OT: - Bleacher Report - ACC schools exploring breakup | Page 2 | The Boneyard

OT: Bleacher Report - ACC schools exploring breakup

The realignment click bait stretch of the offseason is apparently under way among college athletics writers.

The GOR has been looked at 100 times by very fancy lawyers. Even assuming 50% of those lawyers are overpaid idiots (a safe assumption when it comes to lawyers), that means the other 50% aren’t, and they still have not found a way to beat the GOR. It’s not beatable short of dissolving the conference, no matter how many times Clemson’s athletic department leaks to the media that they are looking into it.
 
Interesting that these schools' lawyers are examining the GoR contract looking for contract termination penalties as if this was an oversight.

Shouldn't they have known this upfront? Or were they blinded by greed?

At that level I just find it as 'bad lawyering' for them to now review a contract so extensively (for a fee of course) so late in an enforced agreement.
 
Can a football conference be created for the scraps. Duke, Wake, VT. BC, Syracuse, UConn and who else? Set it up like the old BE with the some playing football and some basketball only.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
The realignment click bait stretch of the offseason is apparently under way among college athletics writers.

The GOR has been looked at 100 times by very fancy lawyers. Even assuming 50% of those lawyers are overpaid idiots (a safe assumption when it comes to lawyers), that means the other 50% aren’t, and they still have not found a way to beat the GOR. It’s not beatable short of dissolving the conference, no matter how many times Clemson’s athletic department leaks to the media that they are looking into it.
Expand ...
The reporting is that there are 7 schools willing to break it up. So they just need 1 more to flip to get the majority, which could dissolve the conference and break up the GOR that way.
 
.-.
nelsonmuntz said:
The realignment click bait stretch of the offseason is apparently under way among college athletics writers.

The GOR has been looked at 100 times by very fancy lawyers. Even assuming 50% of those lawyers are overpaid idiots (a safe assumption when it comes to lawyers), that means the other 50% aren’t, and they still have not found a way to beat the GOR. It’s not beatable short of dissolving the conference, no matter how many times Clemson’s athletic department leaks to the media that they are looking into it.
Expand ...
I don't see any way University presidents fight this out in court for the next 13 years. The GoR has a present value. It may be north of $500m, but if Clemson wants out......
 
People who really think the GOR is "unbreakable" are funny. It's breakable. There will (probably) be consequences, but they can definitely break it if they want.

It's against the law to commit murder, but some people do it any ways. And some people who commit murder even get cleared of it in a court of law.

With that said, if they break the GOR they need a landing spot that will be more profitable than their current situation. And being held at gun point by the ACC is going to give the B1G or SEC plenty of negotiation room for any new incoming member.

The B1G apparently tried to add Oregon and Washington last fall but only would do it if their media partners added $200 million to the deal to ensure no current members get diluted. None of their media partners were willing to pay the price. Would they pay that (or more) for Clemson and/or FSU?
 
Conference realignment should make everyone queasy. We all want the old Big East back, but that's never happening. What we have now is the closest we'll ever get.

But that's supposedly not sustainable financially. So we'll take whatever offer we get, and end up in some leftover ACC, or if we're lucky in the Big 12, where we can once again have conference games against UCF.

Fun stuff.
 
B1GEast said:
Expand ...

I was laughed at just 2 weeks ago for saying the B1G was very interested in UNC, Virginia and ND. They always have been.

That this was ridiculed is a mystery.

If those lawyers get together and figure out how to find landing spots for those 7 teams, despite the GOR, it will happen. 4 to the SEC, 4 to the B1G (including ND).
 
aburks41 said:
I understand the money. I would take a B12 invite. Their media deal pays more than the ACC AND it's up for renegotiation in 2030, which is 6 years ahead of the ACC's first chance at renegotiating their deal.

I would absolutely not hitch my wagon to the ACC when 7 members are publicly trying to leave. That's how you end up with an AAC 2.0
Expand ...
ACC with Duke, Georgia Tech, Wake Forest, Pitt, Syracuse and Louisville is automatically better than the AAC, and I would even argue that it's good enough to lure back West Virginia.

My only question: Is Miami really going anywhere? NC State? Va. Tech?

I can easily see them getting frozen out.

UNC, ND, Virginia, Oregon to the B1G.
Clemson and FSU to the SEC.
 
.-.
Outside of buying their way out, the only means to removing the GOR would be by dissolving the conference, which evidently is what the meeting was about.

I doubt that a simple majority would be sufficient to dissolve the conference. The schools who want to have the option of leaving (and facing the financial costs of doing so) or remaining until sufficient time has passed where the cost will be bearable.

