• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Conference Expansion: Stanford, California and SMU Join the ACC

ironwill24 said:
I'll never understand the logic of someone who respectfully disagrees with me becoming the worst person ever but I guess that's where we are now in 2024
Click to expand...
LOL. I don't think you understand the meme. They were already the worst person in the world. Then they made a good point.
 
PhDeac said:
LOL. I don't think you understand the meme. They were already the worst person in the world. Then they made a good point.
Click to expand...
No I understood that. I just don't understand how someone is the worst person in the world simply because of ideological differences.
 
What’s “ideological” to you is someone else’s basic human rights. I’m not talking about arguments about the Laffer curve or actual ideological arguments. I’m talking about the right to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. People trying to control your body or deny you basic protections that other citizens have are “the worst” even if you agree on relatively minor things like which college sports teams should play each other.

Just consider someone else’s perspective.
 
PhDeac said:
What’s “ideological” to you is someone else’s basic human rights. I’m not talking about arguments about the Laffer curve or actual ideological arguments. I’m talking about the right to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. People trying to control your body or deny you basic protections that other citizens have are “the worst” even if you agree on relatively minor things like which college sports teams should play each other.

Just consider someone else’s perspective.
Click to expand...
But on the other side they would consider a 24 week fetus as a living being that is being denied basic protections in certain states.... So using that logic you are now "the worst" for believing what you believe. This seems like a quick and dangerous road to Tribalism.
 
And maybe I'm just being overly sensitive and obviously it was hyperbole, but having had relatives killed by a communist dictator, it was always the practice of using ideological differences to label your opponent "the worst" or "evil" that scares me a little bit that we are headed to that same tribalistic mentality. They used the same excuse that if you didn't believe in communism and it's "basic human rights" it espoused then you were an undesirable to be robbed and destroyed.
 
You should hear some of the dehumanizing your side uses. That's why they're the worst. They're the wannabe dictators.
 
ironwill24 said:
But on the other side they would consider a 24 week fetus as a living being that is being denied basic protections in certain states.... So using that logic you are now "the worst" for believing what you believe. This seems like a quick and dangerous road to Tribalism.
Click to expand...

There's a board for this shit.
 
I quoted a line from this Ross Dellenger article from Yahoo Sports several days ago, but it's worth going back and reviewing the whole article. The subject is the negotiations that resulted in the new CFP 12 team format and the uneven revenue split among the conferences (some conferences are more equal than others 😄).

While the ACC and each of its member teams will get more money than they got under the old CFP 4-team format, the B1G and SEC will get a lot more than the ACC and the Big 12. I guess Dr. Jim Phillips, PhD (in education 🙄), is not a great negotiator (except of course when it comes to his own salary-$2.4M-and his preferred location for his office-Charlotte).

As the article reveals, the ACC could have had a better deal in 2022 when the negotiations for expanding the CFP first took place, but Phillips helped kill the proposed expansion. Two years later, he had to take what the B1G and SEC were willing to give him.

sports.yahoo.com

How the new College Football Playoff format came to be and what it means for the sport's future

"The rich are getting richer, and the poor get poorer." A look inside the heated negotiations over the latest CFP deal, and the unstable landscape that lies ahead.
sports.yahoo.com sports.yahoo.com

In January of 2022, inside a convention hall within the JW Marriott hotel in downtown Indianapolis, the sport’s most powerful leaders gathered to vote on expanding the College Football Playoff.

Seven months of quibbling over an expansion format had finally led them to this pivotal moment. On the morning of Georgia’s eventual win over Alabama in the national championship game, they met in an effort to finalize a 12-team postseason. Instead, disagreements continued as three conferences — the Big Ten, ACC and Pac-12, members of the now-infamous “Alliance” — pushed back against the proposal.

At some point, as discussions grew heated, then-Big 12 commissioner Bob Bowlsby, frustrated and exhausted of the indecision, slowly packed his bag and began to rise from the table.

“The meeting isn’t over,” someone told him.

“It is for me,” he shot back.

What happened that day still lingers across college athletics.

Last month, more than two years later, commissioners agreed on a new CFP structure featuring an uneven revenue distribution model that is likely to have long-term financial impacts on the industry. The revenue model — a combined 58% of CFP cash flowing to two conferences, the SEC and Big Ten — presents adverse budgetary impacts for the other 99 programs in the Football Bowl Subdivision and grows the gap between them and the sport’s two giants.

