ACC Basketball a Dud

[Waquoit]

UVA just had their best season in decades losing in the Sweet 16 to a team that was smoked by UConn.

 

[Carl Spackler]

The court would be enforcing the old contract's terms, here the Big12's. I'm sure they have planned for that.

So sure huh?

you'd think that being a ND person, you might grasp what I'm talking about. After all, ND owes it's independence to the fight Oklahoma and Georgia took to the Supreme Court 30 years ago. ND was the first program to cash in on the new rules, and the television networks quickly realized (as well as the NCAA itself - when the revenue sharing went haywire for a few years) that it was insanity for individual programs to contract their own media rights. ND still remains independent because of Dick Ebersol hinging the entire sports branch of the network on Notre Dame football and paying through the nose for it long term. BYU was able to work out it's independence through ESPN money years later, and because there are millions of Mormons in the country that support the school. BOth schools, are going to have more and more difficulty scheduling in the future. Notre Dame has two decades of experience in learning how to leach off of existing conferences for scheduling and maintaining their athletic department and sports, while BYU has gone a different kind of route. The military academies are different stories - and probably the only institutions left on the map, that have maintained the integrity of athletics and academics around revenue streams since the mid 1980s. The rest of the intercollegiate world around football has been caught up in a constantly changing money grab every few years ever since.

As an independent, you should grasp why these 'grants of rights' are nothing more than promise ring. A nice symbol of commitment, that in reality has no enforceable means of action, once the networks and broadcasting for games actually begin. Maryland isn't one bit concerned about the ACC grant of rights, and never has been. They don't want to pay $50 mill to leave. The grant of rights will not be enforceable. They will concede the grant of rights to get the exit fee dropped significantly if they need to, and then fight it later. The ACC leadership is probably dumb enough to accept it.

Trust me, there is NO way, that the Big 10 network (for example) is going to incur the expenses of broadcasting, justify charging the subscription fees, get the advertisements, etc...for a Maryland home games and away games vs. Big 10 opponents - and then turn over the profits to ESPN. Nor are they going to let ESPN come in and broadcast say - Maryland home games, and bring in all their own subscribers, advertising, etc....

Nor is Fox going to do it for CBS, or the Pac 14 network for the SEC network, etc. etc. The only possible recourse that can be upheld, will be to take the revenue from a program like Maryland's for non-conference away games and calculate a percentage off it, if anything at all - IF and only IF - the broadcasting company looking to collect - owns the rights to the program that program like Maryland is playing away against.

Protecting schools from things like a grant of rights, is probably the ONLY positive thing, that the 1984 anti-trust suit against the NCAA has done.

Let me put it this way....I have as much confidence in the grant of rights concept holding up if it's ever tested, that I did in the Big East lasting until the end of 2011, after Villanova had a year and half to come up with a plan to upgrade football to 1A, and came back to the table in spring 2011 with a shoebox diorama, and plan to play in an 18,000 seat soccer stadium, the management of which they hadn't even consulted yet.

 

[NotreDameJoe]

So sure huh?

you'd think that being a ND person, you might grasp what I'm talking about. After all, ND owes it's independence to the fight Oklahoma and Georgia took to the Supreme Court 30 years ago. ND was the first program to cash in on the new rules, and the television networks quickly realized (as well as the NCAA itself - when the revenue sharing went haywire for a few years) that it was insanity for individual programs to contract their own media rights. ND still remains independent because of Ebersol hinging the entire sports branch of the network on Notre Dame football and paying through the nose for it long term. BYU was able to work out it's independence through ESPN money years later, and because there are millions of Mormons in the country that support the school. BOth schools, are going to have more and more difficulty scheduling in the future. Notre Dame has two decades of experience in learning how to leach off of existing conferences for scheduling and maintaining their athletic department and sports, while BYU has gone a different kind of route. The military academies are different stories - and probably the only institutions left on the map, that have maintained the integrity of athletics and academics around revenue streams since the mid 1980s. The rest of the intercollegiate world around football has been caught up in a constantly changing money grab every few years ever since.

As an independent, you should grasp why these 'grants of rights' are nothing more than promise ring. A nice symbol of commitment, that in reality has no enforceable means of action, once the networks and broadcasting for games actually begin. Maryland isn't one bit concerned about the ACC grant of rights, and never has been. They don't want to pay $50 mill to leave. The grant of rights will not be enforceable. They will concede the grant of rights to get the exit fee dropped significantly if they need to, and then fight it later. The ACC leadership is probably dumb enough to accept it.

