(08-03-2022 11:55 AM)OneSockUp Wrote:  

(08-03-2022 10:53 AM)bullet Wrote:  I think Sankey is far sighted enough to not do long-term damage for short term dollars. Don't think that is the case with Warren. I don't think he understands the college game. He has made some good dollar decisions for the intermediate term.

I agree with this 100%.

The SEC's leadership is making moves that should benefit the league for the next 50 years while the Big Ten is making moves for their next TV deal.

I am a convergent thinker when looking at the expansion scenarios being espoused. To me, pursing the numbers game is not the determining factor to define the best proficiency. So far, Sankey and the SEC have shown good judgment with expansion.
Being on the far eastern end of the SEC, where can the SEC enhance value? Foremost, I would say the Charlotte market. UNC and/or NCSU could be a big help in acquiring that, though neither is located in the city. (One understands UNCC is there, but is too minor a consideration for big-time and strategic purposes). UVA (maybe VPI) would be on my exploratory list.
If the SEC can maintain regular games with those in-state ACC rivalries, at least plan for such. Being in separate conferences, but still playing each other in multiple sports is not necessarily negative.
Does the SEC want a stronger footprint in south Florida with Miami? Nice choice, in my opinion, for a second private school.
The SEC got the best in the west with UT and OU. I don’t see anything else in the B12 really moving the financial needle for the SEC.
Clemson and Florida State? A case can be made for those SEC-like schools. I want to see the SEC thrive without the mission to wipe-out the ACC.

The BIG can crow about the acquisition of UCLA and USC. There will be a rising logistics issue. They may have to absorb more PAC12 schools for the sake of the Los Angeles campuses.
The BIG still waiting on Notre Dame looks foolish. ND will strike a new lucrative deal with NBC or another network.
With the ACC’s GoR remaining in effect, frankly the SEC can afford to wait until a reasonable opening.
The BIG could hold until a new media deal is finalized. That may be prudent to do. A race for “numbers” when there are very few high-valued schools remaining outside the P2, with most (from the ACC) currently unavailable, doesn’t make complete sense.

(08-03-2022 02:11 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  

(08-03-2022 11:55 AM)OneSockUp Wrote:  

(08-03-2022 10:53 AM)bullet Wrote:  I think Sankey is far sighted enough to not do long-term damage for short term dollars. Don't think that is the case with Warren. I don't think he understands the college game. He has made some good dollar decisions for the intermediate term.

I agree with this 100%.

The SEC's leadership is making moves that should benefit the league for the next 50 years while the Big Ten is making moves for their next TV deal.

I am a convergent thinker when looking at the expansion scenarios being espoused. To me, pursing the numbers game is not the determining factor to define the best proficiency. So far, Sankey and the SEC have shown good judgment with expansion.
Being on the far eastern end of the SEC, where can the SEC enhance value? Foremost, I would say the Charlotte market. UNC and/or NCSU could be a big help in acquiring that, though neither is located in the city. (One understands UNCC is there, but is too minor a consideration for big-time and strategic purposes). UVA (maybe VPI) would be on my exploratory list.
If the SEC can maintain regular games with those in-state ACC rivalries, at least plan for such. Being in separate conferences, but still playing each other in multiple sports is not necessarily negative.
Does the SEC want a stronger footprint in south Florida with Miami? Nice choice, in my opinion, for a second private school.
The SEC got the best in the west with UT and OU. I don’t see anything else in the B12 really moving the financial needle for the SEC.
Clemson and Florida State? A case can be made for those SEC-like schools. I want to see the SEC thrive without the mission to wipe-out the ACC.

The BIG can crow about the acquisition of UCLA and USC. There will be a rising logistics issue. They may have to absorb more PAC12 schools for the sake of the Los Angeles campuses.
The BIG still waiting on Notre Dame looks foolish. ND will strike a new lucrative deal with NBC or another network.
With the ACC’s GoR remaining in effect, frankly the SEC can afford to wait until a reasonable opening.
The BIG could hold until a new media deal is finalized. That may be prudent to do. A race for “numbers” when there are very few high-valued schools remaining outside the P2, with most (from the ACC) currently unavailable, doesn’t make complete sense.

