***OFFICIAL BIG 12 EXPANSION THREAD 2.0***

[Wesley]

Prepare: Expansion Imminent

Believe it. They want a fresh start in a new conference and they've indicated to the Big 12 that if offered, they'd accept. My guess is: Miami, Fla. St., Clemson, Ga. Tech, Va Tech and NC State.

And then there was this:
http://www.baylorfans.com/forums/showthread.php?t=251882

Your ideal Big XII?

BYU
ISU
Iowa
KU
KSU
Mizz
Neb
ND

A&M
Ark
BU
LSU
OU
OSU
TT
UT
​

http://www.digtriad.com/assetpool/documents/121127034238_acc-vs-umd.pdf

Originally Posted by Baylor187

Baylor Lawyer here. Basically these are the pleadings filed by the ACC against Maryland. This is essentially the ACC stating that UM is refusing to pay the full amount of the exit fee which thereby gives the ACC grounds to seek a judgment from the court that orders UM to pay the exit fee. Keep in mind that you can pretty much allege anything in your pleadings, but this appears to be pretty accurate factually.

The problem the ACC is going to have is that you generally cannot contract for liquidated damages (ie, predetermined damages) that are punitive (ie, punishing/deterrent) in nature, and there is a very good chance the court (or the court of appeals) will rule that this provision of the ACC bylaws are unenforceable.

To give you an example, say you sign an apartment lease for two years but you want to break the lease after only one year. A lease is a contract, and breaking the lease is essentially a breach of contract. The lease can assess a penalty , such as charging a couple of months rent to offset the cost of having to find another renter. These are referred to as "liquidated damages." However, if the land lord tried to ***** 3 years worth of rent as a penalty for breaking a lease one year early, its very unlikely such a provision would ever be enforced by the court. There has to be some reasonable correlation between the financial loss of the breach and the amount of liquidated damages in the contract.

Here, it is pretty clear that the +50 mil exit fee is intended to serve as a deterrent to keep teams from leaving the ACC and is not for the purpose of compensating the conference for the expenses incurred in finding a replacement member. The ACC has to be careful here. A court could strike down the provision entirely which would allow schools to get out of the ACC by only paying the amount of the actual amount of $ incurred by the ACC in the defection. With UConn waiting in the wings and the TV contract already in place, that number could be relatively low.

*disclaimer - My primary area of expertise is not contract law.
Another Baylor lawyer checking in. This is a pretty accurate description of the basic concepts surrounding liquidated damages clauses. The only thing that I would add is that the "reasonableness" of the liquidated damages clause is not based on the actual harm that did happen. As mentioned above, Maryland leaving the conference probably didn't do much, if any, actual harm to the remaining members of the ACC and the ACC itself. However, that doesn't matter as much for a liquidated damages clause. All that matters is that the amount of the liquidated damages clause be reasonable at the time that it is created. That's why the ACC put Paragraphs 22 and 23 in the Complaint. They are trying to show that the amount was reasonable based on the consistently changing landscape of college football, and they are showing that, historically (when the danger and potential harm was lower) the number was lower, but that things have changed and created the potential for more harm.

The critical facts are going to be:

1. Whether or not the ACC could have easily brought another school in to replace a leaving member (keep in mind, the timeframe we are working with is not when Maryland left and Louisville quickly stepped in but is actually when the exit fee was voted on and adopted). If it was pretty clear (at the time of the adoption of the exit fee) that the ACC would be able to cherry pick another roughly equivalent school to fill their roster if one of the schools left, then it's hard to argue that the ACC reasonably thought that they would suffer damages that are as significant enough to charge a school $52 mil to leave.

2. The value of the TV contract at the time the 3x OB exit fee was voted vs. the value of the TV contract the last time an exit fee was voted on (probably the 1.25x OB exit fee). If the number for the former is MUCH larger (disclosure, I don't know much about the ACC contract) than the latter, then it could easily be argued that the potential for harm dramatically increased and necessitated a larger liquidated damages clause. If, however, the numbers were the same or close to the same, it's very hard to argue that the potential harm increased dramatically. As an additional note, this would go for all revenue streams the ACC has, but I used the TV contract because it is probably one of the largest revenue streams, and possibly the one that changed the most in the timeframe (again, I do not know much about the specifics of the ACC TV contract).

