Seminoles & Tigers versus ACC: the ongoing saga (2024)

Post: #1001

(04-26-2024 11:06 AM)Gitanole Wrote:

(04-26-2024 09:48 AM)quo vadis Wrote: FWIW, I think a long messy process works for FSU moreso than the ACC. The psychology of that IMO favors FSU, as the media wisdom about the GOR is that it is supposed to be an unchallengeable, ironclad thing such that anyone who runs in to it will got swatted down summarily in court.

if the judges involved start to treat this as an actual case, one with two sides that have to be thoroughly explored, rather than a slam-dunk, GOR is valid, ACC wins kind of thing, then that destabilizes the ACC even more, I think. So maybe FSU is challenging the contract availability because it gums the works up even more.
....

The process has been messy enough so far, I'd say, that the ACC credibility erosion you mention has begun. The grant of rights has been hyped for years as a sort of contractual Doomsday weapon. Now, when tested, the ACC isn't producing the killer document that smacks down challenges at once with a mighty GoR fist. On the contrary: the ACC is running from subpoenas, filing motions to seal, and claiming authorisation by its membership in meetings it has no record of.

It's not a good look. People notice.

One person who notices is John Preyer, chair of the University of North Carolina Board of Trustees. He recently said this:

"I think that what Clemson is doing is 100 percent proof positive that a significant portion of the membership of the conference is unhappy. I don't see how it is in anyone's interest for the ACC leadership to try and browbeat its member schools from getting access to information and being transparent. And that's kind of the case Clemson is making.

"I think this shows that what is supposed to be a member-based organization is not being led in a way that represents the best interests of all the members, but instead, it's really representing the bottom tier of the membership at the expense of the top tier, which is why Clemson and Florida State are doing what they're doing. I think that's just obvious."

Yeah, Preyer's dissatisfaction is yet one more reason that the ACC needs to extract every penny that they can. Not that they wouldn't want to, anyway, but this clear proof of dissatisfaction within the upper echelons (though as many have pointed out, not the highest echelons) of UNC needs to be dealt with, and that won't be cheap. I don't like it for you guys, but that's the reality of the situation on the ground right now.

Post: #1002

(04-26-2024 02:48 PM)TerryD Wrote:

(04-26-2024 02:23 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:

(04-26-2024 06:15 AM)TerryD Wrote:

(04-25-2024 04:28 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote:

(04-25-2024 04:04 PM)TerryD Wrote: The idea that the ACC is seeking its number (lets call it $350 million) in this case and believes that it has a good chance of hitting that number if it holds out in the litigation for a good while, but instead is "pressured" by a non-party to settle quickly and for only, say, $75 million seems a message board idea, not a real life litigation one.

Everyone is telling me on message boards and Twitter that the ACC is f*cked no matter what.

That FSU, Clemson, NC will leave, no matter what. That the ACC will be parceled out or greatly diminished.

So, what is the great benefit to the ACC to settle low and fast?

Why not try to get the highest amount possible in these lawsuits?

Why not try to get it high enough to deter someone from trying to get out of the GOR?

Would not the ACC strategy be to set the bar for settlement/leaving higher than lower, just as a matter of logic and common sense ?

@TerryD

Which ACC schools would need to stay put for the Notre Dame Fightin' Independents (and its tagalongs in other sports as well as the university itself) to remain committed to its current relationship with the conference?

I don't think the composition of the leftover/backfilled ACC is as important to ND as the fact that some sort of ACC remains to help ND to stay a football independent.

From day one, that was the main value of the ACC to ND. That will not change.

Whomever is left and whomever is backfilled will likely be good enough for ND's purposes.

BC, Pitt, Syracuse, Louisville, Virginia, Duke, Georgia Tech, Stanford, SMU, Cal, maybe backfilled with UConn and Tulane.

Good enough basketball, lacrosse, baseball, etc...

Maybe use the turmoil leverage to reduce the football commitment to three games a year, maybe 4.

If you recall, ND wasn't the first school to leave the Big East, was it? It was one of the last ones.

Then, it only moved when another partial membership opportunity opened up.

Is that instructive on how ND might think and act, or not?

(Has anyone noticed that ND has not made one word, move or sign that it is interested in making any type of change? Quite the contrary, in fact?)

