NCAA reorg imminent

[Farfromgeneva]

ESPN did not in any way steal UT or OU from the big 12. Again, just stop with the crazy talk!

UT and OU were loose in the socket and were free to consider other options. They were not stolen. They walked. Why? How?

Because the b12 media deal and gor was expiring!!!!!! In June 2025. QED. Teams can shop around when they are no longer bound by a gor. Duh!

Why could usc and ucla shop around? Expiring gor! In August 2024.

Colorado, Washington, Oregon, Arizona, ASU, Utah? Expiring gor!

For your patients sake, I hope you are better at doctoring than lawyering.

Need a liver transplant?

https://youtu.be/UFIDdR0INOg

[Farfromgeneva]

Doc, Doc, Doc, Doc -- Stop with the fantasy conspiracy theories. Sheesh.

Please show us the language/theory as to how the rights grants disappear if the ACC conference dissolves. I see nothing to that effect. Also, the GOR says this:

Each of the Member Institutions covenants and agrees that (x) it will not enter into any agreement that is inconsistent with the provisions of this Agreement, and (y) it will not take any action, or permit any action to be taken by others subject to its control, including licensees, or fail to take any action, that would affect the validity and enforcement of the Rights granted to the Conference under this Agreement.

So I think ESPN has a clear breach if a majority of the ACC schools collude to dissolve the conference. Which collusion would be done SOLELY for the purpose of breaching the GOR and the ESPN agreement. TLDR -- the ACC schools have zero ability on their own to do what you suggest. ZERO.

Sure, if ESPN wants to rip up its sweetheart agreement 13 years early (and if they are actually allowed to do that -- unproven, questionable), then all bets are off. But going that route would require an unworkable multi-party negotiation among ESPN, B10, SEC, the leaver schools and the left behind schools. Good luck with that one, buddy.

The idea that FSU would be able to keep and use its rights so long as it lands in another ESPN conference? Boy that's contractual crazy talk.

As we've been through 20 times before, the ACC leavers would never do any of this stuff unless they had first secured their landing spots in their new conferences. The B10 and SEC will not go anywhere near FSU or any of the other leavers so long as they are toxic with lingering legal issues. You don't burn down your current house until after you've bought a new house to live in. Duh.

Also, exactly why would ESPN want to tear up its current agreement with the SEC and start a big legal shirt show? Just so they can get access to FSU and Clemson games (which rights they already own on the cheap fyi)? Just so they can pay more for stuff they already own when those teams go to the SEC???? If you haven't noticed, Disney and ESPN are sucking wind these days -- plummeting revenues, plummeting stock price, layoffs, etc. Same goes for all the other media companies, including Comcast. So now would be the absolutely worst time ever for someone to try to get ESPN (whether still owned by Disney or others) to engage in this convoluted scheme that would result in them increase their costs related to something they already own.

Also, you only have 7 "potential" leavers. That is not enough to dissolve the conference. Who is number 8? And I'd bet that many of the current Mag 7 would back down from launching the nuke on this. Maybe the FSU folks want to go scorched earth -- vaya con dios amigo. But few/none of the very smart lawyers who are presidents, GCs or trustees of the other ACC schools are going to authorize starting a land war in Asia. Exploring potential exit scenarios is not even close to being an actual leaver.

NFW that Jim Ryan (former law professor) at UVA is going to torch his reputation and the reputation of his school (new tag line -- "a great and good university") by signing onto a scheme that would brand them as sleazy contract violators. The concept is absolutely preposterous. Besides, most of the ACC schools (UVA, UNC, Duke, BC, Syracuse etc.) generally suck at football. Always have and always will. They'd all be even worse off competitively in the B10. So long as they can continue to fund their hoops programs (cheap as compared to what football costs)f, there's really no incentive for them to go nuclear just so that they can get steamrolled by Michigan, OSU, PSU, etc.

Let's see if FSU actually gives its exit notice on 8/15/2023. I guess there's a tiny possibility of that. But who else would walk that plank with them?

One good thing though. You appear to have been convinced that all of your prior conspiracy theories (no choice of law!; sovereign immunity defense!; CRCA being over-ruled by SCOTUS!, etc.) were bull shirt.

But I do agree that the ACC GOR is not completely ironclad. If Putin launches the nukes and the world goes up in flames, then yeah -- the GOR won't be enforced.

Why would you think ESPN considers the current ACC agreement a “sweetheart deal?”