There are probably some other factors that are critical, but off the top of my head, that's the basic stuff. If I have some time this weekend, I might be able to revisit this and flesh it out a little more.

 

[swarthmoreCY]

Don't forget rule number 1 about conference realignment: it is all about the money. We would add FSU and Clemson to the Big 12 if it makes us more money. It does that by adding more sexy matchups that TV networks are willing to pay big money for. Nobody is going to be willing to pay more for games with ACC and Big East leftovers. If games with those schools were worth any money, they wouldn't be leftover when the Big 12, B1G, and SEC expand. Plus, what motivation would we have to subsidize those programs left behind? We don't need to do that to appease FSU and Clemson. They don't have any leverage in this deal. They have to come on board if they want to stay relevant, they have nowhere else to go.

I am unsure how you are struggling with such a simple concept. You are connecting a scheduling alliance with the leftovers with impacting the new Big 12 TV payout. It would not. Not anymore than ISU's scheduling agreement with Iowa.

The Big 12 adds FSU and Clemson because the Big 12 needs to add top programs outside its footprint, and they are likely the only two we can get that do that and add more money. It is about the money. That is why instead of adding 4 more ACC teams to reach 16, the Big 12 stops at 12.

However, there will still be OOC games. Even you can understand that, right? Having a scheduling agreement with 1 of those games being against an ACC-Big East school brings more money and needed east exposure than games against FCS or MAC schools. The opportunity cost is minimal, and if it helps get FSU and Clemson make the first move, it makes sense to agree to it. Plus, you cannot being thinking only one move out. The Big 12's only chance at getting additional prime ACC schools, ones that also keep the $$/school number at least static, is to get FSU and Clemson first.

 

[Triggermv]

http://collegesportsinfo.com/conference-realignment-grid/

Updated 17 Jan 13.

This link isn't working for me.

 

[Wesley]

This link isn't working for me.

Try now. It finally worked again. It had a database error for a bit.

 

[aeroclone]

I am unsure how you are struggling with such a simple concept. You are connecting a scheduling alliance with the leftovers with impacting the new Big 12 TV payout. It would not. Not anymore than ISU's scheduling agreement with Iowa.

The Big 12 adds FSU and Clemson because the Big 12 needs to add top programs outside its footprint, and they are likely the only two we can get that do that and add more money. It is about the money. That is why instead of adding 4 more ACC teams to reach 16, the Big 12 stops at 12.

However, there will still be OOC games. Even you can understand that, right? Having a scheduling agreement with 1 of those games being against an ACC-Big East school brings more money and needed east exposure than games against FCS or MAC schools. The opportunity cost is minimal, and if it helps get FSU and Clemson make the first move, it makes sense to agree to it. Plus, you cannot being thinking only one move out. The Big 12's only chance at getting additional prime ACC schools, ones that also keep the $$/school number at least static, is to get FSU and Clemson first.

You are ignoring a couple key points in this scenario. Number 1 is that FSU and Clemson have no leverage. We don't have to do anything to convince them to make the move. If expansion continues, their league (which is already 5th in the pecking order) is going to crumble underneath their feet. The SEC and B1G aren't interested. To FSU and Clemson, the Big 12 is the last life boat on the Titanic.

Second, after all this shakes out, a scheduling agreement with the ACC adds no value because the future ACC won't be much better than the MAC. After all of this is done there will be the big 4 football conferences, and then everyone else. If we wanted to lock in a major scheduling deal with somebody, it would be one of the other three. A Big 12 vs SEC or Big 12 vs Pac 12 challenge would be way more beneficial to us than Big 12 vs remaining ACC/Big East schools that weren't good enough to get invited to the Big 12, B1G, or SEC.

 

[CyFan61]

Not from Chip Brown, that guy is connected.

Not sure if or not, but Chip Brown's the guy who declared the Big 12 100% dead... twice.

 

[UNIGuy4Cy]

Not sure if or not, but Chip Brown's the guy who declared the Big 12 100% dead... twice.

And it was done if not for last ditch efforts from the "Forgotten Five"

 

[CyFan61]

And it was done if not for last ditch efforts from the "Forgotten Five"

Not arguing with you, but the fact is that he's been really wrong multiple times before.

