An Associated Press Source is reporting that Butler, Creighton, and Xavier will be going to the Big East.
Sorry, I got a news flash didn't find it in the Thread for Realignment News Only and posted it before I realized that Commuter Bob had already done so. So if a Mod could remove this thread I would appreciate it.
I noticed that yesterday, HO. Any new expansion moves probably spells bad news for the schools that joined the remaining football schools...
Oh yeah, the whole situation is Admiral Akbar worthy.
can a school sue the BE "leadership" for malpractice or something?
(03-20-2013 06:08 PM)Theodoresdaddy Wrote: [ -> ]can a school sue the BE "leadership" for malpractice or something?
That should have happened years ago.
Moves by a conference are approved by the Presidents of each school, not the conference commissioners, what are they going to sue themselves?
(03-20-2013 11:46 PM)IceJus10 Wrote: [ -> ]Moves by a conference are approved by the Presidents of each school, not the conference commissioners, what are they going to sue themselves?
didn't coke do that??? because coke zero was on a different floor
(03-20-2013 06:08 PM)Theodoresdaddy Wrote: [ -> ]can a school sue the BE "leadership" for malpractice or something?
They'd be suing themselves. It was the university presidents, led by Pitt, who voted to turn down the $1.14 billion TV package - only to see Pitt announce its decision to leave the conference within a matter of weeks.
Back in 2003, BC after originally attempting to leave, continued to participate in planning, only to undermine the best interests of the conference and then to leave within a matter of months. Miami drove internal strife within the conference for years and then secretly went behind the backs of their colleagues to strike a deal with the ACC. Virginia Tech joined in a law suit against the ACC, only to bail and join the ACC at the first opportunity. Syracuse attempted to leave at the same time, only to leave 10 years later. West Virginia publicly lobbied for the demise of the conference for a year before high tailing it for the Big XII.
All of these members had the opportunity to lead a move to form a new all sports conference any time they wanted if they truly believed in an Eastern all sports conference. In the aftermath of the ACC raid in 2003, they considered it but then rejected the idea, replacing it with the prenup. In 2010 when the conditions for the prenup had been met, they once again had the opportunity to initiate a split and for a conference independent of the hybrid about which they had complained for years. Once again they eschewed the option. Then they all proceeded to strike their own deals with other conferences like rats abandoning a sinking ship - after they had just chewed the holes in the vessel that were causing it to take on water in the first place.
We can point the finger of blame at various commissioners all we want, but we have met the enemy and he is us.
(03-21-2013 07:47 AM)Melky Cabrera Wrote: [ -> ] (03-20-2013 06:08 PM)Theodoresdaddy Wrote: [ -> ]can a school sue the BE "leadership" for malpractice or something?
They'd be suing themselves. It was the university presidents, led by Pitt, who voted to turn down the $1.14 billion TV package - only to see Pitt announce its decision to leave the conference within a matter of weeks.
Back in 2003, BC after originally attempting to leave, continued to participate in planning, only to undermine the best interests of the conference and then to leave within a matter of months. Miami drove internal strife within the conference for years and then secretly went behind the backs of their colleagues to strike a deal with the ACC. Virginia Tech joined in a law suit against the ACC, only to bail and join the ACC at the first opportunity. Syracuse attempted to leave at the same time, only to leave 10 years later. West Virginia publicly lobbied for the demise of the conference for a year before high tailing it for the Big XII.
All of these members had the opportunity to lead a move to form a new all sports conference any time they wanted if they truly believed in an Eastern all sports conference. In the aftermath of the ACC raid in 2003, they considered it but then rejected the idea, replacing it with the prenup. In 2010 when the conditions for the prenup had been met, they once again had the opportunity to initiate a split and for a conference independent of the hybrid about which they had complained for years. Once again they eschewed the option. Then they all proceeded to strike their own deals with other conferences like rats abandoning a sinking ship - after they had just chewed the holes in the vessel that were causing it to take on water in the first place.
We can point the finger of blame at various commissioners all we want, but we have met the enemy and he is us.
If there was a suit to be filed, why should anyone sue The BEast or its commissioner? How do we know whether or not Pitt was advised by ESPiN, after they gave us a lowball offer, to turn down the deal, knowing that they'd later be picked up by the ACC. After all, BC leaked the fact that ESPiN was advising the ACC on who to pick from The BEast. Could they not have leaked any future plans to Pitt, who was handling the TV negotiations for The BEast, in advance of any movement? It wouldn't be the first backroom deal that led to a very few getting paid, while the rest get fleeced...
If anyone was to sue, wouldn't ESPiN make the better target. They were a part of both deals, and they most surely knew the outcome prior to the fact of its happening. After all, they were the advisers in both deals, and they would be the ones most likely to set things up so that it came out most favorable to themselves...
