Anyone else find this guy super annoying?
Dude is a super FSU homer, and to hear him tell it the rest of the ACC is not worthy of FSU and Clemson. His videos are basically daily cheerleads for the demise of the ACC. And anytime he talks about what other ACC teams might land in the SEC, he always mentions UNC and UVA. Rarely does he mention VT.
70 Replies
W
WBGV
2y
(In response to this post by daveinop)
D
daveinop
2y
** Edited by daveinop at 5/5/2024, 7:01:43 PM
(In response to this post by WBGV)
R
ren_hoek
2y
Never seen a tinfoil hat he didn't want to wear.
Not the sharpest knife in the drawer.
A few beers shy of a six pack.
(In response to this post by UpstateSCHokie)
Yep. He does have a punchable face. ;)
(In response to this post by UpstateSCHokie)
he is the absolute worst...jimmy, living in his mom's basement, pretending
he has a sports show LOL
(In response to this post by UpstateSCHokie)
T
TDVick
2y
Whether it is Flugaur or this guy or other reporting, ESPN is fighting tooth and nail to keep the terms suppressed. It seems like the ACC is trying to do this also. Clemson hasn't been able to get this information. That was written in black and white on their legal filing. I doubt they are lying about that. How did that deal ever get signed?
Move along, contracts where people don't know the details get signed all the time. This wasn't a drag and click phone agreement.
I'm very sympathetic to FSU and Clemson and want to find out how screwed up this thing was in the first place. I really hope the State of Florida publishes this.
I'd like to know if there was a principal-agent problem in the first place.
I also wonder if ESPN isn't to blame for tearing up college football.
(In response to this post by UpstateSCHokie)
D
daveinop
2y
to get a copy of the B1G deal with Fox from UMD. Has anyone seen the SEC deal?
I doubt if the ACC is the lone ranger in this approach. All we hear are the highlights from the spin folks and the reporting of the actual payouts from the previous year.
** Edited by daveinop at 5/5/2024, 8:08:29 AM
(In response to this post by TDVick)
V
VTCALS72
2y
When you take the uncertainty and amount of money ESPN had to put up to launch the network and the fact that at the time, only Clemson was holding up the ACCs performance, is it really a bad deal for a conference not named the SEC or B10?
(In response to this post by TDVick)
2y
I am beginning to believe that contract between ACC and espn is 100% one sided in espn's favor. I'm beginning to believe there is no reason the extended GOR should have happened. IIRC, the added GOR was done in exchange for the extension of the ACC-espn television agreement.
I'm now beginning to believe the 2026 or 7 look in is strictly for espn's benefit. It's solely for espn to decide if they want to keep televising.
I'm thinking Swofford & Co screwed the ACC members.
I also want VT's administration to swear VT's lawyers went over that contract with a fine tooth comb.
(In response to this post by TDVick)
T
TDVick
2y
under the rug" platitudes by the "Poppycock" crew, when in fact, anyone with a bit a strategic sense knew that SEC was a much better option as far back as 2011. Here we are, sweating it out, when we could be in the club house, with an extra $20+ million a year. Maryland knew. Rutgers knew. Missouri knew. But the VT peeps couldn't figure it out. It looked like a terrible decision to me back in 2011 and the more that bad elements of the deal come out, it is going to look quite unforgivable.
My guess. They either didn't look it over, or did, and smirked and went along with it anyhow.
** Edited by TDVick at 5/5/2024, 1:36:24 PM
(In response to this post by Atlee Hokie)
2
2hhoop3
2y
is they were both broke and still spending money like a drunken sailor. The B1G offer including the loans against future distributions were their only possible lifeline. Even with that both continue to bleed out even today. They knew something but, it is not what you asserted. What you continue to fail to grasp, despite numerous attempts made to explain it to you, is the decisions made by VT folks at the time revolved around more than just picking the likely best long term option. That was a no brainer in 2011 just as it was in 2003 but, in 2003 that was not an option on the table.
(In response to this post by TDVick)
V
VTCALS72
2y
contract as when Vt and everybody else signed the GOR, the signed away all rights to the negotiation and management of the media deal to the ACC. And whereas as far as the media deal, the individual schools became like minors with the ACC the Trustee, probably every conference has the same thing.
I am not sure how you can say Swofford screwed the ACC. Do you think the only reason the ACC did not get a much better, maybe SEC level contract was the ACC commissioner? That is looking for a scapegoat.