Right now, ESPN pays ACC schools over $400 million a year.

Ask yourself this, would ESPN, which has been seeking ways to cut costs, prefer to keep paying schools like Boston College and Wake Forest more than $30 million a year or would ESPN prefer to pay $120 million each year for just FSU and Clemson in the SEC? They get the top two ACC football programs, and save $300 million a year in payouts to the rest of the ACC. Do you really believe that ESPN likes paying hundreds of millions of dollars each year to the ACC’s “filler” schools?

The “rights” that FSU (and Clemson) gave to the ACC were specifically designated for fulfillment of the ACC agreement with ESPN. In other words, FSU and Clemson gave ESPN the rights to broadcast their home games. If both move to the SEC, ESPN still gets to broadcast their home games, because ESPN also owns the right to SEC games.

Now, would ESPN ever maneuver to steal a conference’s two most valuable teams for the SEC?

Yes. In fact, ESPN maneuvered Texas and Oklahoma to join the SEC, nearly destroying the Big 12.

https://trojanswire.usatoday.com/2021/0 ... o-the-sec/

So, ESPN maneuvering to “steal” FSU and Clemson for the SEC is not some fantasy scenario … ESPN has actually done something similar before. And the ACC GOR is no problem, because ESPN still gets to broadcast FSU and Clemson games, but as part of the SEC, not ACC.

I can imagine ESPN maneuvering FSU and Clemson to the SEC, and then using those two defections to cancel the rest of the deal with the ACC remnants. Their SEC package is boosted in value and they get to save $300 million in payments to the ACC leftovers.

Now, just how Machiavellian is ESPN? After nearly destroying the Big 12, the Big 12 bounced back, aggressively expanded, and then jumped the gun and signed an early new media contract … with Fox, but also ESPN.

So, unless you’re convinced that ESPN is determined to broadcast Boston College and Wake Forest sports, you might want to keep and eye open on the doings of ESPN.

DocBarrister

i'm dumber for having read this a 2nd time. espn cannot just take fsu and clem broadcasts elsewhere. fsu and clem granted them to the acc, not espn. are you on a bender?

And the ACC assigned those rights to ESPN.

Read the GOR.

https://www.cbs17.com/wp-content/upload ... CC-GOR.pdf

The ACC GOR could have been a purely ACC affair, and the GOR could have been drafted that way.

However, the ACC GOR is specifically tied to the ESPN agreement with the ACC. Let’s say FSU and Clemson go to the SEC. The ACC tried to invoke the GOR. But FSU and Clemson say, what are the damages? ESPN says, no problem from our perspective, judge, we can still broadcast FSU and Clemson home games. What should the ACC do? Enjoin ESPN from broadcasting FSU and Clemson games?

The GOR could be an issue if FSU and Clemson try to go to the B1G. In that case, ESPN loses the broadcast rights and can seek to enforce those rights. But in the SEC? No problem.

DocBarrister

lmao. i'm no lawyer, but a cursory reading i see nothing of the kind. and plenty of language that says it's the acc's. what's the quote where it says they're assigning their owned rights away, rather than allowing espn to broadcast?

The GOR is specifically tied to the ESPN agreement. That is not really disputable. Just a fact.

If ESPN breaks the deal due to ACC compositional (membership) issues … no GOR.

Swofford said league schools unanimously extended a grant-of-rights provision that gives the ACC control of media rights — and more importantly, the money that comes with them — for any school that choses to leave the conference for the duration of the ESPN deal.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/n ... /87384500/

If I had been drafting the ACC GOR, I would not have made it dependent on the ESPN agreement. However, that’s what the ACC decided to do … make the GOR dependent on the ESPN agreement. If the ESPN agreement ends, say on ESPN’s initiative, then the GOR also disappears.

After the FSU and Clemson are safely part of the SEC, ESPN could end the agreement with the ACC, preventing any ACC action in the GOR, which would no longer be in effect.

ESPN would then have options with respect to the ACC. Maybe ESPN abandons the ACC and ACC network. Maybe ESPN renegotiates the deal on much more favorable terms (maybe cutting media payouts to $20 million annually). ESPN would clearly have all the leverage at that point.

DocBarrister

maybe your number was just a few lines down in the rolodex.

so it's not in the grant of rights that espn holds the cards? glad we established that.

so where's the espn contract and what are the terms and conditions that espn can unilaterally cancel with whatever your compositional thingy means?

