forums

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

RVACane said:
I recall nova saying that we were locked in until 2036 when this started. I haven’t really followed this thread except occasionally jumping in. We’re still locked in I’d think unless we pay $75 million after 2030 or is that not the case??? Just asking, no dog in this hunt here though TOC is my dawg and vice versa lol
Click to expand...
Locked in until early 2030s was my view. Still is. Though I'm definitely surprised at how one sided the settlement looks. Clemson and FSU did well no doubt.

Bottom line is i still don't think any team other than Notre Dame moves the needle enough to expand without a major global restructuring. And that doesn't happen until the contracts up after 2030. We will see. And if the money is close with the unequal distributions, I prefer the easier path in the ACC
 
Advertisement


IMG_2316.jpeg
 
TheOGCane said:


View attachment 329555
Click to expand...

They have veto power over any changes to the new pay distribution that is very likely to make us significantly MORE money though. I mean couldn't you just as well argue that its actually in our benefit that they have veto power, given there is basically nothing that would benefit them and not us in this current new plan? It's not like they have sole power to only benefit themselves and make rule/distribution changes. They ONLY have veto power, which only really serves to make it so the majority can't unite and remove this new distribution plan - which again benefits us. I'm really not seeing the big issue with this veto power tbh. Like maybe if they had veto power over scheduling and choosing which games get broadcast on which channels - as that would have a significant impact to rating and thus now a significant impact to pay distribution. But I doesn't. And I think ESPNs best interest is going to be to broadcast us and Clemson this year. So...
 
Wake_Cane said:
I did not read the settlement agreement as setting aside greater revenue for any specific school(s).
Click to expand...
It does not name the specific schools, but it does that that certain schools will receive a higher percentage of the revenue each year based on a formula. Based on the past few years, that would be Miami, FSU, and Clemson.
 
TheOGCane said:
The ironclad folks = ACC TILL 2030

The GOR was bull**** folks = leaving DAY after lawsuit is DONE, we have B1G locked DOWN

Who was right? GET that crap out of here. noVaCane was RIGHT
Click to expand...


Nobody ever said this bull****. You are a flat-out liar.

Northern Virginia bull****ter said we were stuck until the mid-2030s.

Nobody said we were leaving directly after the settlement of the lawsuit.

Keep spinning your falsehoods.
 
NorthernVirginiaCane said:
Locked in until early 2030s was my view. Still is. Though I'm definitely surprised at how one sided the settlement looks. Clemson and FSU did well no doubt.

Bottom line is i still don't think any team other than Notre Dame moves the needle enough to expand without a major global restructuring. And that doesn't happen until the contracts up after 2030. We will see. And if the money is close with the unequal distributions, I prefer the easier path in the ACC
Click to expand...


You just keep doubling down on "stupid". Never change.
 
Advertisement
NorthernVirginiaCane said:
Locked in until early 2030s was my view. Still is. Though I'm definitely surprised at how one sided the settlement looks. Clemson and FSU did well no doubt.

Bottom line is i still don't think any team other than Notre Dame moves the needle enough to expand without a major global restructuring. And that doesn't happen until the contracts up after 2030. We will see. And if the money is close with the unequal distributions, I prefer the easier path in the ACC
Click to expand...
@DMoney can we crowd source$$$ and bribe you to block his IP?
 
Last edited:
Who wants a good OLE fashioned trip down memory LANE?

Excuse no. 1
“We just need an east coast partner…” (but look even FSU and CLEMSON have given up hope this ends before 2029). So who would be the PARTNER?
IMG_2337.jpeg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Excuse no. 2: “We just need CLARIFICATION from a judge”… don’t worry. The ACC folded and spelled out all of FSU AND CLEMSONS concerns. Clarification points are done… WE can leave now?
IMG_2336.jpeg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Advertisement
TheOGCane said:
Who wants a good OLE fashioned trip down memory LANE?

Excuse no. 1
“We just need an east coast partner…” (but look even FSU and CLEMSON have given up hope this ends before 2029). So who would be the PARTNER?
Click to expand...


I don't know what kind of a moron you are. But you are, without a doubt, clueless.

I also don't know where you got the (mistaken) idea that "FSU and Clemson have given up hope this ends before 2029". Nothing could be further from the truth.

Now, with UNC and UVa likely to the SEC, and with F$U and Clemson looking less likely to the Big 10, Miami would still need an east coast partner to make Big 10 expansion an even-numbered thing. ND would be the best. GaTech could work. I'd settle for F$U. I'd certainly be happy with VaTech.

Nobody, least of all myself, has ever made an "excuse".

You are a liar and a deceiver of other Miami fans. You say things that are simply not true. Nobody ever said that needing a second team on the east coast was an "excuse". Nobody in their right mind has ever said that Miami would be the only team getting a bid to the Big 10. USC-UCLA went in as a pair. Washington-Oregon went in as a pair. How is that so difficult for your tiny brain to comprehend?
 
TheOGCane said:
Excuse no. 2: “We just need CLARIFICATION from a judge”… don’t worry. The ACC folded and spelled out all of FSU AND CLEMSONS concerns. Clarification points are done… WE can leave now?
Click to expand...


As per the removal of the GOR and the clarification of exit terms, we can choose to leave next summer. Not sure what part of that you don't understand. While we did not get clarification from a judge, we absolutely got clarification from a legal settlement. The Grant of Rights no longer exists. Or did you not take notice of that?
 
Last edited:
Back
Top