|
|
Post by Judge Smails on Jan 4, 2024 21:06:24 GMT -8
So if I don’t like the interest rate on my house, I don’t have to pay it? What kind of argument is reasonable? You contracted for a 15-year fixed rate and your mortgage company procured you a 30-year variable rate mortgage without having you agree to it. Do you have to pay on the latter mortgage? Plus, you don't have the same 11th Amendment rights that Florida State University enjoys. I get the 11th amendment argument, but they knew the exit fee going in no matter the length of the contract, just like I knew my loan fee upfront for the mortgage analogy. The could argue the extension and get out early, but why would that wipe out the fee? |
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Jan 4, 2024 21:17:55 GMT -8
You contracted for a 15-year fixed rate and your mortgage company procured you a 30-year variable rate mortgage without having you agree to it. Do you have to pay on the latter mortgage? Plus, you don't have the same 11th Amendment rights that Florida State University enjoys. I get the 11th amendment argument, but they knew the exit fee going in no matter the length of the contract, just like I knew my loan fee upfront for the mortgage analogy. The could argue the extension and get out early, but why would that wipe out the fee? The GOR, by its terms, concludes on June 30, 2027, unless extended. There is no exit fee without a GOR and without a valid media deal. |
|
|
|
Post by Judge Smails on Jan 4, 2024 21:19:15 GMT -8
I get the 11th amendment argument, but they knew the exit fee going in no matter the length of the contract, just like I knew my loan fee upfront for the mortgage analogy. The could argue the extension and get out early, but why would that wipe out the fee? The GOR, by its terms, concludes on June 30, 2027, unless extended. There is no exit fee without a GOR and without a media deal. But, they don’t want to wait until 2027 to leave. They want to leave ASAP. I get their case to leave in 2027. |
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Jan 4, 2024 21:36:52 GMT -8
The GOR, by its terms, concludes on June 30, 2027, unless extended. There is no exit fee without a GOR and without a media deal. But, they don’t want to wait until 2027 to leave. They want to leave ASAP. I get their case to leave in 2027. It has to do with the previous media rights deal, which was made in 2016 that involved the disputed extension. "Which locked in league members to the same rates negotiated in the previous 2012 multimedia rights contract with ESPN. That left league members with the same revenue package for 24 years -- all while other conferences had the ability to renegotiate their contracts and increase their revenue. "If a judge grants declaratory judgment in favor of Florida State, the school would be able to leave the ACC without penalty. The departure would have to be effective Aug. 14, 2023, backdated to ensure Florida State could leave the conference in the event of new bylaws being put into place. If the judge declines to issue a judgment in favor of either side, Florida State and the ACC could be sent to mediation to negotiate a resolution." -- ESPN.com |
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Jan 4, 2024 23:01:28 GMT -8
But, they don’t want to wait until 2027 to leave. They want to leave ASAP. I get their case to leave in 2027. It has to do with the previous media rights deal, which was made in 2016 that involved the disputed extension. "Which locked in league members to the same rates negotiated in the previous 2012 multimedia rights contract with ESPN. That left league members with the same revenue package for 24 years -- all while other conferences had the ability to renegotiate their contracts and increase their revenue. "If a judge grants declaratory judgment in favor of Florida State, the school would be able to leave the ACC without penalty. The departure would have to be effective Aug. 14, 2023, backdated to ensure Florida State could leave the conference in the event of new bylaws being put into place. If the judge declines to issue a judgment in favor of either side, Florida State and the ACC could be sent to mediation to negotiate a resolution." -- ESPN.com Oh, Andrea Adelson. I love a Florida grad without a law degree describing the law as it relates to Florida State. I personally do not understand Florida State's argument to get out next year, and neither does Andrea Adelson. I personally think that this is all a ploy to get out after the 2024 season. I think that they are trying to get out in seven months to get around what I view as a really good ripeness argument by the ACC. That is what I think that Florida State is working on. Playing 2024-2025 in the ACC and then joining a new conference after that. |
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Jan 4, 2024 23:09:31 GMT -8
