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

[GoodForAnother]

Big 10 will hold at 15 until they are convinced Notre Dame will never join their conference.  If SEC goes to 16, that shows that ND has no choice but to join as a full member.  I think this is why Big 10 decided to expand again....trying to force ND to go all in.

1. go to 15 while invading sec country and leaking rumors about taking a big 12 school
2. sit back and watch as the sec/big 12 react and expand and demolish the acc
3. pick up nd
4. profit

[michigancat]

who else is the big 10 going to get besides KU?  UVA? No.  UNC?  No.  Syracuse?  No.  Uconn?  No.  They have no other choices and they certainly aren't sticking at 15.

LOL, if Maryland and GT are going, nothing would keep the schools you listed from going, too.

[Pete]

who else is the big 10 going to get besides KU?  UVA? No.  UNC?  No.  Syracuse?  No.  Uconn?  No.  They have no other choices and they certainly aren't sticking at 15.

LOL, if Maryland and GT are going, nothing would keep the schools you listed from going, too.

Maryland is in bad financial shape AND in a market that the big 10 didn't have, right?  The same has been argued about GT, though not as bad of financial shape but still thought to not be great.

UNC and UVA are in fine financial shape, but do have a good market to covet.

UCONN does not bring a new market.

Syracuse does not bring a new market.

Seems like Catzacker has a valid point to me.

[Ghost of Stan Parrish]

Can't broadcast them, or have to relinquish revenue from them?

I have NEVER read a thing suggesting that it's more than merely monetary.

Haven't read the docs themselves -- are they public? -- but I've seen it described as a grant of all the school's media rights "including revenue" to the conference.  That language implies it's money PLUS.  That means the conference's damages couldn't be strictly monetized and the Big 12 should be able to get an injunction against any other conference broadcasting the school's (KU's) games.  Football, basketball, whathaveyou.

That's my dime legal advice at least.

If more money could be made by letting the Big Ten broadcast it why would the Big 12 not allow that assuming they get it?  Sour grapes?  Also, pretty sure a GoR doesn't permit a conference to make shitty financial decisions regarding public universities just because they're butthurt.  They would get sued and destroyed in the media.

The conference owns the rights.  All of the public institutions signed them over.  And the schools got good value in exchange (television contract, conference stability).  There's simply no way to stop the Big 12 from enforcing its rights by arguing it would hurt a public intstitution -- it already entered into the deal willingly and for good value.  Every Big 12 school made the "shitty decision" to sign over their rights a while ago.

I was thinking a bit more about this and courts have a strong preference for monetary relief rather than injunctive relief.  The school wanting to leave the Big 12 (e.g., KU) might be able to argue that the rights to its broadcasts are actually easily quanitifiable -- it's the amount of money the school would be paid to broadcast the event.  So, I could see a court NOT enjoining the Big 10 (for example) from broadcasting KU games, but rather requiring a certain (diminishing?) share of the broadcast fees be paid to the Big 12 for 13 years rather than to KU.  So the Big 12 might allow the school to be on TV, but it's still not a pretty picture for a team leaving the conference.

[All this being said, I haven't seen the docs themselves, and the way these things are phrased means everything here.]

["storm"nut]

On the Notre Dame thing, as long as the playoff provides "access" (albeit very difficult) to non-top tier conferences and "at large" teams, then it's likely Notre Dame has access.

The way I see the 4 team playoff working with 4, maybe 5 if the ACC hold together, is 3 (SEC champ, Big 10 champ, and one other most years) will be the top Conference champs and the 4th will be Notre Dame if undefeated/1 lost, A undefeated ACC school if still with some football influence, or a School from the Big 10 or SEC with one lose to the conference champ.

[Pete]

Can't broadcast them, or have to relinquish revenue from them?

I have NEVER read a thing suggesting that it's more than merely monetary.

Haven't read the docs themselves -- are they public? -- but I've seen it described as a grant of all the school's media rights "including revenue" to the conference.  That language implies it's money PLUS.  That means the conference's damages couldn't be strictly monetized and the Big 12 should be able to get an injunction against any other conference broadcasting the school's (KU's) games.  Football, basketball, whathaveyou.