In the end it appears the contract will be made public and probably it will be found that ESPN's "trade secrets" are just how much ESPN is making from all conferences. That is what ESPN doesn't want known.
But I do not believe anything shocking or different from any other conference will be in it. It is probably ESPN boiler plate with only the length and stated price unless there is something specific to the launch and continuousness of the ACCN.
Why do so many want this most likely boring contract to be some nefarious?
(In response to this post by Atlee Hokie)
2
2hhoop3
2y
you assert is true. What is the motivation for all the schools, including VT, to remain quiet and compliant now? That would seem to constitute either a massive cover up and/or gross negligence on the part of the member institutions, administrators and professional advisers. Short of a settlement with NDA's everywhere either a few or a lot of people are likely to end up in some pretty uncomfortable situations as the litigation proceeds.
(In response to this post by Atlee Hokie)
2y
may be language that can be "arguably" damaging. I suspect that is the case. The schools that remain quiet may be doing so, because they have a reckless litigant taking all the risk while they nibble popcorn. While they are publicly quiet, I'm sure every school has prepared some steps to follow depending on the nature of the settlement.
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2y
... Swofford, they will want the ACC to prevail in its suit against FSU & Clemson. You are correct it would be embarrassing if they didn't exercise "due diligence" before signing off on the GORs.
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
V
VTCALS72
2y
There was a heck of a lot of pre discussion between the schools and what they wanted BEFORE they signed the GOR. Whereas I don't believe the individual members saw the final contract as they signed that right over to the conference in the GOR. But assuredly they did go over the basics. and probably set the piece of the contract relative to what they, the schools led by FSU wanted as far as the launch of the ACCN. Too many way undersell how badly the big boys in the ACC were desperate to get the network. Heck, as I remember it getting that network was a must have to a whole lot of posters on this board as well.
No one should undersell the cost of the ACCN in the ACC/media deal.
(In response to this post by Atlee Hokie)
2
2hhoop3
2y
aid the ACC and its members in prevailing in the suit? Silence lasts until possibly the first deposition at the latest. FSU, and maybe Clemson, are like the initial settlers, they've burned the boats and there is no going back. It will be interesting IF truth is ever sorted from fiction, however, the most likely scenario is that ESPN comes to the table with money just like both they and FOX did when they were divvying up the PAC 12. The remaining question is which schools in the ACC end up in the UT/OU/USC/UCLA tier, which might end up in the UO/UW tier, which will be the four corners tier and who gets to play the role of Washington State and Oregon State.
(In response to this post by Atlee Hokie)
T
TDVick
2y
and FSU a higher figure. So don't they have strong incentive to prevent disclosure. 2. They either look stupid for doing the deal in the first place (VT) or want to make the conference they are stuck in look better.
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2
2hhoop3
2y
the truth comes out absent a settlement and NDAs. No real benefit to keeping quiet, only downside. How are FSU and Clemson damaged by a deal they knew and pushed? IF, big IF, they are successful in the suit a one way ticket out of the conference is likely their prize.
(In response to this post by TDVick)
2y
weighting is subjective, as there are many factors to consider, but you have
Blue blood status
Brand status
revenue
market
fan base
facilities
academics
viewership ratings
And a few others.
We have a pretty good idea what the P2 has done so far. To assume they will do something different is wishful thinking for a lot of schools.
Compare contrast to the schools that have been invited to the P2, then compare contrast to the schools that we know haven't.
Then compare them to WSU and wOSU.
Who is worth what? How does the P2, or networks know who is worth what?
I don't think the SEC will pull a Big 10, or an ACC, and bring on teams at 1/2 value or less. So far, the B12 only have full members. I don't know, would you want your school to pull a CalFord to get in the SEC? I wouldn't want my school to do that.
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2
2hhoop3
2y
about your statement on the Big 12? I thought the 4 G5 started at reduced rates and only became full with new agreement.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2y
ESPN & Fox declined to pay for the expansion, so the eight incumbent members lent the money by taking reduced payouts for those two years. The OK/TX exit money failed to cover the deficit, leaving over $40 million still due to the eight "lenders."
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
R
RJHokie
2y
to get the info. Not sure why that hasn’t happened yet, but I’m not a lawyer.
(In response to this post by Atlee Hokie)
2y
So they didn’t bother with the details. It was widely celebrated at the time. Now it appears to be the albatross.
(In response to this post by TDVick)
V
VTCALS72
2y
Fu but on the front side, it was a good deal.
