|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Jan 14, 2024 10:36:35 GMT -8
I don’t see the rationale for the PAC-2 to spend millions on buyouts of MWC teams to create arguably a clone of the MWC. The PAC-12 residuals are finite, and trickles in over time, only to give the money to someone else. Pac-2 needs six to make at least eight. The Pac-2 is going to lose all of the money, if they do not make eight. The issue with the residuals will be negotiated before the six teams enter. |
|
|
|
Post by ag87 on Jan 14, 2024 10:40:22 GMT -8
I don’t see the rationale for the PAC-2 to spend millions on buyouts of MWC teams to create arguably a clone of the MWC. The PAC-12 residuals are finite, and trickles in over time, only to give the money to someone else. Pac-2 needs six to make at least eight. The Pac-2 is going to lose all of the money, if they do not make eight.
The issue with the residuals will be negotiated before the six teams enter. There is no other way but with this. Even for a non-legal mind (mine) this one is easy to understand. |
|
|
|
Post by p8nted on Jan 14, 2024 11:24:23 GMT -8
I realize that all this is opinion, but so much is rehashed that has been discussed, laid out, and dismissed as completely false before. Too much to even mention. But, not knowing what will actually happen... - If FSU "wins" it'll be years of appeals/court fights unless the ACC decides to jettison them for fairly large dollars. Dollars that benefit all the other ACC teams and could be as much as a 10% boost if some of the lower figures prove correct. The ACC will not just magically fall apart as the majority of the conference has no where to go and a guaranteed TV /GOR deal and they'll have sufficient teams and depth to continue. So something extremely deep in their contracts would have to exist for Cal and/or Furd to even consider coming back to a Pac4 situation; - The MWC and Gloria were FAR more astute that George and the Pac12 presidents in their conference setup and media contracts. They are not going to let the conference be torn apart, or leave it with too few members to function as a conference. The scheduling alliance earned her schools about $1.27 mil each (about 25% increase in some of their media payouts) to not have to go get killed for a payday. She saw the MWC had all the leverage and not only made $ but protected her conference. My guess she and many of the school presidents are all on the same page... OSU and WSU need to work with the MWC as a whole; - Folks are forgetting the MWC media deal has two years, but will be reopened, probably in the next 6-10 months if typical procedures are used. If the Pac2 hasn't figured their sh&t out they might be on the outside looking in of even a reverse merger. The MWC will have a new deal far before any team can opt out for free; - But, the MWC negotiations might indeed be a Pac2/MWC combined look at what a new media deal will be like. Many still believe the "alliance" will be a one year deal. It was to help slow down the merger process, let everyone catch their collective breath. Let all the revenue/liability issues finalized, see how it all plays out with audiences and gate receipts. And, give ample time for the new media deal to be negotiated with both MWC and Pac2 at the table to see if the reverse merger is indeed a viable option; - Unless the Pac2 has a substantial media deal to present to any of the aforementioned "select" teams they aren't agreeing to any kind of expenditure for a buyout. And, even then they might be hesitant when it is compared to their new media deal with no buyout. Or a total MWC/Pac2 reverse merger media deal; - The Pac2 can NOT afford to help in multiple buyouts of MWC teams with their revenue spread out over years unless they somehow land a pretty large media deal on the speculation that teams will indeed spend to buyout and join. Really? How many large athletic conference media deals are based on "maybes"... these teams may join IF? Hence, said teams would have to give notice, meaning huge buyouts, to then hopefully get a deal that works: - The Pac2 has zero leverage. They had to pay large guarantees to schedule games, and will have to do so for the WCC's help for the (10) other sports. Although I've yet to see any concrete financial details on this affiliated membership?! We'll all see what REALLY happens, but it is tough to ignore some simple common sense and financial realities. You underestimate how ruthlessly efficient a well-funded and well-run judiciary can be, when it is incentivized to be speedy. A Leon County judge, who is a Florida State grad, and who has to answer to a Leon County electorate is going to expedite that one case as fast as justice will bear. Oregon State and Washington State went from initial filing to