Non-Key Tweets

[Adios]

Thanks. MH3 et al. provide a fun read at times but ... a "preliminary GOR"? Even the Dude of WV is calling him out on that one.

If we find this fun, we can never complain about Kim Kardashian shows.

 

[UConnDan97]

I was complimenting the job he's done without starting with a strong hand. I expect you'll take back your insult now

First of all, it's not an insult to be invited to my No Limit Hold 'em tourney. It's an honor.

Second of all, if you are going to have Delany start out with pocket aces, at least give Swofford King / Queen suited...

 

[Jimdish255]

The Dude of WV ‏@theDudeofWV

19m​

B1G needs to have 15 & 16 signed before TV deal is redone. They are looking hard at 6-7 schools from the B12, ACC & SEC.

Darn. Now we're OUT! Not even being considered! Say it an't so Dude!

I'll check in again tomorrow cuz Dude's been super busy these past few days. Things sure do change fast!

 

[BTwelve]

My wish list for 20 would be UConn, Temple, Texas, Baylor, and Tulane along with Notre Dame. Cincinnati, South Florida, West Virginia, and Texas Tech are also options. Texas has already reached out to the ACC once in 2011, but I don't think they would come alone. They would want friends. They also want to be with Notre Dame, and they are tied to ESPN. We'll have to wait until closer to 2025 for availability of anyone in the Big XII, but if we added 2, then the objective will be 20.

I don't mean any disrespect but the idea that Texas would join the ACC any time soon is laughable. The ACC is their 5th best option at present. In 2011, the situation was different. UT's options were limited only because of the LHN. And even then it was only a cursory 'glance' into the idea of joining the ACC.

1) UT's first and most desired option, apart from all Twitter Hillbilly garbage, is to stay right where they are. The Big 12, even if it changes 'shape' by the time the GOR is up, is still their #1 choice. Oklahoma leaving does not necessarily mean that UT would feel the need to leave. But both of those programs are logistically attached at the hip. OU to UT, even more so than OU and OSU. And UT to OU, even more so than UT to TTU.

OU and UT also want to expand back to 12 but can't get it done because the Little Sisters in the conference are concerned about their potentially dwindling slices of the revenue pie. I won't feign knowledge I don't have, but the practical thinking says that Big 12 expansion is no better than 5-5 at present (UT, OU, OSU, Tech, WVU, for it) , or at best 6-4, if Kansas favored it. And 8 votes are needed. As long as two of the following - ISU, KSU, Baylor and TCU - oppose expansion they won't voluntarily expand. It will have to be forced upon them.

If OU and UT ever leave the Big 12, it's going to be over this issue + the lack of CCG hurting the league with the playoff selection committee. Or it will be because the PAC or B1G came calling again. And in the event this happens, they will almost certainly (99%) go together.

2) The PAC is easily the most desired option because the B1G will never take on OSU and TTU, much less Baylor or TCU. And this is a HUGE concern. Huge. Besides, apart from USC, there are no football titans in that conference comparable to OU and UT. There is no great wonder why this almost happened, twice, for REAL. And as long as the PAC rests at 12, this option is always on the table. The PAC going to 14 makes no sense. 16, with a pod of 4 teams from the central time zone, makes great sense.

3) That said, should Delaney want UT and OU before the PAC can act, they would both have to listen (to say the least). Assuming the GOR issue, at that point, could be settled.

4) Beyond this - the choice is pretty obvious. Notre Dame has done it forever. BYU has proven they can do it. There is no reason at all that UT would need to do anything other than go Indy and keep their LHN cash cow.

*there is a big gap here*

5) If all else fails, there's always the ACC. The new TV contract alone makes the ACC far less desirable to UT than it was in 2011. And you could argue that it wasn't that desired to begin with, in 2011, just exploratory conversation. And coming "with friends" is interesting considered that Oklahoma wasn't mentioned. Even accepting the very low odds of probability of this move, a scenario does NOT exist where UT ends up in the ACC w/o Oklahoma. If they have to 'divorce' OU, they will go Independent all day long over sharing $$ in the ACC with...(fill in the blank).

