Also it's pretty funny that you keep making threads baiting or flat out bashing members who are leaving and then have the balls to create a thread and say that defectors can't post in it. Goes both ways doesn't it?
(03-07-2013 09:45 PM)ODUgradstudent Wrote: I don't think that the new adds can really argue. If they were to try and make the case to get their money back for admission into the BE then fine, that's a legitimate argument but they haven't added to the BE name and don't deserve the money for sale of it.
What the newies are saying that they were told each would receive between $6-8 million per season to join BE; therefore, they should be covered for its lost, too. The three old schools really do not have a choice but to settle because without 8 newies where will Uconn, Cinn, and USF go........ either join new conference or a lower level conference. If three dissolve conference the monies go away to nobody....maybe NCAA. Newies believe old three should get more ($15-20 million each) with other monies as well as their $45-60 million being divided up over the 5 year tv contract with an additional $130 million from espn. It is still hard to believe c7 wanted the name BE so bad to give up $100 million to new conference but c7 did get a great tv contract, to. Anyway, it will all be settle because newies of 8 (NCAA required number) could form its own conference so both groups need each other and if three leave early they will lose monies as monies will be issued over a five year period. It is estimated each school should receive $3-4 million per five year contract. The hope is in five years the new conference will have proved its worth for bigger tv contract. Again, why so much negative as it is not a school who would not want to 3x its monies and probably have wrote letters to apply.
I think that's a valid point, but UConn and UC really make that conference. I don't think those three running off like children to MAC or C-USA (which they could do in a heartbeat, using the ACC 'the other option' is rather unlikely in the very near future) is at all likely or in the minds of the ADs, but it means that they do not really need the new members. If they were being fair then of course the money would be spread. They should be nice to their new friends, but I don't think that they have to be.
That said, if ODU were in the A-12 then I'd think my argument complete nonsense.
A few days ago a couple of posters here asked when our AD would speak about the status of the new conference. Looks like we got the answer.
I understand the reason for the stance, because the conference that exists isn't the conference that Memphis joined. However, I'm just not understanding any legal basis for any "demands", if that's what's being done. We didn't do anything to "earn" any of the exit fees/BB credits from the programs that are leaving.
I can guarantee you Cincy isn't the only school who has talked to the ACC. If the ACC gets raided again, it won't be just two teams. If the B1G strikes again and takes two, the SEC and Big 12 (remember when they were on their death bed 18 months ago?) will follow suit. The ACC will end up being a conglomerate of the old BE, ACC and NBE.
A few days ago a couple of posters here asked when our AD would speak about the status of the new conference. Looks like we got the answer.
I understand the reason for the stance, because the conference that exists isn't the conference that Memphis joined. However, I'm just not understanding any legal basis for any "demands", if that's what's being done. We didn't do anything to "earn" any of the exit fees/BB credits from the programs that are leaving.
It will be interesting to see how this plays out.
You are correct that the new teams did not earn or create that pot of money. What you have are the Presidents and AD's of the schools that joined a house of cards trying to save face with this demand. It really is a no brainer to make the demand. That said, fat chance of it working in my opinion.
A few days ago a couple of posters here asked when our AD would speak about the status of the new conference. Looks like we got the answer.
I understand the reason for the stance, because the conference that exists isn't the conference that Memphis joined. However, I'm just not understanding any legal basis for any "demands", if that's what's being done. We didn't do anything to "earn" any of the exit fees/BB credits from the programs that are leaving.
It will be interesting to see how this plays out.
You are correct that the new teams did not earn or create that pot of money. What you have are the Presidents and AD's of the schools that joined a house of cards trying to save face with this demand. It really is a no brainer to make the demand. That said, fat chance of it working in my opinion.
(03-07-2013 09:45 PM)ODUgradstudent Wrote: I don't think that the new adds can really argue. If they were to try and make the case to get their money back for admission into the BE then fine, that's a legitimate argument but they haven't added to the BE name and don't deserve the money for sale of it.