winning at the Washington State Supreme Court in 14 weeks flat. It can clearly be done. If the ACC and Florida State can streamline discovery, Florida State could have its own ruling from the Florida State Supreme Court by the end of March. The ACC may be able to stall this thing out a couple more months, but it's probably ultimately a loser for the ACC. (The ACC can probably hold the conference together for 2024-25, but will probably lose beyond that.) If Florida State wins, the GOR is illusory, and the ACC as we know it will almost immediately implode. Florida State is gunning for a great ruling from a Florida court by August, so that they can do something completely different in 2025. Clemson and Miami are probably both in the same boat. And the Virginia schools would likely jump on board, if those three leave. And California, Notre Dame, and Stanford will be looking for new homes, if Clemson, Florida State, Miami, and the Virginias leave. The conference will be DOA. Secondly, if Florida State wins, the Mountain West's GOR is likely just as unenforceable, if not more so. Once the ACC implodes, the Mountain West implodes second.Thirdly, if in the unlikely situation Florida State loses, I believe that you underestimate that six Mountain West teams can basically implement the nuclear option and implode the conference from the inside. If six Mountain West teams want to, they could veto all new media deals. The GOR is based on the media deal. If there is ever a year without a media deal, any Mountain West team can leave for free the year following. If the six Mountain West teams want to, they can put the other Mountain West teams over a barrel. We will get out this year, or the Mountain West will functionally be nonexistent in 2027 and be completely gone in 2028. Your choice. Granted, the Pac-12 will have to make promises to those six Mountain West teams, but because the contract runs out in 2026, six unified Mountain West schools will have a lot of power in 2026. The MW does not have a GOR. It has exit fees. not close to the same thing |
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Jan 14, 2024 13:27:30 GMT -8
You underestimate how ruthlessly efficient a well-funded and well-run judiciary can be, when it is incentivized to be speedy. A Leon County judge, who is a Florida State grad, and who has to answer to a Leon County electorate is going to expedite that one case as fast as justice will bear. Oregon State and Washington State went from initial filing to winning at the Washington State Supreme Court in 14 weeks flat. It can clearly be done. If the ACC and Florida State can streamline discovery, Florida State could have its own ruling from the Florida State Supreme Court by the end of March. The ACC may be able to stall this thing out a couple more months, but it's probably ultimately a loser for the ACC. (The ACC can probably hold the conference together for 2024-25, but will probably lose beyond that.) If Florida State wins, the GOR is illusory, and the ACC as we know it will almost immediately implode. Florida State is gunning for a great ruling from a Florida court by August, so that they can do something completely different in 2025. Clemson and Miami are probably both in the same boat. And the Virginia schools would likely jump on board, if those three leave. And California, Notre Dame, and Stanford will be looking for new homes, if Clemson, Florida State, Miami, and the Virginias leave. The conference will be DOA. Secondly, if Florida State wins, the Mountain West's GOR is likely just as unenforceable, if not more so. Once the ACC implodes, the Mountain West implodes second.Thirdly, if in the unlikely situation Florida State loses, I believe that you underestimate that six Mountain West teams can basically implement the nuclear option and implode the conference from the inside. If six Mountain West teams want to, they could veto all new media deals. The GOR is based on the media deal. If there is ever a year without a media deal, any Mountain West team can leave for free the year following. If the six Mountain West teams want to, they can put the other Mountain West teams over a barrel. We will get out this year, or the Mountain West will functionally be nonexistent in 2027 and be completely gone in 2028. Your choice. Granted, the Pac-12 will have to make promises to those six Mountain West teams, but because the contract runs out in 2026, six unified Mountain West schools will have a lot of power in 2026. The MW does not have a GOR. It has exit fees. not close to the same thing You believe that there is a difference between writing it into the bylaws and doing it through a separate GOR? Any caselaw on point? |
|
|
|
Post by aggielarry on Jan 16, 2024 19:54:01 GMT -8
Hey guys, long time no see.