And I ask that you guys look at the ACCN in a different light. With the ACCN the conference or individual schools even are in position to quickly produce and sell individual streamed games to ESPN/Fox or smaller networks. So ESPN spends zero (which I think is part of their plan) on production cost, they just buy the streamed product with the matchups and time slots they need, stream it into their studio, add their announcers and that is how teams not in the P2 will get air time.
(In response to this post by Millpoint)
2y
as The CW is doing with their ACC content.
Do you ever wonder how much synergy is gained for ESPN by having collocated production facilities for The ACCN and The SECN? Is this saving (in my imagination) visible in the expense accounting? ESPN brings out my cynical side.
(In response to this post by VTCALS72)
E
EDGEMAN
2y
...the ACCN started. That wasn't exactly cheap...lol
(In response to this post by Millpoint)
When the news leaked out that ESPN had the opportunity to pull the plug in
2027, that was a game changer. Especially if the member schools didn't know about it.
As annoying as the FSU podcasters and their running dog lemmings are, the ACC and ESPN should be a far bigger concern to us.
With all this worry we are stuck until 2036, who knew that this secret was out there that said that ESPN can pull the plug on the whole operation? It's just bad.
BTW, part of me hopes that ESPN decides to back out. And I think they will if FSU and Clemson win the lawsuit; that, or renegotiate for less of a payout for remaining schools.
(In response to this post by TDVick)
V
VTCALS72
2y
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
2y
With FSU and Clemson planning to leave. Unless fsu and Clemson change their mind between now and February and decide to stay, I'm assuming ESPN is going to back out on their media deal, or negotiate a much lower payment. Also, if the FSU and Clemson issue is not settled, ESPN will not know if the settlement would be for a price that other schools would find affordable, causing other schools to possibly leave as well. Until ESPN knows what the makeup of ACC will be going forward, I do not see the ACC getting a good deal . And with schools leaving, I don't see them getting a good deal anyway. Everyone has wanted the ACC to renegotiate its deal with ESPN earlier than 2036. Be careful what you wish for! It's not going to turn out to our advantage.
** Edited by wwhokie1 at 5/4/2024, 11:18:29 PM
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
Don't know why ACC would even bother giving ESPN an extension in making the
decision to opt-out. Had the ACC said NO to extending the deadline to ESPN to make the decision, I might be more sympathetic to them in their current fight against FSU. They could have just said to ESPN, "No, make a decision. Is it 2027 or 2036?"
Had ESPN said NO, then the FSU and Clemson lawsuits would be purposeless. Everyone, including FSU and Clemson could leave in 2027. If ESPN said, YES, then the ACC mid-level and lower programs would be taken care of. And ACC and ESPN would have the high ground in going to the mat to keep FSU and Clemson.
But no. The ACC just rolled over again for ESPN and kicked the can down the road.
But what ESPN is stuck with now is the prospect of losing FSU to Fox. And I think that bothers them as much as losing the entire bottom half of the ACC.
** Edited by Maroon Baboon at 5/4/2024, 11:34:38 PM
(In response to this post by wwhokie1)
V
VTCALS72
2y
"look in/opt out" was scheduled. If I remember correctly, the ACCN was way late actually coming to market and that first date would have put the look in at a very bad time because the ACCN was not yet turning a profit.
Good deal or bad, both ESPN and the ACC sunk a lot of money in the ACCN as everybody thought it necessary and nobody was going to kill it before it had time to "grow up." So the look in was pushed back to allow the ACCN to really get their feet on the ground and see if it was worthy of ESPN putting any more money into it.
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
If that's the case, why is everyone acting like they didn't know about it?
And does "look-in" mean either party can can't pull the plug on the deal? Or just ESPN. And why didn't everyone know about it?
Moreover, you bring up the length of time it took to get to market. I remember that the ACCN was ready. But Comcast seemed to wait about 2 years to put it on their system of channels. Whose fault is this? ESPN certainly didn't push for it for some reason. But maybe it's Comcast's fault, or the ACC's. Don't know, but this failure is part and parcel of the ACC's troubles as a conference.
(In response to this post by VTCALS72)
V
VTCALS72
2y
everything in every contract everybody signed. 2nd again IMHO the ACC/media contract is "nothing to see here" and most likely everybody has one, even the new CFP contract. Who benefits from the new CFP "look in?" It is not the weaker conferences, it is the stronger ones wanting more. When the ACC/ESPN contract was signed the ACC was asking for a lot more than their apparent current value at the time was. Remember that. I wonder what the annual return would have been if every team in the ACC had not directed the ACC to get the ACCN?
