Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="upstater, post: 4735031, member: 153"] I can't wrap my head around most of this. Mainly I wonder what's in it for those that voted them in. I get that they are more financially secure at 15 members if a few walk away. BUT they have to carry SMU's dead ass into eternity now. Unless many leave for the B12. BUT how does that help those left behind? I also wonder about vote shares here. Does SMU get a full vote? If so, they're not going to side with the people pushing for payout differentials. Even better, if I'm SMU, receiving no money for 9 years, I'm going to vote with FSU and Clemson when it comes to dissolution of the league. Maybe SMU doesn't have a vote however. But if it did it would certainly want to get paid quicker, through a new media deal covering ALL members. The only incentive here for ESPN is that this speeds up ACC dissolution, gets them out of this horrid contract that runs until 2036, and forces the conference to take a lesser payout. Meanwhile ESPN still owns 1/2 or more of the B12 contract so they'll still have the most valuable properties, they'll pay less for BC and Wake Forest. Oddly, there's an in here for UConn if more than 3 members leave the ACC (and I do see that happening). ESPN just agreed to pay for the ACC importing a bomb into the conference, because when that bomb goes off, ESPN will dissolve the contract and come out ahead. But why did the ACC do this? This weakens them massively? They could've held onto the GOR and added new members once they got wind of the departures. [/QUOTE]

Verification: First name of men's bb coach

Forum statistics

Threads: 164,663

Messages: 4,405,730

Members: 10,221

Latest member: abbbb