My guess is that the primary purpose of this meeting (which would have remained clandestine if it were legitimately what it is being portrayed as) was to give FSU and Clemson the opportunity to tell their fan bases they are doing something.

One other possibility is that the members of the conference may believe it is worth the risk to attempt to vote to rescind the GOR (not sure they could get enough votes), leading ESPN to say "the media contract was dependent on the GOR", with the hope that ESPN will either throw more cash their way. Considering the layoffs ESPN just implemented I don't see how they can justify spending money they aren't required to spend just to be nice.
 
Rocktheworld said:
BC would be fun

They don’t deserve it, but it would be fun
Expand ...
Did Michael Corleone decide to bring Fredo back because having him around was "fun"?

No, no he did not.
1684247444906.png
 
Rocktheworld said:
They took Rutgers and Maryland because a lot of B1G alum moved to the NY/DMV areas.
Expand ...
No, as has been discussed ad nauseam, they took them because it allowed them to get first tier pricing into huge population areas. And it was exactly the right move.
 
FfldCntyFan said:
Outside of buying their way out, the only means to removing the GOR would be by dissolving the conference, which evidently is what the meeting was about.

I doubt that a simple majority would be sufficient to dissolve the conference. The schools who want to have the option of leaving (and facing the financial costs of doing so) or remaining until sufficient time has passed where the cost will be bearable.

My guess is that the primary purpose of this meeting (which would have remained clandestine if it were legitimately what it is being portrayed as) was to give FSU and Clemson the opportunity to tell their fan bases they are doing something.

One other possibility is that the members of the conference may believe it is worth the risk to attempt to vote to rescind the GOR (not sure they could get enough votes), leading ESPN to say "the media contract was dependent on the GOR", with the hope that ESPN will either throw more cash their way. Considering the layoffs ESPN just implemented I don't see how they can justify spending money they aren't required to spend just to be nice.
Expand ...
I could be wrong, but I think they need 9 of 14 on board to dissolve the conference. So they only need 2 other defectors who think their situation could be better...
 
McLovin said:
People who really think the GOR is "unbreakable" are funny. It's breakable. There will (probably) be consequences, but they can definitely break it if they want.
Expand ...

The consequences will be that their media rights will stay with the ACC. Which means they have no incentive to leave.

This GoR has been in effect for 10 years now; I'm sure lawyers wouldn't be "looking into" if they can break it or not now. They already know if they can. The fact that it's only been grumbling from Florida State and Miami and nothing else tells me they know they can't break it.
 
.-.
CL82 said:
No, as has been discussed ad nauseam, they took them because it allowed them to get first tier pricing into huge population areas. And it was exactly the right move.
Expand ...
Which is why I never understood why UConn seemed so intent on hitching their wagon to NYC. That market, from a TV perspective is already covered by Rutgers. The Boston MSA (which is way closer geographically to UConn than NYC anyways) is the 10th largest TV market in the country and I don't believe is in the B1G footprint.

UConn missed a huge brand pivot opportunity after the first round of conference realignments in 2010 to "claim" the New England sports market and make them an attractive add for the B1G (which I'm sure also has a good alumni base in Boston). It's too late to make that pivot now, probably...
 
McLovin said:
I could be wrong, but I think they need 9 of 14 on board to dissolve the conference. So they only need 2 other defectors who think their situation could be better...
Expand ...
For the sake of argument, let's discuss this on the premise that nine votes for dissolution would be sufficient.

If you remember the gyrations the member schools went through when we first reconstituted the BE in 2004 (eight non-football members, eight football members), it was because a group of schools cannot join together, call themselves a conference and have the NCAA accept them as a conference. This was setup so that after eight years (I believe the agreement the schools signed when we added UL, UC, USF, DePaul and Marquette was aligned with NCAA recognition rules) the two factions could leave (we can get into the details later) the member schools could continue as separate valid conferences.

If any school votes for dissolution of the ACC, they would have to know that they have a home in an existing conference. The schools that voted to not dissolve would potentially have a claim for damages against the schools that left and the conferences that took them in. This wouldn't be the BE claiming the ACC was trying to destroy the conference, it would be schools that got left out in the cold (and lost tens of millions in annual revenues) bringing a suit because they did destroy a conference.
 
McLovin said:
Which is why I never understood why UConn seemed so intent on hitching their wagon to NYC. That market, from a TV perspective is already covered by Rutgers. The Boston MSA (which is way closer geographically to UConn than NYC anyways) is the 10th largest TV market in the country and I don't believe is in the B1G footprint.