1. The value isn't in individual schools. It's in marketing a closed group of 2 Leagues one centered with the Big Ten and the other with the SEC. There will be only 2 conferences within a decade. Initially we will have 3.

2. Old value-added thinking is moot this time and IMO is being intentionally used to conceal what is really in the works behind the scenes. If the SEC does indeed go to 24 Clemson and FSU will be content multipliers, North Carolina schools a market multi-sport set of additions, Miami a needed 3rd scheduling date in Florida a Virginia school a market addition, and #7 and 8 open for debate.

3. Your sentiment for the ACC is appreciated but won't be relevant.

4. Four Billion plus for CFP and Tourney post seasons are the primary motivation and having a closed schedule means 12 P games with 11 likely being in conference and that too is a massive content boost. Studies done 3 years ago projected 110 million in annual media revenue per school included.

And it's for real, not just a concept.

(08-03-2022 03:46 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-03-2022 02:11 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  

(08-03-2022 11:55 AM)OneSockUp Wrote:  

(08-03-2022 10:53 AM)bullet Wrote:  I think Sankey is far sighted enough to not do long-term damage for short term dollars. Don't think that is the case with Warren. I don't think he understands the college game. He has made some good dollar decisions for the intermediate term.

I agree with this 100%.

The SEC's leadership is making moves that should benefit the league for the next 50 years while the Big Ten is making moves for their next TV deal.

I am a convergent thinker when looking at the expansion scenarios being espoused. To me, pursing the numbers game is not the determining factor to define the best proficiency. So far, Sankey and the SEC have shown good judgment with expansion.
Being on the far eastern end of the SEC, where can the SEC enhance value? Foremost, I would say the Charlotte market. UNC and/or NCSU could be a big help in acquiring that, though neither is located in the city. (One understands UNCC is there, but is too minor a consideration for big-time and strategic purposes). UVA (maybe VPI) would be on my exploratory list.
If the SEC can maintain regular games with those in-state ACC rivalries, at least plan for such. Being in separate conferences, but still playing each other in multiple sports is not necessarily negative.
Does the SEC want a stronger footprint in south Florida with Miami? Nice choice, in my opinion, for a second private school.
The SEC got the best in the west with UT and OU. I don’t see anything else in the B12 really moving the financial needle for the SEC.
Clemson and Florida State? A case can be made for those SEC-like schools. I want to see the SEC thrive without the mission to wipe-out the ACC.

The BIG can crow about the acquisition of UCLA and USC. There will be a rising logistics issue. They may have to absorb more PAC12 schools for the sake of the Los Angeles campuses.
The BIG still waiting on Notre Dame looks foolish. ND will strike a new lucrative deal with NBC or another network.
With the ACC’s GoR remaining in effect, frankly the SEC can afford to wait until a reasonable opening.
The BIG could hold until a new media deal is finalized. That may be prudent to do. A race for “numbers” when there are very few high-valued schools remaining outside the P2, with most (from the ACC) currently unavailable, doesn’t make complete sense.

1. The value isn't in individual schools. It's in marketing a closed group of 2 Leagues one centered with the Big Ten and the other with the SEC. There will be only 2 conferences within a decade. Initially we will have 3.

2. Old value-added thinking is moot this time and IMO is being intentionally used to conceal what is really in the works behind the scenes. If the SEC does indeed go to 24 Clemson and FSU will be content multipliers, North Carolina schools a market multi-sport set of additions, Miami a needed 3rd scheduling date in Florida a Virginia school a market addition, and #7 and 8 open for debate.

3. Your sentiment for the ACC is appreciated but won't be relevant.

4. Four Billion plus for CFP and Tourney post seasons are the primary motivation and having a closed schedule means 12 P games with 11 likely being in conference and that too is a massive content boost. Studies done 3 years ago projected 110 million in annual media revenue per school included.

And it's for real, not just a concept.

