forums

MEGA Conference Realignment and lawsuits Megathread(Its still personal)

ben said:
I was trying to find a Sebastian Cabot gif but this is the best I could do

View attachment 249298
Click to expand...
Screenshot_20230803_173855_DuckDuckGo.jpg
 
Advertisement
canecane232323 said:
While i agree on those two being a change in circumstances. He has also been called out on usc and ucla to big ten when he said weeks before it was announced that it wasnt happening last year. He also has changed his stance on any more big ten adds this offseason. He has completly made it sound like Clemson was out of big ten consideration weeks ago and started picking them and fsu up again once rumors started last weekend. Im just saying nobody in the Big Ten or athletic departments of big ten schools is going home and calling this guy feeding him info everyday. He is extrapolating **** from the same news we are hearing. Thats it. And i am pretty sure he also said oregon and washington wouldnt even get invites for half share a month ago. Now suddenly fox is forcing the big ten into that? Hard to believe some of what he paints as fact.
Click to expand...
Ive been following this thread closely and focusing on Miami, so wasnt aware of USC UCLA stuff.
 
TheOriginalCane said:
I will say a couple of things here.

First, I believe Genetic has better sources than any of us. I do not believe he is simply extrapolating from the news.

Second, and I've said this before, EVERYONE is bluffing, at least a li'l bit, in public. A lot of the schools have put out their own self-serving "rumors". And I honestly believe that the Big 10 and SEC are bull****ting everyone about EXACTLY where they stand at any given moment.

Look, Clemson WAS told "no thanks" and then **** changed. That doesn't mean that some Clemson fan who said "Big 10" twelve months ago is "right". It just means he got lucky when the roulette wheel stopped spinning.

The ****nuts in all of this are North Carolina and Bubba Cunningham, and, of course, the Florida State SemenHoles and their unqualified president and their unqualified Athletic Director. Beta Blake was a "ticket guy" and Michael Alford is a "booster club guy".
Click to expand...
I respect all that. I think beyond trusting Genetics on twitter though, people should really only follow what actually has happened.

Colorado board meeting. Left PAC and joined Big 12.

Arizona calling Board right after PAC deal disclosed to them, definitely smoke.

Miami and ND getting AAU. Definitely smoke.

FSU leaking a big board meeting and then screaming about the acc. But not taking any action. Posturing.

Oregon and Washington seeing PAC fall apart and asking BIG 10 to reevaluate, probably smoke. Considering BiG 12 also, probably smoke.

Fsu's posturing to me seems like they want to go SEC over BiG 10. Or they dont have the BIG 10 invite people claim and so they want somebody to assure them their in a P2. JMO
 
Advertisement
canecane232323 said:
I respect all that. I think beyond trusting Genetics on twitter though, people should really only follow what actually has happened.

Colorado board meeting. Left PAC and joined Big 12.

Arizona calling Board right after PAC deal disclosed to them, definitely smoke.

Miami and ND getting AAU. Definitely smoke.

FSU leaking a big board meeting and then screaming about the acc. But not taking any action. Posturing.

Oregon and Washington seeing PAC fall apart and asking BIG 10 to reevaluate, probably smoke. Considering BiG 12 also, probably smoke.

Fsu's posturing to me seems like they want to go SEC over BiG 10. Or they dont have the BIG 10 invite people claim and so they want somebody to assure them their in a P2. JMO
Click to expand...
You had me until the last example. Listen to your own advice, FSU applied for AAU and didn't qualify, yet. They are predicted to get it next round.

I am more confident than ever FSU is heading to the Big 10.
 
Empirical Cane said:
Could Miami (or anyone) challenge it, et it resolved, but then file to leave ACC say a year or two later?
Click to expand...


Best guess on the procedural elements...

Notice is given by 8/15 to exit by 2024. Presumably, anyone leaving the ACC will sign onto a deal with NewCo (new conference), which will have provisions covering broadcast rights. ESPN files for injunctive relief.

I have previously commented that this would depend upon whether the "original" GOR was the FINAL grant of rights, and the ACC owns the rights, or if Bubba Cunningham's claim is true, that the ACC in turn sold the rights to ESPN.

Now, whether a settlement can be hammered out in 10 months...that's a LOT of billable hours.

ESPN 2-pronged approach - if ESPN moves its rights for the Big 10's ACC-legacy schools' home games into a BRAND NEW deal with the Big 10 (which would need to be negotiated), then potentially ESPN is the temporary/permanent home for ACC-to-Big-10 schools (and the corresponding Big 10 visitors playing in our stadiums in any given weekend). ESPN could then keep the rest of the ACC rights, and possibly renegotiate or add homeless Pac teams. I honestly believe this turns on whether the Big 10 wants to let the ESPN fox back in the henhouse.

