Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
ACC 16
Author Message
SMUmustangs Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,186
Joined: Jul 2004
Reputation: 71
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #61
RE: ACC 16
(07-18-2017 07:15 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  
(07-17-2017 07:08 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  IIRC, all SEC teams signed a GOR before the launch of the SEC Network.

(07-17-2017 08:32 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  NO.....the SEC teams have not signed a GOR.

03-confused

I can understand your confusion. People sometimes post what they think they might remember. However, I am not going to spend a lot of time proving I am right. It just does not matter that much to me.

If you definitely want to know who is correct, the information is out there.
(This post was last modified: 07-18-2017 08:59 AM by SMUmustangs.)
07-18-2017 08:39 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Nerdlinger Offline
Realignment Enthusiast
*

Posts: 4,908
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 423
I Root For: Realignment!
Location: Schmlocation
Post: #62
RE: ACC 16
(07-18-2017 08:39 AM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  
(07-18-2017 07:15 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  
(07-17-2017 07:08 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  IIRC, all SEC teams signed a GOR before the launch of the SEC Network.

(07-17-2017 08:32 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  NO.....the SEC teams have not signed a GOR.

03-confused

I can understand your confusion. People sometimes post what they think they might remember. I definitely remember. However, I am not going to spend a lot of time proving I am right. You can accept it or not. It just does not matter that much to me.

If you definitely want to know who is correct, the information is out there.

Well, if there is no penalty for leaving the SEC, that does give the Big Ten one more option for expansion. I just don't know if Missouri would be willing to make the jump.
07-18-2017 09:00 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BePcr07 Online
All American
*

Posts: 4,900
Joined: Dec 2015
Reputation: 342
I Root For: Boise St & Zags
Location:
Post: #63
RE: ACC 16
While I think Texas could end up in the ACC with a Notre Dame type of deal, I don't see them accepting living on an island. They would want some of their local friends to come along, but that is where I see the main issue with adding Texas to the ACC.

I don't believe Texas to the ACC will happen. Texas to the PAC has already been publicly shot down, albeit a few years ago. That leaves 4 options: Texas to the SEC, Texas to the B1G, Texas keeps a skeleton of the XII alive, or Texas goes independent in football and joins another conference for all other sports.

I think the most likely would be Texas keeps a skeleton of the XII alive - perhaps resurrects a form of the Southwest Conference:

SWC: Texas, Texas Tech, TCU, SMU, Houston, Rice, Baylor, BYU
SEC + Oklahoma, Oklahoma St
B1G + Kansas, Connecticut
ACC + Cincinnati, West Virginia (Notre Dame remains partial)
AAC - SMU, Houston, Connecticut, Cincinnati + Kansas St, Iowa St
07-18-2017 09:05 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BadgerMJ Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,025
Joined: Mar 2017
Reputation: 267
I Root For: Wisconsin / ND
Location: Wisconsin
Post: #64
RE: ACC 16
(07-18-2017 09:05 AM)BePcr07 Wrote:  While I think Texas could end up in the ACC with a Notre Dame type of deal, I don't see them accepting living on an island. They would want some of their local friends to come along, but that is where I see the main issue with adding Texas to the ACC.

I don't believe Texas to the ACC will happen. Texas to the PAC has already been publicly shot down, albeit a few years ago. That leaves 4 options: Texas to the SEC, Texas to the B1G, Texas keeps a skeleton of the XII alive, or Texas goes independent in football and joins another conference for all other sports.

I think the most likely would be Texas keeps a skeleton of the XII alive - perhaps resurrects a form of the Southwest Conference:

SWC: Texas, Texas Tech, TCU, SMU, Houston, Rice, Baylor, BYU
SEC + Oklahoma, Oklahoma St
B1G + Kansas, Connecticut
ACC + Cincinnati, West Virginia (Notre Dame remains partial)
AAC - SMU, Houston, Connecticut, Cincinnati + Kansas St, Iowa St

I don't see the B1G taking UConn. If they were that hot to add them, they would have when Rutgers and MD came aboard. I think for the B1G it would be KU, OK, and/or TX. I doubt they'd add just for the sake of adding.

