(10-10-2026 10:33 AM)The Beaver Wrote:  

(10-10-2026 10:23 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(10-10-2026 09:07 AM)The Beaver Wrote:  

(10-10-2026 08:51 AM)Dr Dawgma III Wrote:  

(10-10-2026 08:48 AM)The Beaver Wrote:  I'm not arguing for equity across the board. I'm arguing that teams be allowed to move between conferences, should the conferences have them. The four teams trying to kill this obviously have a long-term future in either the SEC or Big Ten but the PCSA wants them to be permanently anchored to a bunch of non-performers in the ACC for the specific purpose of giving their hard earned money to a group of poorer programs with smaller fan bases.

We’re talking in circles here.

20 team cap = 6 spots total in B1G / SEC

6 > 4

Hence, where is the permanence?

The Big Ten is likely reserving a spot for Notre Dame and thus won't go beyond 19. And also might not want to be at 19 since it makes for a messy schedule so might stay at 18. And then the SEC might prefer Virginia to Clemson, Miami or both, leaving some stranded. They're the 4 schools publicly fighting this but I don't think they're the four most desired schools in the ACC, at least not from a Big Ten perspective.

Doubtful.
The Big Ten most likely would settle for a scheduling arrangement with Notre Dame similar to what they currently have with the ACC.
I would think three to perhaps 4 games per year.

The Big Ten already plays 3 Notre Dame games a year without giving up anything (or will once the USC series resumes.) What do we get in that deal? Maybe an extra half football game a year. What do we give up? A full basketball share to a team which isn't particularly good at basketball, plus a share of BTN revenue to their equally mediocre non-revs plus letting them have a vote in conference meetings when 18 is already unwieldy and makes UC difficult. The math only mathed there for the ACC because they were playing so few ND games prior to the deal.

Realistically, when discussing a possible ND/Big Ten football scheduling deal, you are talking 2-4 football games every year, nothing more or less.

ND would keep the ACC arrangement, with no exit fees or lawsuits. Just some more Big Ten games. Fox, CBS, and NBC would like that.

Check future ND schedules. After next year, it will include fewer Big Ten teams and more SEC teams.

https://fbschedules.com/ncaa/notre-dame/

If I am the SEC, I'm in no rush to add Clemson if there's a 20 school cap.

I'd definitely prefer UNC and Florida State, and I would likely prefer Miami and either Virginia Tech or UVA.

I'm not sure Clemson is even in my top 4. But even if they are, they're not in my top two.

So at that point, it's probably wise not to spend slot 19 or 20 on them just yet.

If 22 is the cap, I have no problem inviting Clemson. They'll make us money in the near future.

But long term, it's probably wise not to use a slot on them now if there's a 20 school cap.

(10-10-2026 10:41 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(10-10-2026 10:33 AM)The Beaver Wrote:  

(10-10-2026 10:23 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(10-10-2026 09:07 AM)The Beaver Wrote:  

(10-10-2026 08:51 AM)Dr Dawgma III Wrote:  We’re talking in circles here.

20 team cap = 6 spots total in B1G / SEC

6 > 4

Hence, where is the permanence?

The Big Ten is likely reserving a spot for Notre Dame and thus won't go beyond 19. And also might not want to be at 19 since it makes for a messy schedule so might stay at 18. And then the SEC might prefer Virginia to Clemson, Miami or both, leaving some stranded. They're the 4 schools publicly fighting this but I don't think they're the four most desired schools in the ACC, at least not from a Big Ten perspective.

Doubtful.
The Big Ten most likely would settle for a scheduling arrangement with Notre Dame similar to what they currently have with the ACC.
I would think three to perhaps 4 games per year.

The Big Ten already plays 3 Notre Dame games a year without giving up anything (or will once the USC series resumes.) What do we get in that deal? Maybe an extra half football game a year. What do we give up? A full basketball share to a team which isn't particularly good at basketball, plus a share of BTN revenue to their equally mediocre non-revs plus letting them have a vote in conference meetings when 18 is already unwieldy and makes UC difficult. The math only mathed there for the ACC because they were playing so few ND games prior to the deal.

