Does the cheapest way for ACC schools to leave help us?
Been a while since I've been on the boards. Apologies if this already hashed out in full.
So, impediment to ACC schools leaving right now is GOR. Everyone read the Andy Staples article on the options for getting out of that. Almost all of the options involve paying lawyers millions of dollars, except the one where the conference is dissolved. I've heard conflicting reports on how many it would take to dissolve the conference (News & Observer in Raleigh intimated it was 6, I've heard as many as 9). Let's say it is 8. Wouldn't the most cost-effective and certain option be for 8 schools to coordinate with the SEC and Big10 to find landing spots for those schools and then those schools all agree to dissolve the conference.
You have the schools both conferences would like (as far as I can tell): UNC and UVA and ND (and possibly Miami and Clemson and FSU.....AAU stuff aside)
Then you have the schools only the Big10 would consider: GT (and maybe Pitt)
then you have the schools that only the SEC would consider: FSU (I assume Big10 would want UM over them), NCSU, VT, Louisville
That is 10 schools. If the Big10 and SEC want certainty, could they coordinate to determine who gets who of this list and then those schools vote to dissolve? You will probably have to pay lawyers to defend bad faith, collusion, tortious interference suits brought by the ACC schools left in the cold, but it would be nothing compared to the cost and risk of litigating challenging the GOR.
I feel like this is VT's best shot. Maybe SEC gets UNC, UM, FSU. Big 10 gets ND, UVA, GT. Then the SEC has to decide if it wants to add VT, NCSU, or Lou. I like our odds in that matchup.
The minute the SEC takes UVA, we're screwed. This seems like the only path open for the Hokies to get into one of the big 2.
17 Replies
V
vtka93
4y
Also you leave oregon and UW out of that scenario (and potentially stanford and cal). who is to say big 10 doesn't take some of them, ND and maybe unc/uva?
and no one is going to add a school unless it guarantees the yearly payout to each member goes up. not sure all those teams do that and not sure these power conferences need/want to get to 24
(In response to this post by CampLawHokie)
Don’t think the SEC would EVER consider the Hoos
And conversely the academic talking heads at Uva wouldn’t lower themselves to go to the not so famous SEC academia rankings level.
(In response to this post by CampLawHokie)
I
I85Hokie
4y
Unlike the Hokies, they have this old South, blue blood mentality that they share with many SEC state flagship schools. We used to make fun of UVA students for wearing ties to football games. You know who else does that? Bama students. Ole Miss students. I’d say that the 4 top targets for SEC expansion are UNC, UVA, Clemson, and FSU.
(In response to this post by sacramento hokie)
V
vtka93
4y
(In response to this post by I85Hokie)
4y
others all mention that they have been surprised to hear from a lot of people they know that the SEC might be looking more to add "flagship" schools as opposed to cultural fits. Staples said this specifically surprised him in the VT vs UVA discussion. Obviously take it with a grain of salt, no one knows what the hell is going to happen for sure. But those guys are plugged in enough to at least get me worried about that.
(In response to this post by sacramento hokie)
4y
(In response to this post by CampLawHokie)
4y
(In response to this post by tarheelblue)
4y
But to dissolve the conference (thus nullifying the GoR) you would have to amend the ACC constitution and by-laws, which requires a 3/4 majority vote of all members, or 12 schools. It also requires a 3/4 majority vote to add (or expel) members to the conference.
** Edited by tarheelblue at 7/8/2022, 3:42:44 PM
(In response to this post by IB4TECH)
4y
I'm picking on two of the smallest schools here.
Yes they have both had some success in the ACC over the years. But they will never ever be national brands. And they will never fill their stadiums because they just don't have the numbers.
I'm sure it is very unlikely, but trying to look at all options here. And who knows, maybe it benefits the schools if they are losing money on football.
(In response to this post by tarheelblue)
4y
(In response to this post by HokieAl)
4y
the ACC is going to stay intact and add teams, I hope you're right. I also know that Skipper has been pretty out of the loop on this stuff for some time. Don't think DAZN is heavily involved in getting CFB rights
(In response to this post by Stech)
S
Stech
4y
either striking the deal for ESPN or since he left ESPN working as a Consultant for those getting them. Believe me, he’s in the loop, it’s the Rumor Writers that are out of the loop, because their boss wants something written on this hot subject, whether they know anything or not.
(In response to this post by CampLawHokie)
4y
is now in charge of a fringe streaming service. Not to say he doesn't still have connections. I take your point, he definitely knows a lot of people who are in the decision making positions. But his agreeing to go on LeBatard and be so verbose and expansive makes me think he probably isn't very close to the center of it.
(In response to this post by Stech)
D
daveinop
4y
the head of the organization still calls for advice and I still have a key to the office. Some things change; but some things don't. If Skipper is clean/sober and has contacts, his thoughts are as insightful as any. Money drives these decisions and the networks know who is profitable and who isn't.
(In response to this post by CampLawHokie)
4y
I view it similar to Jim Cramer talking stocks. He is not sharing good info for your benefit. He is sharing info that he's being paid to share for the benefit of big money players.
I trust the sports reporters far more than I trust anyone from the NCAA or one of the networks.
(In response to this post by CampLawHokie)