- Joined
- Jan 22, 2021
- Messages
- 3,088
Lotteries are a tax on people who are bad at math.You'd make the same amount of money as you would winning PowerBall, but with better odds...
Lotteries are a tax on people who are bad at math.You'd make the same amount of money as you would winning PowerBall, but with better odds...
UM should file now, putting more pressure ON the ACC, also officially getting in line TO take a spot in the B10, and getting more official momentum going to potentially have the 8 votes to dissolve the ACC prior to July 1, 2024 when the Cal/StanSMU come aboard. ESPN isn't extending, the current media deal ends after the 2026 football season. UM needs to grow a pair of balls and officially enter the fray. There is no place to go but UP.If ESPN doesn't renew its media rights agreement with the ACC, then there's a strong argument that the GOR extension would no longer be enforcable.
"WHEREAS the Conference is a party to a Multi-Media Agreement with ESPN... and WHEREAS the Conference has negotiated an Amended and Restated Multi-Media Agreement with ESPN.... and WHEREAS ESPN has informed the Conference that it will enter in to the Prospective Agreements only if each of the Member Institutions agrees to amend the Grant of Rights Agreement to extend the terms thereof...
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises set forth in this Amendement and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are acknowledged, the parties agree as follows.... the Original Grant Agreement is hereby amended by deleting the first sentence of the existing Section 5 in its entirety and substituting the following therefor: 'The Term of this Agreement shall begin on the Effective Date and shall continue until June 30, 2036'"
No Multi-Media agreement with ESPN => no more consideration => no more GOR as of 2027.
Now the exit penalty is still a thing. But those have historically been negotiated down and shouldn't hinder anyone from actually leaving.
OK, I'll play along.
WHAT IS THE STRATEGY?
Keep in mind, nothing that F$U or Clemson has done YET has (a) freed them from the ACC, (b) gotten them a public bid from the Big 10 or SEC, and/or (c) set the dollar amount of their exit fee(s).
Therefore, Miami has NOT benefited one iota from watching those two schools from the sidelines.
We would be better served by having three, four, seven, or eight schools all suing the ACC at one time from different jurisdictions. The ACC's collective head would explode. The member institutions would have to think twice about wasting a bunch of money to defend EIGHT lawsuits, and ESPN would know **** well that it doesn't need to exercise its option to extend the ACC.
And then the inevitable would happen. The entire conference would implode, and we would ALL be free with NO penalties at all.
Which will NOT happen if two teams leave. But WILL happen if more teams leave, especially the most attractive teams.
ND is remaining independent for a few more years at least. Minimum 4 ACC schools will move to the P2. Nobody knows "who / where" with any degree of certainty. Could be FSU +1 other to the B10. Everybody wants UNC. If we're lucky maybe UNC / Clemson end up in the SEC and FSU + Miami end up in the Big 10. Would hate the SEC to end up taking UNC paired with NcState out of political necessity, and the B10 takes FSU + Clemson. If only 4 go to the P2 then 4 would need to go to the B12 in order to have homes for the 8 to dissolve.Counterpoint - Does having a wink-wink nudge-nudge landing spot impact that strategy? Let's say the B10 really is only taking two and it winds up being FSU/ND and the SEC isn't interested. Of course if we have a guaranteed landing spot then this should be a no-brainer and is fireable if it isn't. I, personally would still file, as I would rather be in the B12 long term than the ACC if the P2 are off the table.
UM should file now, putting more pressure ON the ACC, also officially getting in line TO take a spot in the B10, and getting more official momentum going to potentially have the 8 votes to dissolve the ACC prior to July 1, 2024 when the Cal/StanSMU come aboard. ESPN isn't extending, the current media deal ends after the 2026 football season. UM needs to grow a pair of balls and officially enter the fray. There is no place to go but UP.
