(07-16-2022 10:42 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  Wait a minute! Am I reading this correctly:

Like UNC’s Guskiewicz, Heird is hopeful ESPN will see some advantage in revisiting a network-friendly rights deal, presumably to preserve a partnership that could collapse if a majority of ACC members were to vote to dissolve the conference as a means of circumventing the league’s grant of media rights and finding new homes.

A majority would be 8 members, assuming that the Domers have one vote. If that's true then that changes the calculus tremendously.

That is what Flug is tweeting about...

(07-16-2022 06:50 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(07-16-2022 04:22 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(07-16-2022 12:09 PM)Scoochpooch1 Wrote:  

(07-16-2022 11:46 AM)CardinalJim Wrote:  

(07-16-2022 08:27 AM)Hokie4Skins Wrote:  University of Louisville interim president Dr. Lori Gonzalez declined an interview request from the Courier Journal on the subject, a spokesman said, because “she thinks there are too many unknowns at this time to speculate on the future of the ACC.”

https://www.courier-journal.com/story/sp...373480007/

Don’t read anything into Gonzalez not knowing anything. She’s a lost ball in tall grass. As her first duty as UofL President was to walk to the podium and tell everyone how much she loves the University of Kentucky


https://www.wdrb.com/news/uofl-interim-p...973c3.html


Thankfully Lori is interim.

Yay, women in charge! #metoo

You really don't learn any lessons, do you?

He’s made numerous sexist remarks against women on this site, which have been pointed out on many occasions.

It's repulsive. Every time it seems the man is starting to behave, act like an adult and actually contribute posts that are thoughtful and helpful to the board's overall discourse ... he posts this garbage. I trust the mods take notice.

(07-16-2022 10:42 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  Wait a minute! Am I reading this correctly:

Like UNC’s Guskiewicz, Heird is hopeful ESPN will see some advantage in revisiting a network-friendly rights deal, presumably to preserve a partnership that could collapse if a majority of ACC members were to vote to dissolve the conference as a means of circumventing the league’s grant of media rights and finding new homes.

A majority would be 8 members, assuming that the Domers have one vote. If that's true then that changes the calculus tremendously.

There have been allusions in other articles about this as well. I'm a little surprised people haven't jumped on this more...at least in this thread.

The ACC is facing a serious crisis otherwise all its leaders would simply repeat one line: "Our contract lasts until 2036 and we are committed to the ACC. Thank you and have a nice day."

Instead, you've got a lot of hemming and hawing along with vague statements about the uncertainty of the future.

(07-17-2022 04:14 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  Instead, you've got a lot of hemming and hawing along with vague statements about the uncertainty of the future.

Which means there are too many $ on the table, via new B1G and SEC contracts. So, naturally, all sides are talking.

ACC fans should steel themselves for _potential_ sudden/dramatic news. My guess: the BigSplit is in final negotiations.

(07-17-2022 04:14 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(07-16-2022 10:42 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  Wait a minute! Am I reading this correctly:

Like UNC’s Guskiewicz, Heird is hopeful ESPN will see some advantage in revisiting a network-friendly rights deal, presumably to preserve a partnership that could collapse if a majority of ACC members were to vote to dissolve the conference as a means of circumventing the league’s grant of media rights and finding new homes.

A majority would be 8 members, assuming that the Domers have one vote. If that's true then that changes the calculus tremendously.

There have been allusions in other articles about this as well. I'm a little surprised people haven't jumped on this more...at least in this thread.

The ACC is facing a serious crisis otherwise all its leaders would simply repeat one line: "Our contract lasts until 2036 and we are committed to the ACC. Thank you and have a nice day."

Instead, you've got a lot of hemming and hawing along with vague statements about the uncertainty of the future.

I have long suspected a simple majority might be enough to kill the ACC, and although it is still just a suspicion comments like this support the idea. I've seen others throw out supermajority, 12, etc. but so far as I know nobody has actually had the opportunity to review the ACC bylaws and confirm what number is needed? This is in stark contrast to the GoR, the 2013 version at least, which clearly states unanimous approval is required to modify that agreement.

I think a simple majority for dissolution makes sense because the ACC bylaws have been around for a long time, and prior to this GoR era who would ever have thought that a conference could, or would even try to, muddle on if a majority of the membership wanted to end it? Modifying the bylaws probably does require a supermajority of some kind, so I'm speculating that total dissolution was never updated to match the ACC hostage-taking plan and may actually provide the easiest way out of the GoR, and the ACC altogether.

