(11-18-2022 04:03 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(11-18-2022 03:49 PM)djsuperfly Wrote:  

(11-17-2022 09:45 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  Interesting.

Based upon the above, the SEC adding NC state, VT, FSU, and Clemson, is an interesting idea.

It leaves the rest of the NC cluster intact in the ACC, so that ND doesn't flee.

Replace with Cin, UCF, USF, WV, and pick 2 other former Big East schools for 6 (UConn, Temple, ECU, Memphis, Navy, etc.).

Why does no one ever want to address an $80 million lateral (at best) move when they bring this scenario up?

I've noted in other threads that inviting is not necessarily equal to immediately joining. WV in particular likely would wait at least til after TX and OK left.

The penalty might not apply to the new recruits yet.

The precedent has been set (TCU/Boise) that, yes, the penalty would apply. Also they're not "new recruits" anymore. They have contracted entrance date to the conference. Now, they're not immediately receiving full shares, so I guess that means the exit fee would be lower as well. But I doubt the ACC would be inviting UCF and Cincy in the next 2 years anyway, so that seems moot.

What's the point of not "immediately joining?" Grabbing the TX/OU exit money is nice, but it still doesn't change the $80 million equation for WVU no matter when they would leave. The consensus around here seems to be that the ACC will make a bit more, maybe about $5 million per year. It would take WVU 16 years to make up that money.

And that's $5 million more per year as currently constituted. You guys were talking about FSU, Clemson, NCSU, and VT leaving. Give up $80 million to move to that? I'd be sitting down and having a bourbon with every booster and decision maker I know in Orlando to let them know what an absolutely horrific idea that is.

(11-18-2022 06:09 PM)djsuperfly Wrote:  

(11-18-2022 04:03 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(11-18-2022 03:49 PM)djsuperfly Wrote:  

(11-17-2022 09:45 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  Interesting.

Based upon the above, the SEC adding NC state, VT, FSU, and Clemson, is an interesting idea.

It leaves the rest of the NC cluster intact in the ACC, so that ND doesn't flee.

Replace with Cin, UCF, USF, WV, and pick 2 other former Big East schools for 6 (UConn, Temple, ECU, Memphis, Navy, etc.).

Why does no one ever want to address an $80 million lateral (at best) move when they bring this scenario up?

I've noted in other threads that inviting is not necessarily equal to immediately joining. WV in particular likely would wait at least til after TX and OK left.

The penalty might not apply to the new recruits yet.

The precedent has been set (TCU/Boise) that, yes, the penalty would apply. Also they're not "new recruits" anymore. They have contracted entrance date to the conference. Now, they're not immediately receiving full shares, so I guess that means the exit fee would be lower as well. But I doubt the ACC would be inviting UCF and Cincy in the next 2 years anyway, so that seems moot.

What's the point of not "immediately joining?" Grabbing the TX/OU exit money is nice, but it still doesn't change the $80 million equation for WVU no matter when they would leave. The consensus around here seems to be that the ACC will make a bit more, maybe about $5 million per year. It would take WVU 16 years to make up that money.

And that's $5 million more per year as currently constituted. You guys were talking about FSU, Clemson, NCSU, and VT leaving. Give up $80 million to move to that? I'd be sitting down and having a bourbon with every booster and decision maker I know in Orlando to let them know what an absolutely horrific idea that is.

It depends on what's been signed. Cin and company haven't joined yet.

So unless you have seen what's been signed, anything in regards to that is merely you or I guessing.

As for WV waiting, it's because there are timeframes to meet. It's Presumably why TX and OK announced when they did, for the leave date that they did.

There are other threads where the bylaws and GoR have been discussed.

All that said, even if I accepted the premise of your misinformed assertion - 80 million to go from b12 to ACC - if even only due to travel savings (without even talking about former rivalries, etc) yes, I think they would - in a heartbeat.