It has to do with the previous media rights deal, which was made in 2016 that involved the disputed extension. "Which locked in league members to the same rates negotiated in the previous 2012 multimedia rights contract with ESPN. That left league members with the same revenue package for 24 years -- all while other conferences had the ability to renegotiate their contracts and increase their revenue. "If a judge grants declaratory judgment in favor of Florida State, the school would be able to leave the ACC without penalty. The departure would have to be effective Aug. 14, 2023, backdated to ensure Florida State could leave the conference in the event of new bylaws being put into place. If the judge declines to issue a judgment in favor of either side, Florida State and the ACC could be sent to mediation to negotiate a resolution." -- ESPN.com Oh, Andrea Adelson. I love a Florida grad without a law degree describing the law as it relates to Florida State. I personally do not understand Florida State's argument to get out next year, and neither does Andrea Adelson. I personally think that this is all a ploy to get out after the 2024 season. I think that they are trying to get out in seven months to get around what I view as a really good ripeness argument by the ACC. That is what I think that Florida State is working on. Playing 2024-2025 in the ACC and then joining a new conference after that. Well, this is what I found that I thought would help answer the question. Most of us aren't lawyers. Do you have something against Adelson? I was searching ESPN articles in particular because I didn't want to risk quoting something with an FSU slant. It seems like they will probably be able to leave after the 2027 date at the very least. If this is accurate and they win the lawsuit or force a settlement, I expect them to be able to leave earlier. My biggest interest is how it might affect the Pac-2. I fully expect the Pac-2 to be able to stay intact for two years (maybe three but it gets shaky). So we'll see what happens. |
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Jan 4, 2024 23:52:12 GMT -8
Oh, Andrea Adelson. I love a Florida grad without a law degree describing the law as it relates to Florida State. I personally do not understand Florida State's argument to get out next year, and neither does Andrea Adelson. I personally think that this is all a ploy to get out after the 2024 season. I think that they are trying to get out in seven months to get around what I view as a really good ripeness argument by the ACC. That is what I think that Florida State is working on. Playing 2024-2025 in the ACC and then joining a new conference after that. Well, this is what I found that I thought would help answer the question. Most of us aren't lawyers. Do you have something against Adelson? I was searching ESPN articles in particular because I didn't want to risk quoting something with an FSU slant. It seems like they will probably be able to leave after the 2027 date at the very least. If this is accurate and they win the lawsuit or force a settlement, I expect them to be able to leave earlier. My biggest interest is how it might affect the Pac-2. I fully expect the Pac-2 to be able to stay intact for two years (maybe three but it gets shaky). So we'll see what happens. Adelson is not a neutral party. If you were looking for something with about the least pro-FSU slant, you found it. I have nothing against her other than she married her hyper-creepy dufus husband, who is naturally a professor now. Blind leading the blind. If she is anything like her husband, I have a beef with her, as well. I agree with you, though. My biggest interest is how the ACC's fracturing may help the Pac-2. I am rooting for Florida State to succeed in the courtroom and fail miserably on the field. |
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Jan 5, 2024 12:37:14 GMT -8
Still the same fight on this board as to whether OSU joins another Power 4 or does the reverse merger with the MWC. I think that discussion is over for now, at least in Barnes' mind: "...we have a landing spot that is a really good fit for us right now. It’s super important in the short term. We’re thankful for that. The other option, we continue to talk about. But it’s important to keep the (Pac-12) brand and keep the assets." Of course Barnes is keeping his options open for whatever may arise. That much is clear, but he also thinks OSU is in a good spot right now, at least for the short run. My favorite part and the most relevant part of the article/interview is this: "Q: We have a sense as to what the next two years – 2024-25, 2025-26 – look like. What about 2026-27? Barnes: I think we have to have a pulse. You have to be thinking about what may transpire, like different media contracts and movement in the industry. You have to have your eye on that while you’re taking care of the next two years. Prior to Christmas, we got everything we wanted done. Now we have a lot more to do, including in January two priorities. Media agreements and bowl