(08-06-2022 04:23 PM)GarnetAndBlue Wrote:  

(08-06-2022 09:01 AM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  

(08-05-2022 04:04 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(08-05-2022 01:54 PM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  

(08-05-2022 01:38 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  I was generally opposed to GoRs but also favored limits of conference sizes to 16 each maximum. My thinking has changed on that. Given that GoRs have become hand-in-hand with TV contracts, it is instrumental with negotiations.
Agree Quo, shorter-term GoRs may be the way to go.
The ACC’s GoR was defensively and punitively conceived and way, way too long in duration. At a minimum, their contract negotiations, while maintaining the base distribution, needed to have a window every 3 to 5 years, to discuss and pitch for revenue enhancements and other pertinent modifications sought.

The conferences would need leverage to get that. The ACC didn't have it.

The ACC GOR wasn't too long. It is what is saving the conference, or at least going to get schools accommodations. If the ACC GOR was up soon, it would have already crumbled. It was a win-win as far as the network and conference survival (delayed death) are concerned.

Particular schools may not like it, but the conference wisely sought security. The ACC was never going to compete with the coterminous P2s in revenue, so without GOR length, it was dead. It still could be, but at least schools will get some utility in it being killed off now.

The way I see it, "the conference" is just the schools that comprise it. So a conference surviving is not necessarily a good thing. It is imo bad if its continued existence is holding members back from doing better.

In 2016, we can assume all ACC schools thought the GOR was a good idea, because they all signed it.

Today, the ACC GOR is good for the low value schools with no place else of equal value to go. Bad for the schools that could go to the SEC or B1G.

So IMO if the question is, "is the ACC GOR too long?" The answer is yes for some schools, no for other schools.

That’s the basic essence of it all. FSU was opposed, and Maryland didn’t want it on their way out the door.
Swofford sold this to ACC members, that several now regret doing so.
Locked-in financial figures for a 20+ year or so period is a fiscal risk and such is not limited to inflationary costs. There’s no outlet to adjust in proportionality of what competitor conferences are negotiating and receiving during the contract duration.

interesting & ironic that the way-too-long-term-GoR may ultimately cause the destruction of the ACC due to it not being able to adapt/evolve during all of the ongoing changes.

I get what you're saying, but it is not the too-long-GOR that ultimately will cause the destruction.

Think, if the GOR was up in 2 years, would the ACC be better able to survive? I don't think so. It is the revenue and perception disparity causing the destruction- the same factors that led to the long GOR in the first place.

It hasn't been the long GOR that kept schools of value away. The ACC wasn't luring top SEC or BIG schools with a different GOR. The ACC couldn't pull in OUT or USC.

imo this era of realignment to a P2 is paying the price of 2010/11. Even Larry Scott knew the PAC needed to become less PAC back in 2010. When they failed in that attempt, the writing was on the wall- and this last decade of decline in PAC shows Scott was correct. With no PAC-Big 12 combo agreeable, and the ACC and Big 12 also not able to figure out which conference would poach the other, all 3 punted the problem down the road to the point any chance of a true P3 setup was missed.

time to collect on that stubbornness and conference pride.

(08-06-2022 05:37 PM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  

(08-06-2022 04:23 PM)GarnetAndBlue Wrote:  

(08-06-2022 09:01 AM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  

(08-05-2022 04:04 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(08-05-2022 01:54 PM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  The conferences would need leverage to get that. The ACC didn't have it.

The ACC GOR wasn't too long. It is what is saving the conference, or at least going to get schools accommodations. If the ACC GOR was up soon, it would have already crumbled. It was a win-win as far as the network and conference survival (delayed death) are concerned.

Particular schools may not like it, but the conference wisely sought security. The ACC was never going to compete with the coterminous P2s in revenue, so without GOR length, it was dead. It still could be, but at least schools will get some utility in it being killed off now.

The way I see it, "the conference" is just the schools that comprise it. So a conference surviving is not necessarily a good thing. It is imo bad if its continued existence is holding members back from doing better.

In 2016, we can assume all ACC schools thought the GOR was a good idea, because they all signed it.

Today, the ACC GOR is good for the low value schools with no place else of equal value to go. Bad for the schools that could go to the SEC or B1G.

So IMO if the question is, "is the ACC GOR too long?" The answer is yes for some schools, no for other schools.

That’s the basic essence of it all. FSU was opposed, and Maryland didn’t want it on their way out the door.
Swofford sold this to ACC members, that several now regret doing so.
Locked-in financial figures for a 20+ year or so period is a fiscal risk and such is not limited to inflationary costs. There’s no outlet to adjust in proportionality of what competitor conferences are negotiating and receiving during the contract duration.

interesting & ironic that the way-too-long-term-GoR may ultimately cause the destruction of the ACC due to it not being able to adapt/evolve during all of the ongoing changes.

I get what you're saying, but it is not the too-long-GOR that ultimately will cause the destruction.

Think, if the GOR was up in 2 years, would the ACC be better able to survive? I don't think so. It is the revenue and perception disparity causing the destruction- the same factors that led to the long GOR in the first place.

It hasn't been the long GOR that kept schools of value away. The ACC wasn't luring top SEC or BIG schools with a different GOR. The ACC couldn't pull in OUT or USC.

imo this era of realignment to a P2 is paying the price of 2010/11. Even Larry Scott knew the PAC needed to become less PAC back in 2010. When they failed in that attempt, the writing was on the wall- and this last decade of decline in PAC shows Scott was correct. With no PAC-Big 12 combo agreeable, and the ACC and Big 12 also not able to figure out which conference would poach the other, all 3 punted the problem down the road to the point any chance of a true P3 setup was missed.

time to collect on that stubbornness and conference pride.

My point is that by being too-dadgum-long it doesn't allow other upcoming/not-quite-P2 programs to backfill the spots fast enough and things start to rot. The ACC now sits on life-support instead of being able to rip off the band-aid and rebuild itself into strong 3rd place conference serving as a nice home for the added non-P2 programs..

(08-07-2022 07:57 AM)GarnetAndBlue Wrote:  

(08-06-2022 05:37 PM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  

(08-06-2022 04:23 PM)GarnetAndBlue Wrote:  

(08-06-2022 09:01 AM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  

(08-05-2022 04:04 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  The way I see it, "the conference" is just the schools that comprise it. So a conference surviving is not necessarily a good thing. It is imo bad if its continued existence is holding members back from doing better.

In 2016, we can assume all ACC schools thought the GOR was a good idea, because they all signed it.

