wednesday. Last year the "big ruckus" was the news of the Magnificent Seven looking for an out. Will there be any follow up after this years meeting? You would think that members might want some clarification, on the record, from Phillips regarding the ESPN media agreement. Would be great if the members got 8 together to "vote to dissolve" and blew it up this week!! The former chair of UNC's BOT, Dave Boliek, stated that he is in favor of UNC joining a higher revenue conference and believes all efforts should be made in that direction.

Sure would be nice to hear a similar comment from one of the Miami "realignment team".
 
UNC making noise. Dave Boliek, former UNC Chair, and current trustee, announced that the BOT is calling for an audit of the UNC athletic department and stated that funds have to be used from other university activities to cover the athletic department deficit. He also stated that UNC is underutilizing it's assets (ie, the football program) and is receiving less revenue than they should be receiving due to a very bad ACC deal. He stated that it is his opinion that UNC should be doing everything possible to join a higher revenue conference.

This was announced today, while Bubba Cunningham, the AD, is at the ACC Spring Meeting in Amelia Island, which runs from May 13-15.

Should be an interesting meeting.
 
Rickd said:
Would be nice to be a "fly on the wall" at the ACC annual Spring Meeting in Amelia Island. Began today and runs through Wednesday. Last year the "big ruckus" was the news of the Magnificent Seven looking for an out. Will there be any follow up after this years meeting? You would think that members might want some clarification, on the record, from Phillips regarding the ESPN media agreement. Would be great if the members got 8 together to "vote to dissolve" and blew it up this week!! The former chair of UNC's BOT, Dave Boliek, stated that he is in favor of UNC joining a higher revenue conference and believes all efforts should be made in that direction.

Sure would be nice to hear a similar comment from one of the Miami "realignment team".
Click to expand...
I would imagine each party is going to hold their cards very close to the vest.

Probably the least productive meeting in ACC history, if nothing else the smaller schools pushing for action/certainty, while the bigger schools sitting very tight and not sharing a word of their true intentions.

The smaller schools just have to know that life is going to change for them at some point, and change very negatively.
 
Last edited:
Advertisement
Empirical Cane said:
I would imagine each party is going to hold their cards very close to the vest.

Probably the least productive meeting in ACC history, if nothing else the smaller schools pushing for action/certainty, while the bigger schools sitting very tight and not sharing a word of their true intentions.
Click to expand...
1000001433.gif
 
Advertisement
On one hand, we have done literally nothing publicly to suggest that we have any interest in leaving the ACC. Like literally nothing. We’ve done nothing but reaffirm our position as happy in the ACC. With our admins history of horrible decisions, it shouldn’t shock me that they’d possibly continue to push us further into irrelevance.

On the other hand, with the money we’ve put into the program recently and appear to be putting towards the future, I cannot fathom a reality that we’re not making moves to leave this conference. There is not a single possibility that exists in which the people in charge of decision making at this school cannot see that the literal future of our school, in terms of sports, resides on getting the **** off of this sinking ship. This would exceed general stupidity and would border on mental retardation if we do not find a way into the P2.
 
So flo just asked the question if we would rather take 50% share of big10 (30-40M) vs big12 full shares (40-50M). With the context that in 6 years we would go P2.

He also said Miami’s position will be leaking out in the next few weeks.

I don’t know how accurate those numbers are but wondering if any of the insiders had heard anything like that. I personally would take the b10 offer and move on - we can’t afford to be left out.
 
Advertisement
Canesrule230 said:
So flo just asked the question if we would rather take 50% share of big10 (30-40M) vs big12 full shares (40-50M). With the context that in 6 years we would go P2.

He also said Miami’s position will be leaking out in the next few weeks.

I don’t know how accurate those numbers are but wondering if any of the insiders had heard anything like that. I personally would take the b10 offer and move on - we can’t afford to be left out.
Click to expand...
That's a no brainer. The gap between the P2 and B12 will only keep getting bigger. Any position outside of the P2 is only accepting irrelevancy.
 