Based on your list, I could see the ACC adding WVU, if not them, perhaps the SEC. A school with WVU's sports pedigree will find a home. I just don't see any of the other conferences racing to add a Cincy or a Memphis for example.

It will be interesting to see if TX would rather join a conference with real competition and be one of the boys, or does their ego get in the way pushing them to be the big fish in their own pond (your SWC idea).

Also, should be interesting to see who'll have a greater part in the decision making, the athletic department or the academics. That MIGHT decide which path some of these schools and conferences decide to travel.
07-18-2017 09:27 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wilkie01 Offline
Cards Prognosticater
Jersey Retired

Posts: 26,753
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation: 1072
I Root For: Louisville
Location: Planet Red
Post: #65
RE: ACC 16
05-nono If Notre Dame has a change of heart and joins ACC for football, the following are the schools that would fight to be #6:

Connecticut
Cincinnati
West Virginia

Folks there is nobody else! And I do not believe Notre Dame is very likely to happen. In my opinion Cincinnati and West Virginia re most likely #15 and #16. Texas is a pipe dream. 07-coffee3
07-18-2017 10:45 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
westophilia Offline
Water Engineer
*

Posts: 69
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 9
I Root For: Boise State
Location:
Post: #66
RE: ACC 16
(07-18-2017 10:45 AM)Wilkie01 Wrote:  05-nono If Notre Dame has a change of heart and joins ACC for football, the following are the schools that would fight to be #6:

Connecticut
Cincinnati
West Virginia

Folks there is nobody else! And I do not believe Notre Dame is very likely to happen. In my opinion Cincinnati and West Virginia re most likely #15 and #16. Texas is a pipe dream. 07-coffee3

WV nor an SEC or B1G school is ever going to the ACC. If Notre Dame is in at 15 then I think this is the preference order for the #16.....Texas, Houston, UConn then Cincy. WV will never even be on the radar.

Lets remember what conferences look at first.....markets, tv sets (and potential tv sets), football and recruiting. Basketball is secondary and to a large extent so is geography and academics. I dont see FSU allowing a USF or UCF to come into the ACC either.
07-18-2017 11:31 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Hokie Mark Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 23,724
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation: 1392
I Root For: VT, ACC teams
Location: Greensboro, NC
Post: #67
RE: ACC 16
Under the old model, WVU was of little value to the ACC, but they do bring brand and instant rivalry with VT, Pitt and Syracuse.
07-18-2017 03:27 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Gitanole Offline
Barista
*

Posts: 5,034
Joined: May 2016
Reputation: 1168
I Root For: Florida State
Location: Speared Turf
Post: #68
RE: ACC 16
(07-17-2017 03:48 PM)krux Wrote:  If ND joined in full and the ACC Network closed the gap, I wonder if someone like a Penn State might be enticed to make the leap over to the ACC.

That's the first call you make if you're the ACC commissioner. Maybe you ask the AD at Notre Dame to make the follow-up call.

Penn State's president right now is Eric Barron. He was Florida State president when the Seminoles initially signed the grant of rights.
07-18-2017 05:39 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Gitanole Offline
Barista
*

Posts: 5,034
Joined: May 2016
Reputation: 1168
I Root For: Florida State
Location: Speared Turf
Post: #69
RE: ACC 16
(07-18-2017 10:45 AM)Wilkie01 Wrote:  If Notre Dame has a change of heart and joins ACC for football, the following are the schools that would fight to be #6:

Connecticut
Cincinnati
West Virginia

Folks there is nobody else! And I do not believe Notre Dame is very likely to happen.
....

If the ACC keeps doing well in all sports, makes good media money off its network, and gets a commitment from Notre Dame to join for football: that's a strong hand.

Your first looks are to Penn State and Texas to gauge interest. Those looks are very much worth taking.

If they're not open and you're still looking deep, South Carolina or maybe Maryland.