One problem with your thinking is the B2 could faced anti-trust issues, and there will be revolt among their ranks that they want to preserved ties with like Oklahoma vs Oklahoma State in the Bedlum series. It is one of the largests tv draws out there. There are people in the SEC and Big 10 are saying the split will be for all sports in D1 with the FBS schools. That would mean more money for those schools in men's basketball tournaments. They don't want a school like Villanova, Butler or a Gonzaga to upset the apple cart.

(08-03-2022 11:55 AM)OneSockUp Wrote:  

(08-03-2022 10:53 AM)bullet Wrote:  I think Sankey is far sighted enough to not do long-term damage for short term dollars. Don't think that is the case with Warren. I don't think he understands the college game. He has made some good dollar decisions for the intermediate term.

I agree with this 100%.

The SEC's leadership is making moves that should benefit the league for the next 50 years while the Big Ten is making moves for their next TV deal.

In fairness to the B1G, I think an argument can be made that there really is nothing for a conference beyond its next TV deal.

(08-03-2022 03:46 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-03-2022 02:11 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  

(08-03-2022 11:55 AM)OneSockUp Wrote:  

(08-03-2022 10:53 AM)bullet Wrote:  I think Sankey is far sighted enough to not do long-term damage for short term dollars. Don't think that is the case with Warren. I don't think he understands the college game. He has made some good dollar decisions for the intermediate term.

I agree with this 100%.

The SEC's leadership is making moves that should benefit the league for the next 50 years while the Big Ten is making moves for their next TV deal.

I am a convergent thinker when looking at the expansion scenarios being espoused. To me, pursing the numbers game is not the determining factor to define the best proficiency. So far, Sankey and the SEC have shown good judgment with expansion.
Being on the far eastern end of the SEC, where can the SEC enhance value? Foremost, I would say the Charlotte market. UNC and/or NCSU could be a big help in acquiring that, though neither is located in the city. (One understands UNCC is there, but is too minor a consideration for big-time and strategic purposes). UVA (maybe VPI) would be on my exploratory list.
If the SEC can maintain regular games with those in-state ACC rivalries, at least plan for such. Being in separate conferences, but still playing each other in multiple sports is not necessarily negative.
Does the SEC want a stronger footprint in south Florida with Miami? Nice choice, in my opinion, for a second private school.
The SEC got the best in the west with UT and OU. I don’t see anything else in the B12 really moving the financial needle for the SEC.
Clemson and Florida State? A case can be made for those SEC-like schools. I want to see the SEC thrive without the mission to wipe-out the ACC.

The BIG can crow about the acquisition of UCLA and USC. There will be a rising logistics issue. They may have to absorb more PAC12 schools for the sake of the Los Angeles campuses.
The BIG still waiting on Notre Dame looks foolish. ND will strike a new lucrative deal with NBC or another network.
With the ACC’s GoR remaining in effect, frankly the SEC can afford to wait until a reasonable opening.
The BIG could hold until a new media deal is finalized. That may be prudent to do. A race for “numbers” when there are very few high-valued schools remaining outside the P2, with most (from the ACC) currently unavailable, doesn’t make complete sense.

1. The value isn't in individual schools. It's in marketing a closed group of 2 Leagues one centered with the Big Ten and the other with the SEC. There will be only 2 conferences within a decade. Initially we will have 3.

2. Old value-added thinking is moot this time and IMO is being intentionally used to conceal what is really in the works behind the scenes. If the SEC does indeed go to 24 Clemson and FSU will be content multipliers, North Carolina schools a market multi-sport set of additions, Miami a needed 3rd scheduling date in Florida a Virginia school a market addition, and #7 and 8 open for debate.

3. Your sentiment for the ACC is appreciated but won't be relevant.

4. Four Billion plus for CFP and Tourney post seasons are the primary motivation and having a closed schedule means 12 P games with 11 likely being in conference and that too is a massive content boost. Studies done 3 years ago projected 110 million in annual media revenue per school included.