What the newies are saying that they were told each would receive between $6-8 million per season to join BE; therefore, they should be covered for its lost, too. The three old schools really do not have a choice but to settle because without 8 newies where will Uconn, Cinn, and USF go........ either join new conference or a lower level conference. If three dissolve conference the monies go away to nobody....maybe NCAA. Newies believe old three should get more ($15-20 million each) with other monies as well as their $45-60 million being divided up over the 5 year tv contract with an additional $130 million from espn. It is still hard to believe c7 wanted the name BE so bad to give up $100 million to new conference but c7 did get a great tv contract, to. Anyway, it will all be settle because newies of 8 (NCAA required number) could form its own conference so both groups need each other and if three leave early they will lose monies as monies will be issued over a five year period. It is estimated each school should receive $3-4 million per five year contract. The hope is in five years the new conference will have proved its worth for bigger tv contract. Again, why so much negative as it is not a school who would not want to 3x its monies and probably have wrote letters to apply.
I think that's a valid point, but UConn and UC really make that conference. I don't think those three running off like children to MAC or C-USA (which they could do in a heartbeat, using the ACC 'the other option' is rather unlikely in the very near future) is at all likely or in the minds of the ADs, but it means that they do not really need the new members. If they were being fair then of course the money would be spread. They should be nice to their new friends, but I don't think that they have to be.
That said, if ODU were in the A-12 then I'd think my argument complete nonsense.
Hell, at the rate we're going ODU might wind up in the A12 or whatever it will be called.
A few days ago a couple of posters here asked when our AD would speak about the status of the new conference. Looks like we got the answer.
I understand the reason for the stance, because the conference that exists isn't the conference that Memphis joined. However, I'm just not understanding any legal basis for any "demands", if that's what's being done. We didn't do anything to "earn" any of the exit fees/BB credits from the programs that are leaving.
It will be interesting to see how this plays out.
You are correct that the new teams did not earn or create that pot of money. What you have are the Presidents and AD's of the schools that joined a house of cards trying to save face with this demand. It really is a no brainer to make the demand. That said, fat chance of it working in my opinion.
Ok but in the case of Memphis for example they are leaving behind a bunch of money in basketball credits. Everyone is giving up some amount of money even if it is just exit and entrance fees. So the new members are absolutely entitled to some compensation for the loss of the name which negatively affects our future.
I think everyone outside of ECU and Tulane would have to spend more money to not join that conference at this point. So essentially these teams invited the C-USA schools and had them sign a contract to join a conference, then sold off a bunch of the assets between the time they signed and when they start participation. No one is arguing that the new teams deserve compensation. There are just now ongoing negotiations about how much that is.
(03-07-2013 10:40 PM)TheEastisPurple Wrote: Why is this a C-USA issue?
Everyone likes to see a good train wreck and this has all the aspects of one. I believe that this will all work out in the end, but it looks ugly right now. Nothing changes in the BE, something like this has been brewing almost since its inception and it's reaching its ultimate boiling point.
(03-07-2013 09:45 PM)ODUgradstudent Wrote: I don't think that the new adds can really argue. If they were to try and make the case to get their money back for admission into the BE then fine, that's a legitimate argument but they haven't added to the BE name and don't deserve the money for sale of it.
What the newies are saying that they were told each would receive between $6-8 million per season to join BE; therefore, they should be covered for its lost, too. The three old schools really do not have a choice but to settle because without 8 newies where will Uconn, Cinn, and USF go........ either join new conference or a lower level conference. If three dissolve conference the monies go away to nobody....maybe NCAA. Newies believe old three should get more ($15-20 million each) with other monies as well as their $45-60 million being divided up over the 5 year tv contract with an additional $130 million from espn. It is still hard to believe c7 wanted the name BE so bad to give up $100 million to new conference but c7 did get a great tv contract, to. Anyway, it will all be settle because newies of 8 (NCAA required number) could form its own conference so both groups need each other and if three leave early they will lose monies as monies will be issued over a five year period. It is estimated each school should receive $3-4 million per five year contract. The hope is in five years the new conference will have proved its worth for bigger tv contract. Again, why so much negative as it is not a school who would not want to 3x its monies and probably have wrote letters to apply.
I think that's a valid point, but UConn and UC really make that conference. I don't think those three running off like children to MAC or C-USA (which they could do in a heartbeat, using the ACC 'the other option' is rather unlikely in the very near future) is at all likely or in the minds of the ADs, but it means that they do not really need the new members. If they were being fair then of course the money would be spread. They should be nice to their new friends, but I don't think that they have to be.
That said, if ODU were in the A-12 then I'd think my argument complete nonsense.
Hell, at the rate we're going ODU might wind up in the A12 or whatever it will be called.