Why do people think that ND will bolt after shaping things just the way it wants ???

I’d be using that turmoil to leverage an increased ACC payout. You can still easily fill your schedule with enough USC/A&M/Michigan/etc games to keep the SOS high.

ND doesn't need any more money from the ACC...or from anywhere. it is sitting extremely pretty, financially.

It may need an extra game per year to schedule schools from elsewhere than the ACC, though.

Yes, we know. But you didn't get there by ignoring opportunities to make more $$ either, did you? Demanding a higher % of the ACC contract after some of the better programs depart is such low-hanging fruit that it almost obligatory to grab it. This isn't like UNC or FSU demanding an unfairly-high payout in relation to the rest of the ACC. You could convincingly argue RIGHT NOW that ND is worth more to the ACC than a mere 20% of the media contract, and it's probably worth at least a 50% share of an ACC that's been weakened by multiple defections.

Post: #1003

(04-26-2024 06:15 AM)TerryD Wrote:

(04-25-2024 04:28 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote: @TerryD

Which ACC schools would need to stay put for the Notre Dame Fightin' Independents (and its tagalongs in other sports as well as the university itself) to remain committed to its current relationship with the conference?

I don't think the composition of the leftover/backfilled ACC is as important to ND as the fact that some sort of ACC remains to help ND to stay a football independent.

From day one, that was the main value of the ACC to ND. That will not change.

Whomever is left and whomever is backfilled will likely be good enough for ND's purposes.

BC, Pitt, Syracuse, Louisville, Virginia, Duke, Georgia Tech, Stanford, SMU, Cal, maybe backfilled with UConn and Tulane.

Good enough basketball, lacrosse, baseball, etc...

Maybe use the turmoil leverage to reduce the football commitment to three games a year, maybe 4.

BC
Cal
Duke
Georgia Tech
Louisville
Pitt
SMU
Stanford
Syracuse
Tulane
UConn
Virginia
***Notre Dame***

- - - - -

An arrangement along these lines is possible if the B1G holds on 18 and if "only" FSU, Clemson, UNC and NC State flee for the SEC (fwiw, seems iffy that Louisville with its $6M per football coach would stick around for an FBS version of the Ivy League)

Very little chance this ND safe house comes to fruition if the P2 go to 24 each as most or all of Cal, Duke, GT, Pitt, Stanford, Syracuse, UConn and Virginia would either get a promotion to the SEC or B1G or a life raft to the Big XII.

If 2x24 does indeed happen as Herbstreit, Dellenger and Thamel have suggested is possible, the Irish's best bet for keeping its football program conference-free would be a similar "one foot in, one foot out" agreement with Yappy Yormark and the Big XII — including 'x' number of football games and full-membership in other sports sponsored by the one remaining "M-tier" conference.

Football thumbs up: Preserves ND's football independence

Football thumbs down: With the now clear-cut delineation between the SEC/B1G and everyone else, would choosing to align with a mid-tier conference be cutting off one's nose to spite its face? And how might that non-P2 affiliation impact ND in football recruiting (and possibly other sports) going forward?

Post: #1004

(04-26-2024 02:48 PM)TerryD Wrote: (Has anyone noticed that ND has not made one word, move or sign that it is interested in making any type of change? Quite the contrary, in fact?)

These comments by (now ex-) ND athletic director Jack Swarbrick were interesting. Maybe they prove prophetic, too?

Post: #1005

(04-27-2024 11:15 AM)PeteTheChop Wrote:

(04-26-2024 02:48 PM)TerryD Wrote: (Has anyone noticed that ND has not made one word, move or sign that it is interested in making any type of change? Quite the contrary, in fact?)

These comments by (now ex-) ND athletic director Jack Swarbrick were interesting. Maybe they prove prophetic, too?

No doubt he meant exactly what he said, but ND is in an excellent position to maintain their current nebulous status as long as there isn't a seismic shift in the landscape. 3x24 wouldn't hurt them, 4x18 wouldn't hurt them, 2 x 20/1 x 30 wouldn't hurt them. The only way I see ND deciding to become a member of a Conference would be if a new P1 was established, not a P2 merger but rather as an entirely new entity with 20-40 founding members. In that scenario, ND would still work to play both sides of the still-simmering SEC/B1G divide, just from within the Conference rather than outside of it.