(07-17-2022 10:48 AM)Gamenole Wrote:  I have long suspected a simple majority might be enough to kill the ACC, and although it is still just a suspicion comments like this support the idea. I've seen others throw out supermajority, 12, etc. but so far as I know nobody has actually had the opportunity to review the ACC bylaws and confirm what number is needed?

Sort of thing happens way too often on this board.

It's one thing to have an opinion on how things will or won't unfold. It's something else entirely to declare "a supermajority is required" to dissolve the ACC when:

1. We've read articles with contradictory info and/or quotes from different sources, including officials at ACC schools;

2. From what I've seen (and certainly could've missed it), nobody on this board has posted actual verbiage on what it would take to dissolve the ACC.

So all we've really got is speculation passed off as fact

(07-17-2022 11:05 AM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  

(07-17-2022 10:48 AM)Gamenole Wrote:  I have long suspected a simple majority might be enough to kill the ACC, and although it is still just a suspicion comments like this support the idea. I've seen others throw out supermajority, 12, etc. but so far as I know nobody has actually had the opportunity to review the ACC bylaws and confirm what number is needed?

Sort of thing happens way too often on this board.

It's one thing to have an opinion on how things will or won't unfold. It's something else entirely to declare "a supermajority is required" to dissolve the ACC when:

1. We've read articles with contradictory info and/or quotes from different sources, including officials at ACC schools;

2. From what I've seen (and certainly could've missed it), nobody on this board has posted actual verbiage on what it would take to dissolve the ACC.

So all we've really got is speculation passed off as fact

The Raleigh News Observer actually said 8 last week or so. That’s the only “source”

From the linked…

“3. DISSOLVE THE POLITICAL BONDS

There is no language in the ACC’s bylaws and constitution covering dissolution of the conference, other than a standard boilerplate clause about the distribution of property. The North Carolina law governing the dissolution of nonprofits would theoretically apply, requiring only a majority of voting members to agree to it. (Notre Dame, for some reason, gets a full vote and not 20 percent of a vote, even though it only gets a one-fifth share of revenue. That has never been sufficiently explained.)

If it only takes eight votes to disband the ACC, and lawyers bill a lot of hours arguing such things, there are a couple scenarios that could get there. If Notre Dame and North Carolina were ready to jump to the Big Ten, and Clemson, Florida State and Miami were ready to jump to the SEC, that’s five votes. Perhaps the defectors could convince the Big Ten to take Duke and N.C. State as well, and the SEC to take Georgia Tech or Virginia to get a majority.

Those are not all schools either uber-conference would necessarily want if they each grow to 20 teams, but would they do it if it meant removing the ACC as we know it from the field of play forever? It would be a stunning display of predatory realpolitik, but SEC commissioner Greg Sankey and, as of last week, Big Ten commissioner Kevin Warren haven’t been shy about looking out for No. 1.

All of that is predicated on the requirement of a majority vote to dissolve. But it’s one way the grant of rights becomes no longer a barrier to exit.“




https://www.hastingstribune.com/sports/c...4aaf4.html

The issue is there aren’t even eight schools that are going to add value to the two leagues.

The last four major additions were Oklahoma, Texas, USC, and UCLA. So which ACC schools approximate that value? That means they’re worth more than Oregon and Washington, don’t forget.

UNC
Notre Dame
Florida State

Then it gets iffy. The SEC didn’t jump on FSU and Clemson a decade ago. Are they worth more now? I’m sure Clemson would hedge their bets on being included and let’s even go as far as saying UVa and Duke will be included. That’s not a sure thing, and that’s only six votes.

(07-16-2022 11:36 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  I would be more inclined to pay attention to a president of any lower-value ACC, PAC or B12 school who says something like ...

"well, we need to pray to God that the GOR holds or that the B1G doesn't want any more PAC schools, because otherwise it's back to G5-land for us, or at best a quasi-power league like say the 2000s Big East. We thought we had escaped that forever, and now we're all having sleepless nights wondering whether the next SEC or B1G move will send us back to purgatory".

And let’s be clear, at the point where 6 schools realize they are getting demoted to G5 status when their conference GOR is cracked, those left out schools will almost certainly file a massive tampering suit against the ESPN, the exiting ACC schools, and the conferences that poached them. They would probably have a decent interference case that ESPN and the conferences worked together to dismember the pre-existing contractual GOR that held the ACC together. I could see this getting very messy if every single ACC team doesn’t have a landing spot acceptable to their respective administrations. Thus, any dissolution strategy likely will need to provide acceptable homes for every AAC school.