(11-11-2022 07:14 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(11-11-2022 12:28 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(11-10-2022 05:27 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  ....
This really was a simple solution to all the drama -

Vote to allow FSU to leave.
[Perhaps Clemson as well. -G]

Vote to add Cin, UCF, and (eventually) WV.
[I'd say USF & UCF, Cincy & WV. -G]

And espn even gets more school matchups/rivalries for content, and it would be in their best interest to update the ACC deal based upon that, to help facilitate the moves. Why? Because it sets up the B12 to get some PAC school adds, and espn is doing the deal with the B12 as well - first picks.

This is an "everyone's happy" solution.
....

I think the ACC would be happy to let FSU go for the right price.

One would think so.
It's merely a matter of negotiation.

Something of the sort may be under discussion as we speak.

(12-29-2022 10:41 AM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(11-11-2022 07:14 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(11-11-2022 12:28 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(11-10-2022 05:27 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  ....
This really was a simple solution to all the drama -

Vote to allow FSU to leave.
[Perhaps Clemson as well. -G]

Vote to add Cin, UCF, and (eventually) WV.
[I'd say USF & UCF, Cincy & WV. -G]

And espn even gets more school matchups/rivalries for content, and it would be in their best interest to update the ACC deal based upon that, to help facilitate the moves. Why? Because it sets up the B12 to get some PAC school adds, and espn is doing the deal with the B12 as well - first picks.

This is an "everyone's happy" solution.
....

I think the ACC would be happy to let FSU go for the right price.

One would think so.
It's merely a matter of negotiation.

Something of the sort may be under discussion as we speak.

That would definitely be news.

Speaking just for myself, I've been banging this drum awhile lol

I've been wondering whether the ACC would do something after the season ends. But with all the silence, I'll admit I had started to doubt.

(11-18-2022 10:41 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(11-18-2022 06:09 PM)djsuperfly Wrote:  

(11-18-2022 04:03 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(11-18-2022 03:49 PM)djsuperfly Wrote:  

(11-17-2022 09:45 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  Interesting.

Based upon the above, the SEC adding NC state, VT, FSU, and Clemson, is an interesting idea.

It leaves the rest of the NC cluster intact in the ACC, so that ND doesn't flee.

Replace with Cin, UCF, USF, WV, and pick 2 other former Big East schools for 6 (UConn, Temple, ECU, Memphis, Navy, etc.).

Why does no one ever want to address an $80 million lateral (at best) move when they bring this scenario up?

I've noted in other threads that inviting is not necessarily equal to immediately joining. WV in particular likely would wait at least til after TX and OK left.

The penalty might not apply to the new recruits yet.

The precedent has been set (TCU/Boise) that, yes, the penalty would apply. Also they're not "new recruits" anymore. They have contracted entrance date to the conference. Now, they're not immediately receiving full shares, so I guess that means the exit fee would be lower as well. But I doubt the ACC would be inviting UCF and Cincy in the next 2 years anyway, so that seems moot.

What's the point of not "immediately joining?" Grabbing the TX/OU exit money is nice, but it still doesn't change the $80 million equation for WVU no matter when they would leave. The consensus around here seems to be that the ACC will make a bit more, maybe about $5 million per year. It would take WVU 16 years to make up that money.

And that's $5 million more per year as currently constituted. You guys were talking about FSU, Clemson, NCSU, and VT leaving. Give up $80 million to move to that? I'd be sitting down and having a bourbon with every booster and decision maker I know in Orlando to let them know what an absolutely horrific idea that is.

It depends on what's been signed. Cin and company haven't joined yet.

So unless you have seen what's been signed, anything in regards to that is merely you or I guessing.

As for WV waiting, it's because there are timeframes to meet. It's Presumably why TX and OK announced when they did, for the leave date that they did.

There are other threads where the bylaws and GoR have been discussed.

All that said, even if I accepted the premise of your misinformed assertion - 80 million to go from b12 to ACC - if even only due to travel savings (without even talking about former rivalries, etc) yes, I think they would - in a heartbeat.

Its not guessing. Its informed opinion that they are committed. Thinking otherwise is just random speculation without any logical reason to believe it is true.