Today, the ACC GOR is good for the low value schools with no place else of equal value to go. Bad for the schools that could go to the SEC or B1G.

So IMO if the question is, "is the ACC GOR too long?" The answer is yes for some schools, no for other schools.

That’s the basic essence of it all. FSU was opposed, and Maryland didn’t want it on their way out the door.
Swofford sold this to ACC members, that several now regret doing so.
Locked-in financial figures for a 20+ year or so period is a fiscal risk and such is not limited to inflationary costs. There’s no outlet to adjust in proportionality of what competitor conferences are negotiating and receiving during the contract duration.

interesting & ironic that the way-too-long-term-GoR may ultimately cause the destruction of the ACC due to it not being able to adapt/evolve during all of the ongoing changes.

I get what you're saying, but it is not the too-long-GOR that ultimately will cause the destruction.

Think, if the GOR was up in 2 years, would the ACC be better able to survive? I don't think so. It is the revenue and perception disparity causing the destruction- the same factors that led to the long GOR in the first place.

It hasn't been the long GOR that kept schools of value away. The ACC wasn't luring top SEC or BIG schools with a different GOR. The ACC couldn't pull in OUT or USC.

imo this era of realignment to a P2 is paying the price of 2010/11. Even Larry Scott knew the PAC needed to become less PAC back in 2010. When they failed in that attempt, the writing was on the wall- and this last decade of decline in PAC shows Scott was correct. With no PAC-Big 12 combo agreeable, and the ACC and Big 12 also not able to figure out which conference would poach the other, all 3 punted the problem down the road to the point any chance of a true P3 setup was missed.

time to collect on that stubbornness and conference pride.

My point is that by being too-dadgum-long it doesn't allow other upcoming/not-quite-P2 programs to backfill the spots fast enough. ESPN greased the skids a decade ago for an eventual clear-cut P2. The ACC now sits on life-support instead of being able to rip off the band-aid and rebuild itself into strong 3rd place conference. The gap between the haves and have nots (both conferences and programs) will just get bigger and bigger. Intentional destruction.

LOL no such thing. Who are you going to bring in to be your anchor programs that fill up 100,000 seat stadiums and bring millions of TV sets to the negotiations? Oregon? Baylor? UCF? Memphis? North Dakota State?

Actually, this all imagines that the GOR isn't there, which means that the SEC and Big Ten take the next 8-16 most attractive schools off the board, all you're left with is--leftovers.

Ain't gonna be no "P3" conference. You is or you ain't. Ask Aresco how shooting for "tweener" status works out.

Notre Dame
BC, Syracuse, Pitt, Louisville,
VT, UVA, UNC, NCSU, Duke, WF
CLemson, GT, FSU, Miami
Washignton, Oregon, Stanford, Cal
Utah, Colorado, Arizona, ASU
UCF, West Virginia, Cincinatti
Houston, TCU, Baylor, Texas Tech
Oklahoma State, Kansas State, Iowa State
Kansas, BYU.

Big Ten, SEC take Notre Dame, UNC, UVA, Washington, Oregon, Stanford/Cal to start.
Then NCSU, Virginia Tech (Big Ten and SEC will both want NC/VA access)

Let's stop there. ACC has BC, Syracuse, Pitt, Louisville, Duke, WF, CLemson, GT, FSU, Miami

SEC takes FSU, Clemson, Big Ten takes Miami. ACC has 7, who do you take from
Utah, Colorado, Arizona, ASU, UCF, West Virginia, Cincinatti, Houston, TCU, Baylor, Texas Tech,Oklahoma State, Kansas State, Iowa State, Kansas.

Kansas basketball gets you 8. Are the 4 Corners schools going to make a difference for you? Houston? TCU? UCF?

The 2036 Grant of Rights is the reason that half of the ACC isn't at an Aresco-League level after the best 4-6 schools jump.

(08-07-2022 07:57 AM)GarnetAndBlue Wrote:  

(08-06-2022 05:37 PM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  

(08-06-2022 04:23 PM)GarnetAndBlue Wrote:  

(08-06-2022 09:01 AM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  

(08-05-2022 04:04 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  The way I see it, "the conference" is just the schools that comprise it. So a conference surviving is not necessarily a good thing. It is imo bad if its continued existence is holding members back from doing better.

In 2016, we can assume all ACC schools thought the GOR was a good idea, because they all signed it.

Today, the ACC GOR is good for the low value schools with no place else of equal value to go. Bad for the schools that could go to the SEC or B1G.

So IMO if the question is, "is the ACC GOR too long?" The answer is yes for some schools, no for other schools.

That’s the basic essence of it all. FSU was opposed, and Maryland didn’t want it on their way out the door.
Swofford sold this to ACC members, that several now regret doing so.
Locked-in financial figures for a 20+ year or so period is a fiscal risk and such is not limited to inflationary costs. There’s no outlet to adjust in proportionality of what competitor conferences are negotiating and receiving during the contract duration.

interesting & ironic that the way-too-long-term-GoR may ultimately cause the destruction of the ACC due to it not being able to adapt/evolve during all of the ongoing changes.

I get what you're saying, but it is not the too-long-GOR that ultimately will cause the destruction.

Think, if the GOR was up in 2 years, would the ACC be better able to survive? I don't think so. It is the revenue and perception disparity causing the destruction- the same factors that led to the long GOR in the first place.

It hasn't been the long GOR that kept schools of value away. The ACC wasn't luring top SEC or BIG schools with a different GOR. The ACC couldn't pull in OUT or USC.

imo this era of realignment to a P2 is paying the price of 2010/11. Even Larry Scott knew the PAC needed to become less PAC back in 2010. When they failed in that attempt, the writing was on the wall- and this last decade of decline in PAC shows Scott was correct. With no PAC-Big 12 combo agreeable, and the ACC and Big 12 also not able to figure out which conference would poach the other, all 3 punted the problem down the road to the point any chance of a true P3 setup was missed.

time to collect on that stubbornness and conference pride.

My point is that by being too-dadgum-long it doesn't allow other upcoming/not-quite-P2 programs to backfill the spots fast enough and things start to rot. The ACC now sits on life-support instead of being able to rip off the band-aid and rebuild itself into strong 3rd place conference serving as a nice home for the added non-P2 programs..

That’s not true. They have had chances to add. They passed because what they could get wouldn’t help, the same reason USC passed on building Pac. And UT and OU passed on building B12. Conferences with schools planning their exit don’t build.

Outside of CU to PAC, which was decades in the works, schools only go to P2 conference.