As for the ACCN being ready to go, yours is a distinction that doesn't matter except to say that was a reason the start up took longer. Doesn't matter the reason, the ACCN was not producing the revenues for ESPN or the ACC at the time the look in should have occurred. There were extenuating circumstances so both sides agreed to give the ACCN more time. I think the ACCN has done much better since that 2021 date.
And the very idea that any of these media contracts benefit the schools/conferences more than the media companies is naive. Not just the ACC but everybody.
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
When you say "most likely everybody had a copy of the (ACC/media contract)"
Well...apparently FSU didn't, because their lawyers had to go into the ACC vault to look at it without taking pictures or even taking notes.
I will assume your account of the reasons for the delays and extensions are true. But even so, it doesn't promote an environment that would make top football schools and brands want to stay.
Lastly, you mention that people are "naive" if they think schools should benefit more than the media companies. I don't know anyone who thinks that. But what a reasonable person would expect is that the contract would benefit both sides. But when a contract fails to benefit one of the parties, the disadvantaged party looks to move on, especially when the contact was ill-conceived and perhaps a legal loophole.
Hence, we have FSU and Clemson looking for a way out.
(In response to this post by VTCALS72)
V
VTCALS72
2y
most likely every other conference has a contract with a look in provision within it. Didn't mean every ACC member as the ACC media contract. Just a point that the "look in" may well be more of just business as usual much more so than a poison pill specifically for the ACC.
2nd, the ACC nor the PAC nor the XII have anything that would make top football brands want to stay, period.
Clemson and FSU and anybody else in the ACC or XII could make way more money by being in the P2. But they are trying to welch out on everybody else of a contract they signed.
That is the issue and the only issue to me. The GOR is an agreement, not just between a member and the "conference" but an agreement between members to share and share alike. I believe every team understood what was happening and willingly signed the GOR. Period.
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
W
WBGV
2y
decide to end their media rights contract with the ACC has been the biggest bombshell in conference realignment history IMO. The fact that ESPN must make that decision before February 2025 (less than a year away) is also shocking.
I now see it playing out the following way. FSU & Clemson give their notice to leave the ACC before August 2024. ESPN declines their unilateral option to extend the contract with the ACC before February 2025 and/or activates the composition clause in the media rights contract. Each ACC school with options will devise their own exit strategy at that point which could be to negotiate a settlement with the remaining schools in the conference for an immediate exit, wait until 2027 when the media rights contract ends and the GOR is of little value, or if enough schools have options then dissolution of the conference becomes a real possibility.
I think you are going to get your wish and ESPN won’t extend the contract without FSU and Clemson as members.
** Edited by WBGV at 5/4/2024, 3:49:07 PM
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
V
VTCALS72
2y
only be true if a court says so. IMHO, in the end the exit fees/GOR payouts will be very steep for FSU, Clemson and whomever else may have a spot in the P2. For all the rest of which VT may well be one, will have little choice but to stay because the exit fee to enter a comparable pay conference will be too steep.
(In response to this post by WBGV)
W
WBGV
2y
it seems to me that the cost to leave the conference at that time could be as low as the exit fee which is three time the conference yearly operating budget ($120 million). And Clemson is already challenging the exit fee as being exorbitant.
Those steep estimates to withdraw from the ACC referenced in FSU legal documents were based on them leaving immediately, buying back their media rights, and a media rights agreement that went until 2036. That would not be the case if the media rights contract ends in 2027.
The GOR refers to the ESPN agreement about a dozen times so there are tie-ins and if that agreement ends in 2027, then I don’t see how the cost to leave the conference could be that steep at that point. Also, how could any school contemplate staying in a conference without a media rights agreement and the guaranteed income that comes with it. I guess the conference could attempt to seek out new media rights partners, but isn’t that what the PAC-12 tried to do for over a year without any success.
(In response to this post by VTCALS72)
V
VTCALS72
2y
If your view is correct then the date 2036 should not appear anywhere in the contract. But I am pretty sure the ACC/Media contract "look in" is just like the one in the new CFP contract. In other words not something new and different just to screw the ACC but an
industry standard.
Yes there are tie in between the GOR and the media company the ACC had been working with for years and years. But the question of the GOR surviving the current contract is one that only the court can answer. I say there is a whole lot that says the ACC has the rights until 2036 for the purpose providing the best possible media deal to the members. That doesn't mean better for FSU over BC.
