Smoke your cigars and enjoy the band while you can....

[Panjandrum]

Fitz is so pissed right now.

http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/8682572/tulane-join-big-east-all-sports-source-said

East Carolina sneaking into the BigEast for football in 2014 as well.

Big East needs an intervention...or a mercy killing.

This is the beginning stage of a re-imagining.

[Rage Against the McKee]

So, why are we only talking about big 10 and SEC?  Isn't our main threat a hungry Pac 12?  If there are 4 super conferences on the horizon, Big 10, SEC, ACC and a split betyween Pac and Big 12, aren't we worried that Pac 12 gets hungry and looks to end us?  They will need to get to 16 and I don't see where they get there without raiding us.

I think that if we raid good teams from the ACC, Texas and Oklahoma will want to stay, and the Pac would be better off staying at 12 teams than taking garbage teams to get to 16.

[ChiComCat]

People have 2/3rds control over the current BCS.  They are the ones that have KSU at, essentially, the worst 1 loss right now.  Its pretty Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) to think if people had 100% control over it the results would be any better.  If people were 100% in control, we'd be in a tight race to get in for an 8 game playoff.

And this isn't the NCAA tournament where teams have 10 losses so margin of victory gets watered down.  This is 1 loss which makes those comparisons easier. 

Theoretically, wouldn't divisions hurt a conference more than help in the 4 game.  How often does a division runner-up end with one loss (More often in the SEC I guess)?   You're guaranteeing a loss to a top team in the champ game.

[Panjandrum]

So, why are we only talking about big 10 and SEC?  Isn't our main threat a hungry Pac 12?  If there are 4 super conferences on the horizon, Big 10, SEC, ACC and a split betyween Pac and Big 12, aren't we worried that Pac 12 gets hungry and looks to end us?  They will need to get to 16 and I don't see where they get there without raiding us.

I don't think there will be 4x16.  I think there will be 2x16, 1x14, and 1x12 (or something like that).

The ACC probably won't survive another 13 years in its current incarnation.  Once the $50 million buyout is shot down in court, enough teams will leave to the point where they will become the Big East circa five years ago.

[Rage Against the McKee]

People have 2/3rds control over the current BCS.  They are the ones that have KSU at, essentially, the worst 1 loss right now.  Its pretty Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) to think if people had 100% control over it the results would be any better.  If people were 100% in control, we'd be in a tight race to get in for an 8 game playoff.

And this isn't the NCAA tournament where teams have 10 losses so margin of victory gets watered down.  This is 1 loss which makes those comparisons easier. 

Theoretically, wouldn't divisions hurt a conference more than help in the 4 game.  How often does a division runner-up end with one loss (More often in the SEC I guess)?   You're guaranteeing a loss to a top team in the champ game.

Well, the season is not over, and those rankings will look different after Alabama/Georgia get their second loss, Kansas State wins the Big 12, etc. I think our current spot has as much to do with preseason polls as it does our loss to Baylor, though.

[catzacker]

i don't understand why the $50m buyout can be negotiated but everyone in big12 country is like "oh, yeah, we triple stamped the GOR thing so it can't be touched".

[ChiComCat]

i don't understand why the $50m buyout can be negotiated but everyone in big12 country is like "oh, yeah, we triple stamped the GOR thing so it can't be touched".

Maybe its just that nobody has ever really challenged a GOR Also, I think it would be harder to challenge a document that says "The Big 12 owns this for x years" than work down from a random number.  Just my guess though

[Panjandrum]

i don't understand why the $50m buyout can be negotiated but everyone in big12 country is like "oh, yeah, we triple stamped the GOR thing so it can't be touched".

If Kansas, or anyone else, wanted to leave now, we'd have to give them their TV rights back since they signed them over to the conference.

I guess they could sue to get them back, but the lawyers would have to weigh in on that.

[TheHamburglar]

i don't understand why the $50m buyout can be negotiated but everyone in big12 country is like "oh, yeah, we triple stamped the GOR thing so it can't be touched".