Realistically, when discussing a possible ND/Big Ten football scheduling deal, you are talking 2-4 football games every year, nothing more or less.

ND would keep the ACC arrangement, with no exit fees or lawsuits. Just some more Big Ten games. Fox, CBS, and NBC would like that.

Check future ND schedules. After next year, it will include fewer Big Ten teams and more SEC teams.

https://fbschedules.com/ncaa/notre-dame/

The biggest omission is USC, once they return to the schedule it goes back to between 1 and 3 open slots a year, and that with Notre Dame still having games available to fill. If we're "just" talking football, which Xlance later specified, then just work your schedule out with the individual teams. There's no reason to get the conference involved (or, if its opt in, then you might be very disappointed with the opponent selection you end up with, think less OSU, PSU, USC and more Rutgers, Wisconsin, Washington.)

(10-10-2026 10:44 AM)Jhawkinva Wrote:  If I am the SEC, I'm in no rush to add Clemson if there's a 20 school cap.

I'd definitely prefer UNC and Florida State, and I would likely prefer Miami and either Virginia Tech or UVA.

I'm not sure Clemson is even in my top 4. But even if they are, they're not in my top two.

So at that point, it's probably wise not to spend slot 19 or 20 on them just yet.

If 22 is the cap, I have no problem inviting Clemson. They'll make us money in the near future.

But long term, it's probably wise not to use a slot on them now if there's a 20 school cap.

Outside of Notre Dame I don't think there are any automatic P2 if they want it slots.

Someone tried to argue with me the SEC was waiting for PCSA to be done before adding Clemson. I'd get it if they were waiting for the exit fee settlement for the ACC to finish but that has been done for quite some time now.

Wanting to strike down the sunset independence waiting period, go to 22 etc. doesn't even sound like something the B1G/SEC are open to. If they wanted to expand that badly they would have already set the cap at 24.

(10-09-2026 07:50 PM)The Beaver Wrote:  

(10-09-2026 05:51 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  

Gang of four vs Money & Power

What a bunch of sanctimonious poppycock. Everyone else has been able to move for the past 36 years (and, indeed, for the past 138 years,) but when these four schools want to make an extra 40 million dollars a year its somehow selfish? Ted Cruz wants to permanently cripple them by placing them in a bad conference that earns significantly less than their own programs would if placed among equals. They want the freedom to be with peer institutions. The "compromise" is to only cripple some of them? Given that they have the power, possibly, to delay enough to kill PCSA maybe the "compromise" should be that you give them what they want and they let the rest of your bill through. Especially since 205 is just a rider to protect Texas schools that you got to insert since you were writing the bill.

FWIW Cruz is no dummy, dummies don't clerk for Supreme Court justices.

Cruz is no dummy. But he is a not real problem for Gang of Four.

We all know who is behind this bill. Do you think Gang of Four want to play with fire? UNC and Clemson issued a statement to be safe.

We all thought the bill was dead and then the SEC and the B10 reversed their postion after one tweet.

(10-09-2026 07:50 PM)The Beaver Wrote:  What a bunch of sanctimonious poppycock. Everyone else has been able to move for the past 36 years (and, indeed, for the past 138 years,) but when these four schools want to make an extra 40 million dollars a year its somehow selfish? Ted Cruz wants to permanently cripple them by placing them in a bad conference that earns significantly less than their own programs would if placed among equals. They want the freedom to be with peer institutions. The "compromise" is to only cripple some of them? Given that they have the power, possibly, to delay enough to kill PCSA maybe the "compromise" should be that you give them what they want and they let the rest of your bill through. Especially since 205 is just a rider to protect Texas schools that you got to insert since you were writing the bill.

FWIW Cruz is no dummy, dummies don't clerk for Supreme Court justices.

There’s some performative bullying going on.

The university presidents responded promptly and framed their argument the right way. That’s how you handle these things.

House reps and their constituents know it’s important to solicit ideas from all concerned. One lobbying group does not own the copyright on all public discussion affecting education.

Good news for the Fab Four: their proposals have traction.

The reactive squawking is a tell. Obviously, some support exists. Their proposals have made a difference.

So far, so good. Keep running it up the gut.

This quartet of presidents displays some savvy. Notice the calibrated response.