 

[swarthmoreCY]

1.)You are ignoring a couple key points in this scenario. Number 1 is that FSU and Clemson have no leverage. We don't have to do anything to convince them to make the move. If expansion continues, their league (which is already 5th in the pecking order) is going to crumble underneath their feet. The SEC and B1G aren't interested. To FSU and Clemson, the Big 12 is the last life boat on the Titanic.

2.)Second, after all this shakes out, a scheduling agreement with the ACC adds no value because the future ACC won't be much better than the MAC. After all of this is done there will be the big 4 football conferences, and then everyone else. If we wanted to lock in a major scheduling deal with somebody, it would be one of the other three. A Big 12 vs SEC or Big 12 vs Pac 12 challenge would be way more beneficial to us than Big 12 vs remaining ACC/Big East schools that weren't good enough to get invited to the Big 12, B1G, or SEC.

Man, oh man...

1.) First, they do have some leverage. It is better for the Big 12 they be the first moves- it gives the Big 12 a better chance of convincing other ACC schools they may want. No one exactly knows if the ACC will even be there to schedule- think of it as a negotiation ploy from the Big 12, if you must. Also, no is leverage is needed. We are giving them nothing. Instead of playing some FCS and MAC teams, we say we will play ACC-Big East teams one OOC game...

2.) Cinci, Louisville, Syracuse, BC, Miami, Wake, Pitt, UConn, South Florida, etc are still better than FCS and MAC games. The fact you suggested otherwise is incriminating to your critical thinking on this rumor. The deals with the 4 major conferences would be years away, and will be post-season based anyways. You are nuts if you think enticing FSU and Clemson to make the first jump with an early September weekend with the remaining ACC-Big East schools is costing the Big 12 anything.

 

[aeroclone]

Man, oh man...

1.) First, they do have some leverage. It is better for the Big 12 they be the first moves- it gives the Big 12 a better chance of convincing other ACC schools they may want. No one exactly knows if the ACC will even be there to schedule- think of it as a negotiation ploy from the Big 12, if you must. Also, no is leverage is needed. We are giving them nothing. Instead of playing some FCS and MAC teams, we say we will play ACC-Big East teams one OOC game...

2.) Cinci, Louisville, Syracuse, BC, Miami, Wake, Pitt, UConn, South Florida, etc are still better than FCS and MAC games. The fact you suggested otherwise is incriminating to your critical thinking on this rumor. The deals with the 4 major conferences would be years away, and will be post-season based anyways. You are nuts if you think enticing FSU and Clemson to make the first jump with an early September weekend with the remaining ACC-Big East schools is costing the Big 12 anything.

Why do we have to negotiate with any of them? If they are talking to us, they are coming to our league for a more money and better competition on the football field. We don't need to sweeten the pot by telling them they can keep playing BC or Wake. The fact that they are playing BC or Wake today is part of the reason they need to change conferences in the first place. When the B12, B1G, and SEC get done with the ACC it is going to be a steaming creator. At that point, we can pick up whoever we want. The offer is continued football relevance.

We are not going to be the first mover here. Any school that has reasonable hopes of an SEC or B1G invite is going to wait them out before they would come to the Big 12. The pecking order here is pretty clear.

Schools are going to continue to schedule how they schedule until something major changes in the post season to force their hand. Even if we get to 4 conferences, they will still play a couple punching bag games per year, maybe one top tier opponent, and then their league schedule. If they want to use one of those old ACC teams, great, but there would be no reason at all to put together a conference level agreement with them. Seriously, of those remaining teams, half of them were mid-majors like 10 years ago.

 

[kingcy]

There is a movement to 4 major conferences and it will happen sooner than later. Before any move is made TV networks have to be involved and part of it to make the money work. I also think not having a Big 12 network helps the Big 12. There are networks that are already in place. that wanting programing, like YES covering Big 12 games. The schools can provide their own network for thier fans, and games can be placed by the conference. There is no overhead costs of running a network, no start up costs, no relying on football to pay the bills for all the other programs.

 

[swarthmoreCY]

1.)Why do we have to negotiate with any of them? If they are talking to us, they are coming to our league for a more money and better competition on the football field. We don't need to sweeten the pot by telling them they can keep playing BC or Wake. The fact that they are playing BC or Wake today is part of the reason they need to change conferences in the first place. When the B12, B1G, and SEC get done with the ACC it is going to be a steaming creator. At that point, we can pick up whoever we want. The offer is continued football relevance.