If those are all covered you check down to Cincinnati. Connecticut is next. If you need them, maybe you look to the Mountaineers in the flat.
07-18-2017 06:00 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Gitanole Offline
Barista
*

Posts: 5,034
Joined: May 2016
Reputation: 1168
I Root For: Florida State
Location: Speared Turf
Post: #70
RE: ACC 16
(07-17-2017 03:56 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  IMO Texas will NOT join the ACC unless they can bring their own division with them, i.e., Tech, OU, OSU, KU etc.

The Longhorns' best chance to get that is with the PAC. That's the conference with the most room to grow. And we already know the West Coasters are willing to talk about it.
07-18-2017 06:03 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Pervis_Griffith Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,925
Joined: Feb 2005
Reputation: 364
I Root For: Louisville
Location:
Post: #71
RE: ACC 16
(07-18-2017 06:03 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  
(07-17-2017 03:56 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  IMO Texas will NOT join the ACC unless they can bring their own division with them, i.e., Tech, OU, OSU, KU etc.

The Longhorns' best chance to get that is with the PAC. That's the conference with the most room to grow. And we already know the West Coasters are willing to talk about it.


The PAC would KILL to add Texas.

BUT .... Texas is Central Time Zone.

That is very tough to work with the PAC. 4 schools one hour behind in the mountain. 8 in the pacific TWO hours behind. Games set for Pacific time would be a full two hours behind Austin Texas time. Return trips for UT athletes would be brutal, as they LOSE two hours coming home and Texas has considered that extensively.

Going EAST only involves one time zone, and return trips work out better for student athletes. They gain an hour coming back.

I don't see Texas ever joining the PAC, unless they change this stance on how it effects their student athletes. And I don't think they will.

If the Big XII folds shop, I think Texas will either be Big Ten, ACC, or Indy Football w/ rest in ACC. Much easier logistically for them.
(This post was last modified: 07-18-2017 06:43 PM by Pervis_Griffith.)
07-18-2017 06:37 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Gitanole Offline
Barista
*

Posts: 5,034
Joined: May 2016
Reputation: 1168
I Root For: Florida State
Location: Speared Turf
Post: #72
RE: ACC 16
(07-17-2017 03:56 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  Texas is Central Time Zone.

I know.

In any move the Longhorns would have to decide how important it is to them to keep playing nearby schools versus how important travel and time zones are versus how important TV revenues are versus many other things.

What we have seen is that keeping Texas universities as playmates is a priority for university officials that they themselves do not control. State leaders in Texas have much to say about this.

If taking more than one current conference playmate with them is a necessary part of the picture, Texas already knows the PAC is the non-B12 conference best positioned to absorb four more schools. If the school does join with 3 more schools from its time zone, the travel becomes more manageable. It's not as if the campuses go anywhere.

If it happens that the 'travel partner' obstacle can be finessed, the B1G and SEC are now well positioned to accommodate Texas. Each of those leagues still presents problems to work out, too.

The ACC would take Texas as a full member but it's hard to see why Texas would want to do this with the B1G and SEC making more geographical (and financial, at present) sense. The ACC makes more sense for Texas only if Texas wants football independence with some reliable East Coast TV exposure. Then an ND-type arrangement may be workable.
07-18-2017 07:59 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Gitanole Offline
Barista
*

Posts: 5,034
Joined: May 2016
Reputation: 1168
I Root For: Florida State
Location: Speared Turf
Post: #73
RE: ACC 16
(07-18-2017 05:58 AM)TerryD Wrote:  Indy Star interview with Jack Swarbrick (7/14/17):
http://www.indystar.com/story/sports/col...467734001/

Thanks for sharing that.

The arrangement between the ACC and Notre Dame is already mutually beneficial. People need to take Swofford at his word on this. He was straight with us about the network and he's telling it straight about this.

Swarbrick allows that if something big were to change in his school's access to the playoffs or to media partnerships, 'that would be a different story.' But at the moment nothing disruptive to either is in the cards. And his school is already well-positioned to move if anything does change. That's one of the benefits of its current membership arrangement with the ACC.