There was no saving the AC with realignment.. Which is why ACC HQ wanted the super long GOR

(08-07-2022 08:28 AM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  

(08-07-2022 07:57 AM)GarnetAndBlue Wrote:  

(08-06-2022 05:37 PM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  

(08-06-2022 04:23 PM)GarnetAndBlue Wrote:  

(08-06-2022 09:01 AM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  That’s the basic essence of it all. FSU was opposed, and Maryland didn’t want it on their way out the door.
Swofford sold this to ACC members, that several now regret doing so.
Locked-in financial figures for a 20+ year or so period is a fiscal risk and such is not limited to inflationary costs. There’s no outlet to adjust in proportionality of what competitor conferences are negotiating and receiving during the contract duration.

interesting & ironic that the way-too-long-term-GoR may ultimately cause the destruction of the ACC due to it not being able to adapt/evolve during all of the ongoing changes.

I get what you're saying, but it is not the too-long-GOR that ultimately will cause the destruction.

Think, if the GOR was up in 2 years, would the ACC be better able to survive? I don't think so. It is the revenue and perception disparity causing the destruction- the same factors that led to the long GOR in the first place.

It hasn't been the long GOR that kept schools of value away. The ACC wasn't luring top SEC or BIG schools with a different GOR. The ACC couldn't pull in OUT or USC.

imo this era of realignment to a P2 is paying the price of 2010/11. Even Larry Scott knew the PAC needed to become less PAC back in 2010. When they failed in that attempt, the writing was on the wall- and this last decade of decline in PAC shows Scott was correct. With no PAC-Big 12 combo agreeable, and the ACC and Big 12 also not able to figure out which conference would poach the other, all 3 punted the problem down the road to the point any chance of a true P3 setup was missed.

time to collect on that stubbornness and conference pride.

My point is that by being too-dadgum-long it doesn't allow other upcoming/not-quite-P2 programs to backfill the spots fast enough and things start to rot. The ACC now sits on life-support instead of being able to rip off the band-aid and rebuild itself into strong 3rd place conference serving as a nice home for the added non-P2 programs..

That’s not true. They have had chances to add. They passed because what they could get wouldn’t help, the same reason USC passed on building Pac. And UT and OU passed on building B12. Conferences with schools planning their exit don’t build.

Outside of CU to PAC, which was decades in the works, schools only go to P2 conference.

There was no saving the AC with realignment.. Which is why ACC HQ wanted the super long GOR

In 2010-1 they allegedly had a whopper of a deal in the works with ND/Texas and 2 others rumored to be Oklahoma and Kansas. It was why all of the Va Tech and N.C. State to the SEC noise was happening.

The SECN was to launch with North Carolina, Virginia, Texas, and Missouri in the cable footprint. A year later the ACCN was to launch with the same plus Notre Dame's reach and Oklahoma. The deal had two problems. Boren was pushing OU and OSU together and tried the SEC. But even had OU backed out Baylor or Tech could have just taken their place. The second issue was what supposedly killed the deal. Without NCState and Va Tech's votes Tobacco Road wasn't sure it could remain in control. If BC, Pitt and Cuse sided with ND, and Clemson, Miami, FSU and Ga Tech sided wih UT and OU, then without Va Tech and NCSt a Texas / Notre Dame block could control things. When it fell through is when Maryland bolted for the Big 10.

Then as with all failed deals it never happened. But Deloss Dodds had said Texas was looking East. The Dude of WV had spotted an SEC jet headed to WV and pumped the imminent move of the Eers to the SEC when "allegedly" the SEC delegation met with Va Tech officials at the Greenbriar. Clay Travis and Pennington were pushing NC State and Va Tech to the SEC (a pre sell to the public), and then Kaboom! It was Maryland in need of the money which got pissed and bolted (the flirtation had gone back a while) the ACCN was killed, and GOR's were slapped into place in the B12 and ACC when FOX got wind of it and ESPN suffered the MD departure.

I say all of this because IMO this is when the ACC's upward trajectory ceased.

(08-07-2022 08:48 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-07-2022 08:28 AM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  

(08-07-2022 07:57 AM)GarnetAndBlue Wrote:  

(08-06-2022 05:37 PM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  

(08-06-2022 04:23 PM)GarnetAndBlue Wrote:  interesting & ironic that the way-too-long-term-GoR may ultimately cause the destruction of the ACC due to it not being able to adapt/evolve during all of the ongoing changes.

I get what you're saying, but it is not the too-long-GOR that ultimately will cause the destruction.

Think, if the GOR was up in 2 years, would the ACC be better able to survive? I don't think so. It is the revenue and perception disparity causing the destruction- the same factors that led to the long GOR in the first place.

It hasn't been the long GOR that kept schools of value away. The ACC wasn't luring top SEC or BIG schools with a different GOR. The ACC couldn't pull in OUT or USC.

imo this era of realignment to a P2 is paying the price of 2010/11. Even Larry Scott knew the PAC needed to become less PAC back in 2010. When they failed in that attempt, the writing was on the wall- and this last decade of decline in PAC shows Scott was correct. With no PAC-Big 12 combo agreeable, and the ACC and Big 12 also not able to figure out which conference would poach the other, all 3 punted the problem down the road to the point any chance of a true P3 setup was missed.

time to collect on that stubbornness and conference pride.

My point is that by being too-dadgum-long it doesn't allow other upcoming/not-quite-P2 programs to backfill the spots fast enough and things start to rot. The ACC now sits on life-support instead of being able to rip off the band-aid and rebuild itself into strong 3rd place conference serving as a nice home for the added non-P2 programs..

That’s not true. They have had chances to add. They passed because what they could get wouldn’t help, the same reason USC passed on building Pac. And UT and OU passed on building B12. Conferences with schools planning their exit don’t build.

Outside of CU to PAC, which was decades in the works, schools only go to P2 conference.

There was no saving the AC with realignment.. Which is why ACC HQ wanted the super long GOR

In 2010-1 they allegedly had a whopper of a deal in the works with ND/Texas and 2 others rumored to be Oklahoma and Kansas. It was why all of the Va Tech and N.C. State to the SEC noise was happening.

The SECN was to launch with North Carolina, Virginia, Texas, and Missouri in the cable footprint. A year later the ACCN was to launch with the same plus Notre Dame's reach and Oklahoma. The deal had two problems. Boren was pushing OU and OSU together and tried the SEC. But even had OU backed out Baylor or Tech could have just taken their place. The second issue was what supposedly killed the deal. Without NCState and Va Tech's votes Tobacco Road wasn't sure it could remain in control. If BC, Pitt and Cuse sided with ND, and Clemson, Miami, FSU and Ga Tech sided wih UT and OU, then without Va Tech and NCSt a Texas / Notre Dame block could control things. When it fell through is when Maryland bolted for the Big 10.