So, we're in a holding pattern.
I want to make this abundantly clear. I like both OSU and WSU. I think it would be great to have a merged PAC-2/MWC. I absolutely wish you no ill will. If you get an invitation to the Big 12 or the ACC, BRAVO! I think that's outstanding.
Now, from a MWC perspective, we have a nice regional conference that 12 of the 14 are happy with. Boise and San Diego are perennial malcontents. Call them our UCLA/USC. Watching the turmoil in the P5 has hardened the resolve of the conference office and, again, 12 of the 14 institutions, to keep the conference intact. Consequently, the conference and the majority of the schools are going to make it very hard for anyone to leave. (Don't you wish the PAC-12 had prioritized that?)
What I'm saying is, it would be great to have you as conference mates. If that doesn't happen, life will go on for us. It certainly won't be the end of the world. So, best of luck. I hope to be merged by fall of 2025, but if that doesn't happen, have a nice life. Send us a postcard.
In negotiations, pay attention to which party is really willing to walk away with no deal. In this situation, it's the MWC.
|
|
|
|
Post by orangeattack on Jan 16, 2024 20:06:58 GMT -8
Hey guys, long time no see. So, we're in a holding pattern. I want to make this abundantly clear. I like both OSU and WSU. I think it would be great to have a merged PAC-2/MWC. I absolutely wish you no ill will. If you get an invitation to the Big 12 or the ACC, BRAVO! I think that's outstanding. Now, from a MWC perspective, we have a nice regional conference that 12 of the 14 are happy with. Boise and San Diego are perennial malcontents. Call them our UCLA/USC. Watching the turmoil in the P5 has hardened the resolve of the conference office and, again, 12 of the 14 institutions, to keep the conference intact. Consequently, the conference and the majority of the schools are going to make it very hard for anyone to leave. (Don't you wish the PAC-12 had prioritized that?) What I'm saying is, it would be great to have you as conference mates. If that doesn't happen, life will go on for us. It certainly won't be the end of the world. So, best of luck. I hope to be merged by fall of 2025, but if that doesn't happen, have a nice life. Send us a postcard. In negotiations, pay attention to which party is really willing to walk away with no deal. In this situation, it's the MWC. There's no hard feelings toward the MWC but the reality is that only a few of the schools are marketable on a national level. In the end, it won't matter what the conference office at the MWC has resolved to do. The Pac isn't going to enter into a reverse merger with the MWC as a whole, you can bet on that - at most there will be 6 teams invited to own the Pac. If it wasn't a clue that the Pac wasn't going to simply merge with the MWC when they formed a partnership with the WCC for all sports outside of football, it should have been. |
|
|
|
Post by rgeorge on Jan 16, 2024 20:16:49 GMT -8
Hey guys, long time no see. So, we're in a holding pattern. I want to make this abundantly clear. I like both OSU and WSU. I think it would be great to have a merged PAC-2/MWC. I absolutely wish you no ill will. If you get an invitation to the Big 12 or the ACC, BRAVO! I think that's outstanding. Now, from a MWC perspective, we have a nice regional conference that 12 of the 14 are happy with. Boise and San Diego are perennial malcontents. Call them our UCLA/USC. Watching the turmoil in the P5 has hardened the resolve of the conference office and, again, 12 of the 14 institutions, to keep the conference intact. Consequently, the conference and the majority of the schools are going to make it very hard for anyone to leave. (Don't you wish the PAC-12 had prioritized that?) What I'm saying is, it would be great to have you as conference mates. If that doesn't happen, life will go on for us. It certainly won't be the end of the world. So, best of luck. I hope to be merged by fall of 2025, but if that doesn't happen, have a nice life. Send us a postcard. In negotiations, pay attention to which party is really willing to walk away with no deal. In this situation, it's the MWC. Notice we have a Pac2 rep on the board who not only thinks he knows, but must be an actual part of the negotiations! All that "insider knowledge" and yet... none really! Thx for the post. |
|
|
|
Post by aggielarry on Jan 16, 2024 20:48:41 GMT -8