Trust me, there is NO way, that the Big 10 network (for example) is going to incur the expenses of broadcasting, justify charging the subscription fees, get the advertisements, etc...for a Maryland home games and away games vs. Big 10 opponents - and then turn over the profits to ESPN. Nor are they going to let ESPN come in and broadcast say - Maryland home games, and bring in all their own subscribers, advertising, etc....

Nor is Fox going to do it for CBS, or the Pac 14 network for the SEC network, etc. etc. The only possible recourse that can be upheld, will be to take the revenue from a program like Maryland's for non-conference away games and calculate a percentage off it, if anything at all - IF and only IF - the broadcasting company looking to collect - owns the rights to the program that program like Maryland is playing away against.

Protecting schools from things like a grant of rights, is probably the ONLY positive thing, that the 1984 anti-trust suit against the NCAA has done.

Let me put it this way....I have as much confidence in the grant of rights concept holding up if it's ever tested, that I did in the Big East lasting until the end of 2011, after Villanova had a year and half to come up with a plan to upgrade football to 1A, and came back to the table in spring 2011 with a shoebox diorama, and plan to play in an 18,000 seat soccer stadium, the management of which they hadn't even consulted yet.

I can't help you with your historical fiction but at least you should know how a contract works. Two parties exchange promises (I paint your house, you pay me $). IF they want to agree to be legally bound by the promises then they form a contract, usually written down and signed.

The school holds the rights to her own home football games, mostly the right to broadcast them to a greater audience. If a conference of schools decides their rights are more valuable when pooled together then the individual schools contract to GRANT them to the conference. (and if they decide they'd rather hang onto their own rights, they just remain independent). Now the conference as a corporate entity owns the rights to any home games during the contract's duration.

ESPN doesn't get a vote as to whether to pay the school or the conference or another network, they go by what the signed contract says. IF espn didn't pay the right people then they themselves wind up in court. Similarly if a camera crew tried to tape a football game without the rights to do so, they get sued by the rights holder. If you don't believe me, try walking into Gillette with your own camera crew next fall.

 

[Seaa Blue]

There's a bit much to quote there so let me just throw out:

BTN is not yet bidding for Tier 1 games. ESPN sends a boatload of cash to B1G for the right to choose games each week to be broadcast on their network. BTN is happy to broadcast games not selected by ESPN as ESPN/ABC can bring in a bigger audience for the selected games. The Notre Dame Network (NBC) gives them a national audience most of the time because NBC doesn't have much other content to broadcast. Works out well.

The question with the GoR is: if a team leaves a conference, does the former conference really not have to compensate them for broadcasting home games that feature 2 teams from another conference? The GoR and bylaws say as much, but would that hold up in court? Or, if the former conference opted not to broadcast the event, would the home team really be in breach of contract if it decided to broadcast the game? Yes, it would be a breach, but would it hold up in court?

 

[TerryD]

So sure huh?

you'd think that being a ND person, you might grasp what I'm talking about. After all, ND owes it's independence to the fight Oklahoma and Georgia took to the Supreme Court 30 years ago. ND was the first program to cash in on the new rules, and the television networks quickly realized (as well as the NCAA itself - when the revenue sharing went haywire for a few years) that it was insanity for individual programs to contract their own media rights. ND still remains independent because of Ebersol hinging the entire sports branch of the network on Notre Dame football and paying through the nose for it long term. BYU was able to work out it's independence through ESPN money years later, and because there are millions of Mormons in the country that support the school. BOth schools, are going to have more and more difficulty scheduling in the future. Notre Dame has two decades of experience in learning how to leach off of existing conferences for scheduling and maintaining their athletic department and sports, while BYU has gone a different kind of route. The military academies are different stories - and probably the only institutions left on the map, that have maintained the integrity of athletics and academics around revenue streams since the mid 1980s. The rest of the intercollegiate world around football has been caught up in a constantly changing money grab every few years ever since.

As an independent, you should grasp why these 'grants of rights' are nothing more than promise ring. A nice symbol of commitment, that in reality has no enforceable means of action, once the networks and broadcasting for games actually begin. Maryland isn't one bit concerned about the ACC grant of rights, and never has been. They don't want to pay $50 mill to leave. The grant of rights will not be enforceable. They will concede the grant of rights to get the exit fee dropped significantly if they need to, and then fight it later. The ACC leadership is probably dumb enough to accept it.