I know I have a LLIQ, but this is what it sounded like to me from the UM press conference.  The Maryland Prez, who was a law professor, stated that the $50MM buyout is punitive and he doesn't believe the conference in their partnership agreement has the authority to assess punitive damages to one of the parties when the leave. 

In the GoR, I belive the schools actually signed their rights over to the conference.  The conference isn't assessing a penalty for breaking a contract with the Big12, it's just keeping what has already been signed over to it. 

[pc5k]

i don't understand why the $50m buyout can be negotiated but everyone in big12 country is like "oh, yeah, we triple stamped the GOR thing so it can't be touched".

If I remember correctly, the acc had a vote to up the buyout to $50mil effective immediately- fsu and Maryland voted no but were outvoted so it was forced upon them.  I would think they would have a good chance of getting out of paying that much being that they voted against it.  With the GOR every school had time to decide if they wanted to sign- so I think it would be tougher to get out of.

[catzacker]

i don't understand why the $50m buyout can be negotiated but everyone in big12 country is like "oh, yeah, we triple stamped the GOR thing so it can't be touched".

If Kansas, or anyone else, wanted to leave now, we'd have to give them their TV rights back since they signed them over to the conference.

I guess they could sue to get them back, but the lawyers would have to weigh in on that.

right, but in both instances (buyout or gor) the leaving team (or the conference that the team is going to) would have the money, the Big12 would have to sue to get it back.  ESPN sends the checks to the conf or team, correct?  They wouldn't be bound by an agreement amongst schools to send KU's big 10 check to the Big 12.

[Panjandrum]

i don't understand why the $50m buyout can be negotiated but everyone in big12 country is like "oh, yeah, we triple stamped the GOR thing so it can't be touched".

I know I have a LLIQ, but this is what it sounded like to me from the UM press conference.  The Maryland Prez, who was a law professor, stated that the $50MM buyout is punitive and he doesn't believe the conference in their partnership agreement has the authority to assess punitive damages to one of the parties when the leave. 

In the GoR, I belive the schools actually signed their rights over to the conference.  The conference isn't assessing a penalty for breaking a contract with the Big12, it's just keeping what has already been signed over to it.

My lack of legal knowledge is really going to show here, but I think it's like one of those signing game shows where you get a bad record contract at the end.

As a part of the agreement for participating in the show, they'll hook you up with a record company, and that company will write you a bunch of songs to sing and keep the rights of the music you create.  They'll probably pay you money to sing, perform, tour, etc., but you probably wouldn't get any royalties or anything like that because they aren't "your" songs.  You just sang them.

So, my interpretation of these rights is that if a team in the Big 12 were to go somewhere else, that's fine.  They'd just play in a blackout and get no TV money for X number of years.

Also, it's been rumored that the Big 12 will have revolving "look-in" provisions every five years or so, and if we choose to extend, the GOR extends automatically with it.  I'm sure a lot of that can be worked around, but you get the gist of it.

Kind of like Hotel California.  You can check out any time you like, but you can never (really) leave.

[OK_Cat]

 

[Panjandrum]

i don't understand why the $50m buyout can be negotiated but everyone in big12 country is like "oh, yeah, we triple stamped the GOR thing so it can't be touched".

If Kansas, or anyone else, wanted to leave now, we'd have to give them their TV rights back since they signed them over to the conference.

I guess they could sue to get them back, but the lawyers would have to weigh in on that.

right, but in both instances (buyout or gor) the leaving team (or the conference that the team is going to) would have the money, the Big12 would have to sue to get it back.  ESPN sends the checks to the conf or team, correct?  They wouldn't be bound by an agreement amongst schools to send KU's big 10 check to the Big 12.

The way I understand it is that if KU were to leave, they can't be on TV because we own the rights to their telecasts.

It's kind of like those disclaimers during MLB and NFL games.  You can't broadcast or reproduce the content without written permission of the league.

Well, if what I think I understand is correct, given the scenario, KU can go play in the Big Ten, but you can't put them on TV because we own the right to broadcast them and will for the next 13 years.  The Big Ten could theoretically pay them whatever they wanted, but they'd get no money for it.  It would be a huge net loss.

[thebigcatbowski]

Kansas State, Georgia have much stronger cases.