Now ESPiN has the programs they want in the ACC, and ESPiN has all of the ACC's TV rights. The Catholic schools in the most populated areas are all together, under ESPiN's banner. The football schools that weren't as desirable to the network are getting less than a pittance from ESPiN, who still owns their TV rights at present...
If there is any more movement of football schools, the remaining football schools may not get even that small amount begrudged. I doubt ESPiN cares either way, since the schools they really wanted are all in the ACC now, and the ACC is locked up for quite some time...
(03-21-2013 08:44 AM)bitcruncher Wrote: [ -> ] (03-21-2013 07:47 AM)Melky Cabrera Wrote: [ -> ] (03-20-2013 06:08 PM)Theodoresdaddy Wrote: [ -> ]can a school sue the BE "leadership" for malpractice or something?
They'd be suing themselves. It was the university presidents, led by Pitt, who voted to turn down the $1.14 billion TV package - only to see Pitt announce its decision to leave the conference within a matter of weeks.
Back in 2003, BC after originally attempting to leave, continued to participate in planning, only to undermine the best interests of the conference and then to leave within a matter of months. Miami drove internal strife within the conference for years and then secretly went behind the backs of their colleagues to strike a deal with the ACC. Virginia Tech joined in a law suit against the ACC, only to bail and join the ACC at the first opportunity. Syracuse attempted to leave at the same time, only to leave 10 years later. West Virginia publicly lobbied for the demise of the conference for a year before high tailing it for the Big XII.
All of these members had the opportunity to lead a move to form a new all sports conference any time they wanted if they truly believed in an Eastern all sports conference. In the aftermath of the ACC raid in 2003, they considered it but then rejected the idea, replacing it with the prenup. In 2010 when the conditions for the prenup had been met, they once again had the opportunity to initiate a split and for a conference independent of the hybrid about which they had complained for years. Once again they eschewed the option. Then they all proceeded to strike their own deals with other conferences like rats abandoning a sinking ship - after they had just chewed the holes in the vessel that were causing it to take on water in the first place.
We can point the finger of blame at various commissioners all we want, but we have met the enemy and he is us.
If there was a suit to be filed, why should anyone sue The BEast or its commissioner? How do we know whether or not Pitt was advised by ESPiN, after they gave us a lowball offer, to turn down the deal, knowing that they'd later be picked up by the ACC. After all, BC leaked the fact that ESPiN was advising the ACC on who to pick from The BEast. Could they not have leaked any future plans to Pitt, who was handling the TV negotiations for The BEast, in advance of any movement? It wouldn't be the first backroom deal that led to a very few getting paid, while the rest get fleeced...
If anyone was to sue, wouldn't ESPiN make the better target. They were a part of both deals, and they most surely knew the outcome prior to the fact of its happening. After all, they were the advisers in both deals, and they would be the ones most likely to set things up so that it came out most favorable to themselves...
Now ESPiN has the programs they want in the ACC, and ESPiN has all of the ACC's TV rights. The Catholic schools in the most populated areas are all together, under ESPiN's banner. The football schools that weren't as desirable to the network are getting less than a pittance from ESPiN, who still owns their TV rights at present...
If there is any more movement of football schools, the remaining football schools may not get even that small amount begrudged. I doubt ESPiN cares either way, since the schools they really wanted are all in the ACC now, and the ACC is locked up for quite some time...
One of the more accurate and honest posts on realignment I have read on the the board since this mess started. It's not about conferences or commissioners. Like I said a year ago it's a hostile takeover of undervalued properties and is corporately driven.
(03-21-2013 08:44 AM)bitcruncher Wrote: [ -> ] (03-21-2013 07:47 AM)Melky Cabrera Wrote: [ -> ] (03-20-2013 06:08 PM)Theodoresdaddy Wrote: [ -> ]can a school sue the BE "leadership" for malpractice or something?
They'd be suing themselves. It was the university presidents, led by Pitt, who voted to turn down the $1.14 billion TV package - only to see Pitt announce its decision to leave the conference within a matter of weeks.
Back in 2003, BC after originally attempting to leave, continued to participate in planning, only to undermine the best interests of the conference and then to leave within a matter of months. Miami drove internal strife within the conference for years and then secretly went behind the backs of their colleagues to strike a deal with the ACC. Virginia Tech joined in a law suit against the ACC, only to bail and join the ACC at the first opportunity. Syracuse attempted to leave at the same time, only to leave 10 years later. West Virginia publicly lobbied for the demise of the conference for a year before high tailing it for the Big XII.
All of these members had the opportunity to lead a move to form a new all sports conference any time they wanted if they truly believed in an Eastern all sports conference. In the aftermath of the ACC raid in 2003, they considered it but then rejected the idea, replacing it with the prenup. In 2010 when the conditions for the prenup had been met, they once again had the opportunity to initiate a split and for a conference independent of the hybrid about which they had complained for years. Once again they eschewed the option. Then they all proceeded to strike their own deals with other conferences like rats abandoning a sinking ship - after they had just chewed the holes in the vessel that were causing it to take on water in the first place.