(07-16-2022 04:22 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(07-16-2022 12:09 PM)Scoochpooch1 Wrote:  

(07-16-2022 11:46 AM)CardinalJim Wrote:  

(07-16-2022 08:27 AM)Hokie4Skins Wrote:  University of Louisville interim president Dr. Lori Gonzalez declined an interview request from the Courier Journal on the subject, a spokesman said, because “she thinks there are too many unknowns at this time to speculate on the future of the ACC.”

https://www.courier-journal.com/story/sp...373480007/

Don’t read anything into Gonzalez not knowing anything. She’s a lost ball in tall grass. As her first duty as UofL President was to walk to the podium and tell everyone how much she loves the University of Kentucky


https://www.wdrb.com/news/uofl-interim-p...973c3.html


Thankfully Lori is interim.

Yay, women in charge! #metoo

You really don't learn any lessons, do you?

To which lessons are you referring, plebeian?
Women aren't infallible, yes I've learned that lesson though most ignore that truth.

I like how one official from one school makes some vague comments through a mouthpiece and the internet detectives come out to parse every word to find some deep hidden meaning.

(07-16-2022 06:50 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(07-16-2022 04:22 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(07-16-2022 12:09 PM)Scoochpooch1 Wrote:  

(07-16-2022 11:46 AM)CardinalJim Wrote:  

(07-16-2022 08:27 AM)Hokie4Skins Wrote:  University of Louisville interim president Dr. Lori Gonzalez declined an interview request from the Courier Journal on the subject, a spokesman said, because “she thinks there are too many unknowns at this time to speculate on the future of the ACC.”

https://www.courier-journal.com/story/sp...373480007/

Don’t read anything into Gonzalez not knowing anything. She’s a lost ball in tall grass. As her first duty as UofL President was to walk to the podium and tell everyone how much she loves the University of Kentucky


https://www.wdrb.com/news/uofl-interim-p...973c3.html


Thankfully Lori is interim.

Yay, women in charge! #metoo

You really don't learn any lessons, do you?

He’s made numerous sexist remarks against women on this site, which have been pointed out on many occasions.

Really? Women don't play football, so I don't remember why I would have mentioned them on this forum. Maybe I mentioned Judy before - would you consider her doing a good job?

Pure speculation on my part, but I think some of the delay here revolves around 2 factors.

1. We're waiting to see what Notre Dame decides because that has a significant impact on the valuations of others subsequently.

2. The leaders/executives involved have already gamed all this out, but I think you've probably got several schools in the ACC who are hesitant(for political reasons or possibly a sense of loyalty) to take the first life raft off if they know for certain it will hurt one of their long time conference mates.

We should remember that most of the ACC schools have been together for a very long time. That doesn't mean they won't abandon each other, but I think there are reasons to push the number of members exiting for the P2 and those sorts of discussions are probably being had in earnest because it's only now we're on the cusp.

(07-16-2022 10:52 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(07-16-2022 06:50 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(07-16-2022 04:22 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(07-16-2022 12:09 PM)Scoochpooch1 Wrote:  

(07-16-2022 11:46 AM)CardinalJim Wrote:  Don’t read anything into Gonzalez not knowing anything. She’s a lost ball in tall grass. As her first duty as UofL President was to walk to the podium and tell everyone how much she loves the University of Kentucky


https://www.wdrb.com/news/uofl-interim-p...973c3.html


Thankfully Lori is interim.

Yay, women in charge! #metoo

You really don't learn any lessons, do you?

He’s made numerous sexist remarks against women on this site, which have been pointed out on many occasions.

It's repulsive. Every time it seems the man is starting to behave, act like an adult and actually contribute posts that are thoughtful and helpful to the board's overall discourse ... he posts this garbage. I trust the mods take notice.

I have realized my contributions have been less snarky of late too. But I feed off the energy of the board. When someone comes here and says (picking a school) Iowa Tech is the best school ever and deserves Big Ten consideration, it's hard not to go nuts.

Honestly I don't know how I've acted childish here. Back to the point, saying the wrong name of your employer at the biggest address of the year is pretty much a fireable offense. In today's time, do you think a man would have kept this job?

If you feel compelled to respond. Respond to the points I've made not to some overarching agenda you may have please.

(07-17-2022 11:25 AM)CardinalJim Wrote:  The Raleigh News Observer actually said 8 last week or so. That’s the only “source”

From the linked…

“3. DISSOLVE THE POLITICAL BONDS

There is no language in the ACC’s bylaws and constitution covering dissolution of the conference, other than a standard boilerplate clause about the distribution of property. The North Carolina law governing the dissolution of nonprofits would theoretically apply, requiring only a majority of voting members to agree to it. (Notre Dame, for some reason, gets a full vote and not 20 percent of a vote, even though it only gets a one-fifth share of revenue. That has never been sufficiently explained.)