(This post was last modified: 04-27-2024 11:43 AM by bryanw1995.)

Post: #1006

(04-27-2024 10:11 AM)bryanw1995 Wrote: Yeah, Preyer's dissatisfaction is yet one more reason that the ACC needs to extract every penny that they can.
....

Granted the North Carolinians are not all on the same page: that's not Dr Preyer's point. He has expressly stated that UNC needs to keep its own conference options open. His aim is not to drive up the price of exit, but to make the case that his own university may soon need to make its own exit.

(This post was last modified: 04-27-2024 11:58 AM by Gitanole.)

Post: #1007

(04-27-2024 11:04 AM)PeteTheChop Wrote: BC
Cal
Carolina*
Duke
Georgia Tech
Louisville
Miami*
NC State*
Pitt
SMU
South Florida*
Stanford
Syracuse
Tulane
UConn
Virginia
Virginia Tech*
Wake Forest*
***Notre Dame***

I'm not moving anyone out until they sue the conference. Notre Dame will 100% push for UConn due to Olympic sports and their location, plus they could probably convince UConn to move some of their home games to the Giants Stadium. They will have allies within the conference here.

They will push for South Florida because it's a lot easier to get to than Tally, ask Jack. Plus, the need to remain in FLA is a no-brainer. They will have even more allies here.

(04-27-2024 11:04 AM)PeteTheChop Wrote: With the now clear-cut delineation between the SEC/B1G and everyone else, would choosing to align with a mid-tier conference be cutting off one's nose to spite its face? And how might that non-P2 affiliation impact ND in football recruiting (and possibly other sports) going forward?

The only "clear cut delineation" is the Big XII makes a lot less in its postseason payout. The ACC actually improved its postseason distributions, believe it or not.

Post: #1008

(04-27-2024 11:42 AM)bryanw1995 Wrote:

(04-27-2024 11:15 AM)PeteTheChop Wrote:

(04-26-2024 02:48 PM)TerryD Wrote: (Has anyone noticed that ND has not made one word, move or sign that it is interested in making any type of change? Quite the contrary, in fact?)

These comments by (now ex-) ND athletic director Jack Swarbrick were interesting. Maybe they prove prophetic, too?

No doubt he meant exactly what he said, but ND is in an excellent position to maintain their current nebulous status as long as there isn't a seismic shift in the landscape. 3x24 wouldn't hurt them, 4x18 wouldn't hurt them, 2 x 20/1 x 30 wouldn't hurt them. The only way I see ND deciding to become a member of a Conference would be if a new P1 was established, not a P2 merger but rather as an entirely new entity with 20-40 founding members. In that scenario, ND would still work to play both sides of the still-simmering SEC/B1G divide, just from within the Conference rather than outside of it.

I think he chose the word "align" very carefully.

Post: #1009

(04-27-2024 11:58 AM)Skyhawk Wrote:

(04-27-2024 11:42 AM)bryanw1995 Wrote:

(04-27-2024 11:15 AM)PeteTheChop Wrote:

(04-26-2024 02:48 PM)TerryD Wrote: (Has anyone noticed that ND has not made one word, move or sign that it is interested in making any type of change? Quite the contrary, in fact?)

These comments by (now ex-) ND athletic director Jack Swarbrick were interesting. Maybe they prove prophetic, too?

No doubt he meant exactly what he said, but ND is in an excellent position to maintain their current nebulous status as long as there isn't a seismic shift in the landscape. 3x24 wouldn't hurt them, 4x18 wouldn't hurt them, 2 x 20/1 x 30 wouldn't hurt them. The only way I see ND deciding to become a member of a Conference would be if a new P1 was established, not a P2 merger but rather as an entirely new entity with 20-40 founding members. In that scenario, ND would still work to play both sides of the still-simmering SEC/B1G divide, just from within the Conference rather than outside of it.

I think he chose the word "align" very carefully.

Precisely. There is no "J" or "o" in "align" though that word would share an 'i" and "n" with the other word which Irish will not speak because it summons the Dark Lord.

Post: #1010

(04-27-2024 11:57 AM)Gitanole Wrote:

(04-27-2024 10:11 AM)bryanw1995 Wrote: Yeah, Preyer's dissatisfaction is yet one more reason that the ACC needs to extract every penny that they can.
....