It would require, at a minimum, a true sale structure of the rights. And I seriously doubt they did that. If they did the question posed about structure for selling FSUs IP into an SPV and JV it with PE would already exist.

[Farfromgeneva]

Presentation deck will be on this link end of day today but can listen to earnings presentation for Q2 on Disney if anyone is actually serious about understanding their position.

https://thewaltdisneycompany.com/disney ... s-webcast/

[SCLaxAttack]

Sanity:

https://sports.yahoo.com/heres-an-idea- ... 44420.html

[ggait]

Sanity:

https://sports.yahoo.com/heres-an-idea- ... 44420.html

Totally.

We've seen $$$ college football played somewhat on a long distance basis for 100 years. ND/Army -- 1913; ND/USC -- 1926; ND--Navy -- 1927. The old Chicago Maroons played a few Ivy, Pac 12, SEC teams every year in the 20s and 30s. And obviously the big bowl games -- the Rose Bowl games began in 1902. Long before airplanes. But ONLY in football.

Rutgers/UCLA football seems pretty stupid to me, but ADs and conferences obviously disagree. Rutgers/UCLA for any other sport (including $$ mens hoops) is idiotic.

Back to the future for football makes so much sense.

[Farfromgeneva]

Sanity:

https://sports.yahoo.com/heres-an-idea- ... 44420.html

Ultimately it is a league, one conference. Effectively minor leagues where the football teams are licensees of the trademark and pay rent etc. I’ve felt we are heading toward that for 60-80 programs for more than a decade and long before the NIL ruling. They have to write down the conference network values over time because bifurcation for football from the rest kills the network values as they don’t need filler programming if they don’t have football anymore as programming. Just make it direct digital delivery subscription as se wants you can get (less than Disney’s digital offering I’d imagine). But there’s still the attempt to pretend it’s college related when it’s not. The kids in majors sports, FB and BB often dont go to classes are segregated in housing and meals etc. Once that castle made of sand erodes or decays enough they’ll rip the bandaid and head towards this but that’s probably another 5-10yrs out so we get this nonsense in between.

[wgdsr]

Sanity:

https://sports.yahoo.com/heres-an-idea- ... 44420.html

obviously this narrative is going to pick up some steam, but is it really that much of a difference?
let's look @ the oregon softball player that chose the ducks so her parents could watch:
they scheduled (raw numbers could be off slightly, did quick). they played 55 games and scheduled several more (cancelled... away). only 5 were nc$$ tourn games. 9 were double headers.
so 48 scheduled game dates.
only 15 were at home. 33 away dates, often double headers. only several within driving distance. they played a substantial number of cali and other tourns away (including in mexico). played maryland, minnesota, lindenwood, wisconsin, okla st, ole miss, n. dakota st, northwestern, fla, missouri.
add some travel dates they needed on front or back (i minimized these assuming if they could get in or out before or after game times, they did... could be more) and it comes out to at least 38 of the 92 days from 1st game to conference tourney, they were on the road. over 40%.

the b1g had 14 softball teams last year, 21 conference games. assuming with now 18 teams it's 2 divisions... maybe a couple more conference games but not many. of their 9 team division, they still have 3 pac members to play multiple times, and of the others... it likely breaks out to maybe 2 road trips east, one over spring break, and probably with more home games than before as the pac has surprisingly few softball teams.

they very easily could actually have less travel. and then the next question is... some whataboutism of course... why does softball have to have 50 some odd scheduled games pre-playoffs, vast majority on the road, while travelling for essentially 40+% of the semester and most (long) weekends? do we care about athletes impacted by travel, or not? there's also that the b1g pledged to have every sports flight chartered (all teams, all members) @ some point after usc/ucla. don't know where they are on that.