(In response to this post by WBGV)
W
WBGV
2y
Option in the 2016 ACC Tier I Agreement which allows ESPN to walk away from the ACC altogether in 2027. 2036 would be the ending date of this Nine-Year Option, but if it is not exercised by ESPN then the media rights agreement ends in 2027. The media partner must notify the conference of their decision by February of 2025 per the FSU filings.
Even if the Grant of Rights Agreement could somehow still be valid without a supporting Media Rights Agreement in 2027, what value would a school’s “right” have if there wasn’t any compensation or additional consideration from the media partner going forward. It certainly wouldn’t be steep and likely wouldn’t prevent any school from leaving the conference that had options.
(In response to this post by VTCALS72)
T
TDVick
2y
are actual damages, they aren't as insurmountable as an 11 year window and will be negotiated downward. There might be a league called the ACC playing football in 2027, but it will be much different.
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
W
WarHog38
2y
All this about the ACC soon settling lawsuits you see all over the internet. The only thing I can see the ACC possibly settling would be their own demise. I just cannot ever see the ACC ever doing that.
That GOR going public seems the main issue being bounced around the courts presently in all this. I think when ESPN mentioned in the North Carolina court that the FSU attorneys committed a felony divulging trade secrets. ESPN was referencing that June 30, 2027, signing deadline being publicly made known. Not going to argue about making contracts between two identities public. However I think the ACC schools that were somewhat coerced into signing that GOR contract unaware & later deprived of all the contents was wrong. Perhaps legally wrong?
(In response to this post by TDVick)
2y
Clemson bolt? So you want VT to get less money?
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
No. But if the ACC is going to let the two top football dogs out, I'd
rather just start over and get on with the new world order. I'm hoping we have P2 options. But if we don't, the BigXII might be our best bet.
(In response to this post by UpstateSCHokie)
2y
if the ACC dies, we’re likely going to be in a bloated Big 12 getting way less money than we are right now.
(In response to this post by UpstateSCHokie)
2
2hhoop3
2y
because the people that actually sign the contract have had access before, during and after to the document. Fsu and Clemson but, especially Fsu, deserve no sympathy. ESPN is not someone to be defended but, the fact is Fsu and Clemson pushed for these deals originally, signed the deals without objection and benefitted from them for years with nary a whimper right up until buyer's remorse smacked them in the pocketbook. This is only partly about the money. The other piece is a fear by Fsu and Clemson that there best opportunity for a P2 spot is likely now and they are uncertain what another 5 or 10 years might really do to their brands.
(In response to this post by TDVick)
2y
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2y
That presumes neither of the P2 have the Hokies high on their expansion lists because they don’t give them enhanced recruiting or markets.
So if the current ACC deal is the best one we’ll get, we should hope the ACC and ESPN rip their programs to shreds. Force them to come up with five hundred million dollar exit fees and toss the carcasses of their programs to whither in the Big 12.
That aside, the fundamental flaw of Clemson and Florida states legal cases is the ESPN deal and grant of rights deals were favored and promoted by both schools. They wanted these deals and now for them to fight out is violation of their contract. Every ACC school should sue the crap out of FSU and turn the Noles back into a second rate Florida teacher’s college.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
or ESPN. I don't have enough info to make a determination one way or the other, but if FSU and Clemson win their suit, then VT too suffered.
Does that equate a P2 invite? I don't know, but the ACC being a power conference is better for college athletics than having a power 3, and no matter what happens, VT and many, if not all ACC schools, should be in a power conference.
(In response to this post by Hokie1992)
F
Flanker
2y
His FSU channel is called Double Fries No Slaw. I wonder if he has any other channels. I hope he is disclosing his FSU loyalties since he didn't mention his school during the couple shows that I watched.
I wonder how many of these youtubers are paid by conferences to put out propaganda. Two B12 homers that annoy me are John Kurtz and Locked On Big 12. Those two channels often speculate on which ACC teams are heading to the B12. I think the B12 will flourish with a strong ACC and a reconstituted P12. The B12 propagandists are promoting the P3 but I suspect P2 is the endgame.