Granted the North Carolinians are not all on the same page, that wasn't Dr Preyer's point. He has expressly stated that UNC needs to keep its own conference options open. His aim is not to drive up the price of exit, but to make the case that his own university will soon need to make an exit as well.

No doubt, if Preyer was in charge they'd be much more aggressive in their posturing right now. UNC's issue is still that they don't know what they want. FSU and Clemson know exactly what you guys want, and it's in Birmingham. SOME members of the greater UNC community want to join the SEC. Some want to join the B1G. Some would prefer to remain in the ACC, as long as their ability to keep winning 2-3 NCAAT games per year (and 6 in some years) is not curtailed. A quick FSU/Clemson exit with very low exit fees would give a huge boost to the "leave now" camps. Then it would just come down to which one they settled on, SEC or B1G, but a slow/painful/drawn out exit with enormous exit fees, immediately followed by $15-30m in ACC sweeteners would likely prove impossible for either of the leave now camps to reach critical mass.

I'm starting to think we'll end up with FSU/Clemson to the SEC in 2027 or 2028, with the next moves delayed until after the end of the ACC contract in 2036 or thereabouts.

Post: #1011

(04-26-2024 01:28 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote: An organization’s managers are accountable to all dues paying members whether or not they are part of a subset or clique therein. A commissioner is to work in behalf of the collective and not a fraction of it. Impacting documents, negotiated and signed by a commissioner or his/her designees, need to be shared with all the membership, for approval beforehand. Access by each member to signed documents is not a negotiated factor, and a commissioner has no inherent rights to withhold that information from any and all members.

Any meeting called whereby there are discussions, decision-making, and formal voting, need to have notice, invitations, and access to all members, inclusive of those who have expressed intentions to eventually leave and/or filed lawsuits against the organization. They are still entitled to privileges afforded to others, and retain voting rights for all business until they have submitted resignation letters with termination dates.

All this is what Clemson is complaining about; and they have the high road.

12-3

It's pretty obvious who the commissioner is siding with.

Post: #1012

(04-27-2024 11:42 AM)bryanw1995 Wrote: ...in that scenario, ND would still work to play both sides of the still-simmering SEC/B1G divide ...

I don't think the SEC/B1G divide is simmering. At all (at least for those who matter like Sankey and Petitti as opposed to us fans).

Two entities can be competitive with one another while also working together to ensure mutually beneficial outcomes. Like on the CFP revenue split.

Or, for another closely linked pair of frenemies working together: ESPN and FOX (see UFL partnership or the "exclusive" rights deal for the CFP which conveniently permits ESPN to license 'x' number of games to other outlets)

(This post was last modified: 04-27-2024 12:08 PM by PeteTheChop.)

Post: #1013

(04-27-2024 12:02 PM)JRsec Wrote:

(04-27-2024 11:58 AM)Skyhawk Wrote:

(04-27-2024 11:42 AM)bryanw1995 Wrote:

(04-27-2024 11:15 AM)PeteTheChop Wrote:

(04-26-2024 02:48 PM)TerryD Wrote: (Has anyone noticed that ND has not made one word, move or sign that it is interested in making any type of change? Quite the contrary, in fact?)

These comments by (now ex-) ND athletic director Jack Swarbrick were interesting. Maybe they prove prophetic, too?

No doubt he meant exactly what he said, but ND is in an excellent position to maintain their current nebulous status as long as there isn't a seismic shift in the landscape. 3x24 wouldn't hurt them, 4x18 wouldn't hurt them, 2 x 20/1 x 30 wouldn't hurt them. The only way I see ND deciding to become a member of a Conference would be if a new P1 was established, not a P2 merger but rather as an entirely new entity with 20-40 founding members. In that scenario, ND would still work to play both sides of the still-simmering SEC/B1G divide, just from within the Conference rather than outside of it.

I think he chose the word "align" very carefully.

Precisely. There is no "J" or "o" in "align" though that word would share an 'i" and "n" with the other word which Irish will not speak because it summons the Dark Lord.

I think we're missing the quote where Jack indicates Notre Dame is the third Sun (of Man).

Post: #1014

(04-27-2024 12:03 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:

(04-27-2024 11:57 AM)Gitanole Wrote:

(04-27-2024 10:11 AM)bryanw1995 Wrote: Yeah, Preyer's dissatisfaction is yet one more reason that the ACC needs to extract every penny that they can.
....