Randy Levine, lobbyist, was the first to attack schools by name, aiming his froth at “Florida State and Miami” while ignoring the Carolinas.

Institutional heads stayed cool. The public response came from Clemson and UNC.

(10-09-2026 01:54 PM)schmolik Wrote:  North Carolina:


Clemson:

(10-10-2026 08:09 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  North Carolina:

Carolina teaching some folks how to approach delicate situations with class and dignity.

Meanwhile, in Tally:

(10-10-2026 10:54 PM)Dr Dawgma III Wrote:  

(10-10-2026 08:09 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  North Carolina:

Carolina teaching some folks how to approach delicate situations with class and dignity.

Meanwhile, in Tally:

Definitely getting the feeling that you guys are better with Daddy Belichick running the defense and little Belichick in timeout.

(10-11-2026 09:24 AM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  Definitely getting the feeling that you guys are better with Daddy Belichick running the defense and little Belichick in timeout.

Yes, Lil B had a bit of clout from Washington but def didn’t deliver on the field in Chapel Hill.

Just imagine if FSU leading the way get's ESPN to cave in to write a bigger check to the ACC so that everybody is happy, then FSU will be the hero.

(10-11-2026 09:24 AM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(10-10-2026 10:54 PM)Dr Dawgma III Wrote:  

(10-10-2026 08:09 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  North Carolina:

Carolina teaching some folks how to approach delicate situations with class and dignity.

Definitely getting the feeling that you guys are better with Daddy Belichick running the defense and little Belichick in timeout.

Very true re: class

As to little B, he's not in timeout, he is gone, gone, gone.

(10-10-2026 08:09 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  This quartet of presidents displays some savvy. Notice the calibrated response.

Randy Levine, lobbyist, was the first to attack schools by name, aiming his froth at “Florida State and Miami” while ignoring the Carolinas.

Institutional heads stayed cool. The public response came from Clemson and UNC.

(10-09-2026 01:54 PM)schmolik Wrote:  North Carolina:


Clemson:

It’s still hard to grasp the strategy of UNC and Clemson leaders. If they want PCSA to pass, then they need to be negotiating with US House authors on accommodations. Not sure how publicity helps find a compromise.

(10-11-2026 02:38 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

(10-10-2026 08:09 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  This quartet of presidents displays some savvy. Notice the calibrated response.

Randy Levine, lobbyist, was the first to attack schools by name, aiming his froth at “Florida State and Miami” while ignoring the Carolinas.

Institutional heads stayed cool. The public response came from Clemson and UNC.

(10-09-2026 01:54 PM)schmolik Wrote:  North Carolina:


Clemson:

It’s still hard to grasp the strategy of UNC and Clemson leaders. If they want PCSA to pass, then they need to be negotiating with US House authors on accommodations. Not sure how publicity helps find a compromise.

I thought they already are negotiating with Congress with Miami/Florida State about the increase of the cap to 22 and the elimination of the independence requirement. Once it's out in the public, why not make a public statement and make yourself look good?

(10-11-2026 02:38 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

(10-10-2026 08:09 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  This quartet of presidents displays some savvy. Notice the calibrated response.

Randy Levine, lobbyist, was the first to attack schools by name, aiming his froth at “Florida State and Miami” while ignoring the Carolinas.

Institutional heads stayed cool. The public response came from Clemson and UNC.

(10-09-2026 01:54 PM)schmolik Wrote:  North Carolina:


Clemson:

It’s still hard to grasp the strategy of UNC and Clemson leaders. If they want PCSA to pass, then they need to be negotiating with US House authors on accommodations. Not sure how publicity helps find a compromise.

But... they were. They sent a letter to congressional leaders asking that they pass PCSA with changes. Thats the start of the negotiations.

Alternate take: They're lying, would rather be in the SEC with athletes having employment status than in the ACC with employment status undecided but possibly eventually reclassified to employees anyway.

(10-11-2026 09:24 AM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(10-10-2026 10:54 PM)Dr Dawgma III Wrote:  

(10-10-2026 08:09 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  North Carolina:

Carolina teaching some folks how to approach delicate situations with class and dignity.

