altgeld88
- Arlington, Virginia
What Kliavkoff sees as opportunism KWarr views as sound strategy. And, really, did collegiality exist among conferences once TV $$ began to grow exponentially and conference TV networks arose, if it ever did?
What Kliavkoff sees as opportunism KWarr views as sound strategy. And, really, did collegiality exist among conferences once TV $$ began to grow exponentially and conference TV networks arose, if it ever did?
Anything other than everyone getting equal shares of a unified TV contract becomes a very dangerous game very quickly (Illinois REALLY does not want that door to open up), but these are desperate times.
does the GoR not require membership of the ACC? i thought similarly, for ACC schools, why not sign a contract to join the B1G in 2037 when GoR ends and if it dissolves earlier then can join earlier? but then i realized B1G would likely not go for that because it's hard to predict what's going to happen between now and then.Just a stray thought, given what a dead letter the ACC is now. Pretty sure there's nothing stopping any of their schools from leaving the conference, joining the Big Ten or SEC, and just living with the grant of rights and collecting the lower amount from the ACC deal until 2037.
The Big Ten and Fox would have to live with those games being broadcast on ESPN, which might be a deal breaker, but in the name of just resolving all of this right now that's something to think about.
Now, if those schools are going to live with half the TV revenue in the short term, what's stopping the Big Ten or SEC from throttling any increases from there and keeping them as second class citizens? A Clemson might look at this deal differently from a position of strength than a Florida State for whom this might be the last chopper out of Saigon.
Anything other than everyone getting equal shares of a unified TV contract becomes a very dangerous game very quickly (Illinois REALLY does not want that door to open up), but these are desperate times.
Per this, it does notdoes the GoR not require membership of the ACC?
LOLOLOL at the idea that Nebraska would get the boot over us.unequal shares would be a good way to force the lower schools out (Neb/MD/RU) but would think everyone would have to agree to that (which they would not).
I sincerely believe that another mega conference will eventually evolve from what is left of the PAC/ACC/Big12. It may take several years and it may not have the star power of the B1G or SEC, but it won't be irrelevant and it will be part of what I predict as a 16 team CFP at some point.It takes 8 schools to vote to end the GoR. Could the SEC/ESPN & B1G/FOX come calling for enough schools to both conferences? Or even throw in the Big 12 to take a few of the have not's along with the B1G/SEC taking the top schools?
Read the document above, no it doesn't. Doesn't seem clear to me the conference dissolution gambit works either.It takes 8 schools to vote to end the GoR.
If there were loyalty to tradition, there'd be loyalty to tradition.I may be looking at this with orange colored glasses, but Illinois is not getting booted or “lower tiered” before the newest additions are. I promise you that.
The AAC and Mountain West aren't irrelevant and often feature highly ranked teams. They will never and can never become major conferences though. So too the not-so-power-three.I sincerely believe that another mega conference will eventually evolve from what is left of the PAC/ACC/Big12. It may take several years and it may not have the star power of the B1G or SEC, but it won't be irrelevant and it will be part of what I predict as a 16 team CFP at some point.
Well, that is certainly a good point. Although, sometimes I think some of us think that to be loyal to tradition, you have to be loyal to all tradition. I just don't see that as being true. I'm not saying Illinois is holding all the cards here or really has any negotiating power, but unless the top 30 teams from the NCA all decide to join a super-duper conference, Illinois isn't going anywhere.If there were loyalty to tradition, there'd be loyalty to tradition.
Why is Kickoff talking about that? What's his end game? A reversal of the decision? Holding a school in your conference at gunpoint isn't a great strategy and it's not a good look for his remaining members.
I just don’t see that happening as long as Illinois, Iowa, Purdue, Indiana, Minny, NW, Rutgers, Maryland and MSU comprise more than half of the conference. None of those schools would command a greater-than-equal share, so why would they vote to give a bigger share to a school like, say tOSU or PSU to keep them happy? I mean, there isn’t going to be a greener pasture than the BIG for any school to leave to for a long long time.Anything other than everyone getting equal shares of a unified TV contract becomes a very dangerous game very quickly (Illinois REALLY does not want that door to open up), but these are desperate times.