Granted the North Carolinians are not all on the same page, that wasn't Dr Preyer's point. He has expressly stated that UNC needs to keep its own conference options open. His aim is not to drive up the price of exit, but to make the case that his own university will soon need to make an exit as well.

No doubt, if Preyer was in charge they'd be much more aggressive in their posturing right now. UNC's issue is still that they don't know what they want. FSU and Clemson know exactly what you guys want, and it's in Birmingham. SOME members of the greater UNC community want to join the SEC. Some want to join the B1G. Some would prefer to remain in the ACC, as long as their ability to keep winning 2-3 NCAAT games per year (and 6 in some years) is not curtailed. A quick FSU/Clemson exit with very low exit fees would give a huge boost to the "leave now" camps. Then it would just come down to which one they settled on, SEC or B1G, but a slow/painful/drawn out exit with enormous exit fees, immediately followed by $15-30m in ACC sweeteners would likely prove impossible for either of the leave now camps to reach critical mass.

I'm starting to think we'll end up with FSU/Clemson to the SEC in 2027 or 2028, with the next moves delayed until after the end of the ACC contract in 2036 or thereabouts.

North Carolina and its donors know damn well where they want to be if they leave, there's isn't much ambivalence there. What they don't want is to leave without Virginia, Duke, N.C. State, and though they know it is not possible, Wake Forest. There is only one dilemma in decision making, leave for the place that satisfies the fans and donors (SEC) or stay and preserve the ACC. That pull is in favor of the latter for the most part. If they feel they must leave they will first seek a destination where Virginia, Duke, and N.C. State will be accepted. When that major ask is refused, they will seek a place which will take them and N.C. State. The positioning of the Governors of the University System of North Carolina is merely the first step in seeking a bargaining position with the Big 10 or SEC, or to establish a rededication to the ACC.

(This post was last modified: 04-27-2024 12:16 PM by JRsec.)

Post: #1015

(04-27-2024 10:11 AM)bryanw1995 Wrote:

(04-26-2024 11:06 AM)Gitanole Wrote:

(04-26-2024 09:48 AM)quo vadis Wrote: FWIW, I think a long messy process works for FSU moreso than the ACC. The psychology of that IMO favors FSU, as the media wisdom about the GOR is that it is supposed to be an unchallengeable, ironclad thing such that anyone who runs in to it will got swatted down summarily in court.

if the judges involved start to treat this as an actual case, one with two sides that have to be thoroughly explored, rather than a slam-dunk, GOR is valid, ACC wins kind of thing, then that destabilizes the ACC even more, I think. So maybe FSU is challenging the contract availability because it gums the works up even more.
....

The process has been messy enough so far, I'd say, that the ACC credibility erosion you mention has begun. The grant of rights has been hyped for years as a sort of contractual Doomsday weapon. Now, when tested, the ACC isn't producing the killer document that smacks down challenges at once with a mighty GoR fist. On the contrary: the ACC is running from subpoenas, filing motions to seal, and claiming authorisation by its membership in meetings it has no record of.

It's not a good look. People notice.

One person who notices is John Preyer, chair of the University of North Carolina Board of Trustees. He recently said this:

"I think that what Clemson is doing is 100 percent proof positive that a significant portion of the membership of the conference is unhappy. I don't see how it is in anyone's interest for the ACC leadership to try and browbeat its member schools from getting access to information and being transparent. And that's kind of the case Clemson is making.

"I think this shows that what is supposed to be a member-based organization is not being led in a way that represents the best interests of all the members, but instead, it's really representing the bottom tier of the membership at the expense of the top tier, which is why Clemson and Florida State are doing what they're doing. I think that's just obvious."

Yeah, Preyer's dissatisfaction is yet one more reason that the ACC needs to extract every penny that they can. Not that they wouldn't want to, anyway, but this clear proof of dissatisfaction within the upper echelons (though as many have pointed out, not the highest echelons) of UNC needs to be dealt with, and that won't be cheap. I don't like it for you guys, but that's the reality of the situation on the ground right now.

The question would be from whom?

Post: #1016

(04-27-2024 12:03 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote: I'm starting to think we'll end up with FSU/Clemson to the SEC in 2027 or 2028, with the next moves delayed until after the end of the ACC contract in 2036 or thereabouts.