And it's for real, not just a concept.

lol, my missing self-awareness of ACC lust is condescendingly tossed into the ash heap of the ACC's near demise?

The point is that what may be in the interests of the BIG and the SEC as still existing, for now, as autonomous conferences, will yield to broadcasting networks quest for bundling and packaging content for delivery. Time, place, and when for games, will shift even more, to ESPN, Fox, and whatever other networks become involved at a strategic level. It may get to the point the media dictates who to add, who to dump, and who gets reassigned. As the BIG and the SEC choose to further expand, I stated a preference to focus on the specific schools they seek to add rather than eliminating the existing other power conferences, including the ACC. I don't see that as a commendable mission if such is a conference's intent. A network may see further assimilation as more cost-effective and to deal with an overall a fewer number of conferences. The motive can look obvious without being stated.

Do I have compassion for schools left out of the new order due to locales, fan bases, budgetary resources, or level of TV popularity? I would hope each gets matched in a conference design with compatible and consistent brethren. How many ACC schools (or PAC12 and B12) may eventually end-up in the P2 remains undetermined at the moment. It is known that several seek to escape due to the comparatively lower payout they are still under contract for receiving.
With their long-term GoR in place, will all the "players" (political, administrative, and individual schools; not athletes), come to an amiable terms, sooner rather than later? That's a tall order.

(08-03-2022 11:55 AM)OneSockUp Wrote:  

(08-03-2022 10:53 AM)bullet Wrote:  I think Sankey is far sighted enough to not do long-term damage for short term dollars. Don't think that is the case with Warren. I don't think he understands the college game. He has made some good dollar decisions for the intermediate term.

I agree with this 100%.

The SEC's leadership is making moves that should benefit the league for the next 50 years while the Big Ten is making moves for their next TV deal.

I think the same thing. Without a true western wing in the Big 10 I expect USC and UCLA to be uncompetitive. They're apparently banking on USC football returning to form but this move is going to make it more difficult.

(08-04-2022 12:37 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  

(08-03-2022 03:46 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-03-2022 02:11 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  

(08-03-2022 11:55 AM)OneSockUp Wrote:  

(08-03-2022 10:53 AM)bullet Wrote:  I think Sankey is far sighted enough to not do long-term damage for short term dollars. Don't think that is the case with Warren. I don't think he understands the college game. He has made some good dollar decisions for the intermediate term.

I agree with this 100%.

The SEC's leadership is making moves that should benefit the league for the next 50 years while the Big Ten is making moves for their next TV deal.

I am a convergent thinker when looking at the expansion scenarios being espoused. To me, pursing the numbers game is not the determining factor to define the best proficiency. So far, Sankey and the SEC have shown good judgment with expansion.
Being on the far eastern end of the SEC, where can the SEC enhance value? Foremost, I would say the Charlotte market. UNC and/or NCSU could be a big help in acquiring that, though neither is located in the city. (One understands UNCC is there, but is too minor a consideration for big-time and strategic purposes). UVA (maybe VPI) would be on my exploratory list.
If the SEC can maintain regular games with those in-state ACC rivalries, at least plan for such. Being in separate conferences, but still playing each other in multiple sports is not necessarily negative.
Does the SEC want a stronger footprint in south Florida with Miami? Nice choice, in my opinion, for a second private school.
The SEC got the best in the west with UT and OU. I don’t see anything else in the B12 really moving the financial needle for the SEC.
Clemson and Florida State? A case can be made for those SEC-like schools. I want to see the SEC thrive without the mission to wipe-out the ACC.

The BIG can crow about the acquisition of UCLA and USC. There will be a rising logistics issue. They may have to absorb more PAC12 schools for the sake of the Los Angeles campuses.
The BIG still waiting on Notre Dame looks foolish. ND will strike a new lucrative deal with NBC or another network.
With the ACC’s GoR remaining in effect, frankly the SEC can afford to wait until a reasonable opening.
The BIG could hold until a new media deal is finalized. That may be prudent to do. A race for “numbers” when there are very few high-valued schools remaining outside the P2, with most (from the ACC) currently unavailable, doesn’t make complete sense.