Then as with all failed deals it never happened. But Deloss Dodds had said Texas was looking East. The Dude of WV had spotted an SEC jet headed to WV and pumped the imminent move of the Eers to the SEC when "allegedly" the SEC delegation met with Va Tech officials at the Greenbriar. Clay Travis and Pennington were pushing NC State and Va Tech to the SEC (a pre sell to the public), and then Kaboom! It was Maryland in need of the money which got pissed and bolted (the flirtation had gone back a while) the ACCN was killed, and GOR's were slapped into place in the B12 and ACC when FOX got wind of it and ESPN suffered the MD departure.

I say all of this because IMO this is when the ACC's upward trajectory ceased.

Let's put it this way, that 2010-11 saga really depends on which side you're hearing it from.

But the end result is the same- the P2 has been coming since schools outside the BIG and SEC could not figure out how to join together over a decade ago.

The ACC knew its weakness in realignment. You don't sign a super long GOR unless you have a lot of fear you'll be liquidated. These conferences know the networks make the money on the backside of the deal, with the escalation priced in not up to market expectations. The networks are not in the business of helping give a conference security while also giving a premium.

Makes sense, if you're ACC HQ. I don't think anyone there regrets the GOR length. And as long as UNC is willing to save the former Big East schools at its own peril, the conference has a fighting chance.

(08-07-2022 10:46 AM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  

(08-07-2022 08:48 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-07-2022 08:28 AM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  

(08-07-2022 07:57 AM)GarnetAndBlue Wrote:  

(08-06-2022 05:37 PM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  I get what you're saying, but it is not the too-long-GOR that ultimately will cause the destruction.

Think, if the GOR was up in 2 years, would the ACC be better able to survive? I don't think so. It is the revenue and perception disparity causing the destruction- the same factors that led to the long GOR in the first place.

It hasn't been the long GOR that kept schools of value away. The ACC wasn't luring top SEC or BIG schools with a different GOR. The ACC couldn't pull in OUT or USC.

imo this era of realignment to a P2 is paying the price of 2010/11. Even Larry Scott knew the PAC needed to become less PAC back in 2010. When they failed in that attempt, the writing was on the wall- and this last decade of decline in PAC shows Scott was correct. With no PAC-Big 12 combo agreeable, and the ACC and Big 12 also not able to figure out which conference would poach the other, all 3 punted the problem down the road to the point any chance of a true P3 setup was missed.

time to collect on that stubbornness and conference pride.

My point is that by being too-dadgum-long it doesn't allow other upcoming/not-quite-P2 programs to backfill the spots fast enough and things start to rot. The ACC now sits on life-support instead of being able to rip off the band-aid and rebuild itself into strong 3rd place conference serving as a nice home for the added non-P2 programs..

That’s not true. They have had chances to add. They passed because what they could get wouldn’t help, the same reason USC passed on building Pac. And UT and OU passed on building B12. Conferences with schools planning their exit don’t build.

Outside of CU to PAC, which was decades in the works, schools only go to P2 conference.

There was no saving the AC with realignment.. Which is why ACC HQ wanted the super long GOR

In 2010-1 they allegedly had a whopper of a deal in the works with ND/Texas and 2 others rumored to be Oklahoma and Kansas. It was why all of the Va Tech and N.C. State to the SEC noise was happening.

The SECN was to launch with North Carolina, Virginia, Texas, and Missouri in the cable footprint. A year later the ACCN was to launch with the same plus Notre Dame's reach and Oklahoma. The deal had two problems. Boren was pushing OU and OSU together and tried the SEC. But even had OU backed out Baylor or Tech could have just taken their place. The second issue was what supposedly killed the deal. Without NCState and Va Tech's votes Tobacco Road wasn't sure it could remain in control. If BC, Pitt and Cuse sided with ND, and Clemson, Miami, FSU and Ga Tech sided wih UT and OU, then without Va Tech and NCSt a Texas / Notre Dame block could control things. When it fell through is when Maryland bolted for the Big 10.

Then as with all failed deals it never happened. But Deloss Dodds had said Texas was looking East. The Dude of WV had spotted an SEC jet headed to WV and pumped the imminent move of the Eers to the SEC when "allegedly" the SEC delegation met with Va Tech officials at the Greenbriar. Clay Travis and Pennington were pushing NC State and Va Tech to the SEC (a pre sell to the public), and then Kaboom! It was Maryland in need of the money which got pissed and bolted (the flirtation had gone back a while) the ACCN was killed, and GOR's were slapped into place in the B12 and ACC when FOX got wind of it and ESPN suffered the MD departure.

I say all of this because IMO this is when the ACC's upward trajectory ceased.

Let's put it this way, that 2010-11 saga really depends on which side you're hearing it from.

But the end result is the same- the P2 has been coming since schools outside the BIG and SEC could not figure out how to join together over a decade ago.

The ACC knew its weakness in realignment. You don't sign a super long GOR unless you have a lot of fear you'll be liquidated. These conferences know the networks make the money on the backside of the deal, with the escalation priced in not up to market expectations. The networks are not in the business of helping give a conference security while also giving a premium.

IMO, a decade ago it was by no means clear that the SEC and B1G were going to be making way more than the other P-leagues. They were the most valuable conferences, but not categorically so.

To me, at that time, the ACC was arguably the boldest of the major conferences. Bringing in Big East schools, largely resulting in that conference's dissolution as a football league, and making a major push in to the northeast.

Losing Maryland to the B1G was a shell-shock moment for the ACC. It scurred them in to signing the long GOR and network deal.

I would agree with the first song, but my "last" disco hit would be Queen's "Another One Bites the Dust".

In fact, IMO, "Funky Town" isn't really a disco song. It's more of an electro-funk song. Arguably the first big hit of that kind.

(08-07-2022 10:57 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(08-07-2022 10:46 AM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  

(08-07-2022 08:48 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-07-2022 08:28 AM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  

(08-07-2022 07:57 AM)GarnetAndBlue Wrote:  My point is that by being too-dadgum-long it doesn't allow other upcoming/not-quite-P2 programs to backfill the spots fast enough and things start to rot. The ACC now sits on life-support instead of being able to rip off the band-aid and rebuild itself into strong 3rd place conference serving as a nice home for the added non-P2 programs..

That’s not true. They have had chances to add. They passed because what they could get wouldn’t help, the same reason USC passed on building Pac. And UT and OU passed on building B12. Conferences with schools planning their exit don’t build.