agreements for next year. We’re working on those. Right now, we’re working on getting ‘24 settled, but you’re also thinking longer term. Q: When you say media for next year, is that the home football games? Barnes: Not just football, but everything we have. We have our rights for all home football games, but also our other sports, what we’re doing with the WCC inside and out. What opportunities the Pac-12 Network holds in the future. All those things. Q: Will you have some finality about media for 2024-25 in January? Barnes: I don’t know that we’ll have anything codified in January. We’ve already started, but after the holidays, we’ll start to get some of the answers in terms of what our go-forth plan is, with football driving the circumstances. I don’t know that we’ll get it done in January, but certainly we want to be way down the road. Q: What are options for bowls in 2024 and 2025? Barnes: We currently hold all the current (Pac-12) contracts, and there are two years left on this contract. We’re starting to have conversations, on what priorities we will have, and a pecking order, and what those agreements could look like, coupled with the expansion of the CFP. Q: If Oregon State wins at least six games next season, there will be a bowl somewhere? Barnes: Yes, absolutely." The bold emphasis is mine. It stuns me how little OSU's short-term media rights and bowl tie-ins are discussed on this board. I've always assumed that Barnes (along with WSU's representation) is working at getting media deals going, but it's good to see comments directly from Barnes regarding the issue, with an emphasis on a desire to get media coverage for a lot of sports, not just football. That is good news, as is the news of bowl tie-ins. I am still curious as to how the bowls will work out. It is obvious that the Pac-2 can maintain their contract with only two bowls (absent a very creative solution), and one likely cannot be the LA Bowl. But which two bowls? Alamo Las Vegas Holiday Sun Independence I have thought it was doubtful that the Pac-2 will be able to keep the Alamo Bowl. That berth will likely go to a different Power Four Conference, and I would be mildly shocked if it was not the SEC. But it would be great if the Las Vegas and Holiday Bowls stuck around, maybe forming a joint Mountain West - Pac-2 bowl alliance. That said, I am concerned that the Las Vegas Bowl may just become another Big Ten v. SEC bowl. Hopefully, though, the Pac-2 and Mountain West will join together and do a joint bowl agreement that includes the Las Vegas, Holiday, Sun, and Independence Bowls. |
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Jan 5, 2024 12:46:56 GMT -8
Oh, Andrea Adelson. I love a Florida grad without a law degree describing the law as it relates to Florida State. I personally do not understand Florida State's argument to get out next year, and neither does Andrea Adelson. I personally think that this is all a ploy to get out after the 2024 season. I think that they are trying to get out in seven months to get around what I view as a really good ripeness argument by the ACC. That is what I think that Florida State is working on. Playing 2024-2025 in the ACC and then joining a new conference after that. Well, this is what I found that I thought would help answer the question. Most of us aren't lawyers. Do you have something against Adelson? I was searching ESPN articles in particular because I didn't want to risk quoting something with an FSU slant. It seems like they will probably be able to leave after the 2027 date at the very least. If this is accurate and they win the lawsuit or force a settlement, I expect them to be able to leave earlier. My biggest interest is how it might affect the Pac-2. I fully expect the Pac-2 to be able to stay intact for two years (maybe three but it gets shaky). So we'll see what happens. I think there is no year 3 for the Pac-2. It's either a conference with the NCAA minimum number of teams, or it's gone, if I'm reading the NCAA's position correctly. |
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Jan 5, 2024 12:51:29 GMT -8
Well, this is what I found that I thought would help answer the question. Most of us aren't lawyers. Do you have something against Adelson? I was searching ESPN articles in particular because I didn't want to risk quoting something with an FSU slant. It seems like they will probably be able to leave after the 2027 date at the very least. If this is accurate and they win the lawsuit or force a settlement, I expect them to be able to leave earlier. My biggest interest is how it might affect the Pac-2. I fully expect the Pac-2 to be able to stay intact for two years (maybe three but it gets shaky). So we'll see what happens. I think there is no year 3 for the Pac-2. It's either a conference with the NCAA minimum number of teams, or it's gone, if I'm reading the NCAA's position correctly. Yes, you are right. I was focused on the financial aspects but forgot that they have the two years before they need to expand to eight teams. So two years it is. |