 

How is having the same record against a better schedule not a better case?

Getting blown out by Baylor < Losing in overtime to current #8 (especially when #1 went to overtime with the same team)

And, there's barely a difference between the quality of the schedules, not enough to make up for the loss at least.

And, if you have Alabama in there, then Georgia has no argument whatsoever.

You're also on crack if you think a committee would put a 3rd SEC team in with a worse record than a Pac-12 school either last year or this year. Maybe if it's the second team but not the third.

the point is that divisions give the Pac 12, ACC, and Big 10 no advantage over the Big 12. The SEC currently has an advantage over everyone, and it's not necessarily due to their division format.

Except for math, divisions don't help at all.

Would you rather have five one-loss teams or three at the end of the season? One undefeated and three one-loss teams or one undefeated and one one-loss team?

Are you arguing that the SEC is significantly better than they were last year? The rankings seem to say they are even though, to me, I actually think they're worse.

To make a 4-team playoff: 14 teams > 12 teams > 10 teams and there's simply no argument.

[Rage Against the McKee]

Kansas State, Georgia have much stronger cases.

 

How is having the same record against a better schedule not a better case?

Getting blown out by Baylor < Losing in overtime to current #8 (especially when #1 went to overtime with the same team)

And, there's barely a difference between the quality of the schedules, not enough to make up for the loss at least.

And, if you have Alabama in there, then Georgia has no argument whatsoever.

You're also on crack if you think a committee would put a 3rd SEC team in with a worse record than a Pac-12 school either last year or this year. Maybe if it's the second team but not the third.

the point is that divisions give the Pac 12, ACC, and Big 10 no advantage over the Big 12. The SEC currently has an advantage over everyone, and it's not necessarily due to their division format.

Except for math, divisions don't help at all.

Would you rather have five one-loss teams or three at the end of the season? One undefeated and three one-loss teams or one undefeated and one one-loss team?

Are you arguing that the SEC is significantly better than they were last year? The rankings seem to say they are even though, to me, I actually think they're worse.

To make a 4-team playoff: 14 teams > 12 teams > 10 teams and there's simply no argument.

You get more chances with more teams (obviously), but you also have to split your money more ways. If the Big 12 had 2 divisions, we probably still would have lost a game to a shitty team, and we would be in even worse shape because our conference schedule would be awful.

[michigancat]

Could the Big 12 broadcast and get money for KU's Big 10 football games after they leave? LOL, like we would care. But still.

[Rage Against the McKee]

Could the Big 12 broadcast and get money for KU's Big 10 football games after they leave? LOL, like we would care. But still.

Probably not, unless KU would consent to it. The GOR does put a conference in a position of power, though, because instead of having to sue somebody for money, they have to sue us to get their tv rights back. We possess their rights, and possession is 90% of the law, or so I've heard.

[thebigcatbowski]

Kansas State, Georgia have much stronger cases.

 

How is having the same record against a better schedule not a better case?

Getting blown out by Baylor < Losing in overtime to current #8 (especially when #1 went to overtime with the same team)

And, there's barely a difference between the quality of the schedules, not enough to make up for the loss at least.

And, if you have Alabama in there, then Georgia has no argument whatsoever.

You're also on crack if you think a committee would put a 3rd SEC team in with a worse record than a Pac-12 school either last year or this year. Maybe if it's the second team but not the third.

the point is that divisions give the Pac 12, ACC, and Big 10 no advantage over the Big 12. The SEC currently has an advantage over everyone, and it's not necessarily due to their division format.

Except for math, divisions don't help at all.

Would you rather have five one-loss teams or three at the end of the season? One undefeated and three one-loss teams or one undefeated and one one-loss team?

Are you arguing that the SEC is significantly better than they were last year? The rankings seem to say they are even though, to me, I actually think they're worse.

To make a 4-team playoff: 14 teams > 12 teams > 10 teams and there's simply no argument.

You get more chances with more teams (obviously), but you also have to split your money more ways. If the Big 12 had 2 divisions, we probably still would have lost a game to a shitty team, and we would be in even worse shape because our conference schedule would be awful.