Outside of CU to PAC, which was decades in the works, schools only go to P2 conference.

There was no saving the AC with realignment.. Which is why ACC HQ wanted the super long GOR

In 2010-1 they allegedly had a whopper of a deal in the works with ND/Texas and 2 others rumored to be Oklahoma and Kansas. It was why all of the Va Tech and N.C. State to the SEC noise was happening.

The SECN was to launch with North Carolina, Virginia, Texas, and Missouri in the cable footprint. A year later the ACCN was to launch with the same plus Notre Dame's reach and Oklahoma. The deal had two problems. Boren was pushing OU and OSU together and tried the SEC. But even had OU backed out Baylor or Tech could have just taken their place. The second issue was what supposedly killed the deal. Without NCState and Va Tech's votes Tobacco Road wasn't sure it could remain in control. If BC, Pitt and Cuse sided with ND, and Clemson, Miami, FSU and Ga Tech sided wih UT and OU, then without Va Tech and NCSt a Texas / Notre Dame block could control things. When it fell through is when Maryland bolted for the Big 10.

Then as with all failed deals it never happened. But Deloss Dodds had said Texas was looking East. The Dude of WV had spotted an SEC jet headed to WV and pumped the imminent move of the Eers to the SEC when "allegedly" the SEC delegation met with Va Tech officials at the Greenbriar. Clay Travis and Pennington were pushing NC State and Va Tech to the SEC (a pre sell to the public), and then Kaboom! It was Maryland in need of the money which got pissed and bolted (the flirtation had gone back a while) the ACCN was killed, and GOR's were slapped into place in the B12 and ACC when FOX got wind of it and ESPN suffered the MD departure.

I say all of this because IMO this is when the ACC's upward trajectory ceased.

Let's put it this way, that 2010-11 saga really depends on which side you're hearing it from.

But the end result is the same- the P2 has been coming since schools outside the BIG and SEC could not figure out how to join together over a decade ago.

The ACC knew its weakness in realignment. You don't sign a super long GOR unless you have a lot of fear you'll be liquidated. These conferences know the networks make the money on the backside of the deal, with the escalation priced in not up to market expectations. The networks are not in the business of helping give a conference security while also giving a premium.

IMO, a decade ago it was by no means clear that the SEC and B1G were going to be making way more than the other P-leagues. They were the most valuable conferences, but not categorically so.

To me, at that time, the ACC was arguably the boldest of the major conferences. Bringing in Big East schools, largely resulting in that conference's dissolution as a football league, and making a major push in to the northeast.

Losing Maryland to the B1G was a shell-shock moment for the ACC. It scurred them in to signing the long GOR and network deal.

I would agree with the first song, but my "last" disco hit would be Queen's "Another One Bites the Dust".

In fact, IMO, "Funky Town" isn't really a disco song. It's more of an electro-funk song. Arguably the first big hit of that kind.

I prefer Johnny Mathis and Deniece Williams, "Too Much, Too Little, Too Late!"

(08-07-2022 10:57 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(08-07-2022 10:46 AM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  

(08-07-2022 08:48 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-07-2022 08:28 AM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  

(08-07-2022 07:57 AM)GarnetAndBlue Wrote:  My point is that by being too-dadgum-long it doesn't allow other upcoming/not-quite-P2 programs to backfill the spots fast enough and things start to rot. The ACC now sits on life-support instead of being able to rip off the band-aid and rebuild itself into strong 3rd place conference serving as a nice home for the added non-P2 programs..

That’s not true. They have had chances to add. They passed because what they could get wouldn’t help, the same reason USC passed on building Pac. And UT and OU passed on building B12. Conferences with schools planning their exit don’t build.

Outside of CU to PAC, which was decades in the works, schools only go to P2 conference.

There was no saving the AC with realignment.. Which is why ACC HQ wanted the super long GOR

In 2010-1 they allegedly had a whopper of a deal in the works with ND/Texas and 2 others rumored to be Oklahoma and Kansas. It was why all of the Va Tech and N.C. State to the SEC noise was happening.

The SECN was to launch with North Carolina, Virginia, Texas, and Missouri in the cable footprint. A year later the ACCN was to launch with the same plus Notre Dame's reach and Oklahoma. The deal had two problems. Boren was pushing OU and OSU together and tried the SEC. But even had OU backed out Baylor or Tech could have just taken their place. The second issue was what supposedly killed the deal. Without NCState and Va Tech's votes Tobacco Road wasn't sure it could remain in control. If BC, Pitt and Cuse sided with ND, and Clemson, Miami, FSU and Ga Tech sided wih UT and OU, then without Va Tech and NCSt a Texas / Notre Dame block could control things. When it fell through is when Maryland bolted for the Big 10.

Then as with all failed deals it never happened. But Deloss Dodds had said Texas was looking East. The Dude of WV had spotted an SEC jet headed to WV and pumped the imminent move of the Eers to the SEC when "allegedly" the SEC delegation met with Va Tech officials at the Greenbriar. Clay Travis and Pennington were pushing NC State and Va Tech to the SEC (a pre sell to the public), and then Kaboom! It was Maryland in need of the money which got pissed and bolted (the flirtation had gone back a while) the ACCN was killed, and GOR's were slapped into place in the B12 and ACC when FOX got wind of it and ESPN suffered the MD departure.

I say all of this because IMO this is when the ACC's upward trajectory ceased.

Let's put it this way, that 2010-11 saga really depends on which side you're hearing it from.

But the end result is the same- the P2 has been coming since schools outside the BIG and SEC could not figure out how to join together over a decade ago.

The ACC knew its weakness in realignment. You don't sign a super long GOR unless you have a lot of fear you'll be liquidated. These conferences know the networks make the money on the backside of the deal, with the escalation priced in not up to market expectations. The networks are not in the business of helping give a conference security while also giving a premium.

IMO, a decade ago it was by no means clear that the SEC and B1G were going to be making way more than the other P-leagues. They were the most valuable conferences, but not categorically so.


Losing Maryland to the B1G was a shell-shock moment for the ACC. It scurred them in to signing the long GOR and network deal.

There is a subtle but important difference between what you're saying and what I said.

A decade ago the PAC, Big 12, and ACC failed to figure out how to combine. Soon after that failure is when it became clear we could not avoid the P2 imo. And it is why I have this account- a belief it wasn't really a Big 12 issue as much as the Big 12 the first to feel the consolidation pains, as a corporate marriages prone to corporate infidelity.