[Farfromgeneva]

Sanity:

https://sports.yahoo.com/heres-an-idea- ... 44420.html

obviously this narrative is going to pick up some steam, but is it really that much of a difference?
let's look @ the oregon softball player that chose the ducks so her parents could watch:
they scheduled (raw numbers could be off slightly, did quick). they played 55 games and scheduled several more (cancelled... away). only 5 were nc$$ tourn games. 9 were double headers.
so 48 scheduled game dates.
only 15 were at home. 33 away dates, often double headers. only several within driving distance. they played a substantial number of cali and other tourns away (including in mexico). played maryland, minnesota, lindenwood, wisconsin, okla st, ole miss, n. dakota st, northwestern, fla, missouri.
add some travel dates they needed on front or back (i minimized these assuming if they could get in or out before or after game times, they did... could be more) and it comes out to at least 38 of the 92 days from 1st game to conference tourney, they were on the road. over 40%.

the b1g had 14 softball teams last year, 21 conference games. assuming with now 18 teams it's 2 divisions... maybe a couple more conference games but not many. of their 9 team division, they still have 3 pac members to play multiple times, and of the others... it likely breaks out to maybe 2 road trips east, one over spring break, and probably with more home games than before as the pac has surprisingly few softball teams.

they very easily could actually have less travel. and then the next question is... some whataboutism of course... why does softball have to have 50 some odd scheduled games pre-playoffs, vast majority on the road, while travelling for essentially 40+% of the semester and most (long) weekends? do we care about athletes impacted by travel, or not? there's also that the b1g pledged to have every sports flight chartered (all teams, all members) @ some point after usc/ucla. don't know where they are on that.

I'm sure the pull through will be lower than the giving pledge...

ESPN going into gameing hard now. That'll be interesting with gambling and college...

https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/ ... ts-Betting

PENN Entertainment and ESPN Enter into Long-Term Exclusive Strategic Alliance for U.S. Online Sports Betting
August 08, 2023 04:18 PM Eastern Daylight Time
WYOMISSING, Pa.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--PENN Entertainment, Inc. (“PENN” or the “Company”) (Nasdaq: PENN) today announced that it has entered into a transformative, exclusive U.S. online sports betting (“OSB”) agreement with ESPN, Inc. and ESPN Enterprises, Inc (together, “ESPN”). PENN will discuss the ESPN transaction as well as its second quarter 2023 results on its previously scheduled conference call and webcast tomorrow morning at 9:00 a.m. ET. For further information, the Company has posted a presentation to its website regarding the transaction, which can be found here.

ESPN Transaction Highlights:

Exclusive Right to the #1 U.S. Sports Brand: PENN has secured the exclusive right to the ESPN Bet trademark for OSB in the U.S. for an initial 10-year term which may be extended for an additional 10 years upon mutual agreement

Launch of ESPN Bet: The online Barstool Sportsbook will be rebranded ESPN Bet in the Fall of 2023; theScore Bet will continue to operate in Canada
Deep Integration: ESPN Bet, operated by PENN Interactive, will benefit from exclusive promotional services across ESPN platforms including programming, content, and access to ESPN talent

ESPN Becomes a Highly Aligned, Long-Term Strategic Partner: Agreement enables efficient customer acquisition and retention spend across premier sports content

Mutually beneficial relationship through ongoing collaboration and warrants

PENN has agreed to make $1.5 billion in cash payments to ESPN paid over the initial ten-year term and grant ESPN approximately $500 million of warrants to purchase approximately 31.8 million PENN common shares that will vest ratably over 10 years, in exchange for media, marketing services, brand and other rights provided by ESPN

Upon ESPN Bet meeting certain U.S. OSB market share performance thresholds, ESPN could receive bonus warrants to purchase up to an additional approximately 6.4 million PENN common shares

ESPN will have the option, at its discretion, to designate one non-voting Board observer or, upon completion of year 3 of the agreement, designate a Board member subject to satisfying gaming regulatory approval(s) and a minimum ownership threshold

Significant Value Creation Potential: Provides an estimated $500 million to $1.0 billion+ of annual long-term Adjusted EBITDA potential in our Interactive segment

Rebranded iCasino Product: Powered by our new promotional engine, our new app will include a separate Hollywood-branded iCasino product in those states where permitted

Barstool Divestiture

PENN Divests Barstool Sports to Founder David Portnoy: PENN sold 100% of the Barstool Sports, Inc. (“Barstool”) common stock to David Portnoy in exchange for certain non-compete and other restrictive covenants. PENN also has the right to receive 50% of the gross proceeds received by David Portnoy in any subsequent sale or other monetization event of Barstool
Jay Snowden, Chief Executive Officer and President of PENN, commented, “This transformative, exclusive agreement with ESPN marks another major milestone in PENN’s evolution from a pure-play U.S. regional gaming operator to a North American entertainment leader. ESPN Bet will be deeply integrated with ESPN’s broad editorial, content, digital and linear product, and sports programming ecosystem. ESPN Bet will also benefit from PENN’s operational experience, extensive market access and proprietary technology platform, which successfully debuted in the U.S. this July.”