ESPN "gets out of the ACC business" approach - even though ESPN has "low-cost content" in the ACC, maybe the juice isn't worth the squeeze without the best ACC schools, and maybe ESPN wants to go "full re+ard" (and I am quoting Robert Downey Jr. here) with the SEC.

ESPN "insists it still owns the ACC", but has no real plan - this approach would be a game of chicken, where ESPN tries to get submission by choking us out. And, yes, I just used "choking" and "chicken" in the same sentence.

I still believe there is merit in focusing on the EXTENSION as the unenforceable agreement. This would allow the judge to still allow for the CONCEPT of a GOR to stand, while allowing F$U (and others) to talk about how the revenue projections were trash, thus the basis on which we entered into the extension was either "fraudulent inducement" and/or there WAS NO valid consideration given for the extension. As I have pointed out, in 2016, WE WERE ALREADY UNDER THE GOR FOR ANOTHER 11 YEARS. The "extra 9 years" was just something that ESPN wanted. It was not necessary to do the deal. And it may have actually transpired AFTER the deal was already done. So there are a number of working arguments to be made about how the "extra 9 years" is just not enforceable, and a court may find THAT approach to be a neat compromise, allowing them to uphold the original GOR, but for a much shorter term.

And after all of that...we STILL need the courage to be able to fight the FEAR of the GOR. Without that, the GOR is never challenged. And without that challenge, we are all just sheep trudging off to be sheared. Or slaughtered. Or both.

1691100520758.png
 
MPCane17 said:
Forgive me for asking the question again but given the developments over last few days, any chance we somehow get left out in this craziness? I know it seems to change daily
Click to expand...


I will say what I've said all along.

Basically? No. We will not be "left out".

The only thing I can see that possibly derails Miami-to-the-Big-10 AT LEAST FOR NOW is a hesitance by ANY East Coast partner to come with us. I don't think the Big 10 takes Miami as the ONLY-ONLY East Coast school.

The ONE thing that could be fascinating...based on Genetics' reporting...is what happens if Notre Dame either joins the Big 10 (he said ND is closer to joining the Big 10 than anyone realizes) or just does a scheduling agreement with the Big 10?

Now, the latter is more likely, because the "joining" of the Big 10 would be against ND's agreement with the ACC that "if they join any league for football before 2035", it would be the ACC.

But if the Big 10 has a scheduling agreement with ND? Then I could see the Big 10 POSSIBLY taking Miami only, and then letting the ACC state schools come when they are ready.

We shall see. I'd prefer to bring the "thinks they are hotter than they are" ***** along with us (F$U) and Clemson would be nice too.
 
Advertisement
canecane232323 said:
I respect all that. I think beyond trusting Genetics on twitter though, people should really only follow what actually has happened.

Colorado board meeting. Left PAC and joined Big 12.

Arizona calling Board right after PAC deal disclosed to them, definitely smoke.

Miami and ND getting AAU. Definitely smoke.

FSU leaking a big board meeting and then screaming about the acc. But not taking any action. Posturing.

Oregon and Washington seeing PAC fall apart and asking BIG 10 to reevaluate, probably smoke. Considering BiG 12 also, probably smoke.

Fsu's posturing to me seems like they want to go SEC over BiG 10. Or they dont have the BIG 10 invite people claim and so they want somebody to assure them their in a P2. JMO
Click to expand...


I agree with you, the "having an actual meeting" is the far superior level of certainty. Absolute truth.

But the smoke and maneuvers are fascinating. And nerve-wracking.

And I think Genetics is not really in it for the clout. He's like @Cribby in that he doesn't show his face and he doesn't have some monetized content. He's a guy with a solid day-job. He might have a face for radio, and he **** sure has a voice for telegraph ("Or-e-GONE"). He's from Nebraska, so he would probably blister under an arc light.

I think he just reports what he knows. And **** changes by the day.
 
Advertisement
TheOriginalCane said:
I agree with you, the "having an actual meeting" is the far superior level of certainty. Absolute truth.

But the smoke and maneuvers are fascinating. And nerve-wracking.

And I think Genetics is not really in it for the clout. He's like @Cribby in that he doesn't show his face and he doesn't have some monetized content. He's a guy with a solid day-job. He might have a face for radio, and he **** sure has a voice for telegraph ("Or-e-GONE"). He's from Nebraska, so he would probably blister under an arc light.

I think he just reports what he knows. And **** changes by the day.
Click to expand...
See the Genetics/Cribby thing is why i dont believe him Genetics.

Cribby brings info infrequently, always legit but not everyday giving us updates. Because i would assume he isn't riding his sources everyday for an update and also because some stuff he knows he probably was asked not to share.