Hey guys, long time no see. So, we're in a holding pattern. I want to make this abundantly clear. I like both OSU and WSU. I think it would be great to have a merged PAC-2/MWC. I absolutely wish you no ill will. If you get an invitation to the Big 12 or the ACC, BRAVO! I think that's outstanding. Now, from a MWC perspective, we have a nice regional conference that 12 of the 14 are happy with. Boise and San Diego are perennial malcontents. Call them our UCLA/USC. Watching the turmoil in the P5 has hardened the resolve of the conference office and, again, 12 of the 14 institutions, to keep the conference intact. Consequently, the conference and the majority of the schools are going to make it very hard for anyone to leave. (Don't you wish the PAC-12 had prioritized that?) What I'm saying is, it would be great to have you as conference mates. If that doesn't happen, life will go on for us. It certainly won't be the end of the world. So, best of luck. I hope to be merged by fall of 2025, but if that doesn't happen, have a nice life. Send us a postcard. In negotiations, pay attention to which party is really willing to walk away with no deal. In this situation, it's the MWC. There's no hard feelings toward the MWC but the reality is that only a few of the schools are marketable on a national level. In the end, it won't matter what the conference office at the MWC has resolved to do. The Pac isn't going to enter into a reverse merger with the MWC as a whole, you can bet on that - at most there will be 6 teams invited to own the Pac. If it wasn't a clue that the Pac wasn't going to simply merge with the MWC when they formed a partnership with the WCC for all sports outside of football, it should have been. Re: the WCC scheduling agreement. That's one interpretation. As has been mentioned, it may also have been the case that the WCC was willing to do an agreement for a lot less. Those are small institutions without football programs. They can cut a leaner deal. It may also be that having both a football scheduling agreement and an Olympic sports scheduling agreement was starting to look too much like an immediate merger, and might have weakened the PAC-2's legal case. Who knows? Re: The national marketability of MWC schools. We don't care. Would it be nice to have more money? Sure! As Danny Devito said in Heist, "Everyone needs more money. That's why they call it money." But, we're doing OK with what we have. We did fine last year. We'll do fine next year. As I said, keeping the conference intact is a very high priority, and Gloria has done a very good job of making sure that the price of walking away from the conference is very, very high. Prohibitively high. There will be at most 12 teams invited to the PAC, or at most 0 teams. Either one is fine with us. So. Like I said, if a full merger isn't in the cards, we're fine. Have a nice life. Let me know what plan B is. |
|
|
|
Post by rgeorge on Jan 16, 2024 20:58:18 GMT -8
There's no hard feelings toward the MWC but the reality is that only a few of the schools are marketable on a national level. In the end, it won't matter what the conference office at the MWC has resolved to do. The Pac isn't going to enter into a reverse merger with the MWC as a whole, you can bet on that - at most there will be 6 teams invited to own the Pac. If it wasn't a clue that the Pac wasn't going to simply merge with the MWC when they formed a partnership with the WCC for all sports outside of football, it should have been. Re: the WCC scheduling agreement. That's one interpretation. As has been mentioned, it may also have been the case that the WCC was willing to do an agreement for a lot less. Those are small institutions without football programs. They can cut a leaner deal. It may also be that having both a football scheduling agreement and an Olympic sports scheduling agreement was starting to look too much like an immediate merger, and might have weakened the PAC-2's legal case. Who knows? Re: The national marketability of MWC schools. We don't care. Would it be nice to have more money? Sure! As Danny Devito said in Heist, "Everyone needs more money. That's why they call it money." But, we're doing OK with what we have. We did fine last year. We'll do fine next year. As I said, keeping the conference intact is a very high priority, and Gloria has done a very good job of making sure that the price of walking away from the conference is very, very high. Prohibitively high. There will be at most 12 teams invited to the PAC, or at most 0 teams. Either one is fine with us. So. Like I said, if a full merger isn't in the cards, we're fine. Have a nice life. Let me know what plan B is. National marketability in hoops seems to be pretty good right now. Title game appearance, and so far 5 teams projected in the tourney. Pac12 with 3. But, yeah the whole market appeal argument is a bit lame coming from a fan of a team left out of a conference! 🤔 |
|
|
|
Post by orangeattack on Jan 16, 2024 23:57:24 GMT -8