Jimmy Pitaro, Chairman of ESPN, said, “After meeting with Jay and the PENN team, it was clear that they were the right long-term strategic partner to build ESPN Bet into a leading U.S. sports betting platform. We are confident that the combination of our unparalleled audience along with PENN’s operational expertise and state-of-the-art technology provides us with a tremendous opportunity to serve the ever-growing number of consumers interested in betting.”

Mr. Snowden continued, “In connection with the transaction, we are selling Barstool back to founder David Portnoy. Barstool has been a great partner and we are thankful to Dave Portnoy, Erika Ayers, Dan Katz and their team for helping to rapidly scale our digital footprint across 16 jurisdictions in the U.S. and introducing their audience to our retail and digital products. The divestiture allows Barstool to return to its roots of providing unique and authentic content to its loyal audience without the restrictions associated with a publicly traded, licensed gaming company.”

“Our agreement with ESPN will provide us access to the largest ecosystem in sports, with 105 million+ monthly unique digital visitors, an audience of more than 370 million across social platforms, 25 million ESPN+ subscribers, and the nation’s #1 fantasy database. PENN’s ability to leverage the leading sports media brands in both the U.S. and Canada with ESPN and theScore, combined with our newly launched sports betting app, will allow us to significantly expand our digital footprint and catapult ESPN Bet into a strong podium position in this space. We believe we can achieve substantial adjusted EBITDA in our Interactive Segment over the coming years – and this will translate to very strong free cash flow generation for the Company and value creation for our shareholders,” concluded Mr. Snowden.

[wgdsr]

acc now vetting smu. with cali, 2 largest mkts in the country. it's happening. literally no one in the b1g wants acc lax to carry on.

[jhu06]

https://www.espn.com/college-football/s ... anford-cal

acc in limbo with for mens lax purposes UNC and UVA in that mix looking at other options.

[ggait]

No acc team is leaving the acc any time soon unless they are willing and able to write a check for $200 to 400 million.

ACC is not in limbo. It is as completely locked in/down as possible.

[Farfromgeneva]

acc now vetting smu. with cali, 2 largest mkts in the country. it's happening. literally no one in the b1g wants acc lax to carry on.

Yes this is driving a lot of the interest here just like the annual crying about it “not being a conference” as of the NCAA arbitrarily created AQ threshold is the definition of a conference. Though that’s consistent with the general behavior of the BigTen in general which is to dilute and trash history and commonality to whitewash the Gordon Gees and Jerry Samduskys.

[wgdsr]

https://www.espn.com/college-football/s ... anford-cal

acc in limbo with for mens lax purposes UNC and UVA in that mix looking at other options.

there was a magnificent 7 that months ago got together likely with their attorneys to compare notes on what they had figured out over the last couple years on how to skate out of the gor. evidently they didn't get very far, although fsu found something and won't tell anyone.

tho the uva a.d. has been rumored by someone well sourced to have been on some calls of a clandestine nature.

[Farfromgeneva]

https://www.espn.com/college-football/s ... anford-cal

acc in limbo with for mens lax purposes UNC and UVA in that mix looking at other options.

Docs been talking about ESPN jamming everyone up for their benefit and I immediately thought they’d be liable for tortious interference for the remaining members losses but no point in arguing with someone who just wants to exhaust folks with lots of embedded assumptions that are not facts or even generally accepted to be true aspects that underpin every single argument he makes. Clearly doesn’t evaluate risk/reward with respect to this but hope the legal advice provided is better than that.

Quotes:

While the general expectations remain that no school will leave just yet, the mere possibility and FSU's vocal unrest leave the league in a muddled place.

The ACC schools exploring exiting also do not appear to have anywhere to immediately go, which layers the move in complications. No league can promise them a spot because of the threat of tortious interference, and most leagues would want to see how the legal battles sort out before offering an invitation.

That leaves the other ACC schools seeking some security, which both Cal and Stanford would represent as strong academic schools with established brands and athletic departments.

[ggait]

Note that the unc ad a few days ago was publicly saying that fsu should stfu. Said fsu can leave if they want to pay the exit fee. And that if they did that, fsu would not have any games to sell their new league until 2036.

So obviously unc isn’t going anywhere. And neither is anyone else.

ACC is trying to add teams. It is only in danger of losing teams willing to pay hundreds of millions for the privilege.

