Non-Key Tweets

[billybud]

Penalties?

Like any contract in breach that does not have a predetermined approximation of liquidated damages, the damage would be decided in a court of law. Say in 2017, ND wanted out...that would be 50 lost games on the ACC schedule that almost guarantee ticket sales (and teams like Pitt ask almost double for Notre Dame tickets than a run of the mill opponent), cost of replacement teams, etc......all sorts of ancillary damages.

It just isn't going to happen any more than Virginia is going to bolt for the Big ten.

 

[kyleslamb]

No one has seen the contract..obviously.

But unless I like wearing a tin foil hat and deciding that it is all some conspiracy, I take the ACC's comment about the contract at face measure.

There seems to be a huge need by fans of former Big East teams to believe that the ACC got snookered by Notre Dame.

I do understand the mechanisms in play. If your ex wife snookered you badly, you have to believe that her new husband will get the same.

It is part of the human condition.

What on earth does conspiracies have to do with it?

Having a termination clause to a contract isn't a conspiracy. It's standard practice. Notre Dame looks out for Notre Dame. I promise they didn't back themselves into one corner for 15 years with no way out.

That has nothing to do with conspiracies. It's just good business.

 

[btstimpy]

What are the penalties?

ASKED

They have not been disclosed. And when I was told about it, I didn't bother to ask because that part of the contract won't be exercised.

 

[kyleslamb]

I'm not putting faith in a comment by Swofford. In fact, I'm shocked Swofford let the cat out of the bag. The UVA legal team reviewed the Notre Dame football contract and commitment before authorizing Teresa Sullivan to sign the Grant of Rights. In fact, every school in the ACC has seen it, and is comfortable with it. ESPN has seen it. Everyone agreed to keep it a secret and to respect Notre Dame's desire to be able to claim independence even when they all knew it wasn't actually independence. It is partial independence. Then Swofford failed to keep his own secret when asked in the Press Conference.

And I'm sure the UVA legal team, bound by a confidentiality clause and non-disclosure agreement, has loose lips telling everyone what was contained in that agreement.

 

[SouthronCross]

I'm sort of used to schools doing things to suit themselves after being around North Carolina and Duke for so long. They do too. I don't see that as a big issue. Will I feel differently down the road? Who knows?

When was the last time Carolina did something that suited themselves, or, was at odds with majority opinion within the league?

 

[billybud]

What on earth does conspiracies have to do with it?

Having a termination clause to a contract isn't a conspiracy. It's standard practice. Notre Dame looks out for Notre Dame. I promise they didn't back themselves into one corner for 15 years with no way out.

That has nothing to do with conspiracies. It's just good business.

I think that with the BE crumbling, that the ACC had bargaining power.

But I understand your reasoning. I have seen the same thought posted many times.

"You think that Texas would sign a GOR without a way out"?

You remember those posts from the BGN B-12 board?

 

[CL82]

.

Can they pay a bunch of money to break that contract? Probably. Maryland is going to be doing it. .

I doubt it. They may pay nuisance value of the suit, but that's about it. If the $50M was enforceable the need for a GOR would have been much less pressing.

 

[SouthronCross]

Some of the accounts I've read state the $20M figure includes the Notre Dame bump as well as the $2M guaranteed payout annually if the ACC network never launches. I've also seen the figure quoted at $18M without the guaranteed payout. You also need to consider that EPSN et al owns 100% of the media rights. Unlike Oklahoma and Kansas, who can add $6M or more for 2nd and 3rd tier rights on top of the $22M they collected, the ACC schools can't. The ACC will also collect less revenue from BCS (non playoff) bowls than the other four conferences.

Yes, and, no.

ACC schools cannot make extra money on Tier 3 TV rights, as you correctly point out.

But, they still make plenty of money on other Tier 3 media, such as radio broadcast rights, coaches shows, etc. UNC's Tier 3 deal with Learfield Sports is nearly $12M per year. NCSU signed with Learfield for over $5M per year. FSU gets $7M from their deal. And, that is without any TV rights.

Also, keep in mind that the $22M that OU and KU got this past season was slightly inflated. The Big 12's contract was for $198M total. Had all 10 members gotten equal shares, they'd have gotten $19.8M each. But, TCU and WVU both just got half shares, worth $11M each.

And lastly, yep, we will make less from BCS bowls than the rest, but, what we will get is not chump change. We'll split $55M with either the SEC or the B1G (roughly $2M per school), when they're the opponent, and, get $41M (just under $3M per school) when ND is. The chance is there to get more. Its down to our teams performing on the field as to whether or not we're able to.