That's my dime legal advice at least.

If more money could be made by letting the Big Ten broadcast it why would the Big 12 not allow that assuming they get it?  Sour grapes?  Also, pretty sure a GoR doesn't permit a conference to make shitty financial decisions regarding public universities just because they're butthurt.  They would get sued and destroyed in the media.

The conference owns the rights.  All of the public institutions signed them over.  And the schools got good value in exchange (television contract, conference stability).  There's simply no way to stop the Big 12 from enforcing its rights by arguing it would hurt a public intstitution -- it already entered into the deal willingly and for good value.  Every Big 12 school made the "shitty decision" to sign over their rights a while ago.

I was thinking a bit more about this and courts have a strong preference for monetary relief rather than injunctive relief.  The school wanting to leave the Big 12 (e.g., KU) might be able to argue that the rights to its broadcasts are actually easily quanitifiable -- it's the amount of money the school would be paid to broadcast the event.  So, I could see a court NOT enjoining the Big 10 (for example) from broadcasting KU games, but rather requiring a certain (diminishing?) share of the broadcast fees be paid to the Big 12 for 13 years rather than to KU.  So the Big 12 might allow the school to be on TV, but it's still not a pretty picture for a team leaving the conference.

[All this being said, I haven't seen the docs themselves, and the way these things are phrased means everything here.]

Good points.


Tell me more about what possible test there is to determine "punitive" penalty on breaking a contract.  Is that one convoluted?

[MadCat]

The Dude of WV @theDudeofWVI can't share details right now but the damn is about to break & the B12 will be Great.

[Pete]

On the Notre Dame thing, as long as the playoff provides "access" (albeit very difficult) to non-top tier conferences and "at large" teams, then it's likely Notre Dame has access.

The way I see the 4 team playoff working with 4, maybe 5 if the ACC hold together, is 3 (SEC champ, Big 10 champ, and one other most years) will be the top Conference champs and the 4th will be Notre Dame if undefeated/1 lost, A undefeated ACC school if still with some football influence, or a School from the Big 10 or SEC with one lose to the conference champ.

Isn't the bigger deal the notion that they will have to provide some form of "access" to teams outside of the super conferences, lest risk anti-trust type crap?

I have no idea, just have heard lots of noise about crap like that...

[catzacker]

in a world where ACC is dead, UNC Duke are part of the SEC. That is not crazy. What now?

I’ll disagree with the idea that the ACC dying is realistic.  A possibility?  Sure, but slim.  Lose Maryland, add UL.  Lose GT, Add Uconn.  Lose FSU and Clemson (or Miami), Pitt and Syracuse are coming next year.  Great football?  Not really.  They’ll still be the 4th best BCS conference regardless. But they are comfortable with really good basketball.  And they’ll have enough of a TV presence with the added teams.  As for the SEC, maybe they want/convince VT. But if the “gentlemen’s agreement” still holds up, then who would they pair VT with?  What’s better for the SEC than a withering ACC (and FSU and Miami and Clemson)?  Why would uSC and Florida give in on their gentlemen’s agreement?  Just to “get” FSU and Clemson?  There would be no reason.  Especially since the 14 team league provides an easier avenue to get the most teams it possibly can into the playoffs.

I don’t think there will be a world where the ACC doesn’t exist.  A possibility?  Sure, but slim.  Like <5% (IMO).  Lose Maryland, add UL.  Lose GT, Add Uconn.  Lose FSU and Clemson (or Miami) to the Big 12, Pitt and Syracuse are coming next year. 

As for the SEC – maybe they convince VT (do they really want VT?) . But if the “gentlemen’s agreement” still holds up, then who would they pair VT with?  What’s better for the SEC than a withering – but still alive in some capacity - ACC (and FSU and Miami and Clemson)?  Why would uSC and Florida give in on their gentlemen’s agreement?  Just to “get” FSU and Clemson?  There would be no reason.  Especially since the 14 team league provides an easier avenue to get the most teams it possibly can into the playoffs. 

Great football in the ACC?  Not really.  They’ll still be the 4th best BCS conference regardless. But they are comfortable with really good basketball.  And they’ll have enough of a TV presence with the added teams.