Trust me, there is NO way, that the Big 10 network (for example) is going to incur the expenses of broadcasting, justify charging the subscription fees, get the advertisements, etc...for a Maryland home games and away games vs. Big 10 opponents - and then turn over the profits to ESPN. Nor are they going to let ESPN come in and broadcast say - Maryland home games, and bring in all their own subscribers, advertising, etc....

Nor is Fox going to do it for CBS, or the Pac 14 network for the SEC network, etc. etc. The only possible recourse that can be upheld, will be to take the revenue from a program like Maryland's for non-conference away games and calculate a percentage off it, if anything at all - IF and only IF - the broadcasting company looking to collect - owns the rights to the program that program like Maryland is playing away against.

Protecting schools from things like a grant of rights, is probably the ONLY positive thing, that the 1984 anti-trust suit against the NCAA has done.

Let me put it this way....I have as much confidence in the grant of rights concept holding up if it's ever tested, that I did in the Big East lasting until the end of 2011, after Villanova had a year and half to come up with a plan to upgrade football to 1A, and came back to the table in spring 2011 with a shoebox diorama, and plan to play in an 18,000 seat soccer stadium, the management of which they hadn't even consulted yet.

Maryland never signed the ACC Grant of Rights. They had given notice prior to its execution.

The ACC/Maryland lawsuit is about exit fees, not a GOR.

 

[dayooper]

NotreDameJoe, post: 915473, member: 4632"]I can't help you with your historical fiction but at least you should know how a contract works. Two parties exchange promises (I paint your house, you pay me $). IF they want to agree to be legally bound by the promises then they form a contract, usually written down and signed.

This is a simplistic view of things. There is much more to a media contract than I pay you to paint my house. Almost every case of media rights (many times in the recording industry) the publishing company does hold the rights, but still must pay what the original contract specifies. Conference by-laws mean nothing if the courts decide the are in breach of the GoR. There is precedence that they just may be.

The school holds the rights to her own home football games, mostly the right to broadcast them to a greater audience. If a conference of schools decides their rights are more valuable when pooled together then the individual schools contract to GRANT them to the conference. (and if they decide they'd rather hang onto their own rights, they just remain independent). Now the conference as a corporate entity owns the rights to any home games during the contract's duration.

Yet, you are missing the final piece of the puzzle: the conference has sold those rights to the media outlet (ESPN, Fox, NBC/Comcast, ext.). Since they are sold (or leased), ESPN can do whatever they want with them. The GoR isn't about keeping schools in conferences, it's about making sure the media gets to keep what they pay for. They don't want Kansas basketball out of their inventory. ESPN could care less if they are in the Big12, they just want to be able to broadcast them (and the advertisements that go along with them). In fact, some might say that ESPN might want them in the Big10. Imagine the match ups: Kansas vs Indiana, Kansas vs MSU, Kansas vs Michigan, ect. (and with UConn, if they were in the Big10). The only thing the conferences do is distribute the media payouts. That's the only card the conferences have. The Big12 can't deny ESPN what they paid for.

ESPN doesn't get a vote as to whether to pay the school or the conference or another network, they go by what the signed contract says. IF espn didn't pay the right people then they themselves wind up in court. Similarly if a camera crew tried to tape a football game without the rights to do so, they get sued by the rights holder. If you don't believe me, try walking into Gillette with your own camera crew next fall.

Just like if The Big12 denied payment to a school if they left the conference. If The Big12 didn't pay Kansas, they would be in breach of contract. ESPN/Fox/NBC will pay for what ever contract says, obviously. Since ESPN/Fox has their hands in The Big12 and The Big10 broadcasting, why can't they just broadcast those games on their outlets in the Midwest and Northeast? They bought them. The Big12 can't say "You can't show Kansas' games, we forbid it." Then The Big12 would be in breach of contract and could lose payment.

Since ESPN/Fox works with both conferences, how could The Big12 prevent them from filming the games? They can't. Since ESPN has rights to The Big12's tier 1 games, and when would Kansas be a tier 1 game, Fox already has the rights to the tier 2/3 games. They bought them. They can do whatever they want with them. If they want to put them on the BTN (which they own 51% of), what's stopping them?

The only real issue getting around a GoR is what's in it for the new conference. They are adding another mouth to feed without getting something back from the media, unless the new conference can get ESPN/Fox to pay more for something they already own (why there won't be An ACC Network anytime soon). The only way I see that if it was a huge move, like Texas (which isn't happening).