Additionally, should they be forced, the only sensible expansion options for the B12 are USF and UCF. Don't trust anyone that tells you different. At least one of the Twitter hillbillies has got that much right. The Big 12 revenue model is built on matchups and direct $$ from the TV networks. Not cable subscribers. And there are effectively no desirable teams (w/r/t highly desirable matchups) available this side of BYU. And the BYU thing is a non-starter for the Big 12 at the moment. Too much would need to change. So with no desirable football option (ala TCU and WVU, which were pushed by FOX) the Big 12 would move towards what benefits them all. Two patsies to beat up on, while adding a presence in FL. WVU's outlier status pushes them East, rather than West for SDSU and...just say, Fresno St. But also adding the #4 program in a football hungry large state like FL is the equivalent of adding a Texas Tech. USF is a young program and the ceiling is high. An obvious move.

As for UConn...I think UConn is sitting in a great position, ironically enough, in the AAC without a GOR. Flexibility over these next several years could be MASSIVE. There is still a lot to be decided. Also, I wouldn't spend ten seconds worrying about AAU status. If the move makes $en$e otherwise, the move will be made. And if the B1G really wants some of those Big 12 and ACC schools, those respective GOR's squash a lot of fantasy right off the bat.

 

[HuskyBandDad]

A couple of questions simply out of curiosity ....



What is the likelihood that Notre Dame will ever join the ACC as a full member in football?



Who does the ACC add to get to 20?

No chance. Why should they ? With their own TV deal and access to the playoffs what would be their motivation ?

 

[Adios]

Of course, with a "goal" of five 16-20 team conferences, I am curious to know how the PAC gets to that number. Could the PAC even find teams to make that expansion worthwhile?
1. BYU: national reach but ... acceptable to Cal and Stanford due to religious affiliation?
2. Boise State: football success but ... academics and other sports acceptable to PAC?
3. UNLV: potential new market but ... academics and lack of football success acceptable to PAC?
4. New Mexico: potential new market but ... academics and lack of football success acceptable to PAC?
5. Colorado State: research dollars have exceeded some AAU members but ... lack of football success acceptable to PAC?
6. Hawaii: research dollars have exceeded some AAU members but ... distance acceptable to PAC?

Immediate options for the Pac-12:

UNM
UNLV
UNR
SDSU

That's 16. There's a bunch of other schools who can take it a step up. CSU, SJSU and Fresno State may become options. Who knows. More and more students will go to public schools. Temple really is aiming high.

Personally, I'd like to see UMass succeed. Would be good for New England. Would have been nice if some other former Yankee Conference mates went FBS.

 

[btstimpy]

I don't mean any disrespect but the idea that Texas would join the ACC any time soon is laughable. The ACC is their 5th best option at present. In 2011, the situation was different. UT's options were limited only because of the LHN. And even then it was only a cursory 'glance' into the idea of joining the ACC.

1) UT's first and most desired option, apart from all Twitter Hillbilly garbage, is to stay right where they are. The Big 12, even if it changes 'shape' by the time the GOR is up, is still their #1 choice. Oklahoma leaving does not necessarily mean that UT would feel the need to leave. But both of those programs are logistically attached at the hip. OU to UT, even more so than OU and OSU. And UT to OU, even more so than UT to TTU.

OU and UT also want to expand back to 12 but can't get it done because the Little Sisters in the conference are concerned about their potentially dwindling slices of the revenue pie. I won't feign knowledge I don't have, but the practical thinking says that Big 12 expansion is no better than 5-5 at present (UT, OU, OSU, Tech, WVU, for it) , or at best 6-4, if Kansas favored it. And 8 votes are needed. As long as two of the following - ISU, KSU, Baylor and TCU - oppose expansion they won't voluntarily expand. It will have to be forced upon them.