UConn missed a huge brand pivot opportunity after the first round of conference realignments in 2010 to "claim" the New England sports market and make them an attractive add for the B1G (which I'm sure also has a good alumni base in Boston). It's too late to make that pivot now, probably...
Expand ...
Some BC proponents think they will bring the Boston market to the B1G
 
FfldCntyFan said:
For the sake of argument, let's discuss this on the premise that nine votes for dissolution would be sufficient.

If you remember the gyrations the member schools went through when we first reconstituted the BE in 2004 (eight non-football members, eight football members), it was because a group of schools cannot join together, call themselves a conference and have the NCAA accept them as a conference. This was setup so that after eight years (I believe the agreement the schools signed when we added UL, UC, USF, DePaul and Marquette was aligned with NCAA recognition rules) the two factions could leave (we can get into the details later) the member schools could continue as separate valid conferences.

If any school votes for dissolution of the ACC, they would have to know that they have a home in an existing conference. The schools that voted to not dissolve would potentially have a claim for damages against the schools that left and the conferences that took them in. This wouldn't be the BE claiming the ACC was trying to destroy the conference, it would be schools that got left out in the cold (and lost tens of millions in annual revenues) bringing a suit because they did destroy a conference.
Expand ...
I think having a landing spot is what is preventing it from happening. Neither the SEC nor B1G wants to dilute their payouts (smart) and will require their media partners to kick in more money for any school they add during their current deals.

And realistically, if the B1G reports of seeking an additional $200 million to add Oregon and Washington was true, then they will require a TON of cash to bring in 9 (or 7) new members...
 
Take Clemson, Florida State, Miami, North Carolina, North Carolina State, Virginia and Virginia Tech out of the ACC.

So we can imagine a small but mighty basketball/football conference of

UConn,
West Virginia ( after the B12 break up)
BC,
Syracuse,
Pittsburg,
L'ville,

You need two more, (at least) the candidates would be from among...

Georgia Tech,
Duke,
Temple,
Nova (if they add football which they have tinkered with for a long time),
Notre Dame (maybe as a non-football member only. And if they guarantee to schedule a few football games each year.

This covers most of the large cities on the East Coast. That gives it a little negotiating leverage.
 
McLovin said:
Which is why I never understood why UConn seemed so intent on hitching their wagon to NYC. That market, from a TV perspective is already covered by Rutgers. The Boston MSA (which is way closer geographically to UConn than NYC anyways) is the 10th largest TV market in the country and I don't believe is in the B1G footprint.

UConn missed a huge brand pivot opportunity after the first round of conference realignments in 2010 to "claim" the New England sports market and make them an attractive add for the B1G (which I'm sure also has a good alumni base in Boston). It's too late to make that pivot now, probably...
Expand ...
Well, part of our New York brand is the way Connecticut turns out in Madison Square Garden games, which for those of us who have been there, is impressive. Keep in mind though that the fact that Rutgers secured those first tier rates for the Big Ten doesn't mean that we cannot secure them for another conference.
 
.-.
aburks41 said:
I have zero interest in a league of GA Tech, VTech, Cuse, Duke, Wake, and BC. At that point the best option for both the BE and ACC would be to merge together, and force them to ditch the basketball tourney in Greensboro in favor of the BET at MSG
Expand ...
the concept of a coastal league split between football and bball only schools sounds awfully familiar
 
Doesn't matter where in Connecticut the university is, the state as a whole is much more closely aligned with NYC than Boston. The rest of New England hardly considers Connecticut to be one of them. We're tri-state area all the way.
 
CL82 said:
Well, part of our New York brand is the way Connecticut turns out in Madison Square Garden games, which for those of us who have been there, is impressive. Keep in mind though that the fact that Rutgers secured those first tier rates for the Big Ten doesn't mean that we cannot secure them for another conference.
Expand ...
No doubt we show out at MSG, it’s awesome. But I think we’d own the TD Garden if we played any Big East (or really any team, including BC) there. We have tons of alumni in Boston, just surprised they never thought it’d be good to stake a claim to that city / the rest of New England.

You’re right we can bring the NYC metro market to another conference (Big12), but IMO the only 2 conferences that matter getting into in the long-term are the B1G and SEC. And I don’t see the SEC using UConn as a way to get into NYC. Then again, I’d love to be wrong about that.
 
The last time we did something like this with Gonzaga the return game was at TD (I think it was still called Fleet then). Our turnout was quite disappointing.
 
Palatine said:
( after the B12 break up)
Expand ...
why is the big12 breaking up? no one wants the programs that are left in it. if anything they are going to add some more pac schools that dont get invited to the BIG.
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,359
Messages
4,567,483
Members
10,469
Latest member
xxBlueChips


Top Bottom