Meanwhile, in Tally:

Definitely getting the feeling that you guys are better with Daddy Belichick running the defense and little Belichick in timeout.

The thing is the youngest Belichick is making the majority of the defensive calls but I'm sure pops is involved

(10-11-2026 02:56 PM)mj4life Wrote:  

(10-11-2026 09:24 AM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(10-10-2026 10:54 PM)Dr Dawgma III Wrote:  

(10-10-2026 08:09 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  North Carolina:

Carolina teaching some folks how to approach delicate situations with class and dignity.

Meanwhile, in Tally:

Definitely getting the feeling that you guys are better with Daddy Belichick running the defense and little Belichick in timeout.

The thing is the youngest Belichick is making the majority of the defensive calls but I'm sure pops is involved

https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...-concludes

Not according to this story with a few weeks ago...

(10-11-2026 03:39 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(10-11-2026 02:56 PM)mj4life Wrote:  

(10-11-2026 09:24 AM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(10-10-2026 10:54 PM)Dr Dawgma III Wrote:  

(10-10-2026 08:09 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  North Carolina:

Carolina teaching some folks how to approach delicate situations with class and dignity.

Meanwhile, in Tally:

Definitely getting the feeling that you guys are better with Daddy Belichick running the defense and little Belichick in timeout.

The thing is the youngest Belichick is making the majority of the defensive calls but I'm sure pops is involved

https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...-concludes

Not according to this story with a few weeks ago...

On the same day sites like pro football talk & yahoo reported Brian as taking over play calling duties but didn't say whether he was getting promoted. Bob Diaco is believed to also have a hand in game planning but can't find any articles

(10-11-2026 02:38 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

(10-10-2026 08:09 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  This quartet of presidents displays some savvy. Notice the calibrated response.

Randy Levine, lobbyist, was the first to attack schools by name, aiming his froth at “Florida State and Miami” while ignoring the Carolinas.

Institutional heads stayed cool. The public response came from Clemson and UNC.

(10-09-2026 01:54 PM)schmolik Wrote:  North Carolina:


Clemson:

It’s still hard to grasp the strategy of UNC and Clemson leaders. If they want PCSA to pass, then they need to be negotiating with US House authors on accommodations. Not sure how publicity helps find a compromise.

The four were already negotiating with US House authors on accommodations. They still are.

Their proposal of a cap at 22 is already a compromise. As we saw, some reps were already wanting to cut that whole section from the bill. That idea remains on the table, too.

A public reply becomes necessary when a public accusation has been levelled. Preferably the reply makes the same or the next news cycle.

That is what the presidents did here. Message to Cody Campbell & Company: Get back to business, or we’ll see you and raise.

If the lobbyists are smart they will get back to business. Universities can outlast anybody.

(10-11-2026 05:36 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(10-11-2026 02:38 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

(10-10-2026 08:09 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  This quartet of presidents displays some savvy. Notice the calibrated response.

Randy Levine, lobbyist, was the first to attack schools by name, aiming his froth at “Florida State and Miami” while ignoring the Carolinas.

Institutional heads stayed cool. The public response came from Clemson and UNC.

(10-09-2026 01:54 PM)schmolik Wrote:  North Carolina:


Clemson:

It’s still hard to grasp the strategy of UNC and Clemson leaders. If they want PCSA to pass, then they need to be negotiating with US House authors on accommodations. Not sure how publicity helps find a compromise.

The four were already negotiating with US House authors on accommodations. They still are.

Their proposal of a cap at 22 is already a compromise. As we saw, some reps were already wanting to cut that whole section from the bill. That idea remains on the table, too.

A public reply becomes necessary when a public accusation has been levelled. Preferably the reply makes the same or the next news cycle.

That is what the presidents did here. Message to Cody Campbell & Company: Get back to business, or we’ll see you and raise.

If the lobbyists are smart they will get back to business. Universities can outlast anybody.

If the PCSA doesn’t pass exactly as written, theres a good chance that nothing is done for now and perhaps not for a very long time. As we have seen, a whole lot of entities have veto power, and it’s been very tough to get them all to agree on something they can live with. And while I’d be happier with a 22 cap and no independence requirement, I could live with what we have now. I think that’s where most of the relevant parties are today.