(In response to this post by UpstateSCHokie)
W
WarHog38
2y
Those Big 12 YouTubers all know that and Drake Toll thought his Baylor Bears were finally up $hit creek. Texas Governor Ann Richards was a alumni of Baylor and literally saved Baylor when the SWC died. Those Big 12 or Little 12 remnants would have jumped at the chance to merge with the PAC that soon lost USC & UCLA. However George Kliavkoff made one of his legendary blunders saying he didn't feel like going shopping. Kliavkoff is now shopping for a new job. Those B12 YouTubers remember all that and them getting those 4 Corner schools to end the PAC. They are ready to do the same to the ACC.
I think the only real advantage the Big 12 ever had over the PAC & ACC was central location. To the distress of the Big 12, they may not hold onto some PAC and possible new ACC acquisitions very long. They are still at the mercy of the SEC & B1G. Who have taken Arkansas, Texas, Texas A&M, Oklahoma. Missouri & Nebraska from their ranks. Who knows when ESPN may dictate more expansion by the P2. That expansion will cost the Big 12 in the future just like the past.
(In response to this post by Flanker)
2y
was less than a thread the B12 leftovers were hanging on. It looked like the Mountain West for some. What saved the B12 was the fact that the PAC and ACC both refused to pick apart the remaining schools. Had either of them had acted, there would be no B12, the PAC would still be there, and your wouldn't have this mess with the ACC.
The B12 shouldn't even exist, but hey, that contract after adding the G5 schools raised a lot of eyebrows, surprised all of us, and put the PAC and ACC on the chopping block.
Geography is now in play.
(In response to this post by WarHog38)
2y
and Louisville joining the B12. Him and the FSU homer sometimes do shows together dreaming of the ACC's collapse.
** Edited by UpstateSCHokie at 5/4/2024, 9:36:50 AM
(In response to this post by Flanker)
S
saret
2y
(In response to this post by UpstateSCHokie)
V
VTCALS72
2y
Is totally unwatchable to me. Not only does he base everything he says on a set of beliefs without foundation, he is about as smug as Howard Cosell.
(In response to this post by UpstateSCHokie)
W
WarHog38
2y
It was about 2 Weeks Ago and he claimed sources in a YouTube video where he predicted future landing spots for every ACC school. He had FSU, Clemson, UVA, NC State & Louisville all going to the B1G. He had UNC, Virginia Tech, Miami & Duke in the SEC. Duke was just in the SEC for basketball in his prediction. Anyway it got over 500 comments of very negative blow back on his predictions. I didn't like Duke & Miami in his SEC predictions. Many of those comments alleged Click Bait and just un-sourced info that was totally his own opinion. He likes to get under his site comments with light hearted responses and pluses. He was not responding to many of those under that video. 500 is about double the comments he gets under most his vids. I have noticed he is not quite the same ACC hating zealot since that video. I will post the Link to it below.
Link:
Addiction
(In response to this post by VTCALS72)
2y
NC State to the Big Ten and Duke to the SEC for basketball only.
(In response to this post by UpstateSCHokie)
2y
I wonder what he does for a living sell condos or timeshares in florida
(In response to this post by UpstateSCHokie)
2y
(In response to this post by UpstateSCHokie)
S
Stech
2y
leaving at or before June 30th. He is trying to get the ACC schools to jump ship, like the PAC, because that’s what’s good for FSU, but the two conferences are in very different situations. This whole thing is mainly in ESPN’s, Fox’s and the P2 University Presidents hands, and the rest of us sit and wait, while he and the B12 podcasters try to create pandemonium in the ACC.
Mawww, where’s the meatloaf?!!!! 🤣🤣 (Reminds me of Wedding Crasher guy, living the dream) Mawww, where’s the meatloaf?!?!?
** Edited by Stech at 5/3/2024, 10:29:23 PM
(In response to this post by UpstateSCHokie)
2y
he based his reputation on it. I haven't watched him recently, but he backed off of that date?
(In response to this post by Stech)
2
2hhoop3
2y
is ignore morons like Pittinger, Drake Toll and the trolls that inhabit this board from time to time and if you do listen or read ask yourself what is being said, who is saying it, what is their track record and likely motivation and most important how definitive and specific is what is being said. With conference meeting season upon us, rising pressure to get remaining CFP specifics finalized and the court dockets continuing to fill up info and misinfo will spill out and it is important to separate fact from propaganda.
(In response to this post by Stech)
2y
He knows who his audience is, and that is FSU fans. They want to hear happy stories of FSU going to the B1G, so he delivers happy stories about FSU going to the B1G.
More views he gets, the more $$ he can generate on Youtube.
(In response to this post by UpstateSCHokie)