Without UC and UConn, I really don't think that there's much between the two conferences. I'm really excited for C-USA; Mid Tenn, USM and others could blow up and be great. It all depends on how the next few years go, a few good recruiting classes and C-USA could perhaps have one or two ranked teams. However, the same could be said for the A-12 and I know what conference I'd rather be in right now (ignoring entry/exit fees, who the hell knows what they would be?) and it's the one with the better FL and NC teams, but that's because I'm East Coast.
A few days ago a couple of posters here asked when our AD would speak about the status of the new conference. Looks like we got the answer.
I understand the reason for the stance, because the conference that exists isn't the conference that Memphis joined. However, I'm just not understanding any legal basis for any "demands", if that's what's being done. We didn't do anything to "earn" any of the exit fees/BB credits from the programs that are leaving.
It will be interesting to see how this plays out.
You are correct that the new teams did not earn or create that pot of money. What you have are the Presidents and AD's of the schools that joined a house of cards trying to save face with this demand. It really is a no brainer to make the demand. That said, fat chance of it working in my opinion.
Ok but in the case of Memphis for example they are leaving behind a bunch of money in basketball credits. Everyone is giving up some amount of money even if it is just exit and entrance fees. So the new members are absolutely entitled to some compensation for the loss of the name which negatively affects our future.
I think everyone outside of ECU and Tulane would have to spend more money to not join that conference at this point. So essentially these teams invited the C-USA schools and had them sign a contract to join a conference, then sold off a bunch of the assets between the time they signed and when they start participation. No one is arguing that the new teams deserve compensation. There are just now ongoing negotiations about how much that is.
Why is this a C-USA issue?
Lets say you went out and bought a house five years ago that appraised for $400,000 and you felt that money was worth it for the house based on the the quality of the new neighborhood over your present home's neighborhood, even though the house itself wasn't that much of an improvement.
Then the housing bubble bursts and you are stuck with a $300,000 house you paid $400,000 for. Do you think you can ask the person that sold you that house for the difference? Or better yet, do you think you should ask the owners that were in the neighborhood when you bought the house for the difference?
No, it was a bad decision and decisions have consequences. At the time you bought the house it looked like a wise decision, but you know what, s#$t happens. You bite the bullet, take your loss and move on.
(This post was last modified: 03-07-2013 10:54 PM by EagleRockCafe.)
A few days ago a couple of posters here asked when our AD would speak about the status of the new conference. Looks like we got the answer.
I understand the reason for the stance, because the conference that exists isn't the conference that Memphis joined. However, I'm just not understanding any legal basis for any "demands", if that's what's being done. We didn't do anything to "earn" any of the exit fees/BB credits from the programs that are leaving.
It will be interesting to see how this plays out.
You are correct that the new teams did not earn or create that pot of money. What you have are the Presidents and AD's of the schools that joined a house of cards trying to save face with this demand. It really is a no brainer to make the demand. That said, fat chance of it working in my opinion.
A few days ago a couple of posters here asked when our AD would speak about the status of the new conference. Looks like we got the answer.
I understand the reason for the stance, because the conference that exists isn't the conference that Memphis joined. However, I'm just not understanding any legal basis for any "demands", if that's what's being done. We didn't do anything to "earn" any of the exit fees/BB credits from the programs that are leaving.
It will be interesting to see how this plays out.
You are correct that the new teams did not earn or create that pot of money. What you have are the Presidents and AD's of the schools that joined a house of cards trying to save face with this demand. It really is a no brainer to make the demand. That said, fat chance of it working in my opinion.
Ok but in the case of Memphis for example they are leaving behind a bunch of money in basketball credits. Everyone is giving up some amount of money even if it is just exit and entrance fees. So the new members are absolutely entitled to some compensation for the loss of the name which negatively affects our future.
I think everyone outside of ECU and Tulane would have to spend more money to not join that conference at this point. So essentially these teams invited the C-USA schools and had them sign a contract to join a conference, then sold off a bunch of the assets between the time they signed and when they start participation. No one is arguing that the new teams deserve compensation. There are just now ongoing negotiations about how much that is.
Why is this a C-USA issue?
Lets say you went out and bought a house five years ago that appraised for $400,000 and you felt that money was worth it for the house based on the the quality of the new neighborhood over your present home's neighborhood, even though the house itself wasn't that much of an improvement.