Yoyo82 said:
That's a no brainer. The gap between the P2 and B12 will only keep getting bigger. Any position outside of the P2 is only accepting irrelevancy.
Click to expand...
Agreed my fear is that he made it sound like Miami was thinking about taking the $ from the B12 and expecting to get into the BIG in 6ish years. Hoping that’s not our approach.
 
Canesrule230 said:
So flo just asked the question if we would rather take 50% share of big10 (30-40M) vs big12 full shares (40-50M). With the context that in 6 years we would go P2.

He also said Miami’s position will be leaking out in the next few weeks.

I don’t know how accurate those numbers are but wondering if any of the insiders had heard anything like that. I personally would take the b10 offer and move on - we can’t afford to be left out.
Click to expand...
If that's the only scenario, you couldn't afford NOT to go P2.
Going Big XII in that scenario would be extremely shortsighted, like picking Adidas over Nike in 2015 for "short term financial gains" (cc: @TheOriginalCane ) and signal we're not serious about competing at the highest levels and winning.

Flo also said recruiting wouldn't be affected, but the day is soon coming where if you aren't P2 you'll be considered JV status.

In addition, Oregon and Washington are taking more than their half-share initially because they are borrowing from future earnings through loans from the Big Ten. If Miami really needed to, they could do the same.
 
Advertisement
PhenomCane said:
If that's the only scenario, you couldn't afford NOT to go P2.
Going Big XII in that scenario would be extremely shortsighted, like picking Adidas over Nike in 2015 for "short term financial gains" (cc: @TheOriginalCane ) and signal we're not serious about competing at the highest levels and winning.

Flo also said recruiting wouldn't be affected, but the day is soon coming where if you aren't P2 you'll be considered JV status.

In addition, Oregon and Washington are taking more than their half-share initially because they are borrowing from future earnings through loans from the Big Ten. If Miami really needed to, they could do the same.
Click to expand...
Agreed man - hoping our leadership sees it the same way.
 
Canesrule230 said:
So flo just asked the question if we would rather take 50% share of big10 (30-40M) vs big12 full shares (40-50M). With the context that in 6 years we would go P2.

He also said Miami’s position will be leaking out in the next few weeks.

I don’t know how accurate those numbers are but wondering if any of the insiders had heard anything like that. I personally would take the b10 offer and move on - we can’t afford to be left out.
Click to expand...
I’m not sure what he’s hearing so not here to refute that but I’m quite certain he’s off on the numbers behind this theory. Not a shot at Flo to be clear but the math he’s indicating even if big 12 renegotiates a new deal up because of higher value schools joining is wrong imo. I truly like Flo and all that his crew does. Maybe there is some 8d chess version where suddenly big 12 territory is no longer in bum**** with few exceptions (unlike the deal they just got a year ago with 4 larger metros and states added and yet still 🤷‍♂️)

Simplest version (and I may update this later with more detail- edit I did )
- new big 12 deal ends with 2030 football season, big ten is 2029 season I believe (maybe 2030- I’ve seen both out there but I think that’s confusion over academic vs calendar year)

- even in the worst estimate range for big ten and best estimate range for the big 12, the annual payment per team is more than twice in the big ten (thus 50% in big ten is more than 100% in big 12). Those are 71m and 31.7m respectively annualized average (there are no higher numbers reported for big 12, but there are estimates for big 10 that by the last year of deal are in the $85M to $100m+ range- remember big 12 deal starts this year, while lowest $ deal year of big ten that lowers the average already happened in 2023). Using annualized because not great sources of how it escalates per year but a good rule of thumb could be 5-10% a year.