And in reality, and whether one recognized then or not, it was implicit to the moves we're discussing- there is a reason why the prominent major reorganization type moves were 6 Big 12 to PAC, Big 12 trying to take many ACC, or ACC trying to get ND and several from Big 12. All failed, but all were due to the strength of the BIG and SEC, breach-proof even then, and the need to keep up.

Outside of the CU move, every P5 to P5 has really been P5 to P2.

The Big 12 was never anything but a Conference that members belonged to. The schools were not "The Conference".

The PAC had moats of history (they were the conference) and distance the Big 12 did not have.

The ACC more similar to the Big 12 with one exception....Why similar to Big 12? I consider the ACC disfiguring the Big East, then killing the Big East, more similar to the Big 8-SWC-Big 12 moves, and why it was in a similar spot of peril, and needed that long GOR. Wise move, as if it had not extended in 2016, it would be in a similar spot as the PAC now. That aforementioned exception with the ACC corporate marriage, is unlike the Big 12 with OU/NU, in the ACC the OU/NU types are the staunchest pro-ACCs (UNC and Co). I think it is well known that when the BIG was building out via BTN carriage, Delaney wanted UNC, more than NU. Had UNC been like NU, and looking to leave because the corporate conference resulted in UNC losing its longtime pole position, the ACC is done. The parallels are interesting, because had OU and NU been very pro-Big 12, you'd have the new meal ticket in UT (FSU) wanting elsewhere, but the conference weakness in part because it was floundering on the field. A&M is Miami's role.

Both lacked the geography defense of PAC, with the BIG and SEC either coterminous, or in the Big 12's case, no where to really expand the footprint as needed. So you end up with them trying to figure out how to couple, or in the Big 12's case go all the way west. Or just 6 go west, which was always the wrong econometric move, with 6-8 going east the better bump.

Some would say NU to BIG and MU to SEC were the shockwaves of UT considering going to PAC, instead of signing a long GOR. Really, had Clemson (NU) or NCSt (MU) had the same convictions, the ACC is already done.

That is a longwinded way to say this has been coming for awhile. Just off the top of my head, I recall a 2016 or 2017 CBSsport article calling out this time frame as a time for big moves, and that was before the NIL, potential employment, and CFP implications. Consolidation could be foreseen, and really, has been occurring for decades. Conferences have yet to try to just cull. The culling has been done for 30 years by schools leaving to add value to another and a pay raise.

(08-07-2022 11:37 AM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  

(08-07-2022 10:57 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(08-07-2022 10:46 AM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  

(08-07-2022 08:48 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-07-2022 08:28 AM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  That’s not true. They have had chances to add. They passed because what they could get wouldn’t help, the same reason USC passed on building Pac. And UT and OU passed on building B12. Conferences with schools planning their exit don’t build.

Outside of CU to PAC, which was decades in the works, schools only go to P2 conference.

There was no saving the AC with realignment.. Which is why ACC HQ wanted the super long GOR

In 2010-1 they allegedly had a whopper of a deal in the works with ND/Texas and 2 others rumored to be Oklahoma and Kansas. It was why all of the Va Tech and N.C. State to the SEC noise was happening.

The SECN was to launch with North Carolina, Virginia, Texas, and Missouri in the cable footprint. A year later the ACCN was to launch with the same plus Notre Dame's reach and Oklahoma. The deal had two problems. Boren was pushing OU and OSU together and tried the SEC. But even had OU backed out Baylor or Tech could have just taken their place. The second issue was what supposedly killed the deal. Without NCState and Va Tech's votes Tobacco Road wasn't sure it could remain in control. If BC, Pitt and Cuse sided with ND, and Clemson, Miami, FSU and Ga Tech sided wih UT and OU, then without Va Tech and NCSt a Texas / Notre Dame block could control things. When it fell through is when Maryland bolted for the Big 10.

Then as with all failed deals it never happened. But Deloss Dodds had said Texas was looking East. The Dude of WV had spotted an SEC jet headed to WV and pumped the imminent move of the Eers to the SEC when "allegedly" the SEC delegation met with Va Tech officials at the Greenbriar. Clay Travis and Pennington were pushing NC State and Va Tech to the SEC (a pre sell to the public), and then Kaboom! It was Maryland in need of the money which got pissed and bolted (the flirtation had gone back a while) the ACCN was killed, and GOR's were slapped into place in the B12 and ACC when FOX got wind of it and ESPN suffered the MD departure.

I say all of this because IMO this is when the ACC's upward trajectory ceased.

Let's put it this way, that 2010-11 saga really depends on which side you're hearing it from.

But the end result is the same- the P2 has been coming since schools outside the BIG and SEC could not figure out how to join together over a decade ago.

The ACC knew its weakness in realignment. You don't sign a super long GOR unless you have a lot of fear you'll be liquidated. These conferences know the networks make the money on the backside of the deal, with the escalation priced in not up to market expectations. The networks are not in the business of helping give a conference security while also giving a premium.

IMO, a decade ago it was by no means clear that the SEC and B1G were going to be making way more than the other P-leagues. They were the most valuable conferences, but not categorically so.


Losing Maryland to the B1G was a shell-shock moment for the ACC. It scurred them in to signing the long GOR and network deal.

There is a subtle but important difference between what you're saying and what I said.

A decade ago the PAC, Big 12, and ACC failed to figure out how to combine. Soon after that failure is when it became clear we could not avoid the P2 imo. And it is why I have this account- a belief it wasn't really a Big 12 issue as much as the Big 12 the first to feel the consolidation pains, as a corporate marriages prone to corporate infidelity.

And in reality, and whether one recognized then or not, it was implicit to the moves we're discussing- there is a reason why the prominent major reorganization type moves were 6 Big 12 to PAC, Big 12 trying to take many ACC, or ACC trying to get ND and several from Big 12. All failed, but all were due to the strength of the BIG and SEC, breach-proof even then, and the need to keep up.

Outside of the CU move, every P5 to P5 has really been P5 to P2. The PAC had moats of history and distance the Big 12 did not have.

I consider the ACC disfiguring, then killing the Big East more similar to the Big 8-SWC-Big 12 moves, and why it was in a similar spot of peril, and need that long GOR. Wise move, as if it had not extended in 2016, it would be in a similar spot as the PAC now. One difference with the ACC corporate marriage, is unlike the Big 12 with OU/NU, in the ACC the OU/NU types are the staunchest pro-ACCs (UNC and Co). The parallels are interesting, because had OU and NU been very pro-Big 12, you'd have the new meal ticket in UT (FSU) wanting elsewhere, but the conference weakness in part because it was floundering on the field. A&M is Miami's role.

