CSNbbs

That's thanks to the new grant-of-rights agreement that pumped the brakes on realignment, basically locks in the current members and Louisville until 2027, and ''publicly secured our position as one of the nation's premier conferences,'' Swofford said.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/acc-swoffor...ncaaf.html

(07-21-2013 06:42 PM)CivilEng Wrote: [ -> ]That's thanks to the new grant-of-rights agreement that pumped the brakes on realignment, basically locks in the current members and Louisville until 2027, and ''publicly secured our position as one of the nation's premier conferences,'' Swofford said.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/acc-swoffor...ncaaf.html

Well, there's still the possibility of the B12 wanting to get a championship game; BYU and Cincinnati maybe? And then the trickle down from that. But at least publicly they are happy at 10 members.

how far out is the 'foreseeable future' - six months? a year?

(07-21-2013 06:47 PM)Chappy Wrote: [ -> ]Well, there's still the possibility of the B12 wanting to get a championship game; BYU and Cincinnati maybe? And then the trickle down from that. But at least publicly they are happy at 10 members.

If they wanted those schools they would already have had those schools.

The only way things change are if the Big XII expands and takes from the AAC. If only one is taken from the AAC, I think UMass will be added. If two are taken, one from CUSA will probably be taken and CUSA would probably taken one from the SBC.

Movement would be pretty minimal. We won't be seeing any massive conference shakeups for 10+ years.

I think we'll see a split between P5 and G5 before we see any massive changes in conference membership.

While this locks some stuff down.... it is far from over.

(07-21-2013 07:04 PM)StillJonesing Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-21-2013 06:47 PM)Chappy Wrote: [ -> ]Well, there's still the possibility of the B12 wanting to get a championship game; BYU and Cincinnati maybe? And then the trickle down from that. But at least publicly they are happy at 10 members.

If they wanted those schools they would already have had those schools.

Thank you Nostra-idiot. ...decided to pull that out of your arse w/o any factual data, eh? Like anybody really knows....still laughing....

(07-21-2013 07:05 PM)Niner National Wrote: [ -> ]The only way things change are if the Big XII expands and takes from the AAC. If only one is taken from the AAC, I think UMass will be added. If two are taken, one from CUSA will probably be taken and CUSA would probably taken one from the SBC.

Movement would be pretty minimal. We won't be seeing any massive conference shakeups for 10+ years.

I think we'll see a split between P5 and G5 before we see any massive changes in conference membership.

I think there are several other options without taking from the SBC. Is anyone over there left? We do not really need another in Texas or the gulf states. I think the schools with the most potential are TXST and USA. Neither one will help with this.

Outside of the belt there is MO State, JMU, an A10 team starting football? Any other ideas? Can we hold at 13 for a while until we decide who is growing the best? Maybe another team is plucked up and we are down to an even 12.

Yes, by that logic the ACC would still have 12 because hey, if they had wanted Pitt and Syracuse they could have taken them years ago.

(07-21-2013 07:36 PM)stinkfist Wrote: [ -> ]Thank you Nostra-idiot. ...decided to pull that out of your arse w/o any factual data, eh? Like anybody really knows....still laughing....

Laugh away, but I laugh at the same people that say with certainty that UConn and Cincy will be gone before long and speak like it is forgone conclusion. It's fairly obvious if they wanted UConn or Cincy at any point in the last two years they would already be in the Big 12. There was plenty of opportunity to add teams, even Louisville, and they wanted no part of any of them.

This when Cincy and Louisville were all fresh off BCS bowls and UConn just won a national championship in hoops. It's not even like you can say when they get successful they will be gone or something because they have been successful.

Texas runs that conference and it's pretty much has no desire to play in New England or share money with some relative weakings while they prop the Big 12 up. Them taking Oklahoma and going to the Pac 12 seems more realistic turn of event at this point than aligning with UConn or Cincy, and that's just about as unlikey to happen as well. Realignment looks done for a while.

(07-21-2013 09:03 PM)Chappy Wrote: [ -> ]Yes, by that logic the ACC would still have 12 because hey, if they had wanted Pitt and Syracuse they could have taken them years ago.

The ACC took them defensively because at the time they didn't have a Grant of Rights agreement and both the SEC and Big 10 were looking at poaching teams. That's protected against for 15 years now. The Big 12 kingpins that had options have already looked at those options extensively and settled into what they got. If they had wanted to leave they could and would have. If they had wanted to expand they could and would have. The rest of the schools no one else wants so that league looks secure for the foreseeable future as well with the TV they got that pays as much as the elite conferences. It's not like they have anyone breathing down their neck trying to rip their conference apart at this point like the ACC had.

The premise that a grant of rights has delivered stability could only be written by a non-lawyer or person not familiar with the negotiation of media rights.

A grant is reasonably easy to breach with the issue being damages. Now if a GOR league member were to go join a conference with say an NBC or CBS contract the issue of damages could be bloody as ESPN would likely declare the loss of the team significant and demand a significant reduction. If it is to go to an ESPN tied league they may deem the loss trivial demand no change and there are no damages on the TV side.

There is a likelihood of stability because every conference in the P5 except the Big 10 has media right deals extending 10 or more years. The Big 10 has made recent changes and unless they feel the need to make added changes for the 2017 contract they aren't likely to act.

The Big XII has a long-term deal and unless they believe a title game would produce a productive rights fee and productive re-negotiation, they have no economic incentive to expand.

Within the G5 a number of contracts expire in 2016. So if there is any thought of moving from survival mode to enhancement ahead of those deals, it happens in the next 24 months or so.