(03-25-2015 06:21 PM)Big Ron Buckeye Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 06:05 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  The real questions is why is everyone so bent on believing that the ACC doesn't generally want to be together?

Something just doesn't add up. The fundamental question which no ACC aficionado will answer honestly is why would any organization sign up for something that is not in their interest? FSU had massive leverage and to tell me they were not given something for that signature is naive. UNC and Duke have abused their ranking at the head of the table for years, you want to tell me that FSU didnt get anything for keeping the gang together? Im not buying that.

FSU doesn't have a better home. There would only be leverage if there was a credible threat of leaving. There wasn't.

Why do other schools sign GoR's?

Seems like once TV contracts are negotiated, that is when the pen comes out.......

Leverage

(03-25-2015 06:27 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 06:21 PM)Big Ron Buckeye Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 06:05 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  The real questions is why is everyone so bent on believing that the ACC doesn't generally want to be together?

Something just doesn't add up. The fundamental question which no ACC aficionado will answer honestly is why would any organization sign up for something that is not in their interest? FSU had massive leverage and to tell me they were not given something for that signature is naive. UNC and Duke have abused their ranking at the head of the table for years, you want to tell me that FSU didnt get anything for keeping the gang together? Im not buying that.

FSU doesn't have a better home. There would only be leverage if there was a credible threat of leaving. There wasn't.

I have to call Bull. They were already under contract. Why was it necessary to sign the grant and the contract wasn't up until the mid 2020s? Why sign an agreement that you get nothing from. Altruism doesn't pay the bills when all of your neighbors in the SEC are making twice what you're making in TV money.

(03-25-2015 06:56 PM)Big Ron Buckeye Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 06:27 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 06:21 PM)Big Ron Buckeye Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 06:05 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  The real questions is why is everyone so bent on believing that the ACC doesn't generally want to be together?

Something just doesn't add up. The fundamental question which no ACC aficionado will answer honestly is why would any organization sign up for something that is not in their interest? FSU had massive leverage and to tell me they were not given something for that signature is naive. UNC and Duke have abused their ranking at the head of the table for years, you want to tell me that FSU didnt get anything for keeping the gang together? Im not buying that.

FSU doesn't have a better home. There would only be leverage if there was a credible threat of leaving. There wasn't.

I have to call Bull. They were already under contract. Why was it necessary to sign the grant and the contract wasn't up until the mid 2020s? Why sign an agreement that you get nothing from. Altruism doesn't pay the bills when all of your neighbors in the SEC are making twice what you're making in TV money.

1. The SEC isn't making 2x and 2. It wasn't altruism.

(03-25-2015 06:05 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  The real questions is why is everyone so bent on believing that the ACC doesn't generally want to be together?

I liked it when the Big 12 signed a GOR it was far from iron clad, but as soon the ACC did it everyone on this board acted like GORs were unbreakable contracts sent down from God almighty himself.

(03-25-2015 07:08 PM)OldGoldnBlue Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 06:05 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  The real questions is why is everyone so bent on believing that the ACC doesn't generally want to be together?

I liked it when the Big 12 signed a GOR it was far from iron clad, but as soon the ACC did it everyone on this board acted like GORs were unbreakable contracts sent down from God almighty himself.

Funny thing is lot of Big 12(WVU fans large contingent of that)fans still proclaim the ACC Dead conference walking.

(03-25-2015 07:08 PM)OldGoldnBlue Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 06:05 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  The real questions is why is everyone so bent on believing that the ACC doesn't generally want to be together?

I liked it when the Big 12 signed a GOR it was far from iron clad, but as soon the ACC did it everyone on this board acted like GORs were unbreakable contracts sent down from God almighty himself.

Once Fox got the "choice of games" rotation they wanted, and the Big 12 brought in all the teams it could get, the Big 12 signed the GoR. (Please see "leverage" link above)

Looks like once ESPN either committed to an ACC Network or agreed to pay the ACC an extra $2 million a year and let them form their own Network, and also allow every team that wanted out of the conference a chance to get out, that's when the ACC signed the GoR.

