(03-08-2013 10:38 AM)94panther Wrote:  

(03-08-2013 10:36 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(03-08-2013 10:25 AM)94panther Wrote:  Of course Pitt does not deserve anything. They left their NCAA credits to the BE when they left, and gets a share of the ACC units when they join. That is how things normally work, unless you are the America 12.

I'm pretty sure it's standard to not get a share of tourney credits earned before you join. Does anyone have a link to a non-Big East conference entry contract for comparison?

WVU/TCU get a equal share of B12 NCAA revenue.
Pitt/ND/Lou/Syr will get an equal share of ACC NCAA revenue.

The problem is that it is easy to share when it is a few million dollars, and the new teams will increase your future NCAA revenue.

It is a lot harder to share when it it $100m and the NCAA money is going down. Big east was the top earner in NCAA tournament money with over $27million last year alone.

The Big 12 article wasn't talking about what the new schools get. Those articles were from before they admitted TCU--which is why they keep saying "nine schools", and saying that this deal would keep Missouri from going to the SEC.

The ACC article sounded more like it was assuming that the new schools would share.

(03-08-2013 10:38 AM)94panther Wrote:  

(03-08-2013 10:36 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(03-08-2013 10:25 AM)94panther Wrote:  Of course Pitt does not deserve anything. They left their NCAA credits to the BE when they left, and gets a share of the ACC units when they join. That is how things normally work, unless you are the America 12.

I'm pretty sure it's standard to not get a share of tourney credits earned before you join. Does anyone have a link to a non-Big East conference entry contract for comparison?

WVU/TCU get a equal share of B12 NCAA revenue.
Pitt/ND/Lou/Syr will get an equal share of ACC NCAA revenue.

The problem is that it is easy to share when it is a few million dollars, and the new teams will increase your future NCAA revenue.

It is a lot harder to share when it it $100m and the NCAA money is going down. Big east was the top earner in NCAA tournament money with over $27million last year alone.

The new members should get an equal share of the NCAA tourney revenues as they come in each year regardless of who earned them and when they were earned. They are conference revenues and don't belong to individual members. They should go to whomever the conference members are in any given year. That's part of what you pay for when you join and it's what you give up when you leave.

(03-08-2013 10:36 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(03-08-2013 10:25 AM)94panther Wrote:  Of course Pitt does not deserve anything. They left their NCAA credits to the BE when they left, and gets a share of the ACC units when they join. That is how things normally work, unless you are the America 12.

I'm pretty sure it's standard to not get a share of tourney credits earned before you join. Does anyone have a link to a non-Big East conference entry contract for comparison?

I don't believe it's standard. I think it's whatever conditions the conference set as a condition of membership before you join. You either accept that or you don't join.

In this case, it seems that the conditions were not clear when the new members signed on or things are being changed. In either case, the new members had every reason to believe they were getting an equal share unless it was stipulated otherwise from day one.

(03-08-2013 06:48 AM)firmbizzle Wrote:  The new schools need to play hardball. Equal split or no conference.

In running your business, do you take the net income and divide it up into equal shares among yourself and your employees?

Not all situations should result in every participant sharing equally.

(03-08-2013 11:18 AM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  In running your business, do you take the net income and divide it up into equal shares among yourself and your employees?

You think the new Aresco League members are just employees. They're not. They are partners in the business.

(03-08-2013 05:55 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(03-07-2013 11:11 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(03-07-2013 10:17 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(03-07-2013 10:08 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(03-07-2013 09:46 PM)stever20 Wrote:  not really. The money would have remained with the C7 for the most part, and all Cincy, UConn, and USF would have would be their hoops units.

If the football side of the conference collapses, and the non-football schools leave the conference, the conference is dissolved. A lot of that money should revert to the schools that earned it in the first place...

not so much- that would have been where the conference just would have stopped sponsoring football at that point.

The Catholic schools are leaving the conference, even though they're going to take the name with them. The football schools didn't go anywhere. They just happened to stick around long enough to see the conference collapse. So I doubt you're right on this one...

But if the Replacements didn't show up, there wouldn't have been any need for the split. The football league would have collapsed, and the leftovers would have left and paid exit fees, or stayed and found football-only homes, or gone indy.

Unless you're saying the Replacements back out as a group. Then the uncollected exit fees stay that way and the NCAA tournament credits go back to Syracuse, Louisville, West Virginia and Pitt. (I think that if the C7 and the leftovers keep theirs, then Notre Dame would to, but I dunno.)