If OU and UT ever leave the Big 12, it's going to be over this issue + the lack of CCG hurting the league with the playoff selection committee. Or it will be because the PAC or B1G came calling again. And in the event this happens, they will almost certainly (99%) go together.

2) The PAC is easily the most desired option because the B1G will never take on OSU and TTU, much less Baylor or TCU. And this is a HUGE concern. Huge. Besides, apart from USC, there are no football titans in that conference comparable to OU and UT. There is no great wonder why this almost happened, twice, for REAL. And as long as the PAC rests at 12, this option is always on the table. The PAC going to 14 makes no sense. 16, with a pod of 4 teams from the central time zone, makes great sense.

3) That said, should Delaney want UT and OU before the PAC can act, they would both have to listen (to say the least). Assuming the GOR issue, at that point, could be settled.

4) Beyond this - the choice is pretty obvious. Notre Dame has done it forever. BYU has proven they can do it. There is no reason at all that UT would need to do anything other than go Indy and keep their LHN cash cow.

*there is a big gap here*

5) If all else fails, there's always the ACC. The new TV contract alone makes the ACC far less desirable to UT than it was in 2011. And you could argue that it wasn't that desired to begin with, in 2011, just exploratory conversation. And coming "with friends" is interesting considered that Oklahoma wasn't mentioned. Even accepting the very low odds of probability of this move, a scenario does NOT exist where UT ends up in the ACC w/o Oklahoma. If they have to 'divorce' OU, they will go Independent all day long over sharing in the ACC with...(fill in the blank).

Additionally, should they be forced, the only sensible expansion options for the B12 are USF and UCF. Don't trust anyone that tells you different. At least one of the Twitter hillbillies has got that much right. The Big 12 revenue model is built on matchups and direct from the TV networks. Not cable subscribers. And there are effectively no desirable teams (w/r/t highly desirable matchups) available this side of BYU. And the BYU thing is a non-starter for the Big 12 at the moment. Too much would need to change. So with no desirable football option (ala TCU and WVU, which were pushed by FOX) the Big 12 would move towards what benefits them all. Two patsies to beat up on, while adding a presence in FL. WVU's outlier status pushes them East, rather than West for SDSU and...just say, Fresno St. But also adding the #4 program in a football hungry large state like FL is the equivalent of adding a Texas Tech. USF is a young program and the ceiling is high. An obvious move.

As for UConn...I think UConn is sitting in a great position, ironically enough, in the AAC without a GOR. Flexibility over these next several years could be MASSIVE. There is still a lot to be decided. Also, I wouldn't spend ten seconds worrying about AAU status. If the move makes $en$e otherwise, the move will be made. And if the B1G really wants some of those Big 12 and ACC schools, those respective GOR's squash a lot of fantasy right off the bat.

Texas' options remain limited because of the Longhorn Network until 2030. They will go to an ESPN managed conference because of it if they need to leave the Big XII. There are 2 (SEC and ACC). To go to the SEC, Texas would have to be supported by Texas A&M, and they would have to accept the academic standards of the SEC. Texas has already courted the ACC in 2011, and is comfortable with that option. But they chose to remain in the Big XII because they worked out a deal to keep it in tact for the time being, and the ACC didn't like the Long Horn Network idea at the time. Things could all change if DeLoss Dodds leaves though. Who knows what his successor would think.

The ACC would help get Texas and the Longhorn Network distribution on the entire East Coast in some combination working with ESPN and joint ACC/Texas scheduling with the network. Texas has only been in a conference with Oklahoma for less than 20 years. They played often OOC and could continue to going forward. Oklahoma could return to its rivalry with Nebraska. The Big Ten would have to give up on AAU though.