 

[btstimpy]

When was the last time Carolina did something that suited themselves, or, was at odds with majority opinion within the league?

Voted against expansion in 2003 because much of the Rams Club members were worried about getting fewer ACC basketball tournament tickets and Chancellor James Moeser wouldn't stand up to his own faculty. My point is that there are some big brand schools in the league that will all look out for their own interests. Notre Dame isn't the only one. UVA does too.

 

[billybud]

Who really cares about all of the back and forth blather?

We know that the spotlight up on that national stage can get pretty small. All that most of us want is for our team to have a chance on that stage in front of an appreciative national audience.

I don't care much about Big 12 money vs ACC money...I do care that my team will play Notre Dame again, I do care about the quality of opponents (and the jury is still out on how committed some ACC programs are to football); I do care about bowl games that are against good opponents; I do care about television exposure...

 

[btstimpy]

Who really cares about all of the back and forth blather?

We know that the spotlight up on that national stage can get pretty small. All that most of us want is for our team to have a chance on that stage in front of an appreciative national audience.

I don't care much about Big 12 money vs ACC money...I do care that my team will play Notre Dame again, I do care about the quality of opponents (and the jury is still out on how committed some ACC programs are to football); I do care about bowl games that are against good opponents; I do care about television exposure...

I'm happy that Duke is now spending money on its football program and is upgrading Wallace Wade Stadium. It looks like an impressive project, and it's long overdue. FSU doesn't play Duke much anymore because of their being in the opposite division, but I'm excited that they are doing this.

 

[SouthronCross]

Voted against expansion in 2003 because much of the Rams Club members were worried about getting fewer ACC basketball tournament tickets and Chancellor James Moeser wouldn't stand up to his own faculty. My point is that there are some big brand schools in the league that will all look out for their own interests. Notre Dame isn't the only one. UVA does too.

Voting against all of the expansions was not about Carolina getting fewer ACC BBall Tourney tickets. It was 100 percent about protecting the annual home-and-home basketball games among the Tobacco Road Big Four. There was no other reason. It was each school's bread-and-butter. Coach K said as much. And, Roy Williams backed that up when he took over at Carolina. Had they guaranteed them that, UNC and Duke might've gone along with it.

 

[ConnHuskBask]

I wish this thread could just end after the above post by Billybud.

That's college athletics fandom in a nut shell. A lot of which has been lost due to the perils of realignment.

 

[upstater]

And ND signed a Contract committing football to the ACC as well for the same term. We have the appearance of Independence for ND football, but that Independence is reduced to 3 regular season games per year, an independent home game TV contract where ACC teams will be featured, and BCS bowls. The rest of Notre Dame football is in the ACC, 5 games and all other bowl games with splits just like any other ACC team.

Can they pay a bunch of money to break that contract? Probably. Maryland is going to be doing it. Will they? To go to the Big XII or SEC? Doubt it. They have already turned down the Big Ten, and aren't interested in re-evaluating the Big Ten. Jack Swarbrick loved nothing more than dropping Michigan from Notre Dame Football's schedule. He slipped a note into the pocket of the Michigan AD doing it.

Really rose-colored glasses. They signed a commitment for football. What are they penalties for breaking that commitment. They like the ACC more than the B1G. The ACC allows them to maintain independence for football, the B1G doesn't.

I say all of this is absolutely meaningless.

Remember, ND was in the BE for a long time.

 

[upstater]

No one has seen the contract..obviously.

But unless I like wearing a tin foil hat and deciding that it is all some conspiracy, I take the ACC's comment about the contract at face measure.

There seems to be a huge need by fans of former Big East teams to believe that the ACC got snookered by Notre Dame.

I do understand the mechanisms in play. If your ex wife snookered you badly, you have to believe that her new husband will get the same.

It is part of the human condition.

Ex-wife? Uh, no. That's not an apt metaphor. If I had a dime for every time people wanted ND gone in the last decade, I'd be rich.

 

[Husky92]

Just to put some things in perspective: UConn and Buffalo have near identical acceptance rates and average SATs. Near identical top 10% of class numbers.

Is Uconn a safety school?

I gotta disagree with you on this. I don't think the schools are identical.
Acceptance rate: UB 53% UCONN 47% (close, but not the same)
4yr graduation rate: UB 47% UCONN 68% (to me this says a lot about student body)
USNWR ranking: UB 106 UCONN 63 (it is what it is)

I'm sure we could quote statistics all night, but in mind UB is not quite in UCONN's league. It's getting better, but so is UCONN.