But could this have been avoided if a decision were made in 2022?

“Our inability to conclude a deal two-plus years ago had a pretty significant impact on where the financials ended up,” said MAC commissioner Jon Steinbrecher, a leading voice in college sports who often chairs the CFP commissioner meetings. “What was on the table in 2022 was simply different. The delay opened the door for continuing changes to where we ended up.”

After the Pac-12’s collapse, the swelling of other leagues and increasing pressures of athlete revenue sharing, the sport’s two juggernaut conferences negotiated a one-sided deal, in part, by using a lingering belief that they would abandon all others to form their own postseason.

Would the SEC have really taken its proverbial ball and left the CFP?

“Absolutely,” SEC commissioner Greg Sankey told Yahoo Sports. “When we ended that set of meetings in January 2022 without a decision, I was clear: If you are going to walk away from this opportunity, we are going to reevaluate our position on format, revenue sharing and governance.

“People called me [after the latest deal] and said, ‘Why did you take a hard line? Why did you put us in this position?’ I said, ‘You guys walked away from the deal.’”

Yahoo Sports spoke to more than two dozen stakeholders across the industry — some directly involved in the negotiations — to learn more about how the CFP’s new structure came together (and nearly fell apart), its long-term impacts on college sports and an inevitability on the horizon: a vastly different “super league” than the one recently circulated...
Click to expand...
 
Phillips makes $2.4M? I guess the amount makes sense compared to coaches but he’s done nothing to justify that amount.
 
PhDeac said:
Phillips makes $2.4M? I guess the amount makes sense compared to coaches but he’s done nothing to justify that amount.
Click to expand...
Damn straight on that!! He needs to be planning his next move three months ago.
 
Kinda weird that on the one hand Clemson seems anxious to bail on the ACC, while in vturn Dabo is reluctant to heavily play in the transfer portal which pretty much equates with NIL and the further division of the haves from the have-nots. Reminds me of K being late to the inevitability of recruiting one-and-dones
 
AD Currie recently announced a $100M fund raising campaign to support women's sports teams at WFU.

He might want to think about another fund raising scheme to pay the tens of millions of dollars that Wake might have to contribute to any settlement of the House antitrust case. Maybe he could get each one of Wake's 2.7 millions fans to contribute $10 each.

www.espn.com

Sources: NCAA in talks to settle NIL antitrust case

The leaders of college sports are involved in "deep discussions" to reach a legal settlement that would likely lay out the framework for sharing revenue with athletes in a future NCAA business model, sources told ESPN.
www.espn.com www.espn.com

The leaders of college sports are involved in "deep discussions" to reach a legal settlement that would likely lay out the framework for sharing revenue with athletes in a future NCAA business model, sources told ESPN.

The NCAA and its power conferences are defendants in an antitrust class action lawsuit, House v. NCAA, which argues that the association is breaking federal law by placing any restrictions on how athletes make money from selling the rights to their name, image or likeness. The case is scheduled to go to court in January 2025. If the plaintiffs win at trial, the NCAA and its schools could be liable to pay more than $4 billion in damages, which has motivated many leaders across the industry to seek a settlement.

Sources indicated that a turning point in the discussions, which have been ongoing, came last week in the Dallas area, where the power conference commissioners, their general counsels, NCAA president Charlie Baker, NCAA lawyers and the plaintiffs' attorneys met. (They chose the Dallas area because they were already there for the College Football Playoff meetings, which were held in that area last week.)

While sources stressed that no deal is imminent, details about what a multibillion-dollar settlement could look like are expected to be shared with campuses in the near future. There are myriad variables to get to the finish line and still some obstacles and objections at the campus level, but sources indicate that progress has ramped up in recent weeks.

A settlement would provide some legal relief for a college sports industry that's been peppered by lawsuits. It could also serve as a keystone piece to formulating a more stable future. With the settlement expected to cost billions in back pay for former athletes, it would likely also require the NCAA and conferences to agree to a system for sharing more revenue with some of the players moving forward.

Sources indicated the top-end revenue share number per school -- once it's determined -- would be in the neighborhood of $20 million annually, although that's yet to be settled. Whatever number is set by the settlement, individual schools will be able to opt in to share revenue up to that number with their student athletes at their discretion. (They could choose to share less, but not more.)...
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top