I don't want for the ACC to take half the BigXII or too many teams in some sort of merger. Let the PAC 12 and the B1G have some of the rest or even the SEC. Texas is the one that would fit the ACC. Baylor, Texas Tech, TCU could work, but I only want one of them. Texas could select. There was a lot of chatter of Texas wanting Florida State and Clemson. Here's an opportunity for them to join them and get their Long Horn Network off the ground.

 

[btstimpy]

No chance. Why should they ? With their own TV deal and access to the playoffs what would be their motivation ?

When Division 4 says the only access to the playoffs is through a Conference Championship Game.

 

[B1GALUM]

No chance. Why should they ? With their own TV deal and access to the playoffs what would be their motivation ?

I do not see a motivation unless the playoff is restricted to conference champions. However, as I understand it, this is not the plan.
I asked the question trying to understand the perspective of the ACC and wandering why not add UConn and Cincinnati to the ACC now?
This gives the ACC an additional university with proximity to the NYC market effectively taking out the only other option available to the B1G in this region.
This gives the ACC an additional university in the Midwest to counter the B1G attempting to push toward the East.
It is my impression that the ACC is holding at 14 teams in the hopes that Notre Dame will join as the 15th team in the near future.
This seems very unlikely though given the importance of football independence to Notre Dame so why not just get UConn and Cincinnati now?
If Notre Dame decides to join as a 17th team at some point, then 1 or even 3 additional universities should certainly be available.

 

[TRest]

Personally, I'd like to see UMass succeed. Would be good for New England. Would have been nice if some other former Yankee Conference mates went FBS.

One of UConn's problems is that our peer group traditionally in football is the Yankee Conference. BU, Northeastern and UVM have dropped the sport, URI was dropping down to the NEC, and Maine/UNH are getting isolated. Only UMass is even making an attempt to pursue the highest level.

 

[btstimpy]

I do not see a motivation unless the playoff is restricted to conference champions. However, as I understand it, this is not the plan.
I asked the question trying to understand the perspective of the ACC and wandering why not add UConn and Cincinnati to the ACC now?
This gives the ACC an additional university with proximity to the NYC market effectively taking out the only other option available to the B1G in this region.
This gives the ACC an additional university in the Midwest to counter the B1G attempting to push toward the East.
It is my impression that the ACC is holding at 14 teams in the hopes that Notre Dame will join as the 15th team in the near future.
This seems very unlikely though given the importance of football independence to Notre Dame so why not just get UConn and Cincinnati now?
If Notre Dame decides to join as a 17th team at some point, then 1 or even 3 additional universities should certainly be available.

I'm hearing not only restricted to conference champions, but to conference champions selected through a conference championship game. Driven by Television. It is still being debated, but that would get Notre Dame's attention as well as the Big XII.

One of Notre Dame's push backs is sponsorship of sports. They are pushing to increase the minimum number of varsity sports required to be sponsored in Division 4. Swarbrick uses Stanford, who sponsors 36 as the example. That's too high. But I could see 22 fully funded. Most of the SEC only sponsors 16. This allows the SEC to pay football coaches $7 million. And Kentucky pays their basketball coach $7 million per year. That can fund a lot of soccer players.

 

[HuskyBandDad]

I do not see a motivation unless the playoff is restricted to conference champions. However, as I understand it, this is not the plan.
I asked the question trying to understand the perspective of the ACC and wandering why not add UConn and Cincinnati to the ACC now?
This gives the ACC an additional university with proximity to the NYC market effectively taking out the only other option available to the B1G in this region.
This gives the ACC an additional university in the Midwest to counter the B1G attempting to push toward the East.
It is my impression that the ACC is holding at 14 teams in the hopes that Notre Dame will join as the 15th team in the near future.
This seems very unlikely though given the importance of football independence to Notre Dame so why not just get UConn and Cincinnati now?
If Notre Dame decides to join as a 17th team at some point, then 1 or even 3 additional universities should certainly be available.