Some would say NU to BIG and MU to SEC were the shockwaves of UT considering going to PAC, instead of signing a long GOR. Really, had Clemson (NU) or NCSt (MU) had the same convictions, the ACC is already done.

That is a longwinded way to say this has been coming for awhile. Just off the top of my head, I recall a 2016 or 2017 CBSsport article calling out this time frame as a time for big moves, and that was before the NIL, potential employment, and CFP implications. Consolidation could be foreseen, and really, has been occurring for decades. Conferences have yet to try to just cull. The culling has been done for 30 years by schools leaving to add value to another and a pay raise.

So, you are saying the additions were not only accretive to their new destinations accomplishing network product placement for value, but that they are also subtractive by intention as well. Thereby networks passively cull those left behind, only without calling it a cull.

Of course! It's how Corporations make destruction appear natural. They aren't killing off the weak. They are only preserving the strong! That way they can paint destruction as a rescue. The sad part is many will believe and swallow that hook line and sinker!

(08-07-2022 11:48 AM)JRsec Wrote:  So, you are saying the additions were not only accretive to their new destinations accomplishing network product placement for value, but that they are also subtractive by intention as well. Thereby networks passively cull those left behind, only without calling it a cull.

Of course! It's how Corporations make destruction appear natural. They aren't killing off the weak. They are only preserving the strong! That way they can paint destruction as a rescue. The sad part is many will believe and swallow that hook line and sinker!

Semantics 101 for the masses :)

All that aside, if the B1G and SEC each max out at or near 24 teams, then IMO a similarly-sized "3rd wheel conference" will likely be just fine.

No, not as rich as the Super 2, but there absolutely will be some worthy programs with enough resources to, if not win National Championships, consistently succeed at the highest level of Division I (or its post-NCAA successor).

And once the smoke clears from the B1G's new media rights deal, there will mutiple serious bidders looking for their share the of last significant piece of the College Sports pie.

(08-07-2022 12:26 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  

(08-07-2022 11:48 AM)JRsec Wrote:  So, you are saying the additions were not only accretive to their new destinations accomplishing network product placement for value, but that they are also subtractive by intention as well. Thereby networks passively cull those left behind, only without calling it a cull.

Of course! It's how Corporations make destruction appear natural. They aren't killing off the weak. They are only preserving the strong! That way they can paint destruction as a rescue. The sad part is many will believe and swallow that hook line and sinker!

Semantics 101 for the masses :)

All that aside, if the B1G and SEC each max out at or near 24 teams, then IMO a similarly-sized "3rd wheel conference" will likely be just fine.

No, not as rich as the Super 2, but there absolutely will be some worthy programs with enough resources to, if not win National Championships, consistently succeed at the highest level of Division I (or its post-NCAA successor).

And once the smoke clears from the B1G's new media rights deal, there absolutely be some bidders looking for their share the last significant piece of College Sports pie.

How could I not agree. When I raised the 24 school model back some months ago I stated it couldn't happen (litigation) unless there was no loss of revenue and no loss of access for those left behind, which is exactly what you say here will happen. I too don't see a P2 without a catchall #3.

(08-07-2022 12:26 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  

(08-07-2022 11:48 AM)JRsec Wrote:  So, you are saying the additions were not only accretive to their new destinations accomplishing network product placement for value, but that they are also subtractive by intention as well. Thereby networks passively cull those left behind, only without calling it a cull.

Of course! It's how Corporations make destruction appear natural. They aren't killing off the weak. They are only preserving the strong! That way they can paint destruction as a rescue. The sad part is many will believe and swallow that hook line and sinker!

Semantics 101 for the masses :)

All that aside, if the B1G and SEC each max out at or near 24 teams, then IMO a similarly-sized "3rd wheel conference" will likely be just fine.

Lol no.

Quote:No, not as rich as the Super 2, but there absolutely will be some worthy programs with enough resources to, if not win National Championships, consistently succeed at the highest level of Division I (or its post-NCAA successor).

Not in football.

Quote:And once the smoke clears from the B1G's new media rights deal, there will mutiple serious bidders looking for their share the of last significant piece of the College Sports pie.

You're talking about Notre Dame's NBC contract I guess?

(08-07-2022 11:48 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-07-2022 11:37 AM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  

(08-07-2022 10:57 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(08-07-2022 10:46 AM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  

(08-07-2022 08:48 AM)JRsec Wrote:  In 2010-1 they allegedly had a whopper of a deal in the works with ND/Texas and 2 others rumored to be Oklahoma and Kansas. It was why all of the Va Tech and N.C. State to the SEC noise was happening.

The SECN was to launch with North Carolina, Virginia, Texas, and Missouri in the cable footprint. A year later the ACCN was to launch with the same plus Notre Dame's reach and Oklahoma. The deal had two problems. Boren was pushing OU and OSU together and tried the SEC. But even had OU backed out Baylor or Tech could have just taken their place. The second issue was what supposedly killed the deal. Without NCState and Va Tech's votes Tobacco Road wasn't sure it could remain in control. If BC, Pitt and Cuse sided with ND, and Clemson, Miami, FSU and Ga Tech sided wih UT and OU, then without Va Tech and NCSt a Texas / Notre Dame block could control things. When it fell through is when Maryland bolted for the Big 10.

Then as with all failed deals it never happened. But Deloss Dodds had said Texas was looking East. The Dude of WV had spotted an SEC jet headed to WV and pumped the imminent move of the Eers to the SEC when "allegedly" the SEC delegation met with Va Tech officials at the Greenbriar. Clay Travis and Pennington were pushing NC State and Va Tech to the SEC (a pre sell to the public), and then Kaboom! It was Maryland in need of the money which got pissed and bolted (the flirtation had gone back a while) the ACCN was killed, and GOR's were slapped into place in the B12 and ACC when FOX got wind of it and ESPN suffered the MD departure.

I say all of this because IMO this is when the ACC's upward trajectory ceased.

Let's put it this way, that 2010-11 saga really depends on which side you're hearing it from.

But the end result is the same- the P2 has been coming since schools outside the BIG and SEC could not figure out how to join together over a decade ago.

The ACC knew its weakness in realignment. You don't sign a super long GOR unless you have a lot of fear you'll be liquidated. These conferences know the networks make the money on the backside of the deal, with the escalation priced in not up to market expectations. The networks are not in the business of helping give a conference security while also giving a premium.

IMO, a decade ago it was by no means clear that the SEC and B1G were going to be making way more than the other P-leagues. They were the most valuable conferences, but not categorically so.