- let’s say Miami rights are worth as much as Notre Dames (they aren’t as we all know but giving best benefit of doubt to how much a premium brand school could add vs just the same existing per school 100% share payout) all in rights under their new football deal with nbc, plus their all other sports acc revenue- that’s reported to be $67M total. Now divide that among 17 members if Miami was the only one added - if all get equal share that’s 3.9m - essentially making the two deals even if big ten gave you 50% share in worst case of annual revenue, but as I showed you above it’s more likely to still not be close to big ten especially if towards higher range of estimate… but wait there’s more

Add another ND level school? First there aren’t any from media rights perspectives but in alternate universe each team gets 7.4M, so slightly eclipsing lowest range of big ten at half share… but wait, there still more…

- cfp playoff gap- 2026 on $10m gap added on 🤷‍♂️ (at least through 2028 look in most likely)

So even if you give Miami the same juice as Notre dame in allowing big 12 to renegotiate up, and take the lowest end of big ten estimates and with only a 50% share you’re still, worst case , +$10m and very likely $25+ million better, you’re in the big ten, your contract comes up a year earlier and you don’t have to get excited over rivalries with Oklahoma state instead of Ohio state.

This doesn’t even touch on attendance gains at home or competing for recruits. (Can you imagine home attendance against most of big 12 teams no one cares about vs having at least in rotation usc, penn st, Ohio state, Michigan, etc - and yes I know that includes Indiana northwestern- but all those schools have tons of snowbird alumni that will fill seats). 10000 more seats sold at avg price of just $100 (Miami tickets average more than that by far when hurricane club factored in) is $1m minimum

Not trying to be a **** but this is accurate and playing to most benefit of the doubt for Miami and the big 12 $. The only way this could work for Miami vs less share in big ten would be if Miami got 125% or greater share- up to 200% share if big ten were to reach their top end projections. And there is truly no scenario where Miami (or Clemson or fsu) rights are worth more (initially) than the 67M Notre dame new deal is worth. If those ND numbers are off by even $10m it still works out better in most scenarios. (Edit and remember the ND numbers above don’t include the $12m they get from cfp)

And even then it’s a wash on money and you’re stuck there with crap schedule and having to recruit players against the p2. Personally I’d take half share that paid $5m+ less through 2029 to lock into one of the two main conferences and secure the future
 
Last edited:
Ispyin said:
I’m not sure what he’s hearing so not here to refute that but I’m quite certain he’s wrong on the numbers behind his theory. Not a shot at Flo to be clear but the math he’s indicating even if big 12 renegotiates a new deal up because of higher value schools joining is wrong.

Simplest version (and I may update this later with more detail)
- new big 12 ends with 2030 football season, big ten is 2029 season I believe (maybe 2030- I’ve seen both out there but I think that’s confusion over academic vs calendar year)

- even in the worst estimate range for big ten and best estimate range for the big 12, the annual payment per team is more than twice in the big ten (thus 50% in big ten is more than 100% in big 12). Those are 31.7m and 71m respectively annualized average ( there are no higher numbers for big 12, there are estimates for big 10 that by last year of deal are in the $85M to $100m range- remember big 12 deal starts this year, while lowest $ deal year of big ten that lowers the average already happened in 2023)

- let’s say Miami rights are worth as much as Notre Dames (they aren’t as we all know but giving best benefit of doubt all in rights under their new football deal with nbc, plus their all other sports acc revenue- that’s reported to be $67M total. Now divide that among 19 members if Miami was the only one added - if all get equal share that’s 3.5m - essentially making the two deals even if big ten gave you 50% share in worst case of annual revenue, but as I showed you above it’s more likely to still not be close to big ten especially if towards higher range of estimate… but wait there’s more

- cfp playoff gap- 2026 on $10m gap added on

So even if you give Miami the same juice as Notre dame in allowing big 12 to renegotiate up, and take the lowest end of big ten estimates and with only a 50% share you’re still, worst case , +$10m and very likely $30-49 million better, you’re in the big ten, your contract comes up a year later and you don’t have to get excited over rivalries with Oklahoma state instead of Ohio state.

This doesn’t even touch on attendance gains at home or competing for recruits.

Not trying to be a **** but this is accurate and playing to most benefit of the doubt for Miami and the big 12 $. The only way this could work for Miami vs less share in big ten would be if Miami got 125% or greater share- up to 200% share if big ten were to reach their top end projections.

And even then it’s a wash on money and you’re stuck there with crap schedule and having to recruit players against the p2
Click to expand...

Lots of words but the question is…

IMG_1186.gif
 
Advertisement
Back
Top