Every SEC, Big Ten, and Pac-12 team makes more money than we do.

[Skipper44]

i don't understand why the $50m buyout can be negotiated but everyone in big12 country is like "oh, yeah, we triple stamped the GOR thing so it can't be touched".

If Kansas, or anyone else, wanted to leave now, we'd have to give them their TV rights back since they signed them over to the conference.

I guess they could sue to get them back, but the lawyers would have to weigh in on that.

right, but in both instances (buyout or gor) the leaving team (or the conference that the team is going to) would have the money, the Big12 would have to sue to get it back.  ESPN sends the checks to the conf or team, correct?  They wouldn't be bound by an agreement amongst schools to send KU's big 10 check to the Big 12.

The way I understand it is that if KU were to leave, they can't be on TV because we own the rights to their telecasts.

It's kind of like those disclaimers during MLB and NFL games.  You can't broadcast or reproduce the content without written permission of the league.

Well, if what I think I understand is correct, given the scenario, KU can go play in the Big Ten, but you can't put them on TV because we own the right to broadcast them and will for the next 13 years.  The Big Ten could theoretically pay them whatever they wanted, but they'd get no money for it.  It would be a huge net loss.

Does this cover all games or just home games?

[Panjandrum]

Does this cover all games or just home games?

The way I understand it, it would mean KU could never be on a broadcast network (Tier 1), and they couldn't be on cable since we own all cable rights (Tier 2).

I guess the Big Ten could broadcast one game a year that KU holds as a part of our Tier 3 agreement, and I think they could hold back about 4-5 basketball games (I'm not sure on the numbers). 

Otherwise, KU would be blacked out for the duration of the GOR.

[deputy dawg]

We possess their rights, and possession is 90% of the law, or so I've heard.

Possession of future contract rights < possession of your brother's Penthouse.  You heard correctly, but it does not apply in this context.

[ChiComCat]

Does this cover all games or just home games?

The way I understand it, it would mean KU could never be on a broadcast network (Tier 1), and they couldn't be on cable since we own all cable rights (Tier 2).

I guess the Big Ten could broadcast one game a year that KU holds as a part of our Tier 3 agreement, and I think they could hold back about 4-5 basketball games (I'm not sure on the numbers). 

Otherwise, KU would be blacked out for the duration of the GOR.

Would they not be able to be televised or would we just get the revenue?  Seems odd that the point is just to eff a team over and not get a benefit for it (other than holding them hostage)

[Panjandrum]

Does this cover all games or just home games?

The way I understand it, it would mean KU could never be on a broadcast network (Tier 1), and they couldn't be on cable since we own all cable rights (Tier 2).

I guess the Big Ten could broadcast one game a year that KU holds as a part of our Tier 3 agreement, and I think they could hold back about 4-5 basketball games (I'm not sure on the numbers). 

Otherwise, KU would be blacked out for the duration of the GOR.

Would they not be able to be televised or would we just get the revenue?  Seems odd that the point is just to eff a team over and not get a benefit for it (other than holding them hostage)

I think it goes back to the disclaimer that you can't broadcast or re-broadcast the game if you don't have the rights.  I'm sure the Big Ten could pay us to broadcast the games, but why would they do that?

[MadCat]

Does this cover all games or just home games?

The way I understand it, it would mean KU could never be on a broadcast network (Tier 1), and they couldn't be on cable since we own all cable rights (Tier 2).

I guess the Big Ten could broadcast one game a year that KU holds as a part of our Tier 3 agreement, and I think they could hold back about 4-5 basketball games (I'm not sure on the numbers). 

Otherwise, KU would be blacked out for the duration of the GOR.

Would they not be able to be televised or would we just get the revenue?  Seems odd that the point is just to eff a team over and not get a benefit for it (other than holding them hostage)

I think it goes back to the disclaimer that you can't broadcast or re-broadcast the game if you don't have the rights.  I'm sure the Big Ten could pay us to broadcast the games, but why would they do that?

Because the Big Ten schools are all about brotherhood and academic eliteness and reach-arounds and unicorn-crap fights.