Re: the WCC scheduling agreement. That's one interpretation. As has been mentioned, it may also have been the case that the WCC was willing to do an agreement for a lot less. Those are small institutions without football programs. They can cut a leaner deal. It may also be that having both a football scheduling agreement and an Olympic sports scheduling agreement was starting to look too much like an immediate merger, and might have weakened the PAC-2's legal case. Who knows? Re: The national marketability of MWC schools. We don't care. Would it be nice to have more money? Sure! As Danny Devito said in Heist, "Everyone needs more money. That's why they call it money." But, we're doing OK with what we have. We did fine last year. We'll do fine next year. As I said, keeping the conference intact is a very high priority, and Gloria has done a very good job of making sure that the price of walking away from the conference is very, very high. Prohibitively high. There will be at most 12 teams invited to the PAC, or at most 0 teams. Either one is fine with us. So. Like I said, if a full merger isn't in the cards, we're fine. Have a nice life. Let me know what plan B is. National marketability in hoops seems to be pretty good right now. Title game appearance, and so far 5 teams projected in the tourney. Pac12 with 3. But, yeah the whole market appeal argument is a bit lame coming from a fan of a team left out of a conference! 🤔 It’s really not complicated, there is essentially going to be a new conference. It is important to consider market appeal in selecting members. It’s not everything, I will grant you that. Location matters. The commitment level of the university to athletics matters. You need schools that either can compete now or have the growth potential to compete. The MWC as a whole doesn’t fit this. Whatever that’s all extremely subjective but what’s obvious at this point from the comments made by OSU leadership is that they intend to compete at a level on par with the former Pac12 and are taking their time to put together the best deal possible. If the plan is simply a merger with the MWC, why wait? Why not announce the intentions now and say we are working through the details? Because OSU leadership is hoping for a stronger deal than a MWC reverse merger. I’m just reading the tea leaves. They’re LOUD. |
|
|
|
Post by beaver55to7 on Jan 17, 2024 11:07:16 GMT -8
Consequently, the conference and the majority of the schools are going to make it very hard for anyone to leave. (Don't you wish the PAC-12 had prioritized that?) Comparing getting high exit fees in the MWC with getting high exit fees in the former pac 12 is ridiculous. The MWC does not and did not have USC. USC was never going to agree to high exit fees, fees obviously aimed at keeping USC in the conference. To have tried to force that would have also destroyed the conference. A classic case of damned if you try to and damned if you don't. USC always held all the cards and it was only a matter of them finally (the talk of them bailing has been around for at least 10 years) doing the math, seeing the east coast demographics, east coast time zones, east coast money. There never was much that would stop them from leaving once they did the math. Only nostalgia for being in a conference with Stanford and Cal kept them around as long as they stayed. |
|
|
|
Post by orangeattack on Jan 17, 2024 12:01:06 GMT -8
Consequently, the conference and the majority of the schools are going to make it very hard for anyone to leave. (Don't you wish the PAC-12 had prioritized that?) Comparing getting high exit fees in the MWC with getting high exit fees in the former pac 12 is ridiculous. The MWC does not and did not have USC. USC was never going to agree to high exit fees, fees obviously aimed at keeping USC in the conference. To have tried to force that would have also destroyed the conference. A classic case of damned if you try to and damned if you don't. USC always held all the cards and it was only a matter of them finally (the talk of them bailing has been around for at least 10 years) doing the math, seeing the east coast demographics, east coast time zones, east coast money. There never was much that would stop them from leaving once they did the math. Only nostalgia for being in a conference with Stanford and Cal kept them around as long as they stayed. USC and UCLA wanted a bigger split of the media deal since they felt that they collectively had the most value. Had the rest of the conference agreed, we likely would not be talking about any of this and instead talking about the new additions of Texas and Oklahoma who would also be getting a bigger split of the media deal. Would that be undeniably better than the best of our current prospects? Depends on how optimistic you are about what options will open up over the next two years. If you view the reverse merger with the MWC as being inevitable, nope. If you view the FSU case with interest and wonder what types of options will open up if they prevail, you probably think we have a shot at ending up better off than being forced to battle the Big 4 with one arm tied behind your back. And Oregon and Washington were never going to agree to that anyway. |
|
|
|
Post by ochobeavo on Jan 17, 2024 12:58:37 GMT -8
In other kinda/sorta related news, Jon Wilner is reporting that there is an emergency UC Regents meeting next week to discuss a proposed audit of Cal athletic dept. This could potentially cause some ripples or result in one more available dance partner for purposes of the conference rebuild...