Then the housing bubble bursts and you are stuck with a $300,000 house you paid $400,000 for. Do you think you can ask the person that sold you that house for the difference? Or better yet, do you think you should ask the owners that were in the neighborhood when you bought the house for the difference?
No, it was a bad decision and decisions have consequences. At the time you bought the house it looked like a wise decision, but you know what, s#$t happens. You bite the bullet, take your loss and move on.
That's not a good analogy though because the previous owners didn't do anything to depreciate the value between signing the contract and turning over the keys. A better analogy would be if someone sold you a house and then after you signed tore out all the copper wire and water pipes and sold them and kept the money and expected you pay what you agreed in the contract. That doesn't make any sense and would never stand up in court. The argument isn't that the market wasn't what was expected an the TV contract is less. The argument is that the 3 remaining schools sold off part of the value of the league that was what the 6 schools agreed to join and are now trying to keep as much of that money as possible.
Like I said everyone involved agrees that the new schools deserve compensation, they are just deciding what the number will be.
(This post was last modified: 03-07-2013 11:02 PM by TheEastisPurple.)
A few days ago a couple of posters here asked when our AD would speak about the status of the new conference. Looks like we got the answer.
I understand the reason for the stance, because the conference that exists isn't the conference that Memphis joined. However, I'm just not understanding any legal basis for any "demands", if that's what's being done. We didn't do anything to "earn" any of the exit fees/BB credits from the programs that are leaving.
It will be interesting to see how this plays out.
You are correct that the new teams did not earn or create that pot of money. What you have are the Presidents and AD's of the schools that joined a house of cards trying to save face with this demand. It really is a no brainer to make the demand. That said, fat chance of it working in my opinion.
Ok but in the case of Memphis for example they are leaving behind a bunch of money in basketball credits. Everyone is giving up some amount of money even if it is just exit and entrance fees. So the new members are absolutely entitled to some compensation for the loss of the name which negatively affects our future.
I think everyone outside of ECU and Tulane would have to spend more money to not join that conference at this point. So essentially these teams invited the C-USA schools and had them sign a contract to join a conference, then sold off a bunch of the assets between the time they signed and when they start participation. No one is arguing that the new teams deserve compensation. There are just now ongoing negotiations about how much that is.
Why is this a C-USA issue?
Lets say you went out and bought a house five years ago that appraised for $400,000 and you felt that money was worth it for the house based on the the quality of the new neighborhood over your present home's neighborhood, even though the house itself wasn't that much of an improvement.
Then the housing bubble bursts and you are stuck with a $300,000 house you paid $400,000 for. Do you think you can ask the person that sold you that house for the difference? Or better yet, do you think you should ask the owners that were in the neighborhood when you bought the house for the difference?
No, it was a bad decision and decisions have consequences. At the time you bought the house it looked like a wise decision, but you know what, s#$t happens. You bite the bullet, take your loss and move on.
Great analogy...ask the people in Vegas how they feel...flipped upside down they are....me thinks they call it greed...maybe the n?e will look for a government bail-out....spot on sir.
A few days ago a couple of posters here asked when our AD would speak about the status of the new conference. Looks like we got the answer.
I understand the reason for the stance, because the conference that exists isn't the conference that Memphis joined. However, I'm just not understanding any legal basis for any "demands", if that's what's being done. We didn't do anything to "earn" any of the exit fees/BB credits from the programs that are leaving.
It will be interesting to see how this plays out.
You are correct that the new teams did not earn or create that pot of money. What you have are the Presidents and AD's of the schools that joined a house of cards trying to save face with this demand. It really is a no brainer to make the demand. That said, fat chance of it working in my opinion.
Ok but in the case of Memphis for example they are leaving behind a bunch of money in basketball credits. Everyone is giving up some amount of money even if it is just exit and entrance fees. So the new members are absolutely entitled to some compensation for the loss of the name which negatively affects our future.
I think everyone outside of ECU and Tulane would have to spend more money to not join that conference at this point. So essentially these teams invited the C-USA schools and had them sign a contract to join a conference, then sold off a bunch of the assets between the time they signed and when they start participation. No one is arguing that the new teams deserve compensation. There are just now ongoing negotiations about how much that is.
Why is this a C-USA issue?
Lets say you went out and bought a house five years ago that appraised for $400,000 and you felt that money was worth it for the house based on the the quality of the new neighborhood over your present home's neighborhood, even though the house itself wasn't that much of an improvement.