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Jan 5, 2024 15:34:02 GMT -8
I think there is no year 3 for the Pac-2. It's either a conference with the NCAA minimum number of teams, or it's gone, if I'm reading the NCAA's position correctly. Yes, you are right. I was focused on the financial aspects but forgot that they have the two years before they need to expand to eight teams. So two years it is. We should have a pretty good idea of which way things are going by summer of '25 because MWC teams need to give a year's notice just to keep the buyout to 17 million bucks. |
|
|
|
Post by rgeorge on Jan 5, 2024 18:53:23 GMT -8
Yes, you are right. I was focused on the financial aspects but forgot that they have the two years before they need to expand to eight teams. So two years it is. We should have a pretty good idea of which way things are going by summer of '25 because MWC teams need to give a year's notice just to keep the buyout to 17 million bucks. They don't need to give notice to let the deal expire in '26. In '25 they can vote as a conference to let the deal to expire or can begin the deal for a reverse merger and new media deal. Who knows |
|
|
|
Post by seastape on Jan 5, 2024 20:34:34 GMT -8
Still the same fight on this board as to whether OSU joins another Power 4 or does the reverse merger with the MWC. I think that discussion is over for now, at least in Barnes' mind: "...we have a landing spot that is a really good fit for us right now. It’s super important in the short term. We’re thankful for that. The other option, we continue to talk about. But it’s important to keep the (Pac-12) brand and keep the assets." Of course Barnes is keeping his options open for whatever may arise. That much is clear, but he also thinks OSU is in a good spot right now, at least for the short run. My favorite part and the most relevant part of the article/interview is this: "Q: We have a sense as to what the next two years – 2024-25, 2025-26 – look like. What about 2026-27? Barnes: I think we have to have a pulse. You have to be thinking about what may transpire, like different media contracts and movement in the industry. You have to have your eye on that while you’re taking care of the next two years. Prior to Christmas, we got everything we wanted done. Now we have a lot more to do, including in January two priorities. Media agreements and bowl agreements for next year. We’re working on those. Right now, we’re working on getting ‘24 settled, but you’re also thinking longer term. Q: When you say media for next year, is that the home football games? Barnes: Not just football, but everything we have. We have our rights for all home football games, but also our other sports, what we’re doing with the WCC inside and out. What opportunities the Pac-12 Network holds in the future. All those things. Q: Will you have some finality about media for 2024-25 in January? Barnes: I don’t know that we’ll have anything codified in January. We’ve already started, but after the holidays, we’ll start to get some of the answers in terms of what our go-forth plan is, with football driving the circumstances. I don’t know that we’ll get it done in January, but certainly we want to be way down the road. Q: What are options for bowls in 2024 and 2025? Barnes: We currently hold all the current (Pac-12) contracts, and there are two years left on this contract. We’re starting to have conversations, on what priorities we will have, and a pecking order, and what those agreements could look like, coupled with the expansion of the CFP. Q: If Oregon State wins at least six games next season, there will be a bowl somewhere? Barnes: Yes, absolutely." The bold emphasis is mine. It stuns me how little OSU's short-term media rights and bowl tie-ins are discussed on this board. I've always assumed that Barnes (along with WSU's representation) is working at getting media deals going, but it's good to see comments directly from Barnes regarding the issue, with an emphasis on a desire to get media coverage for a lot of sports, not just football. That is good news, as is the news of bowl tie-ins. I am still curious as to how the bowls will work out. It is obvious that the Pac-2 can maintain their contract with only two bowls (absent a very creative solution), and one likely cannot be the LA Bowl. But which two bowls? Alamo Las Vegas Holiday Sun Independence I have thought it was doubtful that the Pac-2 will be able to keep the Alamo Bowl. That berth will likely go to a different Power Four Conference, and I would be mildly shocked if it was not the SEC. But it would be great if the Las Vegas and Holiday Bowls stuck around, maybe forming a joint Mountain West - Pac-2 bowl alliance. That said, I am concerned that the Las Vegas Bowl may just become another Big Ten v. SEC bowl. Hopefully, though, the Pac-2 and Mountain West will join