|
|
|
|
Post by orangeattack on Jan 17, 2024 13:28:24 GMT -8
In other kinda/sorta related news, Jon Wilner is reporting that there is an emergency UC Regents meeting next week to discuss a proposed audit of Cal athletic dept. This could potentially cause some ripples or result in one more available dance partner for purposes of the conference rebuild... Interesting, thanks for sharing. So many different things all going on at the same time, can't keep track of everything. |
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Jan 17, 2024 13:34:55 GMT -8
Comparing getting high exit fees in the MWC with getting high exit fees in the former pac 12 is ridiculous. The MWC does not and did not have USC. USC was never going to agree to high exit fees, fees obviously aimed at keeping USC in the conference. To have tried to force that would have also destroyed the conference. A classic case of damned if you try to and damned if you don't. USC always held all the cards and it was only a matter of them finally (the talk of them bailing has been around for at least 10 years) doing the math, seeing the east coast demographics, east coast time zones, east coast money. There never was much that would stop them from leaving once they did the math. Only nostalgia for being in a conference with Stanford and Cal kept them around as long as they stayed. Would that be undeniably better than the best of our current prospects? Depends on how optimistic you are about what options will open up over the next two years. If you view the reverse merger with the MWC as being inevitable, nope. If you view the FSU case with interest and wonder what types of options will open up if they prevail, you probably think we have a shot at ending up better off than being forced to battle the Big 4 with one arm tied behind your back. And Oregon and Washington were never going to agree to that anyway. If we had agreed to that back in 2012, Oklahoma and Texas likely would already be members, and the Big 12 might not even exist anymore, or it may have been a Group of Six Conference for the entirety of the CFP. Poland, at one point, owned Prussia, owned Sweden, and captured the Russian government. But Sweden won its independence and became an eternal thorn in Poland's side. Russia rebounded to kick out the Poles and set a Romanov on the throne to become an eternal thorn in Poland's side. At one point, Russia and Sweden almost jointly wiped Poland off the map, and Poland was forced to give Prussia its independence to jointly drive out the Swedes from what was left of Poland. Nevertheless, Prussia almost instantly became an eternal thorn in Prussia's side. Prussia and Russia would metastasize and grow (mostly at the expense of Poland and Sweden), until they jointly were able to convince Austro-Hungary to wipe Poland off the map. And, outside of a brief Duchy of Warsaw period under Napoleon, Poland ceased to be a country for 124 years. I am afraid that, by taking Colorado, we turned the Big 12 forever against the Pac-12. We failed to take Oklahoma and Texas, when the Big 12 was in shambles and the Pac-12 was supremely strong. We failed to take Houston, Oklahoma State, and TCU, when the Big 12 was once again in shambles and the Pac-12 was supremely strong. And, after twice seeing the Pac-12 come close to wiping the Big 12 off the face of the map, the Big 12 was only too happy to lay a far more damaging blow to the Pac-12, when they finally had the opportunity. I am hoping that we will learn from this and be the ones to eventually strike back at the ACC, Big Ten, and Big 12 down the line. Hopefully, it will not take 124 years, but revenge is a dish best served cold. |
|