Then the housing bubble bursts and you are stuck with a $300,000 house you paid $400,000 for. Do you think you can ask the person that sold you that house for the difference? Or better yet, do you think you should ask the owners that were in the neighborhood when you bought the house for the difference?
No, it was a bad decision and decisions have consequences. At the time you bought the house it looked like a wise decision, but you know what, s#$t happens. You bite the bullet, take your loss and move on.
That's not a good analogy though because the previous owners didn't do anything to depreciate the value between signing the contract and turning over the keys. A better analogy would be if someone sold you a house and then after you signed tore out all the copper wire and water pipes and sold them and kept the money and expected you pay what you agreed in the contract. That doesn't make any sense and would never stand up in court.
Like I said everyone involved agrees that the new schools deserve compensation, they are just deciding what the number will be.
If USM had made the decision to buy into the Big East and we were in your position, I would be butthurt also and want more of that money. Fact is, it isn't your money. It is the 3 schools that are left money. Now if they out of the goodness of their heart want to give you more, then that is their call. I just don't see it happening.
(03-07-2013 09:45 PM)ODUgradstudent Wrote: I don't think that the new adds can really argue. If they were to try and make the case to get their money back for admission into the BE then fine, that's a legitimate argument but they haven't added to the BE name and don't deserve the money for sale of it.
What the newies are saying that they were told each would receive between $6-8 million per season to join BE; therefore, they should be covered for its lost, too. The three old schools really do not have a choice but to settle because without 8 newies where will Uconn, Cinn, and USF go........ either join new conference or a lower level conference. If three dissolve conference the monies go away to nobody....maybe NCAA. Newies believe old three should get more ($15-20 million each) with other monies as well as their $45-60 million being divided up over the 5 year tv contract with an additional $130 million from espn. It is still hard to believe c7 wanted the name BE so bad to give up $100 million to new conference but c7 did get a great tv contract, to. Anyway, it will all be settle because newies of 8 (NCAA required number) could form its own conference so both groups need each other and if three leave early they will lose monies as monies will be issued over a five year period. It is estimated each school should receive $3-4 million per five year contract. The hope is in five years the new conference will have proved its worth for bigger tv contract. Again, why so much negative as it is not a school who would not want to 3x its monies and probably have wrote letters to apply.
I think that's a valid point, but UConn and UC really make that conference. I don't think those three running off like children to MAC or C-USA (which they could do in a heartbeat, using the ACC 'the other option' is rather unlikely in the very near future) is at all likely or in the minds of the ADs, but it means that they do not really need the new members. If they were being fair then of course the money would be spread. They should be nice to their new friends, but I don't think that they have to be.
That said, if ODU were in the A-12 then I'd think my argument complete nonsense.
Hell, at the rate we're going ODU might wind up in the A12 or whatever it will be called.
Without UC and UConn, I really don't think that there's much between the two conferences. I'm really excited for C-USA; Mid Tenn, USM and others could blow up and be great. It all depends on how the next few years go, a few good recruiting classes and C-USA could perhaps have one or two ranked teams. However, the same could be said for the A-12 and I know what conference I'd rather be in right now (ignoring entry/exit fees, who the hell knows what they would be?) and it's the one with the better FL and NC teams, but that's because I'm East Coast.
Again, until July 1 ODU is a guest and should show respect to those schools who voted ODU into Cusa. You may not know (history lesson) but once Tulsa, ECU, and Tulane leaves there will be but one team (USM) whom have won a Cusa football title.........so yes the better football teams will be leaving except USM. Only time will tell but based on tv markets I can see ODU and UNCC (if they can play successfullly at higher level) being top replacements when Acc picks nBE. (Haters......its only an opinion)
A few days ago a couple of posters here asked when our AD would speak about the status of the new conference. Looks like we got the answer.
I understand the reason for the stance, because the conference that exists isn't the conference that Memphis joined. However, I'm just not understanding any legal basis for any "demands", if that's what's being done. We didn't do anything to "earn" any of the exit fees/BB credits from the programs that are leaving.
It will be interesting to see how this plays out.
You are correct that the new teams did not earn or create that pot of money. What you have are the Presidents and AD's of the schools that joined a house of cards trying to save face with this demand. It really is a no brainer to make the demand. That said, fat chance of it working in my opinion.