Losing Maryland to the B1G was a shell-shock moment for the ACC. It scurred them in to signing the long GOR and network deal.

There is a subtle but important difference between what you're saying and what I said.

A decade ago the PAC, Big 12, and ACC failed to figure out how to combine. Soon after that failure is when it became clear we could not avoid the P2 imo. And it is why I have this account- a belief it wasn't really a Big 12 issue as much as the Big 12 the first to feel the consolidation pains, as a corporate marriages prone to corporate infidelity.

And in reality, and whether one recognized then or not, it was implicit to the moves we're discussing- there is a reason why the prominent major reorganization type moves were 6 Big 12 to PAC, Big 12 trying to take many ACC, or ACC trying to get ND and several from Big 12. All failed, but all were due to the strength of the BIG and SEC, breach-proof even then, and the need to keep up.

Outside of the CU move, every P5 to P5 has really been P5 to P2. The PAC had moats of history and distance the Big 12 did not have.

I consider the ACC disfiguring, then killing the Big East more similar to the Big 8-SWC-Big 12 moves, and why it was in a similar spot of peril, and need that long GOR. Wise move, as if it had not extended in 2016, it would be in a similar spot as the PAC now. One difference with the ACC corporate marriage, is unlike the Big 12 with OU/NU, in the ACC the OU/NU types are the staunchest pro-ACCs (UNC and Co). The parallels are interesting, because had OU and NU been very pro-Big 12, you'd have the new meal ticket in UT (FSU) wanting elsewhere, but the conference weakness in part because it was floundering on the field. A&M is Miami's role.

Some would say NU to BIG and MU to SEC were the shockwaves of UT considering going to PAC, instead of signing a long GOR. Really, had Clemson (NU) or NCSt (MU) had the same convictions, the ACC is already done.

That is a longwinded way to say this has been coming for awhile. Just off the top of my head, I recall a 2016 or 2017 CBSsport article calling out this time frame as a time for big moves, and that was before the NIL, potential employment, and CFP implications. Consolidation could be foreseen, and really, has been occurring for decades. Conferences have yet to try to just cull. The culling has been done for 30 years by schools leaving to add value to another and a pay raise.

So, you are saying the additions were not only accretive to their new destinations accomplishing network product placement for value, but that they are also subtractive by intention as well. Thereby networks passively cull those left behind, only without calling it a cull.

Of course! It's how Corporations make destruction appear natural. They aren't killing off the weak. They are only preserving the strong! That way they can paint destruction as a rescue. The sad part is many will believe and swallow that hook line and sinker!

Corporations, and 501©(3).

This has been going on long before the networks were leading the dance. Some would say even moves in late 80's and early 90's were build-up to getting UT.

Conferences would never say such long held plans were about weakening the other conferences, or even killing them off, just making the strong, stronger. One can't fault them, there really was no incentive to preserve other conferences- which is why the conferences have been making plans to poach for decades. There no feedback loop to any macro level issues with moves.

And certainly no incentive to not become network-backed conferences in exchange becoming wealthy. Making a deal with the devil- which is how we got here in which the networks now have such a large say.

That said, the P2s still have a lot of agency. I think we'll see that with the BIG adding more PAC.

(08-07-2022 12:29 PM)JRsec Wrote:  How could I not agree. When I raised the 24 school model back some months ago I stated it couldn't happen (litigation) unless there was no loss of revenue and no loss of access for those left behind, which is exactly what you say here will happen. I too don't see a P2 without a catchall #3.

The formation of Conference No. 3 (prediction: will be called The National in a slick piece of branding for a league that inevitably will range from coast to coast) and the process will even be more interesting (and less clock and dagger) than what we're seeing with the $EC and B1G.

It'll be the ultimate game of musical chairs.

Get a spot in Conference No. 3 and a school can breathe easily.

Miss out and it's gonna be a scary existence

(08-07-2022 01:03 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  

(08-07-2022 12:29 PM)JRsec Wrote:  How could I not agree. When I raised the 24 school model back some months ago I stated it couldn't happen (litigation) unless there was no loss of revenue and no loss of access for those left behind, which is exactly what you say here will happen. I too don't see a P2 without a catchall #3.

The formation of Conference No. 3 (prediction: will be called The National in a slick piece of branding for a league that inevitably will range from coast to coast) and the process will even be more interesting (and less clock and dagger) than what we're seeing with the $EC and B1G.

It'll be the ultimate game of musical chairs.

Get a spot in Conference No. 3 and a school can breathe easily.

Miss out and it's gonna be a scary existence

Lol. "The National" is The American on steroids--the obes Carrot Top used.

(08-07-2022 01:10 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(08-07-2022 01:03 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  

(08-07-2022 12:29 PM)JRsec Wrote:  How could I not agree. When I raised the 24 school model back some months ago I stated it couldn't happen (litigation) unless there was no loss of revenue and no loss of access for those left behind, which is exactly what you say here will happen. I too don't see a P2 without a catchall #3.

The formation of Conference No. 3 (prediction: will be called The National in a slick piece of branding for a league that inevitably will range from coast to coast) and the process will even be more interesting (and less clock and dagger) than what we're seeing with the $EC and B1G.

It'll be the ultimate game of musical chairs.

Get a spot in Conference No. 3 and a school can breathe easily.

Miss out and it's gonna be a scary existence

Lol. "The National" is The American on steroids--the obes Carrot Top used.

Might as well go NASCAR and sell the naming rights if they're coming up with some sterile new brand. I'll throw out a suggestion a low quality beer brand seize the opportunity. The Budweiser 12PACC

It will be desperate for revenue.

"Conference realignment rumors: Greg Sankey discusses how teams reach out to SEC, says most recent time was 'last week'"

https://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/sec-fo...last-week/

(08-09-2022 02:19 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  "Conference realignment rumors: Greg Sankey discusses how teams reach out to SEC, says most recent time was 'last week'"

"Mr. Sankey, there's a brand new Lamborghini outside the lobby. The guy who parked it handed me a card and told me it was a gift for you from the University of Miami."

(08-07-2022 10:46 AM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  The ACC knew its weakness in realignment. You don't sign a super long GOR unless you have a lot of fear you'll be liquidated.

That's funny. In 2012 all the message-board Einsteins told us that signing a GoR showed how much confidence schools felt about the durability of their league.

Every other P5 had these things. The ACC had exit fees—and the Einsteins told us that wasn't good enough, that's how Maryland was able to bolt, that's what made the ACC 'weak,' all the really stable conferences have grants of rights.

Funny how things turned out, eh?