perhaps its time for them to make a few additions. I'm thinking a couple schools in North Carolina may do the trick...

NC and VA are still our final expansions targets.

Just waiting for them to pick up the phone, probably after Uncle Delaney pays a visit again.

East Carolina and Appalachian State?

shhhh, you aren't supposed to give away our super secret list of targets! Besides, those are just our back ups if Charlotte and ODU dont jump first!

I don't think any movement happens before 2027 when the Grant of Rights expires, with the possible exception of wholesale destruction in time for the 2026 football season - the first season after the current College Football Playoff expires.

(01-25-2014 06:06 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  NC and VA are still our final expansions targets.

Just waiting for them to pick up the phone, probably after Uncle Delaney pays a visit again.

Let the P5 conference cannibalization begin!!!

It'll happen same as this last round with the B1G striking first and then the dominoes fall.

(01-25-2014 06:40 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  I don't think any movement happens before 2027 when the Grant of Rights expires, with the possible exception of wholesale destruction in time for the 2026 football season - the first season after the current College Football Playoff expires.

If there is a breakaway from the NCAA contracts and GOR's will have to be done over. In other words it could be a time for anything goes. Conferences may need a slight face lift for logos and tm's as well as anything else associated with the NCAA. The new entity wouldn't be NCAA.

(01-25-2014 06:38 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  shhhh, you aren't supposed to give away our super secret list of targets! Besides, those are just our back ups if Charlotte and ODU dont jump first!

I'm still trying to figure out why you think the SEC will only get two bids. Will the PAC get just one bid or the ACC three? Please expound. My question would be why do the Northeast, MEAC, Summit, Patriot, Southern, Colonial, Big South or America East get any bids? Maybe a full break from the NCAA would be a good thing for the true Division 1 schools.

FWIW, Lunardi in his last bracket had three SEC teams (the third being Tennessee). I really don't understand why the SEC sucks so hard at basketball. Bad coaches? Athletic departments that don't put any effort into hoops?

Quote:My question would be why do the Northeast, MEAC, Summit, Patriot, Southern, Colonial, Big South or America East get any bids?

Don't knock some of these leagues, they can produce good teams. Davidson came out of the Southern Conference, and the Colonial has been a multiple-bid league in the past.

Part of the charm of the NCAAs is watching the little guy knock out the big guy.

(01-26-2014 02:53 AM)moo Wrote:  FWIW, Lunardi in his last bracket had three SEC teams (the third being Tennessee). I really don't understand why the SEC sucks so hard at basketball. Bad coaches? Athletic departments that don't put any effort into hoops?

Quote:My question would be why do the Northeast, MEAC, Summit, Patriot, Southern, Colonial, Big South or America East get any bids?

Don't knock some of these leagues, they can produce good teams. Davidson came out of the Southern Conference, and the Colonial has been a multiple-bid league in the past.

Part of the charm of the NCAAs is watching the little guy knock out the big guy.

Because the SEC only cares about football. They would get 2 bids if the season ended today but I bet a 3rd team will sneak in.

(01-26-2014 08:31 AM)Jet915 Wrote:  

(01-26-2014 02:53 AM)moo Wrote:  FWIW, Lunardi in his last bracket had three SEC teams (the third being Tennessee). I really don't understand why the SEC sucks so hard at basketball. Bad coaches? Athletic departments that don't put any effort into hoops?

Quote:My question would be why do the Northeast, MEAC, Summit, Patriot, Southern, Colonial, Big South or America East get any bids?

Don't knock some of these leagues, they can produce good teams. Davidson came out of the Southern Conference, and the Colonial has been a multiple-bid league in the past.

Part of the charm of the NCAAs is watching the little guy knock out the big guy.

Because the SEC only cares about football. They would get 2 bids if the season ended today but I bet a 3rd team will sneak in.

This is not true!
...We care about baseball too!

(01-25-2014 07:46 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-25-2014 06:40 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  I don't think any movement happens before 2027 when the Grant of Rights expires, with the possible exception of wholesale destruction in time for the 2026 football season - the first season after the current College Football Playoff expires.

If there is a breakaway from the NCAA contracts and GOR's will have to be done over. In other words it could be a time for anything goes. Conferences may need a slight face lift for logos and tm's as well as anything else associated with the NCAA. The new entity wouldn't be NCAA.

I don't believe this is correct. The GOR's are legal instruments that have been executed by the Conferences and their members. IMO, whatever broader structure the Conferences reside in should have no basis for impacting the GORs unless there is language specifically allowing for the modification of such agreements in the event of a change in said structure.

(01-26-2014 11:40 AM)Eagle78 Wrote:  

(01-25-2014 07:46 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-25-2014 06:40 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  I don't think any movement happens before 2027 when the Grant of Rights expires, with the possible exception of wholesale destruction in time for the 2026 football season - the first season after the current College Football Playoff expires.

If there is a breakaway from the NCAA contracts and GOR's will have to be done over. In other words it could be a time for anything goes. Conferences may need a slight face lift for logos and tm's as well as anything else associated with the NCAA. The new entity wouldn't be NCAA.

I don't believe this is correct. The GOR's are legal instruments that have been executed by the Conferences and their members. IMO, whatever broader structure the Conferences reside in should have no basis for impacting the GORs unless there is language specifically allowing for the modification of such agreements in the event of a change in said structure.