[wgdsr]

https://www.espn.com/college-football/s ... anford-cal

acc in limbo with for mens lax purposes UNC and UVA in that mix looking at other options.

Docs been talking about ESPN jamming everyone up for their benefit and I immediately thought they’d be liable for tortious interference for the remaining members losses but no point in arguing with someone who just wants to exhaust folks with lots of embedded assumptions that are not facts or even generally accepted to be true aspects that underpin every single argument he makes. Clearly doesn’t evaluate risk/reward with respect to this but hope the legal advice provided is better than that.

Quotes:

While the general expectations remain that no school will leave just yet, the mere possibility and FSU's vocal unrest leave the league in a muddled place.

The ACC schools exploring exiting also do not appear to have anywhere to immediately go, which layers the move in complications. No league can promise them a spot because of the threat of tortious interference, and most leagues would want to see how the legal battles sort out before offering an invitation.

That leaves the other ACC schools seeking some security, which both Cal and Stanford would represent as strong academic schools with established brands and athletic departments.

fsu and va tech might look at starting up the old metro conference again. what's old is new again.

[Farfromgeneva]

Note that the unc ad a few days ago was publicly saying that fsu should stfu. Said fsu can leave if they want to pay the exit fee. And that if they did that, fsu would not have any games to sell their new league until 2036.

So obviously unc isn’t going anywhere. And neither is anyone else.

ACC is trying to add teams. It is only in danger of losing teams willing to pay hundreds of millions for the privilege.

Problem is the whiny ones can jam up the future by getting 4 “no” votes for expansion. That’s the best angle the losers have for getting out on the cheap to not allow expansion. Makes far more sense jamming the conference up that way because they don’t/can’t sit still for the remainder of the contract. Lot more sense than these fantastical high risk, low expected value outcome strategies he was tossing around. Except for a partner needing billable hours I guess.

[Farfromgeneva]

https://www.espn.com/college-football/s ... anford-cal

acc in limbo with for mens lax purposes UNC and UVA in that mix looking at other options.

Docs been talking about ESPN jamming everyone up for their benefit and I immediately thought they’d be liable for tortious interference for the remaining members losses but no point in arguing with someone who just wants to exhaust folks with lots of embedded assumptions that are not facts or even generally accepted to be true aspects that underpin every single argument he makes. Clearly doesn’t evaluate risk/reward with respect to this but hope the legal advice provided is better than that.

Quotes:

While the general expectations remain that no school will leave just yet, the mere possibility and FSU's vocal unrest leave the league in a muddled place.

The ACC schools exploring exiting also do not appear to have anywhere to immediately go, which layers the move in complications. No league can promise them a spot because of the threat of tortious interference, and most leagues would want to see how the legal battles sort out before offering an invitation.

That leaves the other ACC schools seeking some security, which both Cal and Stanford would represent as strong academic schools with established brands and athletic departments.

fsu and va tech might look at starting up the old metro conference again. what's old is new again.

Bring back the SWC and let SMU do it’s thing again like it’s the 80s!

[ardilla secreta]

https://www.espn.com/college-football/s ... anford-cal

acc in limbo with for mens lax purposes UNC and UVA in that mix looking at other options.

Docs been talking about ESPN jamming everyone up for their benefit and I immediately thought they’d be liable for tortious interference for the remaining members losses but no point in arguing with someone who just wants to exhaust folks with lots of embedded assumptions that are not facts or even generally accepted to be true aspects that underpin every single argument he makes. Clearly doesn’t evaluate risk/reward with respect to this but hope the legal advice provided is better than that.

Quotes:

While the general expectations remain that no school will leave just yet, the mere possibility and FSU's vocal unrest leave the league in a muddled place.

The ACC schools exploring exiting also do not appear to have anywhere to immediately go, which layers the move in complications. No league can promise them a spot because of the threat of tortious interference, and most leagues would want to see how the legal battles sort out before offering an invitation.

That leaves the other ACC schools seeking some security, which both Cal and Stanford would represent as strong academic schools with established brands and athletic departments.

fsu and va tech might look at starting up the old metro conference again. what's old is new again.

Bring back the SWC and let SMU do it’s thing again like it’s the 80s!

Yes! The Pony Express

[ardilla secreta]

Sent to me from my friend in Beaver Country

IMG_0837.jpeg (45.24 KiB) Viewed 302 times