So UVA, VA Tech, UNC, NC State and the Canes will just twiddle thumbs for a decade while marooned in what amounts to a spread out and watered down SWC? Those AD's must've been sleeping or playing on their phones during the Mag 7 meetings while FSU and Clemson, were plotting their exit strategies.

The earlier the ACC is stripped for parts, the sooner the SEC, Big and Big XII can grab a larger share of CFP revenue and settle on the most advantageous playoff format

(This post was last modified: 04-27-2024 12:38 PM by PeteTheChop.)

Post: #1017

(04-27-2024 12:35 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote:

(04-27-2024 12:03 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote: I'm starting to think we'll end up with FSU/Clemson to the SEC in 2027 or 2028, with the next moves delayed until after the end of the ACC contract in 2036 or thereabouts.

So UVA, VA Tech, UNC, NC State and the Canes will just twiddle thumbs for a decade while marooned in what amounts to a spread out and watered down SWC? Those AD's must've been sleeping or playing on their phones during the Mag 7 meetings while FSU and Clemson, were plotting their exit strategies.

The earlier the ACC is stripped for parts, the sooner the SEC, Big and Big XII can grab a larger share of CFP revenue and settle on the most advantageous playoff format

Ahem. It's ESPN and FOX which are looking to grab a larger share of the CFP and settle on the most advantageous playoff format. The SEC and Big 10 are just the tools being used.

Post: #1018

(04-27-2024 12:03 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:

(04-27-2024 11:57 AM)Gitanole Wrote:

(04-27-2024 10:11 AM)bryanw1995 Wrote: Yeah, Preyer's dissatisfaction is yet one more reason that the ACC needs to extract every penny that they can.
....

Granted the North Carolinians are not all on the same page, that wasn't Dr Preyer's point. He has expressly stated that UNC needs to keep its own conference options open. His aim is not to drive up the price of exit, but to make the case that his own university will soon need to make an exit as well.

No doubt, if Preyer was in charge they'd be much more aggressive in their posturing right now. UNC's issue is still that they don't know what they want. FSU and Clemson know exactly what you guys want, and it's in Birmingham. SOME members of the greater UNC community want to join the SEC. Some want to join the B1G. Some would prefer to remain in the ACC, as long as their ability to keep winning 2-3 NCAAT games per year (and 6 in some years) is not curtailed. A quick FSU/Clemson exit with very low exit fees would give a huge boost to the "leave now" camps. Then it would just come down to which one they settled on, SEC or B1G, but a slow/painful/drawn out exit with enormous exit fees, immediately followed by $15-30m in ACC sweeteners would likely prove impossible for either of the leave now camps to reach critical mass.

I'm starting to think we'll end up with FSU/Clemson to the SEC in 2027 or 2028, with the next moves delayed until after the end of the ACC contract in 2036 or thereabouts.

Looking at the law suits of both FSU and Clemson, I would have to disagree with your statement.
Florida State seems to be trying to burn every bridge possible in their effort to escape. The 'Noles have no respect for their relationship with ESPN and seem to be willing to sever those ties.
Clemson on the other hand, through agreed to redactions is going out of their way to make sure ESPN is kept as far away from their proceedings as possible.
The deeper this goes it appears more and more like FSU has already made a deal with the devil (B1G), while Clemson wants to stay close to the mothership.

Post: #1019

(04-27-2024 12:05 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote:

(04-27-2024 11:42 AM)bryanw1995 Wrote: ...in that scenario, ND would still work to play both sides of the still-simmering SEC/B1G divide ...

I don't think the SEC/B1G divide is simmering. At all (at least for those who matter like Sankey and Petitti as opposed to us fans).

Two entities can be competitive with one another while also working together to ensure mutually beneficial outcomes. Like on the CFP revenue split.

Or, for another closely linked pair of frenemies working together: ESPN and FOX (see UFL partnership or the "exclusive" rights deal for the CFP which conveniently permits ESPN to license 'x' number of games to other outlets)

On the surface, it's all hunky-dory. However, Sankey is no fool, and he's seen all the moves the B1G has made over the past 30 years just like the rest of us have. The current SEC/B1G detente is only as stable as long as our revenues are comparable. If we could both pick apart the rest of the P5, then there's no reason to think that we'd hesitate to pick each other apart in the end if we can. There's a current push for leadership in CFB, Sankey and Petitti are the only people capable of providing that leadership, so they did it. However, they've both seen the other with the knives out, and they each know to watch their back.

