- Joined
- Sep 30, 2011
- Messages
- 74
- Reaction Score
- 4
Nothing new here. If the ACC was worried about the 27 month rule, they should have thought about that ahead of time, not now. Actually kind of comical. The whole purpose of the rule was to make it hard to leave. So now its hard to leave.
The only way they're allowed to leave early is if things stabilize. If WVU, Louisville, etc leave as well.. no way. The remaining programs need the 27 months to figure out WTF they are going to do.
No, it's exactly the opposite. They have to play in the Big East in '12 and '13, with at least two new members, so the Big East can be an AQ league in '14. The only way that Syracuse and Pitt are being let go early is if the Big East football conference collapses. The question is whether Anderson knows something we don't, or whether he's just talking to hear himself speak.
The foregoing analysis, by the way, is for football. There is no reason we couldn't let them out for everything else at the end of this academic year (and if the ACC would take them for everything other than football, that I can see happening).
Perhaps the quotes from the MD AD prompted Marinatto's proclamation that Pitt and Cuse would be held to the 27 month provision?quote]
I think Edsall is feeding his AD misinformation. He still has lingering anger from his previous AD and it's carrying over to MD.
Therapy Randy, therapy.
Unless he already knows that Louisville, WVU and Cincinnati are gone because ESPN has told the ACC that. With 5 of the 8 gone, they might be able to simply dissolve the football league. Or maybe there is a no-fault divorce clause from the hoops schools that they could implement, then dissolve the league.
Of course they are not coming to meetings that concern who to invite to save the league, or the negotiation of future tv contracts, which they have royally screwed up."He said the Big East has asked both Pittsburgh and Syracuse to stop coming to conference meetings and that the conference has signaled to their partners that “the transition could be sooner.”"
This indicates that the Big East may be signaling that Pitt and Cuse could leave sooner. He might mean to have said, "the ACC is telling its partners it could be sooner", but even if thats what he meant, it isn't definitive. Not sure this means much at all, just more b.s.
Why? It allows a competitor to increase the TV revenue differential?The foregoing analysis, by the way, is for football. There is no reason we couldn't let them out for everything else at the end of this academic year (and if the ACC would take them for everything other than football, that I can see happening).
Why? It allows a competitor to increase the TV revenue differential?
What settlement would make the BE whole? Just curious as to what you think could be offered. I can't see cash being sufficient in any reasonable amount.I am assuming that the ACC would make the Big East whole, and, if they did, I think the basketball schools would be happy to never see Syracuse or Pitt again after this year. But I am just speculating.
Nothing new here. If the ACC was worried about the 27 month rule, they should have thought about that ahead of time, not now. Actually kind of comical. The whole purpose of the rule was to make it hard to leave. So now its hard to leave.
Gotcha... I was thinking that there's a chance if the Big East was able to add schools quickly that the waiting period could be waved. I think the exit fees and waiting period for C-USA school is basically non-existant.
What settlement would make the BE whole? Just curious as to what you think could be offered. I can't see cash being sufficient in any reasonable amount.
I am assuming that the ACC would make the Big East whole, and, if they did, I think the basketball schools would be happy to never see Syracuse or Pitt again after this year. But I am just speculating.