The Bishin Cutter wrote:
I ask the same thing about the strength of GoR's when they are sync'ed to media deals, as appears to be the case with the Big XII and ACC. The renegotiation period...is it a suspension of the GoR that hinges on successful and unanimous renegotiation, or are these schools literally bound no matter that outcome?
If it's as easy as hitting pause during the renegotiation window and then fleeing, the next stumbling block isn't the conference or individual schools seeking damages...I think it might be a few of those bowls. Whereas the network can readjust the media deals and conference refill the lost inventory, the bowls are bound in a different way. I don't know if they get any special reevaluation based on certain schools leaving the conference. Bowls might go after the departing school, the departing school's old and new conferences, and maybe network partners. Who knows?
But the ACC...I think the UMD suit is just trivial red tape. The GoR came after UMD, and while FSU didn't approve the increased buy-out, they did put their name to GoR. All UMD's suit is going to solve is how much the Terps are on the hook to that exit fee. 1.25 or 3x ACC yearly operational costs.
I think, really, it's who's got the "look-in" sooner. It would have been the ACC, but the Notre Dame addition saw the reevaluation and GoR. I think Big XII's is up first...2016/17ish.
Like I wrote above, I think the assumption is that they are tied together but I have not seen it that is true or not. I'm not sure how the bowls could sue the school as they are set up through the conference.
The ACC was looking at getting a netwrok but ESPN owns all of their rights 1st/2nd/and 3rd, so I don't see how that is possible, unless...they renegotiate or do a "look-in" and amend the payout of the contract so that the ACC can get back their 3rd tier rights...that is why I think the ACC more likely to be under attack plus I read that their GOR only holds up if a certain payout is met which its has not been (but once againI haven't seen their GOR so that too could be B/S).
The Bishin Cutter wrote:
The B1G has no interest in Iowa State.
How lame. Then the B1G or any other conference should expand upto 16. The max should be upto 14 members for ALL conferences in the NCAA. Iowa State would be a great choice to rival Iowa.
If they open the door to Iowa State, all heck breaks loose in the states of Ohio and Pennsylvania.
Still, it's possible...I kind of thought Kansas and Iowa State kept extremely quiet during all those defections. Kansas could clearly move with more ease than many in that conference, but the Iowa State people weren't jabbering about matters. I found that very curious.
Ding Ding Ding, Iowa St, Cincy, Pitt, and Temple are not getting into the Big Ten because if one does, the others will raise hell and same goes for Kansas St (if Kansas gets in) and Oklahoma State (if Oklahoma gets in).'
The only exceptions to this rule would be for ND (possibly Pitt makes it in if ND wants them), Texas (might take Texas Tech if that's the only way to land them, also would take A&M if it was possible), or UNC (would take Duke if that's all that's holding up the move).
Iowa State, Kansas, K State and Mizzou had an invite from the Big East when they thought the PAC16 was inevitable; Kansas was also in talks to take A&M's spot when they said no and also was apporached by the Big Ten back then to.
Iowa State and K State were discussing whether the Big East (now AAC) or MWC would be a better home for them...so I don't think they had anything up their sleeve. They were quiet because they didn't want to rock the boat, and oddly enough it worked for them.
Fan of the Big 12 Conference, the Mountain West Conference and...