If it only takes eight votes to disband the ACC, and lawyers bill a lot of hours arguing such things

Thanks CJ

I saw this article, too, and to me, it qualifies as more hedging.

In other words, the writer is providing his interpretation of the ACC's bylaws of what it would take to dissolve the conference while acknowledging there could be wiggle room once legal teams get involved.

That's not the same thing as it takes 8 votes to dissolve or 12 votes or all 15 votes.

Not very iron-clad for sure

(07-17-2022 11:53 AM)Scoochpooch1 Wrote:  

(07-16-2022 10:52 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(07-16-2022 06:50 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(07-16-2022 04:22 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(07-16-2022 12:09 PM)Scoochpooch1 Wrote:  Yay, women in charge! #metoo

You really don't learn any lessons, do you?

He’s made numerous sexist remarks against women on this site, which have been pointed out on many occasions.

It's repulsive. Every time it seems the man is starting to behave, act like an adult and actually contribute posts that are thoughtful and helpful to the board's overall discourse ... he posts this garbage. I trust the mods take notice.

I have realized my contributions have been less snarky of late too. But I feed off the energy of the board. When someone comes here and says (picking a school) Iowa Tech is the best school ever and deserves Big Ten consideration, it's hard not to go nuts.

Honestly I don't know how I've acted childish here. Back to the point, saying the wrong name of your employer at the biggest address of the year is pretty much a fireable offense. In today's time, do you think a man would have kept this job?

If you feel compelled to respond. Respond to the points I've made not to some overarching agenda you may have please.

then don't hashing an overarching agenda, dimwit.

(07-17-2022 12:09 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  

(07-17-2022 11:25 AM)CardinalJim Wrote:  The Raleigh News Observer actually said 8 last week or so. That’s the only “source”

From the linked…

“3. DISSOLVE THE POLITICAL BONDS

There is no language in the ACC’s bylaws and constitution covering dissolution of the conference, other than a standard boilerplate clause about the distribution of property. The North Carolina law governing the dissolution of nonprofits would theoretically apply, requiring only a majority of voting members to agree to it. (Notre Dame, for some reason, gets a full vote and not 20 percent of a vote, even though it only gets a one-fifth share of revenue. That has never been sufficiently explained.)

If it only takes eight votes to disband the ACC, and lawyers bill a lot of hours arguing such things

Thanks CJ

I saw this article, too, and to me, it qualifies as more hedging.

In other words, the writer is providing his interpretation of the ACC's bylaws of what it would take to dissolve the conference while acknowledging there could be wiggle room once legal teams get involved.

That's not the same thing as it takes 8 votes to dissolve or 12 votes or all 15 votes.

Not very iron-clad for sure

A common theme with the Big 12 was that if the conference doesn't exist, the GOR doesn't exist. I'm sure it doesn't take all 15 to dissolve the conference. Although a simple majority would be unusually low.

(07-17-2022 12:09 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  That's not the same thing as it takes 8 votes to dissolve or 12 votes or all 15 votes.

If the B1G would get their ~4 (ND, UVa, UNC, Duke and/or GT?), and the SEC their ~4 (Clemson, FSU, ?), and ESPN assures the rest of the same $ until 2036 (plus a bonus) AND the Big XII commits to taking all the rest, I could see a unanimous vote, made public, so that fewer folk are upset. Tuesday is coming swifty ...

(07-17-2022 12:26 PM)bullet Wrote:  I'm sure it doesn't take all 15 to dissolve the conference. Although a simple majority would be unusually low.

Nicely sums up the entirety of the answers to (seemingly) a simple question

(07-17-2022 11:53 AM)Scoochpooch1 Wrote:  I have realized my contributions have been less snarky of late too. But I feed off the energy of the board. When someone comes here and says (picking a school) Iowa Tech is the best school ever and deserves Big Ten consideration, it's hard not to go nuts.

Honestly I don't know how I've acted childish here. Back to the point, saying the wrong name of your employer at the biggest address of the year is pretty much a fireable offense. In today's time, do you think a man would have kept this job?

If you feel compelled to respond. Respond to the points I've made not to some overarching agenda you may have please.

Maybe I’m speaking out of turn but if someone else’s opinion makes you “go nuts”, this probably isn’t the best place for you.

There are posters here I almost never agree with, however, I respect their right to their opinion. In turn they respect my opinion. That’s what this is about sharing ideas.

I’m telling you there are some great people with different points of view. I’m almost 60 and I learn something new here nearly everyday.

No one knows everything about everything. That’s what makes hanging out here enjoyable.