together and do a joint bowl agreement that includes the Las Vegas, Holiday, Sun, and Independence Bowls. My top two choices would be the Las Vegas and the Holiday Bowls. No brainer. I could definitely see the Las Vegas Bowl going big time, SEC, big 10, or even Big 12. There's a pro stadium now I would bet that a lot of fans from all over the country would love to go to a bowl in America's Playground for a bowl. The Sun Bowl would be last on my list. I am sick of the Sun Bowl. I know we've only played in it 3 times, but the last two times it was definitely a consolation prize when greater expectations weren't realized. Plus it's in El Paso. This year: Started off strong, looking good, then the WSU game...hopefully it was a blip against a good team...then Arizona with still UW and UO to go...lost both. 8-4/5-4, tied for 4th with SC and Utah, who were also 8-4/5-4. We got the Sun Bowl. SC got the Holiday, Utah the Las Vegas, and we got the worst of the three. Nowhere near a New Years 6 or even the third place bowl. The Sun. Interestingly enough, all three 4th place teams lost their bowl games. 2008: Started ugly: we blow the season opener at Stanford, who finished 5-7/4-5 then got rolled by Penn St. But we finished the regular season strong at 8-4/7-2 including another great win over SC. We lost the last game against UO in Corvallis, tying Oregon for 2nd with SC finishing first. A win over Oregon would have got us the Rose Bowl. People blamed the Oregon game for that but I blamed the Stanford game as, it seemed like once again, Mike Riley's OSU team was not prepared for the season opener. We beat Stanford and we're in the Rose Bowl. Sun Bowl. OSU 3, Pitt 0 in the most boring football game in Division I bowl history. 2006: That was actually a good Sun Bowl after a good year. Back then, third place in the Pac 10 got you to the Sun Bowl. 10-4/6-3, OSU's first 10-win season since the Fiesta Bowl that featured a great win over SC. An excellent year for Matt Moore. The Sun Bowl was one of the greatest bowl games in modern OSU history, a 1-point win over Mizzou when Riley made a "good" gamble and went for two for the win with no time left on the clock. I would bet a chunk of money that there are people on the Missouri boards who insist that Bernard never made it in the endzone. Helluva game. |
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Jan 5, 2024 21:33:37 GMT -8
We should have a pretty good idea of which way things are going by summer of '25 because MWC teams need to give a year's notice just to keep the buyout to 17 million bucks. They don't need to give notice to let the deal expire in '26. In '25 they can vote as a conference to let the deal to expire or can begin the deal for a reverse merger and new media deal. Who knows If the intent by the Pac-2 is to take 6-7 teams, there may not be the votes to let it expire. Why would the remaining teams do so? My thinking is, if everyone wants the reverse merger, they could quietly have an agreement in principle by 10 am or so tomorrow morning and start looking for a new media deal before making it official. Asking only a portion of the teams to is likely why it takes a year and there would be buyouts. The only ways I see no buyouts is take them all, which they could do right now, or set those who would be left behind up with replacement schools so the MWC remains whole. |
|
|
|
Post by rgeorge on Jan 5, 2024 22:22:15 GMT -8
They don't need to give notice to let the deal expire in '26. In '25 they can vote as a conference to let the deal to expire or can begin the deal for a reverse merger and new media deal. Who knows If the intent by the Pac-2 is to take 6-7 teams, there may not be the votes to let it expire. Why would the remaining teams do so? My thinking is, if everyone wants the reverse merger, they could quietly have an agreement in principle by 10 am or so tomorrow morning and start looking for a new media deal before making it official. Asking only a portion of the teams to is likely why it takes a year and there would be buyouts. The only ways I see no buyouts is take them all, which they could do right now, or set those who would be left behind up with replacement schools so the MWC remains whole. Why would we destroy a conference? OSU isn't getting 6-7 teams to do anything different without a media deal. And, there will be no media deal that's that different with the top 6-7, over the entire MWC. In fact the entire league offers a better media base. The current agreement could in fact be because they are working on a media deal(s) and needed a schedule set. Said MWC agreement could be part of the transition giving both parties time and an "out" if need be. It gives a year of games to give a media partner(s) some real data. Whatever happens I'm going to interpret Barnes and Murthy's words as there will be a Pac2+. Meaning the ACC and B12 talks are about future NC ties in every sport. To me that means media deal + MWC in some form. |
|
