daveinop

outside source unless you buy exclusivity to those rights. the way to do that is to follow the course Terry laid out. you can also somewhat control fraud and you can somewhat control who is eligible to play in your league. The NCAA needs to focus on the things it can do instead of trying to back into some predetermined outcome.

You asked how it would work...that's how it would work...declare the players to be employees...let them unionize ...then collectively bargain you can't control NIL unless you buy it. there is no scenario where you wish it or legislate it away. even the NFL doesn't completely control NIL...but they do pay for the part they use NCAA CAN control wholesale transfer with academically related sideboards on participation, but they still just want to say "you can't go wherever you want whenever you want" instead of linking participation to their mission as codified in their federal tax status...probably because they've forgotten what their mission is

the schools don't own name, image and, likeness unless they buy it. hence employee contracts, union, collective bargaining could work if you have to be a full time student and have completed X number of hours (a full semester) at the school you represent, and have completed a total of no more than Y hours total (or during no more than Z academic calendar years), in order to participate in a NCAA sanctioned event, then transfer is self limiting. People are entitled to attend whatever school they can get into, but there is no inherent right to play NCAA sponsored events. NCAA can put whatever academic sideboards it wants on athletes. Could collectively bargain this as well.

Their education mission is the basis of their non-profit status. So they can base eligibility to compete on how long it takes to get an undergraduate degree and how many credits a player must have earned at the school they represent. Stop trying to control how much money students can earn and how they do it. That is none of their business. Or has Terry points out; make them employees, let them unionize, and collectively bargain. I agree with him; that is the path of least resistance. The NCAA wants what it had...an uber profitable business with under compensated labor. That was and is illegal; and no EO will fix it. Nor will a flimsy law that fails to pass constitutional muster.

big enough (both in numbers and geography) and have enough parity to maintain national interest. If it isn't/doesn't, then the next level of college football with national level interest becomes a big draw. VT leadership thinks the P level is going to 40 or 48 and they are probably right. 40 could be enough. 48 would be enough. A P1 that is too small is the CBA or AAA baseball...better than college and no one cares. Limited geography and it is NASCAR, hoping it has bottomed out after a 15 year decline.

especially after their very public whining this year. wanna stop getting the benefit of the doubt? that's how you do it.

couldn't be money or vanity going from no post season participation, to playing in bowls, to getting an automatic seat via the ACC, to we must have guaranteed access to the CFP; from no paying players, to we should be able to pay them as much as we want (but players still can't be employees because we'd quit over that) the religious schools and other select privates should just withdraw from the NCAA and form their own leagues like they do in HS...oh that's right, they'd lose viewership/$$$ ** Edited by daveinop at 1/18/2026, 11:04:24 AM

Always found your posts informative and entertaining. Seriously, what did you think the ACC was going to do? It is Phillips' job to try to get Miami in the CFP ahead of...really anybody. In the end, the easiest and most effective way to do that was drive home the head to head result with ND. Is the committee chicken**** in how it does it's business? Yes. Did you hear all of the "eyeball test" discussions in the weeks leading up to selection day? What a joke! But if that's how it operates, then that's how you play the game; you point out the obvious. I understand and respect that ND values its football independence above all else, at least athletically. But there is a price to pay for that; no one else is going to be your advocate. It would be a simple matter for ND to put together it's own conference and pretty much dictate how it operates. But you have to be willing to be an equal partner with someone...in football. I don't think ND will go there and if I'm correct, then being left out of a tournament you probably weren't going to win wasn't that big of a deal. ** Edited by daveinop at 12/11/2025, 6:24:54 AM ** Edited by daveinop at 12/11/2025, 6:26:40 AM

ND would like it to be on the table; that's why they are threatening to take their ball and go home. But they won't because it's the best deal they can get.

to try to negotiate more flexibility. I don't think the ACC needs to do anything about it.

so who cares if ND walks. I'd call...if there is a better deal for ND somewhere else, they'd have already taken it. They haven't been able to move the needle in their scheduling negotiations up to now, so now they are offended when the ACC pushes one of it's own; AND the issue is already resolved? This is laughable.

to survive, i.e., joining in football, so it has nothing to gain by giving in to ND for anything. What is ND going to do to make the current situation worse?

there is no other conference with teams they want to play and a network to show their games that will give them this deal next year the playoff deal is moot...top 12 they're in they want those extra games they recently agreed to play to count as contract games. the ACC does not.

with the conference; i.e., which games count toward fulfillment of the contract and which don't. ND wants those extra games added last year to count. ACC does not. ND isn't going to join a conference in football and no one else with schools they like to play will give them this deal and put them on TV all the time. Besides, starting next year this issue doesn't matter. ACC does need to fix the tiebreaker snafu. And all conferences should use the same system.