It is a LOT easier to simply have 8 schools to vote to dissolve the ACC ...then there is NOTHING to negotiate ... it is relatively clear sailing. No exit fee, no GOR, everybody agrees to play the 2024 schedule as is, and during the course of the year all find a new conference affiliation. Some might not be happy, but Wake Forest and BC will need to be in smaller regional conferences that actually reflect their viewership and TV following, they can't continue to be subsidized by major programs.I have a hack theory that either Miami or UNC will file on ACC media days in the summer. If the magnificent 7 are in cahoots, and if the thinking goes that you want to put maximum pressure on the ACC to force them to negotiate on favorable terms to you, then there's value in a drip-drip-drip chinese water torture strategy, staying constantly in the news cycle.
From that tinfoil perspective, it makes sense to have a new member of the magnificent 7 sue the ACC every couple of months, spreading out the pain for the ACC and increasing the news exposure. And it would be valuable to have someone sue them right during the ACC media days to cast a cloud on the whole event and steal the news cycle.
That would maximize the pressure, as opposed to having everyone sue at the same time and having the news forget about it after a couple months of boring legal fights.
It is a LOT easier to simply have 8 schools to vote to dissolve the ACC ...then there is NOTHING to negotiate ... it is relatively clear sailing. No exit fee, no GOR, everybody agrees to play the 2024 schedule as is, and during the course of the year all find a new conference affiliation. Some might not be happy, but Wake Forest and BC will need to be in smaller regional conferences that actually reflect their viewership and TV following, they can't continue to be subsidized by major programs.
You would have thought that being out of action for a long sabbatical would have created a bit of rust and maybe a slow grind to full speed but NO....this break clearly invigorated and refocused the Sensei. He has sharpened his iron and is ready for anything anyone can throw at him. I feel for those who may unwittingly wander into his path.
??? What does February have to do with ACC members voting to dissolve in the Spring of 2024?I have a hard time believing that's possible before February. I've never been a believer in that strategy.
I mean seriously dude you should know better you’ve been reading this thread - and no that’s not remotely Possible to go about having happen right nowI'm starting to hate today. April Fools.
Saw several tweet Wazzu & Oregon St to ACC.
??? What does February have to do with ACC members voting to dissolve in the Spring of 2024?
It is a LOT easier to simply have 8 schools to vote to dissolve the ACC ...then there is NOTHING to negotiate ... it is relatively clear sailing. No exit fee, no GOR, everybody agrees to play the 2024 schedule as is, and during the course of the year all find a new conference affiliation. Some might not be happy, but Wake Forest and BC will need to be in smaller regional conferences that actually reflect their viewership and TV following, they can't continue to be subsidized by major programs.
As long as a program hasn't provided notice that they are leaving they have a right to vote on substantive matters. Clemson and FSU can certainly vote along with 6 others to dissolve the ACC. Also, it wouldn't be in the GOR, those terms would have to be in the conference bylaws. The ACC GOR has been presented on this forum several times and is a very simple document.It's probably not nearly as easy as it sounds. Again, I haven't seen the actual GOR, but from what we know it was basically copied directly from the Big 12's GOR, word for word. The Big 12 GOR (and likely the ACC GOR) have a catch 22 for voting for dissolution. Only "disinterested" parties are allowed to vote for dissolution. If a team wants to join another conference, it is considered an "interested" party and no longer gets a vote. So if you have 8 teams that have spots in other conferences, none of the 8 teams are allowed are allowed to vote for dissolution because they are "interested parties."
Ironically, if UM doesn't have a spot in the P2 and shows that through its actions like not filing a lawsuit against the ACC , it might be considered a "disinterested party" and get to keep its vote. But if the ACC did copy the Big 12 GOR as was reported years ago, then FSU and Clemson will not be allowed a vote.
Yeah. Maybe should have said how stupid today has turned into.I mean seriously dude you should know better you’ve been reading this thread - and no that’s not remotely Possible to go about having happen right now
Counterpoint - Does having a wink-wink nudge-nudge landing spot impact that strategy? Let's say the B10 really is only taking two and it winds up being FSU/ND and the SEC isn't interested. Of course if we have a guaranteed landing spot then this should be a no-brainer and is fireable if it isn't. I, personally would still file, as I would rather be in the B12 long term than the ACC if the P2 are off the table.
Lotteries are a tax on people who are bad at math.