 

[Gfunk]

UVA just had their best season in decades losing in the Sweet 16 to a team that was smoked by UConn.

Let's be fair, you didn't smoke MSU. You pulled away in the last 2 min after a boneheaded, yet rightly called foul on Appling. MSU may have been the media darlings, but I can assure you our health was way overhyped. Just look at Appling's stats the last month. You can't win a NC, most years, with a PG that plays like he has the past two months.

But happy for UConn.

 

[Carl Spackler]

Maryland never signed the ACC Grant of Rights. They had given notice prior to its execution.

The ACC/Maryland lawsuit is about exit fees, not a GOR.

THat's why I wrote they would concede it, if need be, to get the exit fees dropped.....I cant believe the ACC leadership would be dumb enough to accept, but you never know.

 

[Carl Spackler]

This is a simplistic view of things. There is much more to a media contract than I pay you to paint my house. Almost every case of media rights (many times in the recording industry) the publishing company does hold the rights, but still must pay what the original contract specifies. Conference by-laws mean nothing if the courts decide the are in breach of the GoR. There is precedence that they just may be.
Yet, you are missing the final piece of the puzzle: the conference has sold those rights to the media outlet (ESPN, Fox, NBC/Comcast, ext.). Since they are sold (or leased), ESPN can do whatever they want with them. The GoR isn't about keeping schools in conferences, it's about making sure the media gets to keep what they pay for. They don't want Kansas basketball out of their inventory. ESPN could care less if they are in the Big12, they just want to be able to broadcast them (and the advertisements that go along with them). In fact, some might say that ESPN might want them in the Big10. Imagine the match ups: Kansas vs Indiana, Kansas vs MSU, Kansas vs Michigan, ect. (and with UConn, if they were in the Big10). The only thing the conferences do is distribute the media payouts. That's the only card the conferences have. The Big12 can't deny ESPN what they paid for.
Just like if The Big12 denied payment to a school if they left the conference. If The Big12 didn't pay Kansas, they would be in breach of contract. ESPN/Fox/NBC will pay for what ever contract says, obviously. Since ESPN/Fox has their hands in The Big12 and The Big10 broadcasting, why can't they just broadcast those games on their outlets in the Midwest and Northeast? They bought them. The Big12 can't say "You can't show Kansas' games, we forbid it." Then The Big12 would be in breach of contract and could lose payment.
Since ESPN/Fox works with both conferences, how could The Big12 prevent them from filming the games? They can't. Since ESPN has rights to The Big12's tier 1 games, and when would Kansas be a tier 1 game, Fox already has the rights to the tier 2/3 games. They bought them. They can do whatever they want with them. If they want to put them on the BTN (which they own 51% of), what's stopping them? The only real issue getting around a GoR is what's in it for the new conference. They are adding another mouth to feed without getting something back from the media, unless the new conference can get ESPN/Fox to pay more for something they already own (why there won't be An ACC Network anytime soon). The only way I see that if it was a huge move, like Texas (which isn't happening).

Ding ding ding. Winner.

 

[SouthronCross]

Thank you sir. Those games put SCU on the map. Of course, one of the most famous alum we got is Brandi Chastain. There are some good players in the WCC. I still remember UCONN played on the Pepperdine campus before heading out to Maui for that tournament back in 2006.

Oh yeah, the WCC has always had some good teams. But, unless you stay up late here on the east coast, you hardly ever get to see them play. And, thats sad, because they play a good brand of basketball.

When Coach Smith was on the bench, if he had a California player on his roster, he would schedule a game close to his hometown during his senior season. Coach Guthridge and Coach Williams did that, too. But, I think Roy has not done that as much lately. Personally, I think with the way the Wear twins and LDII left the program, he may not be quite so keen to recruit Cali kids in the future.

 

[husky10]

The only real issue getting around a GoR is what's in it for the new conference. They are adding another mouth to feed without getting something back from the media, unless the new conference can get ESPN/Fox to pay more for something they already own (why there won't be An ACC Network anytime soon). The only way I see that if it was a huge move, like Texas (which isn't happening).

Something to consider is that if a school leaves the Big XII they are still taking their third tier rights with them (depending on the media outlet the school is using to broadcast their third tier rights). So for the B1G they would be able to add these games to their B1G network and make money off it immediately. This could allow a school like Kansas to collect some small payout from the B1G while they wait out the GOR. There is even a chance they make more money from the B1G network then they might have from their other contract for broadcasting their 3rd tier rights.