[kim carnes]

Pete and Zacker are right.   The big 12 is dead.  Oklahoma and Texas schools to PAC.   Ku to big 10.   Kstate and Iowa state to mountain west.    Ku is by far the most attractive school to the big 10.

[Panjandrum]

Jack Swarbick has already said that the Big Ten only plans to expand to the East.

If anyone actually thinks KU is a realistic candidate, they're just being, well, a KSU fan.

[ksucrcoop]

in a world where ACC is dead, UNC Duke are part of the SEC. That is not crazy. What now?

I’ll disagree with the idea that the ACC dying is realistic.  A possibility?  Sure, but slim.  Lose Maryland, add UL.  Lose GT, Add Uconn.  Lose FSU and Clemson (or Miami), Pitt and Syracuse are coming next year.  Great football?  Not really.  They’ll still be the 4th best BCS conference regardless. But they are comfortable with really good basketball.  And they’ll have enough of a TV presence with the added teams.  As for the SEC, maybe they want/convince VT. But if the “gentlemen’s agreement” still holds up, then who would they pair VT with?  What’s better for the SEC than a withering ACC (and FSU and Miami and Clemson)?  Why would uSC and Florida give in on their gentlemen’s agreement?  Just to “get” FSU and Clemson?  There would be no reason.  Especially since the 14 team league provides an easier avenue to get the most teams it possibly can into the playoffs.

I don’t think there will be a world where the ACC doesn’t exist.  A possibility?  Sure, but slim.  Like <5% (IMO).  Lose Maryland, add UL.  Lose GT, Add Uconn.  Lose FSU and Clemson (or Miami) to the Big 12, Pitt and Syracuse are coming next year. 

As for the SEC – maybe they convince VT (do they really want VT?) . But if the “gentlemen’s agreement” still holds up, then who would they pair VT with?  What’s better for the SEC than a withering – but still alive in some capacity - ACC (and FSU and Miami and Clemson)?  Why would uSC and Florida give in on their gentlemen’s agreement?  Just to “get” FSU and Clemson?  There would be no reason.  Especially since the 14 team league provides an easier avenue to get the most teams it possibly can into the playoffs. 

Great football in the ACC?  Not really.  They’ll still be the 4th best BCS conference regardless. But they are comfortable with really good basketball.  And they’ll have enough of a TV presence with the added teams.

 

["storm"nut]

On the Notre Dame thing, as long as the playoff provides "access" (albeit very difficult) to non-top tier conferences and "at large" teams, then it's likely Notre Dame has access.

The way I see the 4 team playoff working with 4, maybe 5 if the ACC hold together, is 3 (SEC champ, Big 10 champ, and one other most years) will be the top Conference champs and the 4th will be Notre Dame if undefeated/1 lost, A undefeated ACC school if still with some football influence, or a School from the Big 10 or SEC with one lose to the conference champ.

Isn't the bigger deal the notion that they will have to provide some form of "access" to teams outside of the super conferences, lest risk anti-trust type crap?

I have no idea, just have heard lots of noise about crap like that...

I missed a whole point I was going to try and make. For ND to make it in under the 4 tourney they will almost have to go unintended every year, while the SEC champ and Big 10 champ and a Big 12 champ that is Oklahoma or Texas, will get in with 1 maybe even 2 loses. ND as part of the Big 10 could get in with 1 or 2 loses. Better odds.

[EMAWesome]

Another possibility...

Somebody (it may have been the samy mystery man that was talking about VA & VTech being joined at the hip, I can't remember) said it was possible that Kentucky would try to jump from the SEC to the ACC...if the $$ is close. They realize they will never, ever, ever compete with the SEC in Football, but that they could catch lightning in the bottle once a decade or so in the ACC, and the addition of UK basketball to the AC would make it even more of THE basketball conference. Same argument could be made for Vandy to do the same thing, or to jump to big 10 where they are a better fit academically & athletically.

["storm"nut]

in a world where ACC is dead, UNC Duke are part of the SEC. That is not crazy. What now?