1. The value isn't in individual schools. It's in marketing a closed group of 2 Leagues one centered with the Big Ten and the other with the SEC. There will be only 2 conferences within a decade. Initially we will have 3.

2. Old value-added thinking is moot this time and IMO is being intentionally used to conceal what is really in the works behind the scenes. If the SEC does indeed go to 24 Clemson and FSU will be content multipliers, North Carolina schools a market multi-sport set of additions, Miami a needed 3rd scheduling date in Florida a Virginia school a market addition, and #7 and 8 open for debate.

3. Your sentiment for the ACC is appreciated but won't be relevant.

4. Four Billion plus for CFP and Tourney post seasons are the primary motivation and having a closed schedule means 12 P games with 11 likely being in conference and that too is a massive content boost. Studies done 3 years ago projected 110 million in annual media revenue per school included.

And it's for real, not just a concept.

lol, my missing self-awareness of ACC lust is condescendingly tossed into the ash heap of the ACC's near demise?

The point is that what may be in the interests of the BIG and the SEC as still existing, for now, as autonomous conferences, will yield to broadcasting networks quest for bundling and packaging content for delivery. Time, place, and when for games, will shift even more, to ESPN, Fox, and whatever other networks become involved at a strategic level. It may get to the point the media dictates who to add, who to dump, and who gets reassigned. As the BIG and the SEC choose to further expand, I stated a preference to focus on the specific schools they seek to add rather than eliminating the existing other power conferences, including the ACC. I don't see that as a commendable mission if such is a conference's intent. A network may see further assimilation as more cost-effective and to deal with an overall a fewer number of conferences. The motive can look obvious without being stated.

Do I have compassion for schools left out of the new order due to locales, fan bases, budgetary resources, or level of TV popularity? I would hope each gets matched in a conference design with compatible and consistent brethren. How many ACC schools (or PAC12 and B12) may eventually end-up in the P2 remains undetermined at the moment. It is known that several seek to escape due to the comparatively lower payout they are still under contract for receiving.
With their long-term GoR in place, will all the "players" (political, administrative, and individual schools; not athletes), come to an amiable terms, sooner rather than later? That's a tall order.

The bolded has at least been the norm now for 12 years, but mostly who to add. Nobody has the capacity to simply dump. Reassigned is the flip side of addition.

The bolded and italicized is not the desire of conferences, but it is the end result of their complicity in a raid.

And Odin Frigg, amiable isn't necessary if loss is eliminated and mutual self interest is served.

(08-04-2022 12:37 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  It may get to the point the media dictates who to add, who to dump, and who gets reassigned.

Where you been?

(08-04-2022 12:46 PM)b2b Wrote:  

(08-03-2022 11:55 AM)OneSockUp Wrote:  

(08-03-2022 10:53 AM)bullet Wrote:  I think Sankey is far sighted enough to not do long-term damage for short term dollars. Don't think that is the case with Warren. I don't think he understands the college game. He has made some good dollar decisions for the intermediate term.

I agree with this 100%.

The SEC's leadership is making moves that should benefit the league for the next 50 years while the Big Ten is making moves for their next TV deal.

I think the same thing. Without a true western wing in the Big 10 I expect USC and UCLA to be uncompetitive. They're apparently banking on USC football returning to form but this move is going to make it more difficult.

Absolutely correct b2b, which is why I think the addition of just two schools in the pacific time zone is just a short term thing done specifically for the TV contract as noted by Onesock. IMO the B1G will add between 3 and 8 from the current PAC roster with in the next 10 years. Just guessing but I would think it would be closer to 3 schools and as soon as two years.

The PAC's new TV contract(s) will require a GOR, and likey exit fees will be added too. So it probably will be much harder for PAC teams to be taken. Which is why some of us, with unfortunate experiences to guide us, are quite sure talks are progressing behind the scenes now.

But if the terms are not acceptable, the PAC-10 may stay together. Maybe +1 with SDSU.