 

[upstater]

I gotta disagree with you on this. I don't think the schools are identical.
Acceptance rate: UB 53% UCONN 47% (close, but not the same)
4yr graduation rate: UB 47% UCONN 68% (to me this says a lot about student body)
USNWR ranking: UB 106 UCONN 63 (it is what it is)

I'm sure we could quote statistics all night, but in mind UB is not quite in UCONN's league. It's getting better, but so is UCONN.

https://www.google.com/search?q=U+B...s=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

Where are you getting 53%? The school reported 44% for 2010 and it stayed the same for the last couple of years. Click the link above.

4 yr. graduation rate shows different student bodies, not caliber of students. The caliber is the same, same # of top 10%, same average SAT scores. The difference is this: tuition. That grad rate for UB was scored during years in which the tuition was sub $5k. UConn's was double that in the same period. UConn has more affluent students. UB has a lot of working students. Look at UB's 5-year grad rate. It jumps to 72% from 47%. UConn's jumps to 79%. As for USNWR, I think I've made my feelings about it clear in the past.

UB is trying to address the fact that so many students work to put themselves through school: http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/loca...-Guarantee-Finish-in-Four-Free-145485945.html

Pretty good program.

 

[Ha Who]

https://www.google.com/search?q=U Buffalo acceptance rate&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-USfficial&client=firefox-a

Where are you getting 53%? The school reported 44% for 2010 and it stayed the same for the last couple of years. Click the link above.

4 yr. graduation rate shows different student bodies, not caliber of students. The caliber is the same, same # of top 10%, same average SAT scores. The difference is this: tuition. That grad rate for UB was scored during years in which the tuition was sub $5k. UConn's was double that in the same period. UConn has more affluent students. UB has a lot of working students. Look at UB's 5-year grad rate. It jumps to 72% from 47%. UConn's jumps to 79%. As for USNWR, I think I've made my feelings about it clear in the past.

UB is trying to address the fact that so many students work to put themselves through school: http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/loca...-Guarantee-Finish-in-Four-Free-145485945.html

Pretty good program.

Can you guys start your own thread, this is so boring

 

[NickyNewark]

Someone sounds an awful lot like NJ.com RU recruiting troller Jasondirtbag a Va fan!2 5* commits... recruiting rank 41st congrats! FWIW.

 

[upstater]

Can you guys start your own thread, this is so boring

You are commenting in a thread titled "Non-Key" Tweets, a thread dominated by the Dude of WVa.

 

[kyleslamb]

I think that with the BE crumbling, that the ACC had bargaining power.

But I understand your reasoning. I have seen the same thought posted many times.

"You think that Texas would sign a GOR without a way out"?

You remember those posts from the BGN B-12 board?

And we still don't know that won't be the case if tested.


The premise with the Grant of Rights is that legally, they will have to be compensated for their rights, which makes it worth another conference to take them. If Texas is banking on this, and the Big 12 stops payment after they were to leave, then they could litigate for a breach of contract and potentially be awarded damages as well as invalidating the duration of the agreement. There's never been a case that I've ever seen where someone legally was withheld compensation for a Grant of Rights. There is an overwhelming amount of evidence that a Grant of Rights is utterly enforceable, but it would have to continue with consideration going to all parties for the life of the agreement.

If that's what Texas is banking on, they're probably in good shape. It was never really getting "out" of the Grant of Rights as much as it was daring the Big 12 not to continue compensating for the rights if they left, and the Big 12 daring the schools to leave without promise of compensation.

 

[progrocks]

yeah, and I click on it to see the ravings of a hillbilly lunatic, not to think about SUNY Buffalo, or whatever they call it these days. Take all intelligent discussion out of this thread, immediately!

 

[Ha Who]

You are commenting in a thread titled "Non-Key" Tweets, a thread dominated by the Dude of WVa.

I know. UBis either the greatest Cinderella since the 1980 hockey team or my greatest fantasy since high school. I still say start a UB to Big 10 thread and leave this to new dud of WV rantings

 

[upstater]

yeah, and I click on it to see the ravings of a hillbilly lunatic, not to think about SUNY Buffalo, or whatever they call it these days. Take all intelligent discussion out of this thread, immediately!

Hey, well, that lunatic is the one who "nominated" UB.

 

[GopherHawk]

The Dude of WV ‏@theDudeofWV

1m​

B1G news coming at noon. I've been warned its not what you want to hear.

The Dude of WV ‏@theDudeofWV

1m​

Or maybe its not what I want to hear. I said the only thing that would shock me would be that its Pitt.

For what it's worth

Did the Dude go underground after his "Noon" announcement didn't pan out?

I had to surf through 10 pages of this thread to get back to anything related to Non Key Tweets. shish