I’ll disagree with the idea that the ACC dying is realistic.  A possibility?  Sure, but slim.  Lose Maryland, add UL.  Lose GT, Add Uconn.  Lose FSU and Clemson (or Miami), Pitt and Syracuse are coming next year.  Great football?  Not really.  They’ll still be the 4th best BCS conference regardless. But they are comfortable with really good basketball.  And they’ll have enough of a TV presence with the added teams.  As for the SEC, maybe they want/convince VT. But if the “gentlemen’s agreement” still holds up, then who would they pair VT with?  What’s better for the SEC than a withering ACC (and FSU and Miami and Clemson)?  Why would uSC and Florida give in on their gentlemen’s agreement?  Just to “get” FSU and Clemson?  There would be no reason.  Especially since the 14 team league provides an easier avenue to get the most teams it possibly can into the playoffs.

I don’t think there will be a world where the ACC doesn’t exist.  A possibility?  Sure, but slim.  Like <5% (IMO).  Lose Maryland, add UL.  Lose GT, Add Uconn.  Lose FSU and Clemson (or Miami) to the Big 12, Pitt and Syracuse are coming next year. 

As for the SEC – maybe they convince VT (do they really want VT?) . But if the “gentlemen’s agreement” still holds up, then who would they pair VT with?  What’s better for the SEC than a withering – but still alive in some capacity - ACC (and FSU and Miami and Clemson)?  Why would uSC and Florida give in on their gentlemen’s agreement?  Just to “get” FSU and Clemson?  There would be no reason.  Especially since the 14 team league provides an easier avenue to get the most teams it possibly can into the playoffs. 

Great football in the ACC?  Not really.  They’ll still be the 4th best BCS conference regardless. But they are comfortable with really good basketball.  And they’ll have enough of a TV presence with the added teams.

Now how is pulling who's leg. ACC is 5th best right now as is. You are obviously pulling my leg. good job zacker

[catzacker]

I meant 5th.  They are 5th now, they'll be 5th after this new shift is done.  They don't care.  They care about basketball.

["storm"nut]

I meant 5th.  They are 5th now, they'll be 5th after this new shift is done.  They don't care.  They care about basketball.

I just don't see any conference BBall centric making nearly enough money to justify ND staying. Even if Duke and NC stay in the ACC. The money will not be there and they will leave.

[Mr Bread]

Can't broadcast them, or have to relinquish revenue from them?

I have NEVER read a thing suggesting that it's more than merely monetary.

Haven't read the docs themselves -- are they public? -- but I've seen it described as a grant of all the school's media rights "including revenue" to the conference.  That language implies it's money PLUS.  That means the conference's damages couldn't be strictly monetized and the Big 12 should be able to get an injunction against any other conference broadcasting the school's (KU's) games.  Football, basketball, whathaveyou.

That's my dime legal advice at least.

If more money could be made by letting the Big Ten broadcast it why would the Big 12 not allow that assuming they get it?  Sour grapes?  Also, pretty sure a GoR doesn't permit a conference to make shitty financial decisions regarding public universities just because they're butthurt.  They would get sued and destroyed in the media.

The conference owns the rights.  All of the public institutions signed them over.  And the schools got good value in exchange (television contract, conference stability).  There's simply no way to stop the Big 12 from enforcing its rights by arguing it would hurt a public intstitution -- it already entered into the deal willingly and for good value.  Every Big 12 school made the "shitty decision" to sign over their rights a while ago.

I was thinking a bit more about this and courts have a strong preference for monetary relief rather than injunctive relief.  The school wanting to leave the Big 12 (e.g., KU) might be able to argue that the rights to its broadcasts are actually easily quanitifiable -- it's the amount of money the school would be paid to broadcast the event.  So, I could see a court NOT enjoining the Big 10 (for example) from broadcasting KU games, but rather requiring a certain (diminishing?) share of the broadcast fees be paid to the Big 12 for 13 years rather than to KU.  So the Big 12 might allow the school to be on TV, but it's still not a pretty picture for a team leaving the conference.

[All this being said, I haven't seen the docs themselves, and the way these things are phrased means everything here.]