Genetics tweets 30 times a day like he is in the room with the decision makers. And then replies with let me check with my tv sources. Or let me reach out to my athletic department contacts out west to answer that. Who the **** would tell him anything if it ended up on twitter after he called them. And is he getting updates 30 times a day? Only thing ive seen him definitely report correctly was stuff that i read from a real journalist first (pac-12 tv deal, colorado leaving, arizona BOR meetong.). I dont know, im just skeptical of someone who talks how much they know while no one else seems to know ****.
 
Advertisement
TheOriginalCane said:
I agree with you, the "having an actual meeting" is the far superior level of certainty. Absolute truth.

But the smoke and maneuvers are fascinating. And nerve-wracking.

And I think Genetics is not really in it for the clout. He's like @Cribby in that he doesn't show his face and he doesn't have some monetized content. He's a guy with a solid day-job. He might have a face for radio, and he **** sure has a voice for telegraph ("Or-e-GONE"). He's from Nebraska, so he would probably blister under an arc light.

I think he just reports what he knows. And **** changes by the day.
Click to expand...
I’ve been on three podcasts, that’s it. . Turned down multiple opportunities to do more with this.

I have no interest in clout , attention or or low level celebrity lol. I have no time for that stuff. I enjoy being a random , nobody on a canes site. That’s my pocket.
 
Cribby said:
I’ve been on three podcasts, that’s it. . Turned down multiple opportunities to do more with this.

I have no interest in clout , attention or or low level celebrity lol. I have no time for that stuff. I enjoy being a random , nobody on a canes site. That’s my pocket.
Click to expand...


This is why I love you. And ALWAYS accept your FaceTime butt-dials...

:LOL:
 
TheOriginalCane said:
Best guess on the procedural elements...

Notice is given by 8/15 to exit by 2024. Presumably, anyone leaving the ACC will sign onto a deal with NewCo (new conference), which will have provisions covering broadcast rights. ESPN files for injunctive relief.

I have previously commented that this would depend upon whether the "original" GOR was the FINAL grant of rights, and the ACC owns the rights, or if Bubba Cunningham's claim is true, that the ACC in turn sold the rights to ESPN.

Now, whether a settlement can be hammered out in 10 months...that's a LOT of billable hours.

ESPN 2-pronged approach - if ESPN moves its rights for the Big 10's ACC-legacy schools' home games into a BRAND NEW deal with the Big 10 (which would need to be negotiated), then potentially ESPN is the temporary/permanent home for ACC-to-Big-10 schools (and the corresponding Big 10 visitors playing in our stadiums in any given weekend). ESPN could then keep the rest of the ACC rights, and possibly renegotiate or add homeless Pac teams. I honestly believe this turns on whether the Big 10 wants to let the ESPN fox back in the henhouse.

ESPN "gets out of the ACC business" approach - even though ESPN has "low-cost content" in the ACC, maybe the juice isn't worth the squeeze without the best ACC schools, and maybe ESPN wants to go "full re+ard" (and I am quoting Robert Downey Jr. here) with the SEC.

ESPN "insists it still owns the ACC", but has no real plan - this approach would be a game of chicken, where ESPN tries to get submission by choking us out. And, yes, I just used "choking" and "chicken" in the same sentence.

I still believe there is merit in focusing on the EXTENSION as the unenforceable agreement. This would allow the judge to still allow for the CONCEPT of a GOR to stand, while allowing F$U (and others) to talk about how the revenue projections were trash, thus the basis on which we entered into the extension was either "fraudulent inducement" and/or there WAS NO valid consideration given for the extension. As I have pointed out, in 2016, WE WERE ALREADY UNDER THE GOR FOR ANOTHER 11 YEARS. The "extra 9 years" was just something that ESPN wanted. It was not necessary to do the deal. And it may have actually transpired AFTER the deal was already done. So there are a number of working arguments to be made about how the "extra 9 years" is just not enforceable, and a court may find THAT approach to be a neat compromise, allowing them to uphold the original GOR, but for a much shorter term.

And after all of that...we STILL need the courage to be able to fight the FEAR of the GOR. Without that, the GOR is never challenged. And without that challenge, we are all just sheep trudging off to be sheared. Or slaughtered. Or both.

View attachment 249302
Click to expand...

To strengthen argument, and fsu alluded to it yesterday

From a financial standpoint Football programs subsidize net-loss sports, particularly women’s sports.

When espn puts ACC schools at a disadvantage for “all of their sports, including women” then that’s a extra boost needed to win in court

But I’d be shocked if it played out that way
 
TheOriginalCane said:
Holy crap, I actually said something 10 minutes before Genetics said it.

I won't let it go to my head. I'm just a fake insider with no contacts. I actually attended FGCU (didn't graduate).
Click to expand...
As you know this has been in the works for over a year. Early on we expected the Sec but the last 7-8 months it’s been the B10. At this point it would take a miracle for Miami not to leave. Other schools as well. I just can’t see the Acc getting anywhere close financially to the B10.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top