2.)We are not going to be the first mover here. Any school that has reasonable hopes of an SEC or B1G invite is going to wait them out before they would come to the Big 12. The pecking order here is pretty clear.

3.)Schools are going to continue to schedule how they schedule until something major changes in the post season to force their hand. Even if we get to 4 conferences, they will still play a couple punching bag games per year, maybe one top tier opponent, and then their league schedule. If they want to use one of those old ACC teams, great, but there would be no reason at all to put together a conference level agreement with them. Seriously, of those remaining teams, half of them were mid-majors like 10 years ago.

1.) You are being silly if you think there are no negotiations. It is undeniably in the Big 12's best interest for FSU and Clemson to move first. There is a huge difference between playing a team once every several years (and likely to never play them) then being in an actual conference with them. Seriously.

2.)Again, the desire is to force or entice those that know they are not getting an SEC or BIG invites to move first, rather than wait. It is a game of chicken, and like you have said, the Big 12 has leverage. If the Big 12 only has two spots and can offer more money than the ACC, it is too risky for several of the ACC schools to not move first.

3.) A former mid-major is still a step up from MAC and FCS schools, there is no arguing otherwise. The Big 12 would benefit from some type of Big 12-ACC/Big East OOC agreement. Probably 2 for 1, maybe even 3 for 1, deals that are now given out to far worse programs than those.

 

[ShopTalk]

"And for your $200 question, will you take Miami, FSU, Clemson, and Virginia for national prestige if it meant you had $2M/yr less in your school coffers? "

I'm still waiting on Mr. Don Duck to tell me, I mean, advise me on what his, I mean the correct answer to this question is. The last thing I need is a duck scolding me for the wrong answer.

 

[Gorm]

Prepare: Expansion Imminent



And then there was this:
Your ideal Big XII?


http://www.digtriad.com/assetpool/documents/121127034238_acc-vs-umd.pdf

LOL At Baylor fans wanting to get rid of Iowa State. At Best they are the 5th most popular college in the state of Texas. If the Big 12 did break up, they wouldn't have a home, as the MWC would take Texas Tech and TCU and have the state of Texas Market covered.

 

[TXCyclones]

LOL At Baylor fans wanting to get rid of Iowa State. At Best they are the 5th most popular college in the state of Texas. If the Big 12 did break up, they wouldn't have a home, as the MWC would take Texas Tech and TCU and have the state of Texas Market covered.

He's an idiot, as many/most Texans are, and nobody bit on his comment. But I have to say, I LOVE this idea:

Full merger with the SEC.

Texas
Texas A&M
Baylor
TCU
Tech
LSU

Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
Kansas
Kansas State
Iowa State
Missouri

Arkansas
Ole Miss
Mississippi State
Alabama
Auburn
Florida

South Carolina
Georgia
Tennessee
Vanderbilt
Kentucky
West Virginia

4 6 team divisions. Play 5 of your division, plus one other division each year. Play everyone in 3 years, but it's an 11 game conference schedule. Imagine the football each week though. There would be at least 2-3 marquee games each weekend, plus with the inventory from football and other sports, the tier 3 network would look like ESPN most days. Also, every division (not to mention the entire conference) is contiguous, making it a real division/conference setup for travel purposes.

Imagine the money that each school would pull in in that setup. Basically own the most populated (and growing) section of the United States for college sports purposes. The years that our Pod plays the Arkansas/Alabama pod would be epic.​

This would be a football ratings powerhouse! **** the B1G! Damn that would be awesome!
​

 

[CyFan61]

LOL At Baylor fans wanting to get rid of Iowa State. At Best they are the 5th most popular college in the state of Texas. If the Big 12 did break up, they wouldn't have a home, as the MWC would take Texas Tech and TCU and have the state of Texas Market covered.

LOL is right.

If the Big 12 was going to kick a team out, there wouldn't even be a vote. The other 9 presidents would just slowly turn to look at Ken Starr in unison, who would immediately threaten to sue everyone before Bowlsby called security and Starr (and Baylor) was forcibly removed.

 

[aeroclone]

1.) You are being silly if you think there are no negotiations. It is undeniably in the Big 12's best interest for FSU and Clemson to move first. There is a huge difference between playing a team once every several years (and likely to never play them) then being in an actual conference with them. Seriously.