If I'm saying this, and I'm about as B1G-friendly as you'll find in an SEC fan, then imagine what most SEC or B1G fans are thinking right now. Probably something along the lines of "It's smart to make them think we're friends so the knife will go in easier". The instant that P2 cooperation is no longer required, all the friendliness in the world won't keep Petitti and Sankey from each others' throats.

Post: #1020

(04-27-2024 12:14 PM)JRsec Wrote:

(04-27-2024 12:03 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:

(04-27-2024 11:57 AM)Gitanole Wrote:

(04-27-2024 10:11 AM)bryanw1995 Wrote: Yeah, Preyer's dissatisfaction is yet one more reason that the ACC needs to extract every penny that they can.
....

Granted the North Carolinians are not all on the same page, that wasn't Dr Preyer's point. He has expressly stated that UNC needs to keep its own conference options open. His aim is not to drive up the price of exit, but to make the case that his own university will soon need to make an exit as well.

No doubt, if Preyer was in charge they'd be much more aggressive in their posturing right now. UNC's issue is still that they don't know what they want. FSU and Clemson know exactly what you guys want, and it's in Birmingham. SOME members of the greater UNC community want to join the SEC. Some want to join the B1G. Some would prefer to remain in the ACC, as long as their ability to keep winning 2-3 NCAAT games per year (and 6 in some years) is not curtailed. A quick FSU/Clemson exit with very low exit fees would give a huge boost to the "leave now" camps. Then it would just come down to which one they settled on, SEC or B1G, but a slow/painful/drawn out exit with enormous exit fees, immediately followed by $15-30m in ACC sweeteners would likely prove impossible for either of the leave now camps to reach critical mass.

I'm starting to think we'll end up with FSU/Clemson to the SEC in 2027 or 2028, with the next moves delayed until after the end of the ACC contract in 2036 or thereabouts.

North Carolina and its donors know damn well where they want to be if they leave, there's isn't much ambivalence there. What they don't want is to leave without Virginia, Duke, N.C. State, and though they know it is not possible, Wake Forest. There is only one dilemma in decision making, leave for the place that satisfies the fans and donors (SEC) or stay and preserve the ACC. That pull is in favor of the latter for the most part. If they feel they must leave they will first seek a destination where Virginia, Duke, and N.C. State will be accepted. When that major ask is refused, they will seek a place which will take them and N.C. State. The positioning of the Governors of the University System of North Carolina is merely the first step in seeking a bargaining position with the Big 10 or SEC, or to establish a rededication to the ACC.

That's just a weak attempt to have their P2 cake and eat it too by bringing along important followers from the ACC. The B1G isn't going to tolerate that, and neither will we. While I THINK that the greater UNC community prefers the SEC to the B1G, I'm not as certain of it as you seem to be, but, in the end, it doesn't really matter. The entire "leave" community can coalesce into a single entity and they still won't have the sway to get UNC out of the ACC if they're already getting paid like a P2 school. UNC is a basketball first school, and if they have P2 money and get to stay in their basketball-first and still highly competitive ACC, then that's what they'll do. Perhaps not forever, but at least until 2036. And they don't even really need P2 money, they just need to be able to make significantly more in the ACC through 2036 than they would by moving early to the P2 (or really just the SEC as we both expect). A $40m yearly exit charge makes them roughly revenue-neutral in the P2, but throw on top of that a $15-30m "retention bonus" from the ACC and all of a sudden their options are "make ACC-like money in the SEC until 2036 or make SEC-like money in the ACC until 2036". Which do you think they're going to choose there? Not all of them will fall for this temporary and unwieldy solution, certainly, but enough of them will lean that direction that they won't be able to rebuild the BoG and legislature to their liking soon enough to get out before 2036.

Ofc, the fly in that ointment is that the ACC Presidents have not proven to be much better at this game than the Pac Presidents, and they may very well dare UNC to leave with that same huge exit fee. If that happens then I think the leave coalition wins the day and they get out a year or 2 after FSU and we all start a betting pool on their +1.