Although I am still under the belief that every school that agreed to a GOR is satisfied where they are for the short term.

 

[gioff23]

While I agree with the headline (the ACC was not a good conference this year); they did make exactly as much as The American in terms of tourney credits.

 

[dayooper]

There is even a chance they make more money from the B1G network then they might have from their other contract for broadcasting their 3rd tier rights.

Remember that most of the Big12 tier 3 is all of their remaining media (including coaches shows, radio broadcasts, ect.). The BTN contract doesn't include those, only live TV broadcasts and the like. Michigan makes a couple million more off of their non BTN media.

 

[NotreDameJoe]

This is a simplistic view of things. There is much more to a media contract than I pay you to paint my house. Almost every case of media rights (many times in the recording industry) the publishing company does hold the rights, but still must pay what the original contract specifies. Conference by-laws mean nothing if the courts decide the are in breach of the GoR. There is precedence that they just may be.



Yet, you are missing the final piece of the puzzle: the conference has sold those rights to the media outlet (ESPN, Fox, NBC/Comcast, ext.). Since they are sold (or leased), ESPN can do whatever they want with them. The GoR isn't about keeping schools in conferences, it's about making sure the media gets to keep what they pay for. They don't want Kansas basketball out of their inventory. ESPN could care less if they are in the Big12, they just want to be able to broadcast them (and the advertisements that go along with them). In fact, some might say that ESPN might want them in the Big10. Imagine the match ups: Kansas vs Indiana, Kansas vs MSU, Kansas vs Michigan, ect. (and with UConn, if they were in the Big10). The only thing the conferences do is distribute the media payouts. That's the only card the conferences have. The Big12 can't deny ESPN what they paid for.



Just like if The Big12 denied payment to a school if they left the conference. If The Big12 didn't pay Kansas, they would be in breach of contract. ESPN/Fox/NBC will pay for what ever contract says, obviously. Since ESPN/Fox has their hands in The Big12 and The Big10 broadcasting, why can't they just broadcast those games on their outlets in the Midwest and Northeast? They bought them. The Big12 can't say "You can't show Kansas' games, we forbid it." Then The Big12 would be in breach of contract and could lose payment.

Since ESPN/Fox works with both conferences, how could The Big12 prevent them from filming the games? They can't. Since ESPN has rights to The Big12's tier 1 games, and when would Kansas be a tier 1 game, Fox already has the rights to the tier 2/3 games. They bought them. They can do whatever they want with them. If they want to put them on the BTN (which they own 51% of), what's stopping them?

The only real issue getting around a GoR is what's in it for the new conference. They are adding another mouth to feed without getting something back from the media, unless the new conference can get ESPN/Fox to pay more for something they already own (why there won't be An ACC Network anytime soon). The only way I see that if it was a huge move, like Texas (which isn't happening).

Whatever helps Speckler to make an ounce of sense is great with me. In your scenario the Big12 would love broadcasts Kansas home games because the Big12 would be getting the money (assuming anyone actually watches KU football games) without really having a stake in the outcome. I highly doubt the Big12 could impose a media blackout on a current or former member.

Of course in real life KU just takes back her media rights and the BUG pays the Big12 a cash settlement. I doubt the BUG wants to test the GOR vs Kansas's Sovereign Immunity since that could also invalidate their own GOR.

 

[dayooper]

Whatever helps Speckler to make an ounce of sense is great with me. In your scenario the Big12 would love broadcasts Kansas home games because the Big12 would be getting the money (assuming anyone actually watches KU football games) without really having a stake in the outcome. I highly doubt the Big12 could impose a media blackout on a current or former member.

Why would they "love" it? They would be losing a member and exposure. Again, why are schools playing big time intercollegiate sports? It's not to make money, it's exposure. You, as a ND fan, should understand that more than anybody else. Your independence is more than the fans and donors wanting independence, it's recruiting new students. Why do you have the scheduling contract with The ACC (and before with The Big East)? More potential students on The East Coast. The national brand of ND (and the NBC contract) puts you into more potential student homes than any other school, thus making the pool of better academic candidates much larger. Losing Kansas basketball removes one of the three national brands The Big12 has (Texas and Oklahoma football). It makes The Big12 more regional and in less homes of potential students. Not what the schools of The Big12 want.