Ok but in the case of Memphis for example they are leaving behind a bunch of money in basketball credits. Everyone is giving up some amount of money even if it is just exit and entrance fees. So the new members are absolutely entitled to some compensation for the loss of the name which negatively affects our future.
I think everyone outside of ECU and Tulane would have to spend more money to not join that conference at this point. So essentially these teams invited the C-USA schools and had them sign a contract to join a conference, then sold off a bunch of the assets between the time they signed and when they start participation. No one is arguing that the new teams deserve compensation. There are just now ongoing negotiations about how much that is.
Why is this a C-USA issue?
Lets say you went out and bought a house five years ago that appraised for $400,000 and you felt that money was worth it for the house based on the the quality of the new neighborhood over your present home's neighborhood, even though the house itself wasn't that much of an improvement.
Then the housing bubble bursts and you are stuck with a $300,000 house you paid $400,000 for. Do you think you can ask the person that sold you that house for the difference? Or better yet, do you think you should ask the owners that were in the neighborhood when you bought the house for the difference?
No, it was a bad decision and decisions have consequences. At the time you bought the house it looked like a wise decision, but you know what, s#$t happens. You bite the bullet, take your loss and move on.
That's not a good analogy though because the previous owners didn't do anything to depreciate the value between signing the contract and turning over the keys. A better analogy would be if someone sold you a house and then after you signed tore out all the copper wire and water pipes and sold them and kept the money and expected you pay what you agreed in the contract. That doesn't make any sense and would never stand up in court. The argument isn't that the market wasn't what was expected an the TV contract is less. The argument is that the 3 remaining schools sold off part of the value of the league that was what the 6 schools agreed to join and are now trying to keep as much of that money as possible.
Like I said everyone involved agrees that the new schools deserve compensation, they are just deciding what the number will be.
I expect this to be worked out, but it sure does make interesting reading/discussion in the meantime.
(03-07-2013 10:30 PM)EagleRockCafe Wrote: You are correct that the new teams did not earn or create that pot of money. What you have are the Presidents and AD's of the schools that joined a house of cards trying to save face with this demand. It really is a no brainer to make the demand. That said, fat chance of it working in my opinion.
Ok but in the case of Memphis for example they are leaving behind a bunch of money in basketball credits. Everyone is giving up some amount of money even if it is just exit and entrance fees. So the new members are absolutely entitled to some compensation for the loss of the name which negatively affects our future.
I think everyone outside of ECU and Tulane would have to spend more money to not join that conference at this point. So essentially these teams invited the C-USA schools and had them sign a contract to join a conference, then sold off a bunch of the assets between the time they signed and when they start participation. No one is arguing that the new teams deserve compensation. There are just now ongoing negotiations about how much that is.
Why is this a C-USA issue?
Lets say you went out and bought a house five years ago that appraised for $400,000 and you felt that money was worth it for the house based on the the quality of the new neighborhood over your present home's neighborhood, even though the house itself wasn't that much of an improvement.
Then the housing bubble bursts and you are stuck with a $300,000 house you paid $400,000 for. Do you think you can ask the person that sold you that house for the difference? Or better yet, do you think you should ask the owners that were in the neighborhood when you bought the house for the difference?
No, it was a bad decision and decisions have consequences. At the time you bought the house it looked like a wise decision, but you know what, s#$t happens. You bite the bullet, take your loss and move on.
That's not a good analogy though because the previous owners didn't do anything to depreciate the value between signing the contract and turning over the keys. A better analogy would be if someone sold you a house and then after you signed tore out all the copper wire and water pipes and sold them and kept the money and expected you pay what you agreed in the contract. That doesn't make any sense and would never stand up in court.
Like I said everyone involved agrees that the new schools deserve compensation, they are just deciding what the number will be.
If USM had made the decision to buy into the Big East and we were in your position, I would be butthurt also and want more of that money. Fact is, it isn't your money. It is the 3 schools that are left money. Now if they out of the goodness of their heart want to give you more, then that is their call. I just don't see it happening.
Some of it already is our money they are just deciding how much. I don't get what is hard for people to understand about this. Obviously the 3 remaining schools have incurred more of a loss but all 10 teams incurred some loss from the selling of assets. The new schools are arguing that the current split isn't congruent with what each entity lost. It will be determined one way or the other.