TerryD mentions alumni who will pull support. University officials always have to consider threats like this. If you know Notre Dame's history you understand why their barnstorming football ways are an important feature of their identity.

Still, the picture is complex. Schools have generations of alumni, and what's a deal-breaker for an old alumnus is not always going to rankle a younger one. Finances are also a picture with many moving parts. How much do older alumni contribute versus younger ones versus how much does a school stand to gain if media payouts keep going up? There are many variables to watch.

So things at ND are not as set in stone. But they are definitely set in concrete, and that's enough. You don't break up concrete without very good reason for taking the trouble.
(This post was last modified: 07-18-2017 08:24 PM by Gitanole.)
07-18-2017 08:24 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Pervis_Griffith Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,925
Joined: Feb 2005
Reputation: 364
I Root For: Louisville
Location:
Post: #74
RE: ACC 16
(07-18-2017 07:59 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  
(07-17-2017 03:56 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  Texas is Central Time Zone.

I know.

In any move the Longhorns would have to decide how important it is to them to keep playing nearby schools versus how important travel and time zones are versus how important TV revenues are versus many other things.

What we have seen is that keeping Texas universities as playmates is a priority for university officials that they themselves do not control. State leaders in Texas have much to say about this.

If taking more than one current conference playmate with them is a necessary part of the picture, Texas already knows the PAC is the non-B12 conference best positioned to absorb four more schools. If the school does join with 3 more schools from its time zone, the travel becomes more manageable. It's not as if the campuses go anywhere.

If it happens that the 'travel partner' obstacle can be finessed, the B1G and SEC are now well positioned to accommodate Texas. Each of those leagues still presents problems to work out, too.

The ACC would take Texas as a full member but it's hard to see why Texas would want to do this with the B1G and SEC making more geographical (and financial, at present) sense. The ACC makes more sense for Texas only if Texas wants football independence with some reliable East Coast TV exposure. Then an ND-type arrangement may be workable.


I don't see Texas ever considering the SEC. For two big reasons.

First --- They have always looked down on the academic reputation of the SEC. That's a big deal. Texas would much rather associate with Michigan, or Cal Berkley, or Virginia, or UNC -- the highest profile, state flagship, public universities in the country.

Second --- I don't think they'd EVER join a conference AFTER Texas A&M did. I think the rivalry there is real, and when A&M basically snubbed UT by leaving the Big XII, I think it created some bad blood that hasn't yet healed.

I think the Texas independent route makes sense in that regard -- it "one ups" their "little brother's" move to arguably the best football conference in the country, by saying "we're so big we can do this on our own". But the Big Ten could also be a move that does that too.
(This post was last modified: 07-18-2017 09:42 PM by Pervis_Griffith.)
07-18-2017 09:41 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
nzmorange Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,000
Joined: Sep 2012
Reputation: 279
I Root For: UAB
Location:
Post: #75
RE: ACC 16
I don't see Texas football being a geographic/cultural outlier in their own conference, and I don't see them following A&M. If those two beliefs are true, then Texas' options are stay in the B12 or go Indy and park their sports in another conference. I doubt that either the B1G or the SEC would let Texas join as a non-football member, so the ACC and the Pac are the only real options if Texas decides to leave the B12.

The ACC has a relationship w/ ESPN, better basketball, better basketball recruiting, better baseball, better academics, more exposure (geography and time zones), closer time zones (all the ACC is one hour away), better Olympic sports for most non-swimming/volleyball sports, and will have more money moving forward.

The two conferences have comparable football and are probably roughly equidistant.

The Pac has better water/beach sports, a better relationship w/ FOX, and it has a growing population (the country's population center is shifting west).