(03-25-2015 05:51 PM)Rabbit_in_Red Wrote:  The reality is, the ACC had the opportunity to implode...and it didn't. Instead, they all signed on the dotted line. I don't understand why it's hard for people to understand that the ACC schools are, by and large, happy with one another and their situation. And please...the conference with the largest media footprint won't be left out of the network business.

This. Game. Set. Match.

(03-25-2015 06:21 PM)Big Ron Buckeye Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 06:05 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  The real questions is why is everyone so bent on believing that the ACC doesn't generally want to be together?

Something just doesn't add up. The fundamental question which no ACC aficionado will answer honestly is why would any organization sign up for something that is not in their interest? FSU had massive leverage and to tell me they were not given something for that signature is naive. UNC and Duke have abused their ranking at the head of the table for years, you want to tell me that FSU didnt get anything for keeping the gang together? Im not buying that.

Has it ever occurred to you that us internet message board tv sports contract "experts" just might not be privy to all of the details?!? Good grief. Simplest explanation is that FSU signing the GOR was in their best interest. I highly doubt they would sign up for financial ruin. Doesn't add up, does it? Simplest explanation is that

1. The acc wanted to stick together and couldn't give a rat crap about playing a bunch of rust belt schools in anything.

2. Financial outlook made sticking together viable. Largest media footprint and fertile recruiting grounds don't hurt either.

(03-25-2015 06:56 PM)Big Ron Buckeye Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 06:27 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 06:21 PM)Big Ron Buckeye Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 06:05 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  The real questions is why is everyone so bent on believing that the ACC doesn't generally want to be together?

Something just doesn't add up. The fundamental question which no ACC aficionado will answer honestly is why would any organization sign up for something that is not in their interest? FSU had massive leverage and to tell me they were not given something for that signature is naive. UNC and Duke have abused their ranking at the head of the table for years, you want to tell me that FSU didnt get anything for keeping the gang together? Im not buying that.

FSU doesn't have a better home. There would only be leverage if there was a credible threat of leaving. There wasn't.

I have to call Bull. They were already under contract. Why was it necessary to sign the grant and the contract wasn't up until the mid 2020s? Why sign an agreement that you get nothing from. Altruism doesn't pay the bills when all of your neighbors in the SEC are making twice what you're making in TV money.

The B1G isn't a better home for FSU...let it go.

(03-25-2015 07:08 PM)OldGoldnBlue Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 06:05 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  The real questions is why is everyone so bent on believing that the ACC doesn't generally want to be together?

I liked it when the Big 12 signed a GOR it was far from iron clad, but as soon the ACC did it everyone on this board acted like GORs were unbreakable contracts sent down from God almighty himself.

It's because the BigXII's GOR is more easily gotten out of with the majority of 10 members leaving than the ACC's with 14. That's why. The GOR wouldn't be BROKEN by anyone in the BigXII...if schools left en masse as has been discussed before, the GOR would simply be null and void. THAT is the difference.

(03-25-2015 06:21 PM)Big Ron Buckeye Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 06:05 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  The real questions is why is everyone so bent on believing that the ACC doesn't generally want to be together?

Something just doesn't add up. The fundamental question which no ACC aficionado will answer honestly is why would any organization sign up for something that is not in their interest? FSU had massive leverage and to tell me they were not given something for that signature is naive. UNC and Duke have abused their ranking at the head of the table for years, you want to tell me that FSU didnt get anything for keeping the gang together? Im not buying that.

In what way has Carolina and Dook "abused their ranking at the head of the table for years"? Matter of fact, what the heck are you talking about?

(03-25-2015 08:09 PM)Rabbit_in_Red Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 07:08 PM)OldGoldnBlue Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 06:05 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  The real questions is why is everyone so bent on believing that the ACC doesn't generally want to be together?

I liked it when the Big 12 signed a GOR it was far from iron clad, but as soon the ACC did it everyone on this board acted like GORs were unbreakable contracts sent down from God almighty himself.