You can't know for sure without being able to read them. But if there is a breakaway with a new structural formation of the conferences, and/or internal playoff mechanisms within them, it will permit further realignment. Monetary motivations will remain. And, ultimately, if the formation of such serves the interests of the networks involved damage claims are unlikely, and inequities can be addressed by the same. Such would leave essentially just exit fees. Suffice it to say a breakaway will open possibilities heretofore unconsidered. And if the GOR's remain, likely conference bylaws on dissolution will as well. There are and have always been workarounds. Starting an alternative to the NCAA would be a game changer and those wanting to shape it for their benefit (networks) will do what is necessary to expedite it.

(01-26-2014 12:04 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-26-2014 11:40 AM)Eagle78 Wrote:  

(01-25-2014 07:46 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-25-2014 06:40 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  I don't think any movement happens before 2027 when the Grant of Rights expires, with the possible exception of wholesale destruction in time for the 2026 football season - the first season after the current College Football Playoff expires.

If there is a breakaway from the NCAA contracts and GOR's will have to be done over. In other words it could be a time for anything goes. Conferences may need a slight face lift for logos and tm's as well as anything else associated with the NCAA. The new entity wouldn't be NCAA.

I don't believe this is correct. The GOR's are legal instruments that have been executed by the Conferences and their members. IMO, whatever broader structure the Conferences reside in should have no basis for impacting the GORs unless there is language specifically allowing for the modification of such agreements in the event of a change in said structure.

You can't know for sure without being able to read them. But if there is a breakaway with a new structural formation of the conferences, and/or internal playoff mechanisms within them, it will permit further realignment. Monetary motivations will remain. And, ultimately, if the formation of such serves the interests of the networks involved damage claims are unlikely, and inequities can be addressed by the same. Such would leave essentially just exit fees. Suffice it to say a breakaway will open possibilities heretofore unconsidered. And if the GOR's remain, likely conference bylaws on dissolution will as well. There are and have always been workarounds. Starting an alternative to the NCAA would be a game changer and those wanting to shape it for their benefit (networks) will do what is necessary to expedite it.

IMO, nothing you have written above changes my basic premise. The GORs are contracts between the conferences and their members. They are not contracts with the NCAA, networks, etc. Sure, the conferences have, themselves, engaged in contracts with television networks, etc., but the GORs are strictly between the conferences and their member schools. IMO, whatever happens elsewhere in the broader college sports landscape in no way invalidates or weakens these contracts unless language to the effect is specifically included (which no one has yet proven to be the case).

Sure, if a conference dissolves, IMO, that would have an impact on a GOR; or, if the conference members vote to modify the GOR, I suppose that could be accomplished if there were provisions for such a modification. However, if the P5 did break away from the NCAA, and a member school(s) of a specific conference said "Hey, the environment has changed, I am leaving this conference", they would be subject to the full weight of any GOR that conference had in place.

IMO, in some ways, I think these GORs have the same effect as "poison pills" that some firms have developed, received approval for, and put in place to protect themselves from hostile takeovers.

I always chuckle at how blasé many posters here view these contracts. Many seem to view them to be simple guidelines, to be ignored or modified whenever it suits a specific party. IMO, that will not be the case here unless a conference decides to dissolve; and, contrary to the ongoing fantasies of some on these boards, I don't see any conference doing that.

Whatever happens, UNC and UVa are not going to put themselves into direct competition with schools that have 100K seat football stadiums - just not going to happen. That puts UNC and UVa at a $20 to $25 million disadvantage and football is not popular enough in Charlottesville and UNC has too much competition to sell seats in Chapel Hill from Duke, NC State, and ECU to add the 30K seats necessary to pull into the PSU, Ohio State, Michigan, Wisconsin, Tennessee, Alabama, Florida, TAMU level.

This isn't talked about very much, but it's one of the reasons that the ACC appeals to UNC and UVa. Those two are not going to be happy in a conference where they are a secondary money player. Shared conference revenues have nothing to do with the problem.

the sec isn't a good basketball conference and that shouldn't be news to anybody.

nor do they care that they are not a good basketball conference

(01-26-2014 05:16 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  Whatever happens, UNC and UVa are not going to put themselves into direct competition with schools that have 100K seat football stadiums - just not going to happen. That puts UNC and UVa at a $20 to $25 million disadvantage and football is not popular enough in Charlottesville and UNC has too much competition to sell seats in Chapel Hill from Duke, NC State, and ECU to add the 30K seats necessary to pull into the PSU, Ohio State, Michigan, Wisconsin, Tennessee, Alabama, Florida, TAMU level.

This isn't talked about very much, but it's one of the reasons that the ACC appeals to UNC and UVa. Those two are not going to be happy in a conference where they are a secondary money player. Shared conference revenues have nothing to do with the problem.

Excellent point, lumberpack. IMO, it is also important to note that, unlike what has been reported concerning UMD, these schools are in a far different place financially so they can take a much more balanced approach to conference affiliation; taking into account those factors you so astutely have noted. There is no need for them to sacrifice these longer-term values to satisfy a cash crunch.

(01-26-2014 05:31 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  the sec isn't a good basketball conference and that shouldn't be news to anybody.

nor do they care that they are not a good basketball conference

It's all about championships. The SEC has done OK the last 20 years:

SEC - 6 (Arkansas, Florida, Kentucky)
ACC - 5 (Duke, North Carolina, Maryland)
Big East - 5 (Connecticut, Louisville, Syracuse)
PAC - 2 (UCLA, Arizona)
Big 10 - 1 (Michigan State)
Big 12 - 1 (Kansas)