As such, I think that the ACC would win the tug of war. Still, I think that Texas will do everything that it can to hold the Big XII together. It will all come down to how upset OU/KU are, and/or how upset at the B12 ESPN is. My money is on the B12 not lasting (as it's presently configured) beyond its current TV contract.
07-19-2017 04:40 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CardFan1 Offline
Red Thunderbird
*

Posts: 15,148
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 644
I Root For: Louisville ACC
Location:
Post: #76
RE: ACC 16
Really don't see ND, outside of a collaspe of Their NBC contract and NCAA rules change requiring Them to join ACC in Football as 4 16 schools Conference divisions without Independents. So the most realistic additions likely are WVU, Cincinnati with a hard look at UConn. Likely Big 12 collaspe would send the main players to Pac, B1G, and SEC with Texas going PAC with friends, Oklahoma SEC, Kansas B1G. A few Big 12 could be left out to join AAC.
07-19-2017 10:54 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
dunstvangeet Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 145
Joined: Jul 2011
Reputation: 5
I Root For: Oregon State
Location:
Post: #77
RE: ACC 16
(07-18-2017 06:37 PM)Pervis_Griffith Wrote:  
(07-18-2017 06:03 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  
(07-17-2017 03:56 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  IMO Texas will NOT join the ACC unless they can bring their own division with them, i.e., Tech, OU, OSU, KU etc.

The Longhorns' best chance to get that is with the PAC. That's the conference with the most room to grow. And we already know the West Coasters are willing to talk about it.


Texas is Central Time Zone.

That is very tough to work with the PAC. 4 schools one hour behind in the mountain. 8 in the pacific TWO hours behind. Games set for Pacific time would be a full two hours behind Austin Texas time. Return trips for UT athletes would be brutal, as they LOSE two hours coming home and Texas has considered that extensively.
Do you really think that 1 game in the Pacific timezone is going to be a deal breaker for Texas? That's it for a Pacific timezone for Football. For Basketball it's a total of 2 weekends in the Pacific timezone from a likely schedule. If that's what they're concerned about, then they really are special snowflakes.

My assumptions on scheduling:
Football: 8-team division (7 games), 2 cross-divisional games (one home, one away), 9-games total.
Basketball, 2 games against 4-team pod (6 games total). Travel Partners, and 1 game against other 12 teams (18-games total).

The reality is the only thing that prevented Texas from joining the PAC-10 when it was originally proposed was the fact that Texas wanted an unequal share of the revenue, and the PAC-10 said "No."
07-20-2017 12:30 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
dunstvangeet Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 145
Joined: Jul 2011
Reputation: 5
I Root For: Oregon State
Location:
Post: #78
RE: ACC 16
(07-19-2017 04:40 AM)nzmorange Wrote:  The ACC has a relationship w/ ESPN, better basketball, better basketball recruiting, better baseball, better academics, more exposure (geography and time zones), closer time zones (all the ACC is one hour away), better Olympic sports for most non-swimming/volleyball sports, and will have more money moving forward.
Actually, the PAC-12 and the ACC are about the same when it comes to academics. They both have top private-universities, and top public universities. ACC has Duke, PAC-12 has Stanford. Both conferences have exclusively Tier-1 Universities with Very High Research Activities according to Carneige Institute. On the US News Rankings, each one of them has their strengths and weaknesses.

Stanford #6
California #20
USC #23
UCLA #24
Washington #54
Colorado #92
Oregon #103
Utah #111
Arizona #124
Arizona State #129
Oregon State #143
Washington State #143

Duke #8
Notre Dame #15
Virginia #24
Wake Forest #27
North Carolina #30
Boston College #31
Georgia Tech #34
Miami #44
Syracuse #60
Clemson #66
Pittsburgh #68
Virginia Tech #74
Florida State #92
North Carolina State #92
Louisville #171

The PAC-12 also has quite good olympic sports. Oregon, for instance, won the Women's Track and Field. PAC-12 teams have 500 National Championships, which is actually 193 more than the next closest conference, the Big Ten.
07-20-2017 01:03 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
nzmorange Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,000
Joined: Sep 2012
Reputation: 279
I Root For: UAB
Location:
Post: #79
RE: ACC 16
(07-20-2017 01:03 AM)dunstvangeet Wrote:  
(07-19-2017 04:40 AM)nzmorange Wrote:  The ACC has a relationship w/ ESPN, better basketball, better basketball recruiting, better baseball, better academics, more exposure (geography and time zones), closer time zones (all the ACC is one hour away), better Olympic sports for most non-swimming/volleyball sports, and will have more money moving forward.
Actually, the PAC-12 and the ACC are about the same when it comes to academics. They both have top private-universities, and top public universities. ACC has Duke, PAC-12 has Stanford. Both conferences have exclusively Tier-1 Universities with Very High Research Activities according to Carneige Institute. On the US News Rankings, each one of them has their strengths and weaknesses.

