forums

MEGA Conference Realignment and lawsuits Megathread: Stories, Tales, Lies, and Exaggerations

Ispyin said:
Click to expand...

Pettiti made it very clear in his comments in his opening address to the B10 Conference earlier today that 1). Both the B10 and the SEC are communicating frequently ... multiple times daily ... regarding the Save College Sports Act 2). They are both in agreement that they believe the right number for conference membership is 24 ... with the SEC perhaps taking longer to get there.

It certainly sounded like there is no way that the two (SEC and B10) will agree to be parties to the act with a 19 team member cap. I would imagine that not only are Sankey and Pettiti talking (he said he had spoken with Sankey 5 times on Tuesday prior to the B10 meeting starting), but that they are in talks with certain ACC schools as well. If the Senate approves a bill they aren't in agreement with ... we might see the next wave of realignment announcements in the next 2 weeks.
 
Isn't it interesting that the conference limit of 19 really means 18 because no conference wants to deal with the headache of 19 full members. And that means the B1G can't expand, and leaves just 2 spots in the SEC? How many schools sued the ACC to get out? Oh that's right, 2. And the only place those 2 can escape to is another Disney property? Hmm, maybe the PCSA should be renamed the Protect Disney's Properties Act.
 
Rickd said:
It certainly sounded like there is no way that the two (SEC and B10) will agree to be parties to the act with a 19 team member cap. I would imagine that not only are Sankey and Pettiti talking (he said he had spoken with Sankey 5 times on Tuesday prior to the B10 meeting starting), but that they are in talks with certain ACC schools as well. If the Senate approves a bill they aren't in agreement with ... we might see the next wave of realignment announcements in the next 2 weeks.
Click to expand...


Wait just a minute...are you trying to tell me that the SEC and the Big 10 wouldn't LOVE to jump on the bandwagon of the innovative ACC, by featuring an odd number of teams and thus insuring that there is no way for every team in the conference to play the same number of conference games?

SHOCKING, I tell you...

Speed Wow GIF by STRAPPED!
 
Rickd said:
Pettiti made it very clear in his comments in his opening address to the B10 Conference earlier today that 1). Both the B10 and the SEC are communicating frequently ... multiple times daily ... regarding the Save College Sports Act 2). They are both in agreement that they believe the right number for conference membership is 24 ... with the SEC perhaps taking longer to get there.

It certainly sounded like there is no way that the two (SEC and B10) will agree to be parties to the act with a 19 team member cap. I would imagine that not only are Sankey and Pettiti talking (he said he had spoken with Sankey 5 times on Tuesday prior to the B10 meeting starting), but that they are in talks with certain ACC schools as well. If the Senate approves a bill they aren't in agreement with ... we might see the next wave of realignment announcements in the next 2 weeks.
Click to expand...
Don’t think I heard him say once the number for conference membership and I watched all of it. 24 was only in reference repeatedly around the playoff
 
Ispyin said:
Don’t think I heard him say once the number for conference membership and I watched all of it. 24 was only in reference repeatedly around the playoff
Click to expand...
I believe you are correct ... and that I was listening to the comments while heading out the door and took the reference to the 24 as to conference size ... as that is what I was looking for ... never really thought of the CFP as being any issue for the Senate bill.
 
Rickd said:
I believe you are correct ... and that I was listening to the comments while heading out the door and took the reference to the 24 as to conference size ... as that is what I was looking for ... never really thought of the CFP as being any issue for the Senate bill.
Click to expand...
It’s not to my knowledge. It was big ten media days not all questions were on protect College sports act.
 
Ispyin said:
Don’t think I heard him say once the number for conference membership and I watched all of it. 24 was only in reference repeatedly around the playoff
Click to expand...
Flugaur on his PATC show is the one who mentioned 19 teams. That is what Cruz and Cantwell were trying to add into the bill according to what Flugaur went over in Ross Dellinger’s account of the info he gathered. That is obviously something the B1G or SEC would never agree to. Flugaur did say that if they agreed to alignment to 19 or 20 teams it would be in exchange for the other things they wanted. He also said that if they agreed to expansion to 19-20 teams that there would be a 5 year period they couldn’t expand. The motivation behind that was to prevent the ACC from getting fully destroyed all at one time and allow them to do their own expansion to backfill.

Truthfully there will be lawsuits galore even if it had a chance of getting passed because teams should be able to associate with whatever conference they want to be associated with. That is where this is all unlawful to begin with. The lawyers in here @TheOriginalCane and others should be able to chime in on that.
 
Last edited:

Interesting that not one part of the updated article even references, the real alignment aspect, and the weird 19 thing
 



This one is short and easy to watch. With that said:

B1G 10 commish bewildered by the number 19. 19 is an odd number. Republicans pushed for 20. No satisfactory answer on why 19

A deadline was set for 10 am this morning for the SEC and B1G to vote up or down on the PCSA, however, no vote by the B1G and SEC will happen until this afternoon.

No more back and forth. Take it or leave it. The bill has to be sent to Thune today for a vote next week before a month long recess. No more delay possible. The bill will only pass with support from SEC/B1G

Language added to prevent circumventing the cap.

Flugaur seriously doubts the B1G will approve the bill the way it is now.
 
5NC4 said:
Doubtful…the SEC and B1G can just kick the can down the road today by not agreeing to the bill.
Click to expand...

Just the bill coming up for a vote could trigger an ACC exodus, particularly if an anti-expansion clause is included in the PCSA

No reason to fight a costly and potentially lengthy legal battle when a school can leave after the 2027-28 school year no strings attached by paying the exit fee on the way out the door.

I believe every ACC member knows what kind of opportunity it does or doesn’t have with the SEC, B1G or Big XIi
 
Hold My Beer said:
Just the bill coming up for a vote could trigger an ACC exodus, particularly if an anti-expansion clause is included in the PCSA

No reason to fight a costly and potentially lengthy legal battle when a school can leave after the 2027-28 school year no strings attached by paying the exit fee on the way out the door.

I believe every ACC member knows what kind of opportunity it does or doesn’t have with the SEC, B1G or Big XIi
Click to expand...
Hope that is the case ... this discussion is getting old. Announce for the B10 and get on with life.
 
Back
Top