The point I was making was simply that the Big 12 can't use the GoR to somehow maliciously eff up KU's brand or media exposure, to lessen or restrict it just because KU walked.  It isn't rough ridin' carte blanche authority KU signed over with the GoR even if that's what the specific language used states.  It would never stand.  The Big 12 can't abuse it as they see fit.  The Big 12 would be made whole with money, not absolute authority over KU's media interests.  Not one single team that has left a conference to date has paid the price they agreed to in writing.  It wouldn't change here because it's a GoR and not an exit fee.  Contract law and American civil jurisprudence aren't remotely as simplistic as you make them sound.  "Well they signed it, that's what the language says!"  The practical reality is that they would settle long before a judge ever got a crack at it. 

[Dugout DickStone]

Tom Fornelli @TomFornelli
If rumors are true -- and you can't discount anything anymore -- and big 10 adds Georgia Tech, I'd guess Boston College would be 16.

I hope it's BC.  I dislike them already, so it would be fun to have another reason to dislike them.

Makes sense compared to KU...boston is 7th nationally and would make them more of a real player in the Northeast...would also form a good rivaly w/ Rutgers

Good lord, that Rutgers v. BC rivalry would have me glued to the tv.

[catzacker]

The point I was making was simply that the Big 12 can't use the GoR to somehow mailiciously eff up KU's brand or media exposure, to lessen or restrict it just because KU walked.  It isn't rough ridin' carte blanche authority KU signed over with the GoR even if that's what the specific language used states.  It would never stand.  The Big 12 can't abuse it as they see fit.  The Big 12 would be made whole with money, not absolute authority over KU's media interests.  Not one single team that has left a conference to date has paid the price they agreed to in writing.  It wouldn't change here because it's a GoR and not an exit fee.  Contract law and American civil jurisprudence aren't remotely as symplistic as you make them sound.  "Well they signed it, that's what the language says!"  The practical reality is that they would settle long before a judge ever got a crack at it.

This.  It’s more about the GOR’s determined value (or at least what KU believes it will be).  That starting point will then determine what the negotiated/settled value would be.  And if KU has somehow figured that out or thinks it has and that number is a realistic value (given the additional money it will make in the big 10) then they will go.  I’m guessing that KU will argue that while they receive X, their true “value” is Y (which will be substantially lower) – i.e. the league’s value and contract is driven by UT’s presence, not KU. 

[michigancat]

How much more money do Big 10 teams make?

[mcmwcat]

the ACC agreed to a ridiculous $50 million buy out but would not touch a GOR.  why?  because they believe a GOR is a more powerful agreement when it comes to binding members together?

[Mikeyis4dcats]

the ACC agreed to a ridiculous $50 million buy out but would not touch a GOR.  why?  because they believe a GOR is a more powerful agreement when it comes to binding members together?

agreed.   THe Big 12 learned through the defections what worked and didn't.   IMHO they crafted the best plan possible.

An exit fee is a penalty, and courts aren't fond of penalties, especially when seen as punitive and excessive (see ACC).

A GOR is signing over your property.   The schools might as well have signed over the deeds to the admissions hall on campus.    This is MUCH harder to argue that you should be released from what you willingly and happily did.

[deputy dawg]

Lots of ku fans are yanking their jerky to the thought of going to the Big 10.  Their arguments (in order I can think of them, not in order of strength):
1.  big 10 is satisfied with their football strength, want to build BB brand.  Elite ku brings that to them.
2.  Dominance of KC market, Moo and 'Cats have < 10% of market each
3.  Tejas and land thieves are going to Pac anyway
4.  Would allow ku to rub Moo's nose in failure to get into big 10, would send us to Mountain West
5.  Their med school and AAU status make them pick of the litter, ku would get a lot more research $$$ in big 10

Hmmm....a lot of bennies for ku to go to big 10, a distinct lack of TSC

[Skipper44]

How much more money do Big 10 teams make?

The paid out around $24 million last year (Nebraska got a little less due to the phased membership  )

Big 12 was at around $20 but will be catching up due to Sugar bowl money.  Also, KU makes a pretty penny(more than $4 million IIRC) on tier 3 basketball that would go away if they go big 10.