Of course in real life KU just takes back her media rights and the BUG pays the Big12 a cash settlement. I doubt the BUG wants to test the GOR vs Kansas's Sovereign Immunity since that could also invalidate their own GOR.

Why would The Big10 care about invalidating it's GoR? The Big10 GoR is not in place to hold schools together. It's there to package the media and sell it for he best contract. The Big10 has more in common than a GoR. They are 12 (soon to be 14) large, highly rated universities that play sports against each other. They cooperate, have a system to help each other with research, have a system to allow students to take classes at each others school, and, except for UNL, are part of a research organization together. They are very alike. It's the academics that bind them together. The SEC, who has no GoR, has the southern culture and football that binds them. The Pac has academics (and the geography of half the country). The clamoring about The Big12 and ACC GoR's is because they are perceived as not strong enough to keep together on their own. I disagree about the ACC, but they aren't as strong as The Big10, SEC, and Pac as they are way to0 fragmented.

I personally don't think Kansas has enough to push The Big10 to break the GoR of The Big12. As part of a larger expansion? Yes, but Kansas alone from The Big12 isn't enough. It will cost money to litigate and is Kansas worth it? In the end, I think The Big10 will settle at 20 (4 pods of 5) and I think UConn will be one of the 6 added. Kansas? I really don't know.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

A GOR can not be broken unless there is something very unique about the GoR in question. So unless you are a media lawyer that can point to the specific clause of the Big 12 GoR that has a hole in it, stop saying the GoR can be beaten. There is a lot of case law around the sale of media rights. No one is beating a GoR.

 

[NotreDameJoe]

Why would they "love" it? They would be losing a member and exposure. Again, why are schools playing big time intercollegiate sports? It's not to make money, it's exposure. You, as a ND fan, should understand that more than anybody else. Your independence is more than the fans and donors wanting independence, it's recruiting new students. Why do you have the scheduling contract with The ACC (and before with The Big East)? More potential students on The East Coast. The national brand of ND (and the NBC contract) puts you into more potential student homes than any other school, thus making the pool of better academic candidates much larger. Losing Kansas basketball removes one of the three national brands The Big12 has (Texas and Oklahoma football). It makes The Big12 more regional and in less homes of potential students. Not what the schools of The Big12 want.



Why would The Big10 care about invalidating it's GoR? The Big10 GoR is not in place to hold schools together. It's there to package the media and sell it for he best contract. The Big10 has more in common than a GoR. They are 12 (soon to be 14) large, highly rated universities that play sports against each other. They cooperate, have a system to help each other with research, have a system to allow students to take classes at each others school, and, except for UNL, are part of a research organization together. They are very alike. It's the academics that bind them together. The SEC, who has no GoR, has the southern culture and football that binds them. The Pac has academics (and the geography of half the country). The clamoring about The Big12 and ACC GoR's is because they are perceived as not strong enough to keep together on their own. I disagree about the ACC, but they aren't as strong as The Big10, SEC, and Pac as they are way to0 fragmented.

I personally don't think Kansas has enough to push The Big10 to break the GoR of The Big12. As part of a larger expansion? Yes, but Kansas alone from The Big12 isn't enough. It will cost money to litigate and is Kansas worth it? In the end, I think The Big10 will settle at 20 (4 pods of 5) and I think UConn will be one of the 6 added. Kansas? I really don't know.

I was just talking the legality of a team changing conferences but leaving her rights behind and kept KU as the example. The Big12 would have to lose cOSU to truly rejoice over a defection. You could imagine that the GOR does NOT strongly bind middle to lower tier programs because the new conference can more easily write a check to the old conference.

If the BUG10 didn't feel they needed a GOR then why did they sign one? Perceived strength may be true now but it doesn't have to stay that way. A conference usually needs 80% or so of member votes to dissolve, so say, the Eastern schools wanted to break off, they couldn't leave without the Western schools consent. The only conference that really is different is the SEC with their We don't want you if you don't want to be here attitude. So strong they would never go against their Confederate ideology.


Yes the Big12 would have some soul searching to do if KU got a BUG invite, but I think the Big12 still lives and dies based on what UT/OU do. The little 8 don't really have any obvious landing spots if the conference dissolves.

 

[Seaa Blue]

Well let's consider that the "BUG10" did not sign a GoR under duress. So, peck away if you like but it's a huge stretch to suggest "it's necessary".

If a school really wanted out we certainly would not see the hissy fit being put up by the ACC.