Stanford #6
California #20
USC #23
UCLA #24
Washington #54
Colorado #92
Oregon #103
Utah #111
Arizona #124
Arizona State #129
Oregon State #143
Washington State #143

Duke #8
Notre Dame #15
Virginia #24
Wake Forest #27
North Carolina #30
Boston College #31
Georgia Tech #34
Miami #44
Syracuse #60
Clemson #66
Pittsburgh #68
Virginia Tech #74
Florida State #92
North Carolina State #92
Louisville #171

The PAC-12 also has quite good olympic sports. Oregon, for instance, won the Women's Track and Field. PAC-12 teams have 500 National Championships, which is actually 193 more than the next closest conference, the Big Ten.

Those academic rankings aren't even remotely close. The Pac average ranking is 81, whereas the ACC's is 56. That's a 25 spot spread. Remove outliers that are over 2 standard deviations from the mean, and the spread jumps to 33.

The ACC median is Miami (#44). The Pac median is #97.5, between Colorado (#92) and Oregon (#103). That's a 53.5 point spread.

And +70% of the Pac's championships are concentrated in very few schools (Stanford, USC, and UCLA), and more relevantly, those titles are heavily slanted towards beach sports (which is consistent in my above post), where there is no real fan interest outside of California, and, more importantly, where there is no real competition. W/o exaggeration, at least +25% of Pac championships are from volleyball or some form of swimming. The Pac doesn't have the overall depth and level of competition of the ACC in most sports.
(This post was last modified: 07-20-2017 04:55 AM by nzmorange.)
07-20-2017 04:49 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DawgNBama Offline
the Rush Limbaugh of CSNBBS
*

Posts: 8,319
Joined: Sep 2002
Reputation: 446
I Root For: conservativism/MAGA
Location: US
Post: #80
RE: ACC 16
(07-17-2017 06:50 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  
(07-17-2017 05:24 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  
(07-17-2017 05:17 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  
(07-17-2017 04:47 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  
(07-17-2017 04:24 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  OU and KU plus there is talk of Missouri also. That means they would be in a division with OU, KU, Missouri, Nebraska, Iowa, Wisconsin, Northwestern and Illinois.....not exactly an outlier.

Even then, their only neighbor is OU. Not even any other Texas schools to play.

Also, I believe Missouri's media rights are with the SEC until 2034, so I don't know how free they are to defect to the Big Ten until then.

No.... the SEC has no GOR. OU, KU, MU, Iowa,Nebraska all former Big12 states. UT is Texas, they do not have to play other Texas schools, however they could do that as non-conference games. Any school in Texas would love to have UT on their schedule

http://www.espn.com/college-football/sto...-shuffling

"The ACC and SEC both have long-term media grant-of-rights agreements, running through 2035-36 and 2033-34, respectively."

So if this is true, I would think that Missouri would have to buy out (or surrender) roughly a decade's worth of media rights in order to leave the SEC by 2023-25.

No, those are tv contracts. Once again.....the SEC has no Grant of Rights with the schools.. Any school can leave without penalty. I think most people on this board know that.

GOR or no GOR, I don't foresee Missouri leaving to join the Big Ten at all. That ship sailed when the Big Ten didn't even lift a finger to entertain Missouri possibly joining them. Missouri got so angry and fed up with the Big Ten that they gave up on joining the Big Ten altogether, and looked for another conference to join. The SEC opened up its arms to Missouri, and Missouri has never looked back since. Very interesting statistic about the SEC: no one has left the conference since 1966.
07-20-2017 05:01 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.