(04-18-2023 10:43 AM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(04-18-2023 10:34 AM)Aztecgolfer Wrote:  MHver3 back at it. Now saying Colorado will bolt the PAC if a deal isn't done by June 30:

https://twitter.com/MHver3/status/1648113520867700736

Of course, that is the first deadline that actually makes sense.

Well yeah, it has to be done by then or else it gets a lot costlier.

That it has to happen by then isn't anything most watching things closely can't predict.

Costlier? How? It makes sense that the PAC would want the agreement before they get into the last year of of their current deal. But it isn't going to cost more unless you are figuring SDSU's exit fee doubles after June 30. SDSU can simply inform the MWC that they are leaving and pay the fee without saying where they are going.

(04-18-2023 10:16 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(04-18-2023 07:42 AM)PlayBall! Wrote:  

(04-18-2023 06:43 AM)esayem Wrote:  UNC/State are a package deal.

Not likely, though. UNC (being? will be?) fought over by the B1G and SEC; loser will take a look at NCState. In this age, no two in-state schools are locked together due to the high bar for entrance in the P2. UNC is in a great position, fortunately, except needing to start their own engineering school.

The UNC system has State as the flagship engineering program.

Package deal.

I believe you. And the SEC would be more likely to invite the pair.

(04-18-2023 10:52 AM)Aztecgolfer Wrote:  

(04-18-2023 10:43 AM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(04-18-2023 10:34 AM)Aztecgolfer Wrote:  MHver3 back at it. Now saying Colorado will bolt the PAC if a deal isn't done by June 30:

https://twitter.com/MHver3/status/1648113520867700736

Of course, that is the first deadline that actually makes sense.

Well yeah, it has to be done by then or else it gets a lot costlier.

That it has to happen by then isn't anything most watching things closely can't predict.

Costlier? How? It makes sense that the PAC would want the agreement before they get into the last year of of their current deal. But it isn't going to cost more unless you are figuring SDSU's exit fee doubles after June 30. SDSU can simply inform the MWC that they are leaving and pay the fee without saying where they are going.

Or the PAC just limps along with 10 for the first year of the new deal.

I don't think the SEC has any interest in NC State unless UNC somehow goes B1G. NC State is mediocre at both major sports and UNC delivers the North Carolina market well enough on its own. If the SEC wanted to double dip in North Carolina for some reason, Duke is the better brand and the better choice. If the SEC expanded with FSU, Clemson, Miami, UNC, UVA, and Duke they would further extend their CFB dominance and likely become the best CBB conference in the nation to boot.

March Madness is a huge revenue stream and will soon get bigger once the NCAA is unable to siphon big dollars from that contract.

(04-18-2023 10:16 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(04-18-2023 07:42 AM)PlayBall! Wrote:  

(04-18-2023 06:43 AM)esayem Wrote:  UNC/State are a package deal.

Not likely, though. UNC (being? will be?) fought over by the B1G and SEC; loser will take a look at NCState. In this age, no two in-state schools are locked together due to the high bar for entrance in the P2. UNC is in a great position, fortunately, except needing to start their own engineering school.

The UNC system has State as the flagship engineering program.

Package deal.

Yeah with both the Big 10 and the SEC wanting UNC I see the NC legislature leveraging that into a package deal. They won't allow State to be left behind.

(04-12-2023 10:14 PM)ArmoredUpKnight Wrote:  

I can’t believe it, MHver3 actually made news.

Looking back on it, it seems really odd that the Colo AD posted this. If there was no truth to it, why not let MHver3 be wrong.

Maybe the Colo AD was signalling that a vote may happen, but not next week. After all, we know from other reporting that they were considering the decision for months...

(08-02-2023 08:14 AM)CougarRed Wrote:  

(04-12-2023 10:14 PM)ArmoredUpKnight Wrote:  

I can’t believe it, MHver3 actually made news.

Looking back on it, it seems really odd that the Colo AD posted this. If there was no truth to it, why not let MHver3 be wrong.

Maybe the Colo AD was signalling that a vote may happen, but not next week. After all, we know from other reporting that they were considering the decision for months...

That tweet was back in April when gaslighting was still an effective strategy for the PAC-10.

Eventually administrators demanded to see the media deal numbers.

Wildly different vibes in April vs June.

What was the AD expected to say? "OH hell yeah, screw the PAC. We gone."

(08-02-2023 10:37 AM)PredatorUTEP Wrote:  What was the AD expected to say? "OH hell yeah, screw the PAC. We gone."

He didn't have to respond at all. MHVer3 is a nobody.

It's interesting, in retrospect, that he chose to respond to a very specific rumor re: board vote date.

(08-02-2023 11:27 AM)CougarRed Wrote:  

(08-02-2023 10:37 AM)PredatorUTEP Wrote:  What was the AD expected to say? "OH hell yeah, screw the PAC. We gone."

He didn't have to respond at all. MHVer3 is a nobody.

It's interesting, in retrospect, that he chose to respond to a very specific rumor re: board vote date.

You mean like the L.A. Times did to Fluguar and Delany did to Frank the Tank? It's the typical appeal to the common man whether they agree or disagree they make it seem like any of us actually have a voice, we don't! The board room decides and now they realize they are losing too many common man fans. So, you get these homages to make it look like they give a damn about what anybody thinks outside their board room.

More bread and circuses and more deceit.