2.)Again, the desire is to force or entice those that know they are not getting an SEC or BIG invites to move first, rather than wait. It is a game of chicken, and like you have said, the Big 12 has leverage. If the Big 12 only has two spots and can offer more money than the ACC, it is too risky for several of the ACC schools to not move first.

3.) A former mid-major is still a step up from MAC and FCS schools, there is no arguing otherwise. The Big 12 would benefit from some type of Big 12-ACC/Big East OOC agreement. Probably 2 for 1, maybe even 3 for 1, deals that are now given out to far worse programs than those.

Why does the Big 12 need to move first? The reason that FSU and Clemson seem to keep getting tied up to the B12 is because nobody expects them to get an SEC of B1G invite. Whether they make the first move and jump to join us, or wait for the SEC and B1G to kill the league before they move, the end result for us is the same. For everyone else in the league worth a damn, they are going to be waiting on the SEC and B1G to move before they jump in with us. And whoever is left after an SEC and B1G expansion will be happy to join us no matter what we offer, because they will be left in a league that may not be much better than the MWC.

 

[KnappShack]

If we have learned anything it's that killing a conference is difficult. The Big 12 was DOA and somehow is thriving now. I can't see the ACC brand being wiped out. Weakened for sure, but something called the ACC will probably crawl out of the ashes.

The death of the ACC as we know it sucks. Duke, UNC, and NC State are on top of each of location wise. A lot of traditional rivalries on the chopping block again. The golden goose better watch it's ***. The ax is sharp and ready

 

[TXCyclones]

If we have learned anything it's that killing a conference is difficult. The Big 12 was DOA and somehow is thriving now. I can't see the ACC brand being wiped out. Weakened for sure, but something called the ACC will probably crawl out of the ashes.

The death of the ACC as we know it sucks. Duke, UNC, and NC State are on top of each of location wise. A lot of traditional rivalries on the chopping block again. The golden goose better watch it's ***. The ax is sharp and ready

You're right. Every time someone gets poached it just turns out that another smaller program gets called up to the bigs. And once they're at the table I don't think they're getting sent back down necessarily. And while each of these conferences thinks they're killing a smaller one it appears that they're simply diluting the power of teams overall and over the long haul. By adding more and more as teams get poached it simply puts more teams at the table and gives ESPN and Fox a larger inventory of teams to choose from. They've convinced SEC, B1G, PAC, etc that they need to scarf up the key names to add value for when the conference-ageddon does come, but in reality they're likely building up more minor teams into bigger teams by doing this. ESPN & Fox may be smarter than these idiot Conf Commissioners.

 

[swarthmoreCY]

Why does the Big 12 need to move first? The reason that FSU and Clemson seem to keep getting tied up to the B12 is because nobody expects them to get an SEC of B1G invite. Whether they make the first move and jump to join us, or wait for the SEC and B1G to kill the league before they move, the end result for us is the same. For everyone else in the league worth a damn, they are going to be waiting on the SEC and B1G to move before they jump in with us. And whoever is left after an SEC and B1G expansion will be happy to join us no matter what we offer, because they will be left in a league that may not be much better than the MWC.

This is really simple: the Big 12 needs to go to 12 in regards to the new post-season. The only schools that can be #11 and #12 in the current business model are rumored to be FSU, Miami, ND, and Clemson. Say a network is willing to pay $60 million for FSU and Miami or Clemson in the Big 12, plus cash for a CCG. Those schools respond that they will only come to the Big 12 if a block of ACC schools comes with. Clearly, under the current model, that will cost the Big 12 some money and is a no go. Next, you try a compromise with the win-win that is a OOC scheduling alliance.

Or, you could sit on your hands, do nothing as a conference, and hope other conferences pick apart the ACC prior to 2014, leave the Big 12 what it wants (and hopefully alone). The end result may be the same, or it may not be. You do what you can to get who you want to commit, successful or not. Your comment about FSU being tied to the Big 12 is yet another ignorant statement. There is no settling there. FSU has been tied to the Big 12 before the SEC and BIG were even thought to be a threat to the SEC. This has nothing to do with FSU's position with the BIG or SEC, and everything to do with the Big 12's business model. There are programs very much worth it to the Big 12 that are likely on the outside of the BIG or SEC, one of those being FSU.