Once the Catholic schools announced their departure, it became a moot point. Even if the football side of the conference collapses, the basketball schools decided to leave first. You could even make the claim that it was their departure that caused the collapse of the football side of the conference. So you're barking up the wrong tree, dude...

(03-08-2013 11:46 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(03-08-2013 11:18 AM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  In running your business, do you take the net income and divide it up into equal shares among yourself and your employees?

You think the new Aresco League members are just employees. They're not. They are partners in the business.

if the 3 are truly looking at a short term solution then they should pay the newbies as little as they can away with. I believe the newbies will take next to nothing because their admins can't go back to their base and say sorry we made a big mistake.

Now if the 3 are truly looking out for the longer term health of the conference, then they should cut the newbies a much bigger check.

(03-08-2013 10:21 AM)lazydawg58 Wrote:  I think it is simply a matter of negotiation. The new schools have an offer on the table and they are making a counter offer. The old 3 I am sure are smart enough not to have proposed their bottom line figure right off the bat. They have a number that they will not go beyond and the new schools have a number that that is the least they will settle for. They just have to play it out.

This is true.

Old schools want the split to be 90/10 and the new schools want it to be 75/25.

At the end of the day, both are stronger as a group than separated.

After everyone involved vents a bit over the weekend, people will calm down and negotiate a deal that all parties agree to.

(03-08-2013 11:46 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(03-08-2013 11:18 AM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  In running your business, do you take the net income and divide it up into equal shares among yourself and your employees?

You think the new Aresco League members are just employees. They're not. They are partners in the business.

You nailed it, Wedge.

That is EXACTLY how UConn views the new members.

Connecticut was good back in the day, but things change. There's a reason UConn has been left behind.

Chill out, UConn, and accept your destiny. Do the right thing on this split and your new employees business partners will be friends again.

(03-08-2013 11:12 AM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(03-08-2013 10:36 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(03-08-2013 10:25 AM)94panther Wrote:  Of course Pitt does not deserve anything. They left their NCAA credits to the BE when they left, and gets a share of the ACC units when they join. That is how things normally work, unless you are the America 12.

I'm pretty sure it's standard to not get a share of tourney credits earned before you join. Does anyone have a link to a non-Big East conference entry contract for comparison?

I don't believe it's standard. I think it's whatever conditions the conference set as a condition of membership before you join. You either accept that or you don't join.

In this case, it seems that the conditions were not clear when the new members signed on or things are being changed. In either case, the new members had every reason to believe they were getting an equal share unless it was stipulated otherwise from day one.

The Memphis and Houston contracts were crystal clear. Memphis and Houston get no money from tournament credits earned by existing conference members. (Some Houston posters have lawyered up a clever argument that the credits from the departing schools are not from "existing conference members", and thus would be shared, but I'm pretty sure that that's a standard clause, and has been read in the past to mean no NCAA tournament money from tournaments before you join.)

(03-08-2013 11:18 AM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  

(03-08-2013 06:48 AM)firmbizzle Wrote:  The new schools need to play hardball. Equal split or no conference.

In running your business, do you take the net income and divide it up into equal shares among yourself and your employees?

Not all situations should result in every participant sharing equally.

Why did the BE collect $5 million from TCU when they never joined the league? Answer that question and then you'll understand why the new schools deserve an equal share.

(03-08-2013 12:19 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  

(03-08-2013 11:18 AM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  

(03-08-2013 06:48 AM)firmbizzle Wrote:  The new schools need to play hardball. Equal split or no conference.

In running your business, do you take the net income and divide it up into equal shares among yourself and your employees?

Not all situations should result in every participant sharing equally.

Why did the BE collect $5 million from TCU when they never joined the league? Answer that question and then you'll understand why the new schools deserve an equal share.

First of all, Big East football teams had to fill 8 holes in their schedules. (I'm still in the dark on why exactly the money never found its way to the football schools, but that's the leading reason that TCU owed the Big East money.)

(03-08-2013 12:19 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  

(03-08-2013 11:18 AM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  

(03-08-2013 06:48 AM)firmbizzle Wrote:  The new schools need to play hardball. Equal split or no conference.

In running your business, do you take the net income and divide it up into equal shares among yourself and your employees?

Not all situations should result in every participant sharing equally.

Why did the BE collect $5 million from TCU when they never joined the league? Answer that question and then you'll understand why the new schools deserve an equal share.

I'm pretty sure UC had to play 2 FCS games as a result.