VT figures it has 2-3 years to become relevant enough in football to be picked up by B1G or SEC. What ND does or does not do has no impact on that. In the ACC there was hope that ND would eventually join in football. But that isn't happening and without that the ACC as it once was, is doomed. So the drama going on right now is getting a little press, but none of the members are wringing their hands if ND wants to pull out of the conference. ** Edited by daveinop at 12/8/2025, 4:49:05 PM

it would be a very dumb business decision You have been right about this from the get-go; ND can and should act in its best self-interest, as should everyone else. I thought lack of conference affiliation would hurt ND football in the CFP more than it has. This is the first year it bit you and it looks like that won't happen again (why anyone agreed to that I don't know; but they did). As you said, the lesson this year is one too many losses for ND. The lesson for the ACC this year is dump the stupid internal tiebreakers. I think what is inevitable for the CFP is either dropping the conference title games and just taking the top-ranked X number of teams, or making them play-in games to an 8 team playoff. The notion that winning a conference title game gets you something but losing one doesn't cost anything is as dumb as guaranteeing top 12 ND a slot but not top 12 anyone else.

act in its own self interest and the ACC should plan/act accordingly. Y'all contribute a ton to make this board a great place but why on earth wouldn't the ACC lobby to get one of it's members in ahead of a contract partner? At a minimum, it has a fiduciary responsibility to its members to do that. The ACC will lobby all day to get conference member ND in the NCAA tournament. But football? No way. The door is open for ND to join but there can be no complaining if we push for a member over a non-member. And for what it's worth, Bama should have been the team left out.

a simple resignation should suffice

** Edited by daveinop at 11/25/2025, 7:38:47 PM

they share no playoff revenue with the ACC. ND has an open invitation to join; this is their chosen arrangement, not ours. I think they are pissed that their previously scheduled games with Stanford don't count toward their ACC contract obligation ** Edited by daveinop at 11/22/2025, 1:54:04 PM

not sure why there is any complaint whatsoever

so more TV revenue doesn't give a school more to spend on player "salaries". but it would make it easier to spend up to the cap and support the programs in other ways.

everything else. The locals in both places don't particularly care for outsiders. Don't know why anyone with children would choose to live in Alabama or Louisiana. I could see him interested in UGA if Kirby leaves...maybe UF.

VT is radically restructuring and greatly increasing spending (at least 40% and perhaps a good way above that) on athletics. Sub .500 in the SEC isn't going to get it no matter what your name is. Word is football would be split from the rest of the department and placed under it's own GM. The AD would be over the remaining sports. I think they'll hire a football GM first who will then select a coach. I'll be very surprised if they don't pick a currently successful P4 HC (or VERY successful G5) that has no significant ties to VT, if for no other reason than there aren't any. VT can't really afford to miss right now even if they have overpay to get there.

timing has a lot to do with this...different economic era today. I remember when many, me included, thought Maryland was crazy.

and those numbers aren't that difficult to figure out. As long as they stick to market values, it will be much easier to defend when challenged. The big problem comes when the school pays substantial $ on highly rated high schoolers in revenue sports who then don't see the field/court. The NIL value of those bench warmers is zip. The star pitcher on the softball team on the other hand...

routine deals, for meals, cars, local ads, etc. They aren't known for NCAA-like hand-wringing.

a more easily identifiable demarcation within the conference. (Is there more balance/talent across the Big 12 or just fewer slam dunks?) But overall, another indicator a 32 super league of the current P2 would have some significant holes. I still think 48 is probably the minimum number for a college football super league. If you want a smaller super league, look at regional sports fewer schools sponsor...like lacrosse. 32 can work for a pro league because those teams are franchises of an overall effort to maximize profit. Back in the day, the AFL relatively quickly demonstrated the NFL was undersized. On the other hand, spring pro football efforts, and occasional NFL movement show that they are now probably pretty close to right-sized. TV $ in college sports is mostly about profit for the networks and maintaining a competitive advantage for the schools' sports programs. Does it have residual benefits for academics? Of course. But at their heart colleges are still academic non-profits. UVA may not be able to field a great football team but it could readily afford to buy an NFL franchise as an investment.

Their attempt to control $/rights that didn't belong to them has led to the current mess that is college sports. What they can control is the academic eligibility to play the sports they sanction. For example, they can't control where a student goes to school. They can control what type of academic status a student has...and for how long they have had it...to represent a member in competition.

i think this was expected, if not already known

** Edited by daveinop at 5/18/2025, 7:50:41 PM

I've seen from ND's admin.

anyone see a statement from the ND admin?

The ACC isn't signatory to the deal beyond what what was already scheduled...it's between Clemson and ND. Also note that ND's deal with the conference expires in 2036, before the Clemson 12 game deal runs its course in 2038. I don't doubt that you are correct on ND's position and ND may prevail as it often does. But unlike "ESPN sources" the ACC's statement is clear and direct, "the Clemson-Notre Dame piece of it is not part of that rotation of 5" and "what Clemson and Notre Dame decide after that [the home-home rotation that was already scheduled]; they're working on that piece of it [the 12 game series]".

viewership for the entire bowl season; so whatever they come up for football better figure out how to increase fan interest. i don't think less teams is it. maybe more competitive games and more games that count, and a calendar/system where players aren't opting/portaling out? basketball averaged 9.4 million/game in rounds 1 and 2. the totality of bowl games, cfp included, was in the mid 4's ** Edited by daveinop at 3/30/2025, 7:42:08 PM ** Edited by daveinop at 3/30/2025, 7:42:47 PM