We can point the finger of blame at various commissioners all we want, but we have met the enemy and he is us.
If there was a suit to be filed, why should anyone sue The BEast or its commissioner? How do we know whether or not Pitt was advised by ESPiN, after they gave us a lowball offer, to turn down the deal, knowing that they'd later be picked up by the ACC. After all, BC leaked the fact that ESPiN was advising the ACC on who to pick from The BEast. Could they not have leaked any future plans to Pitt, who was handling the TV negotiations for The BEast, in advance of any movement? It wouldn't be the first backroom deal that led to a very few getting paid, while the rest get fleeced...
If anyone was to sue, wouldn't ESPiN make the better target. They were a part of both deals, and they most surely knew the outcome prior to the fact of its happening. After all, they were the advisers in both deals, and they would be the ones most likely to set things up so that it came out most favorable to themselves...
Now ESPiN has the programs they want in the ACC, and ESPiN has all of the ACC's TV rights. The Catholic schools in the most populated areas are all together, under ESPiN's banner. The football schools that weren't as desirable to the network are getting less than a pittance from ESPiN, who still owns their TV rights at present...
If there is any more movement of football schools, the remaining football schools may not get even that small amount begrudged. I doubt ESPiN cares either way, since the schools they really wanted are all in the ACC now, and the ACC is locked up for quite some time...
I thought the C7 went with Fox?
(03-21-2013 10:04 AM)NJRedMan Wrote: [ -> ] (03-21-2013 10:02 AM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote: [ -> ] (03-21-2013 08:44 AM)bitcruncher Wrote: [ -> ] (03-21-2013 07:47 AM)Melky Cabrera Wrote: [ -> ] (03-20-2013 06:08 PM)Theodoresdaddy Wrote: [ -> ]can a school sue the BE "leadership" for malpractice or something?
They'd be suing themselves. It was the university presidents, led by Pitt, who voted to turn down the $1.14 billion TV package - only to see Pitt announce its decision to leave the conference within a matter of weeks.
Back in 2003, BC after originally attempting to leave, continued to participate in planning, only to undermine the best interests of the conference and then to leave within a matter of months. Miami drove internal strife within the conference for years and then secretly went behind the backs of their colleagues to strike a deal with the ACC. Virginia Tech joined in a law suit against the ACC, only to bail and join the ACC at the first opportunity. Syracuse attempted to leave at the same time, only to leave 10 years later. West Virginia publicly lobbied for the demise of the conference for a year before high tailing it for the Big XII.
All of these members had the opportunity to lead a move to form a new all sports conference any time they wanted if they truly believed in an Eastern all sports conference. In the aftermath of the ACC raid in 2003, they considered it but then rejected the idea, replacing it with the prenup. In 2010 when the conditions for the prenup had been met, they once again had the opportunity to initiate a split and for a conference independent of the hybrid about which they had complained for years. Once again they eschewed the option. Then they all proceeded to strike their own deals with other conferences like rats abandoning a sinking ship - after they had just chewed the holes in the vessel that were causing it to take on water in the first place.
We can point the finger of blame at various commissioners all we want, but we have met the enemy and he is us.
If there was a suit to be filed, why should anyone sue The BEast or its commissioner? How do we know whether or not Pitt was advised by ESPiN, after they gave us a lowball offer, to turn down the deal, knowing that they'd later be picked up by the ACC. After all, BC leaked the fact that ESPiN was advising the ACC on who to pick from The BEast. Could they not have leaked any future plans to Pitt, who was handling the TV negotiations for The BEast, in advance of any movement? It wouldn't be the first backroom deal that led to a very few getting paid, while the rest get fleeced...
If anyone was to sue, wouldn't ESPiN make the better target. They were a part of both deals, and they most surely knew the outcome prior to the fact of its happening. After all, they were the advisers in both deals, and they would be the ones most likely to set things up so that it came out most favorable to themselves...
Now ESPiN has the programs they want in the ACC, and ESPiN has all of the ACC's TV rights. The Catholic schools in the most populated areas are all together, under ESPiN's banner. The football schools that weren't as desirable to the network are getting less than a pittance from ESPiN, who still owns their TV rights at present...
If there is any more movement of football schools, the remaining football schools may not get even that small amount begrudged. I doubt ESPiN cares either way, since the schools they really wanted are all in the ACC now, and the ACC is locked up for quite some time...
I thought the C7 went with Fox?
We did.
The main point of Bit's post was about Network control behind the scenes and that is accurate. The same applies to Fox. The C7's contract holder is relevant but not germane to the point he made.
So I forgot about FOX getting the rights to the Catholic schools. It happens...