Agree 100%. I hated when the Big East sucked up to ND and the ACC is doing it too.

 

[B1GALUM]

Immediate options for the Pac-12:

UNM
UNLV
UNR
SDSU

That's 16. There's a bunch of other schools we can take it a step up. CSU, SJSU and Fresno State may become options. Who knows. More and more students will go to public schools. Temple really is aiming high.

Personally, I'd like to see UMass succeed. Would be good for New England. Would have been nice if some other former Yankee Conference mates went FBS.

The PAC-12 definitely has options as you mentioned. I just question if there is any benefit to the PAC-12 taking further universities unless Texas is one of those universities.
There is discussion about four or five 16 to 20 team conferences; yet, it seems to me, that the PAC-12 is in a difficult position to make it to that size and benefit financially without Texas.

 

[Dooley]

I asked the question trying to understand the perspective of the ACC and wandering why not add UConn and Cincinnati to the ACC now?

There are a few Boneyarders convinced that UCONN has turned down the ACC and is awaiting a "B1G"ger opportunity.

 

[kyleslamb]

The idea of a "preliminary" or short-term GOR isn't as outlandish as some of the other claims (hello Houston to BIG??). It is vary possible that the ACC put out a document that could be signed without the full agreement or vetting process that a bureaucracy like a state university system would require. It is highly likely that not all presidents had the power to sign such documents without state government or AG oversight. In that event, a short-term agreement to quell the media frenzy with the basic parameters of the full agreement makes some sense while the lawyers pour over the fine print.

The biggest mistake I think most people are making is that a GOR is a simple and straight forward agreement.

I believe he said the "preliminary" GOR was for one year. That would indeed be pointless. Any school that left the ACC wouldn't join their new league for a year or two anyhow, so a "preliminary" Grant of Rights that was binding for only one year would be a waste of paper.

 

[jostar1]

Tuxedo Yoda‏@TuxedoYoda6h
Heard from my Austin source. Phone conference early this week with all of the B12 members led by Bowlsby. Realignment related.#time4ucfusf

 

[jostar1]

MH3‏@MH32h
Lets put it this way: the ACC signed a GOR. They signed the document they needed to sign to get the TV deal done. However ...

MH3‏@MH32h
...the GOR has specific wording regarding espn's creation of acc network and regarding a final document to be signed by all member ...

MH3‏@MH32h
...institutions upon creation of said network. The timeline is one year from the date of 'preliminary' GOR. Even if espn creates the ...

MH3‏@MH32h
...ACC network they still need to get all signatures in final tv contract and final GOR. ACC needed more cash quick. Espn needed GOR

MH3‏@MH32h
They got a rush job.

 

[jostar1]

Darn. Now we're OUT! Not even being considered! Say it an't so Dude!

I'll check in again tomorrow cuz Dude's been super busy these past few days. Things sure do change fast!

The Dude of WV‏@theDudeofWV2h
@CizzleUofM Texas, KU, OU. UVA, VT, Mizzou, Vandy, Hou.

 

[B1GALUM]

The Dude of WV‏@theDudeofWV2h
@CizzleUofM Texas, KU, OU. UVA, VT, Mizzou, Vandy, Hou.

There are a few Boneyarders convinced that UCONN has turned down the ACC and is awaiting a "B1G"ger opportunity.