And if a Mizzou or Vandy should leave the SEC, get out the GoR countdown clock. It would follow.

 

[woomba]

The Big Ten didn't sign a GoR under duress but it was necessary due to the way the way each school gets an equity share into the Big Ten Network.

The SEC were rumored to create a GoR for similar reasons but once it became clear that the SEC Network had no equity ownership at stake the need just wasn't there. The Big 12 and ACC GoRs are a bit more unique in that they are more defensive in nature.

 

[Seaa Blue]

The Big Ten didn't sign a GoR under duress but it was necessary due to the way the way each school gets an equity share into the Big Ten Network.

I don't know for sure, but somebody (named Delany) probably had the foresight way back when to see that cobbling together a network would be rather difficult if individual schools were out selling their non-tier-1 TV rights to the highest bidder.

So I think what we're looking at here is the Big Ten saying long ago that they wanted those rights to stay under the conference umbrella. And like shared gate plan, share the secondary TV rights (and don't farm them out Raycom).

That little bit of foresight and brotherhood paid of handsomely.

 

[NotreDameJoe]

So some GORs are somehow nicer than others even though the rules are exactly the same. Got it.

 

[dayooper]

So some GORs are somehow nicer than others even though the rules are exactly the same. Got it.

The rules are not the same. Like contracts, each GoR is written differently to suit the needs of the partners. Sure, someday the The Big10 may not be in the position it is, but things sure aren't looking that way. The Big10 has some of the largest schools with some of the largest alumni bases in what is still one of the most heavily populated in the country. Guess who makes the most loyal fans? Alumni and their families. They also have something that holds them together, institutional culture. They have a common outlook on higher education.

 

[NotreDameJoe]

The rules are not the same. Like contracts, each GoR is written differently to suit the needs of the partners. Sure, someday the The Big10 may not be in the position it is, but things sure aren't looking that way. The Big10 has some of the largest schools with some of the largest alumni bases in what is still one of the most heavily populated in the country. Guess who makes the most loyal fans? Alumni and their families. They also have something that holds them together, institutional culture. They have a common outlook on higher education.

Unless you can point to a clause in the GOR and say "here is what they do differently" then your post just reads like BUG talking points. PSU is bound in the same way as UVA to their respective conferences.

 

[Seaa Blue]

Sometimes the contract is honored (Gerry Faust), sometimes the honor part is forgotten and you do whatever it takes to make the problem (Charlie Weiss) go away, and sometimes both sides run away a fast as they can (George O'Leary). Similar contracts I'm sure, much different results.

 

[UConn9604]

As for football, if UConn returns to Charlottesville, tell the long snapper to watch where he's snapping.

Lucky for you, the next time we play you in football, Donald Brown won't rush for 600 yards like he did the last time.

 

[UConn9604]

You don't have to convince me that UConn would be a good addition to the ACC. I'm already impressed with the UConn athletics department and its potential. This other poster was once again pushing Rutgers. It seems that most of the time I get into good conversation about college athletics here on the boneyard someone wants to bring up Rutgers. My luck I guess.

Not trying to be a wise guy here, but what did you mean by "potential"? Are you saying you think we're *almost* a good athletic institution?

 

[NotreDameJoe]

Thanks for playing Sea Blue

 

[Seaa Blue]

Thanks for playing Sea Blue

I gave it my best shot.

 

[btstimpy]

Not trying to be a wise guy here, but what did you mean by "potential"? Are you saying you think we're *almost* a good athletic institution?

Potential to come into the ACC and add a couple of programs to sponsor varsity programs in all 27 ACC sponsored sports. I could see UConn with a men's lacrosse team if UConn were in the ACC for instance. There has been a lot of momentum and support for UConn athletics over the past 20 years. I could see UConn getting to the top 10 in the Director's Cup. The basketball is already there consistently.

 

[UConn9604]

Potential to come into the ACC and add a couple of programs to sponsor varsity programs in all 27 ACC sponsored sports. I could see UConn with a men's lacrosse team if UConn were in the ACC for instance. There has been a lot of momentum and support for UConn athletics over the past 20 years. I could see UConn getting to the top 10 in the Director's Cup. The basketball is already there consistently.

I don't know how the Director's Cup is scored, but if you filtered out the sports in which we don't field teams, I'd have to say we do as well as any school in the country.

Men's lacrosse and a lot of other men's sports are Title IX casualties at UConn.