(08-02-2022 06:12 PM)Fresno St. Alum Wrote:  SO if ND says no right now to the B1G, do they still even go to 18 to get more of a western wing and then take a final shot at ND towards the end of the ACC GOR along w/ 1 more? ND says yes do they still go to 20 or just 18 to maximize $$.

SEC sits until the end of the ACC gor and matches the B1G 18 or 20 w/ the same number.

No one is sitting around until 2036.

(08-04-2022 01:57 PM)jacksfan29! Wrote:  

(08-02-2022 06:12 PM)Fresno St. Alum Wrote:  SO if ND says no right now to the B1G, do they still even go to 18 to get more of a western wing and then take a final shot at ND towards the end of the ACC GOR along w/ 1 more? ND says yes do they still go to 20 or just 18 to maximize $$.

SEC sits until the end of the ACC gor and matches the B1G 18 or 20 w/ the same number.

No one is sitting around until 2036.

If the Big wants to wait for ACC schools, then a lot gets put off for another dozen years.

(08-04-2022 02:02 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-04-2022 01:57 PM)jacksfan29! Wrote:  

(08-02-2022 06:12 PM)Fresno St. Alum Wrote:  SO if ND says no right now to the B1G, do they still even go to 18 to get more of a western wing and then take a final shot at ND towards the end of the ACC GOR along w/ 1 more? ND says yes do they still go to 20 or just 18 to maximize $$.

SEC sits until the end of the ACC gor and matches the B1G 18 or 20 w/ the same number.

No one is sitting around until 2036.

If the Big wants to wait for ACC schools, then a lot gets put off for another dozen years.

Won't happen, a deal with be made. In this day and age, 12 years is an eternity. Spent enough time with corporate lawyers in my work, no deal is unbreakable if you can get parties to the negotiation table.

(08-04-2022 01:57 PM)jacksfan29! Wrote:  

(08-02-2022 06:12 PM)Fresno St. Alum Wrote:  SO if ND says no right now to the B1G, do they still even go to 18 to get more of a western wing and then take a final shot at ND towards the end of the ACC GOR along w/ 1 more? ND says yes do they still go to 20 or just 18 to maximize $$.

SEC sits until the end of the ACC gor and matches the B1G 18 or 20 w/ the same number.

No one is sitting around until 2036.

I could see Big 12 go to 16 with San Diego State, Boise State, Memphis and USF to be a super conference. Those 4 alone could help Big 12 better than the weak schools of Arizona and Colorado on the field.

(08-04-2022 02:07 PM)jacksfan29! Wrote:  

(08-04-2022 02:02 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-04-2022 01:57 PM)jacksfan29! Wrote:  

(08-02-2022 06:12 PM)Fresno St. Alum Wrote:  SO if ND says no right now to the B1G, do they still even go to 18 to get more of a western wing and then take a final shot at ND towards the end of the ACC GOR along w/ 1 more? ND says yes do they still go to 20 or just 18 to maximize $$.

SEC sits until the end of the ACC gor and matches the B1G 18 or 20 w/ the same number.

No one is sitting around until 2036.

If the Big wants to wait for ACC schools, then a lot gets put off for another dozen years.

Won't happen, a deal with be made. In this day and age, 12 years is an eternity. Spent enough time with corporate lawyers in my work, no deal is unbreakable if you can get parties to the negotiation table.

if you're Wake Forest, what's the number that gets you to agree to drop from the P5 to the G5?
because that's what you're asking.

(08-04-2022 01:03 PM)b2b Wrote:  

(08-04-2022 12:37 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  It may get to the point the media dictates who to add, who to dump, and who gets reassigned.

Where you been?

Certainly not in Greenville, NC.

I am not mesmerized by ESPN.

(08-04-2022 02:07 PM)jacksfan29! Wrote:  

(08-04-2022 02:02 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-04-2022 01:57 PM)jacksfan29! Wrote:  

(08-02-2022 06:12 PM)Fresno St. Alum Wrote:  SO if ND says no right now to the B1G, do they still even go to 18 to get more of a western wing and then take a final shot at ND towards the end of the ACC GOR along w/ 1 more? ND says yes do they still go to 20 or just 18 to maximize $$.