It's because the BigXII's GOR is more easily gotten out of with the majority of 10 members leaving than the ACC's with 14. That's why. The GOR wouldn't be BROKEN by anyone in the BigXII...if schools left en masse as has been discussed before, the GOR would simply be null and void. THAT is the difference.

C'mon dude, it has to be something like 70% of the big 12 to break the contract. You think 7 of the 10 Big 12 teams have a guaranteed safe landing spot in the Power 5? We've already seen Baylor throw a hissy fit and pull political strings

It's easier to find landing spots for those 7 than to persuade the bulk of the ACC to leave...Don't feel so bad though. I'm confident WVU would be one of the 7.

(03-25-2015 08:22 PM)Rabbit_in_Red Wrote:  It's easier to find landing spots for those 7 than to persuade the bulk of the ACC to leave...Don't feel so bad though. I'm confident WVU would be one of the 7.

Sorry but I just don't see anyway possible 7 Big 12 teams would have guaranteed safe P5 spots. It's just as likely that happens as the ACC blowing up

Eh, maybe so...but finding homes for 7 schools is easier than for the what? 10 it'd take to implode the ACC? It's simple numbers. Do you REALLY think that if they were on the table and shopping other conferences would turn down Baylor, Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, K-State, and WVU? Individually, yeah...maybe WVU, OSU, and K-State would struggle...but in a big picture of getting a bigger slice of pie for the 4 conferences left standing, it doesn't look so completely outlandish.

(03-25-2015 05:33 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  On top of that, the deference shown to VT and treating them like a full member upon admission rankled MD. Moreover, VT became more important to the ACC than MD. MD also was against ND on a non-full football basis, and did not want to be in a northern ACC division.

This. Virginia Tech replaced Maryland ten years ago, and Louisville was the expansion team, not the other way around. Maryland's move was probably inevitable and money may have been a factor, but not the most important factor. I think they saw where things were heading and didn't like it. Maryland is probably better off overall, and so is the ACC.

Virginia Tech will probably be much more flexible in scheduling than Maryland would have been should Notre Dame increase its football participation in the ACC in the next few years.

At this point, it's semantics. I don't think Barron did much due diligence on the matter of realignment at Florida State, and had a preference for the ACC that he focused on maintaining and continuing, regardless what board, fans, alumni, and boosters wanted. The ACC got FSU to sign on the line, and regardless of what people will speculate was "promised" to them, I doubt the school will even try to challenge the ACC legally if/were "special conditions" not met.

Maryland actually had a case against the ACC, and the ACC still came out with a good chunk of flesh on the matter. FSU and whoever else had issues with the buyouts and GoR (wasn't it a Virginia school?)...probably should have mirrored Maryland's actions (not just don't vote for the increased buyout, but sit on the GoR, like the Big XII schools did until there was a media deal).

As for the poll, I didn't vote. I think in FSU's case, you had a leader at the school who felt it was better institutionally to stay with that collective, regardless of the athletics. I honestly wonder if Swofford had nothing to say or sell, would Barron have still let the guy talk to his critics? I'm in the camp that believes he would.

(03-25-2015 08:49 PM)Rabbit_in_Red Wrote:  Eh, maybe so...but finding homes for 7 schools is easier than for the what? 10 it'd take to implode the ACC? It's simple numbers. Do you REALLY think that if they were on the table and shopping other conferences would turn down Baylor, Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, K-State, and WVU? Individually, yeah...maybe WVU, OSU, and K-State would struggle...but in a big picture of getting a bigger slice of pie for the 4 conferences left standing, it doesn't look so completely outlandish.

It's easier to find homes for all 10 big 12 teams than it would be for all 14 ACC schools. It's not very realistic to think these conferences would dissolve with just the minimum vote needed. The GoR being indirectly nullified would cause the GoR to cease to exist but it wouldn't stop the financial responsibility to each signee.

Thus due to geography, the big 12 would be much easier to parcel out completely. People can think it's not possible all they want but it's possible. There are plenty of considerations to be mindful of before it could happen but its possible.

They were promised a conference network or an extra $2M/yr in TV revenue, and more importantly, Swofford is a ninja.