As was pointed out in a prior post, I am proud of my conference but also hope I have sufficient humility to recognize that not every university desires to be a part of the B1G.
The B1G may be "looking hard at 6-7 schools from the B12, ACC & SEC" but that does not mean these schools are receptive to overtures from the B1G.
These schools may not even be communicating with the B1G beyond a simple academic courtesy of "thanks but no thanks" from one university president to another university president or conference commissioner.
Texas could have joined the B1G prior to the Big XII GOR but chose not to join.
Kansas could have joined the B1G prior to the Big XII GOR but chose not to join and/or the B1G was not interested and/or could not leave KSU.
Virginia could have voted against the increase of the ACC exit fee and joined the B1G prior to the ACC GOR but did not join.
OU and Virginia Tech both signed the GOR for their respective conferences.
Vanderbilt could join the B1G at any time but has given no indication to date that it desires membership and is a founding member of the SEC.
The B1G has already passed on Mizzou. Perhaps the B1G would re-consider but as posted before would Mizzou even be willing to join the B1G.
The B1G may want to go past 14 t0 16 schools with two of the specific schools mentioned but just because the B1G wants it does not mean it will happen.
I hope the B1G recognizes that UConn would fit quite well with the conference's goal of expansion to the East, proximity to NYC, providing content for BTN as well as winning championships (UConn basketball anyone?) and that a "B1G"ger opportunity does come your way.

 

[UConn Dan]

Thanks. MH3 et al. provide a fun read at times but ... a "preliminary GOR"? Even the Dude of WV is calling him out on that one.

There was a CBS Jeremy Fowler article that on June 5 had said that the GOR was not officially signed and only agreed to in principal (I had posted it on the ACC thread on that date, but I paraphrased -- should have copied and pasted in retrospect). It's since been edited. I wish I had a screenshot of it. It's likely that someone in the ACC made them remove that language.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefoo...3/acc-network-still-in-early-stageswhats-next

 

[billybud]

The ACC released a press release saying that the GOR had been signed by the Presidents of all 15 members.

 

[Fairfield 1st]

The ACC released a press release saying that the GOR had been signed by the Presidents of all 15 members.

Notre Dame signed a GOR for it non FB sports???

 

[SubbaBub]

The ACC released a press release saying that the GOR had been signed by the Presidents of all 15 members.

They signed a piece of paper with the letters GOR on it?

I have no inside info on what was signed or not signed, what it said or didn't say.

I do have some pause that the people in the room that day were able to agree on a detailed 12+ years of commitment and that all delegation had someone present with the authority to do so on such short notice. It's highly irregular in the business world and less likely in academia. They may have agreed in principle subject to the final draft.

They may have said sign this so ESPN will increase our deal, but it's only binding for a year. At the time the sharks were circling the ACC, a GOR announcement of any sort could have been used as a cooling off for anyone thinking of leaving in a panic. Like they did in the BE.

Unless someone has read the GOR, it is a possibility that it isn't as binding as some would believe.

 

[billybud]

A lot of things are possible...but unlikely. It is far more possible that it is what it was declared to be...a signed GOR, effective immediately, and binding until 2027.

Notre Dame did sign the GOR for its non football sports...and signed a binding contract to play five football games a year with ACC members. That contract also spelled oput the bowl participation and the payment that would be due to the Irish for their max two Orange Bowl appearances.

 

[billybud]

They signed a piece of paper with the letters GOR on it?

I have no inside info on what was signed or not signed, what it said or didn't say.

I do have some pause that the people in the room that day were able to agree on a detailed 12+ years of commitment and that all delegation had someone present with the authority to do so on such short notice. It's highly irregular in the business world and less likely in academia. They may have agreed in principle subject to the final draft.

They may have said sign this so ESPN will increase our deal, but it's only binding for a year. At the time the sharks were circling the ACC, a GOR announcement of any sort could have been used as a cooling off for anyone thinking of leaving in a panic. Like they did in the BE.

Unless someone has read the GOR, it is a possibility that it isn't as binding as some would believe.

Swofford came down to FSU and met, individually, with BOG members to explain things (individually to avoid Gov't in Sunshine law that governs group meetings). During FSU's spring game, Swofford quietly met with FSU Booster leaders.

Swofford also met with Virginia's board..and took along the ACC legal counsel. The next very day, Swofford convened a conference call with the ACC Presidents to approve the GOR. It was approved April 18, sent out for quick review and signature..and the ACC announced on April 22.