SEC sits until the end of the ACC gor and matches the B1G 18 or 20 w/ the same number.

No one is sitting around until 2036.

If the Big wants to wait for ACC schools, then a lot gets put off for another dozen years.

Won't happen, a deal with be made. In this day and age, 12 years is an eternity. Spent enough time with corporate lawyers in my work, no deal is unbreakable if you can get parties to the negotiation table.

I wish you were right, the actual lawyers on here think that the GOR is pretty solid. I mean OU and UT are still sticking around the B12. I wish they could just go already, USC and UCLA too. I think at best we hear announcements in 2033. I mean before last yr. the last big moves were in 2011.

(08-05-2022 01:55 AM)Fresno St. Alum Wrote:  

(08-04-2022 02:07 PM)jacksfan29! Wrote:  

(08-04-2022 02:02 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-04-2022 01:57 PM)jacksfan29! Wrote:  

(08-02-2022 06:12 PM)Fresno St. Alum Wrote:  SO if ND says no right now to the B1G, do they still even go to 18 to get more of a western wing and then take a final shot at ND towards the end of the ACC GOR along w/ 1 more? ND says yes do they still go to 20 or just 18 to maximize $$.

SEC sits until the end of the ACC gor and matches the B1G 18 or 20 w/ the same number.

No one is sitting around until 2036.

If the Big wants to wait for ACC schools, then a lot gets put off for another dozen years.

Won't happen, a deal with be made. In this day and age, 12 years is an eternity. Spent enough time with corporate lawyers in my work, no deal is unbreakable if you can get parties to the negotiation table.

I wish you were right, the actual lawyers on here think that the GOR is pretty solid. I mean OU and UT are still sticking around the B12. I wish they could just go already, USC and UCLA too. I think at best we hear announcements in 2033. I mean before last yr. the last big moves were in 2011.

Good discussion and points conveyed.

With two major expansion moves, by the SEC and the BIG during the last couple of years, so much mindset has been underway that it all will be fast-tracked. Such negotiations don’t happen overnight. Extractions from the B12 over time were comparatively easy giving the timing and the fragile bonding the B12 displayed throughout its existence.
Those that may be candidates for elsewhere consume the bulk of attention, while those that are not a priority to shift conferences, become schools held in limbo not necessarily by their own choosing.

Patience may be best. But extended and sustained upheaval is not good.

(08-05-2022 01:55 AM)Fresno St. Alum Wrote:  

(08-04-2022 02:07 PM)jacksfan29! Wrote:  Won't happen, a deal with be made. In this day and age, 12 years is an eternity. Spent enough time with corporate lawyers in my work, no deal is unbreakable if you can get parties to the negotiation table.

I wish you were right, the actual lawyers on here think that the GOR is pretty solid. I mean OU and UT are still sticking around the B12. I wish they could just go already, USC and UCLA too. I think at best we hear announcements in 2033.

Duly noted

I don't think the B1G will/wants to, add more P12 schools st this time ,just so he LA schools have someone else in their time zone. They knew what moving to the B1G would mean to their athletic department and they chose to move. If th B1G HAD to expand at this time then the P12 makes the most sense. but they don't have to expand. IMO as long as ND is available the B1G will hold a spot for them. I also think that if the B1G wants to truly become a national conference, they will look south. The question is at what point do they pull the trigger? Every year that goes by is closer to the end of the ACC GOR. Which means the buyout should lessen every year. What is the magic number between exit fee and windfall from being in the B1G? 5 years? 7? I don't know what is considered legal, but could the B1G already 'be talking to ACC schools, off the record, telling them in X years there is a spot for you. The BIG must know what bringing in certain combos of programs would do for their bottom line. It would make sense to me to put in their contract a provision for expansion should desirable programs become available. The B1G is patient and will more at it's own pace and what it thinks is best for the long term. Whether that means adding Oregon next week or waiting to get into the state of Florida remains to be seen