Expansion/Realignment Talk Heating Up Again

[TN-Gamecock]

John Swofford...

The absolutely worse thing to ever happen to the ACC was John Swofford.

The Clemson and FSU folks despised him. He looked after UNC's best interests while commissioner.

There will never be another Commissioner of any conference where he/she was an athletic director of a member school.

 

[TN-Gamecock]

Yes Missouri touches Tennessee in the Northwest corner of the state.

 

[Harvard Gamecock]

Also, all of this is reads to me as the ACC gets the rights to the teams that leave the conference. If I was wanting to get out of it, I would disband the ACC, and there wouldn't be a conference to claim those rights. But you would probably need a majority of the teams to do that. And they would need to each know they had a landing spot before they pulled that trigger.

 

[KingWard]

It ain't enough; call later! https://www.espn.com/college-sports...c-pac-12-report-record-revenue-2021-22-season

 

[Mauze1]

Actually, they were against McGuire's violating the spirit of the 800 rule. He found a loophole in recruiting Grosso which arch-enemy Eddie Cameron despised. Again, the ACC had nothing against USC per se; USC was in the cross-fire of a feud between Cameron and McGuire which went back to McGuire's days at UnCarolina. Up until USC won the 1971 ACC tournament, the only non-big-4 school to win it was Maryland in 1958 (the year after McGuire's Tar Holes won the national title). I haven't read anything about the ACC or the big-4 having it in for Maryland post-1958.

Had it been left up to McGuire, USC would never have left the ACC. GCJerryUSC, you are, however, spot-on re: Dietzel.

And that is what I have always thought. It was more Dietzel than McGuire. Cameron was rumored to have given verbal permission for 2 non-qualifying (under 800 SAT) football players. Then he saw that the two players were the top two player in the country, and changed his mind. The two players were Freddie Solomon and Issac Jackson. Freddie went to the University of Tampa and became a star in the NFL with the 49er’s. Jackson went to Kansas State and had multiple injuries, but he still player a great deal of college ball. Not sure about pro.

 

[Lurker123]

I attribute any and all legal acumen (or lack thereof) to hours of watching Law and Order.

 

[Psycock]

The SEC does not "need" to do anything. There is no reason for the SEC to save the ACC teams from going elsewhere. Who gives a flip if Clemson or FSU ends up in the Big 10 or wherever - just not the SEC. The worst the ACC teams do, i.e. Clemson, FSU, Louisville, Ga. Tech(not so much) the better for the SEC teams. Let all of them go elsewhere and/or wither and die. The last thing in the world we need to do is take away the biggest advantage we have over them - playing in the SEC. I would rather stop playing them, if needed, than see them reap the financial windfall that is, and will be even more, belonging to the SEC. Big 10 money? Let them have it. They don`t want to be in any league other than where they are now or the SEC - don`t let them fool anyone.

 

[Lurker123]

The SEC does not "need" to do anything. There is no reason for the SEC to save the ACC teams from going elsewhere.

I don't think anyone thinks that the SEC is going to do anything to "save" anyone. If we expand, it's because the conference thinks it'll be worth it monetarily.

 

[Harvard Gamecock]

I don't think anyone thinks that the SEC is going to do anything to "save" anyone. If we expand, it's because the conference thinks it'll be worth it monetarily.

 

[Thunderstick]

This. Clemson and FSU would not be pursuing unequal revenue sharing, which still won't bring them up to SEC money, if they had any other options.

UNC has one of the best law schools in the nation. They can't find a way out.

I do not believe UNC's law school is that prestigious...see the most recent ranking by US News & World Report: https://www.usnews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-law-schools/law-rankings

There are three SEC law schools (Vandy, UGA and UF) ranked higher (or tied) than UNC's. Duke and UVA are also rated higher.

Don't mean to be nit-picking here but I will do almost anything to refute those arrogant bastards' claims of superiority.

 

[atl-cock]

Missouri touches Arkansas also, does it not, and Tennessee?

Georgia Tech left because the SEC was athletically too tough and academically too soft. They didn't like it when an Alabama boy kicked one of their players in the head.

They are probably less stringent academically than they were but now they are less desirable. Bobby Dodd ain't over there anymore.

Tulane, in my lifetime at least, has never been more as an SEC member than an easy in-state rival for LSU, about as Vandy is to Tennessee. The league doesn't need another rivalry of that kind.

My reading of Tech secession was officially, the "140 rule" the total number of football and basketball players one could have on scholarship. SEC schools (schools, not teams) would "overrecruit" and "cut" football players late in the summer, too late to find a spot on a team at another school. Dodd despised that, feeling that outside of egregious behaviour by a player (and sadly, we see far too much of that today), you recruit 'em, you keep 'em on scholly for the four years.

The above is pretty much the official line of Tech's SEC departure, as our official ACC departure was pushing for lower academic standards (shame on us).

Tech was competing well enough in the SEC. Though not officially stated, I would not be surprised if the Darwin Holt hit on Chick Graning played a role in the departure, although likely not the straw that broke it. Dodd also talked about wanting to play a more national schedule.

But my point is that if you consider your league to be regional, you don't expand the footprint.

 

[KingWard]

My reading of Tech secession was officially, the "140 rule" the total number of football and basketball players one could have on scholarship. SEC schools (schools, not teams) would "overrecruit" and "cut" football players late in the summer, too late to find a spot on a team at another school. Dodd despised that, feeling that outside of egregious behaviour by a player (and sadly, we see far too much of that today), you recruit 'em, you keep 'em on scholly for the four years.

The above is pretty much the official line of Tech's SEC departure, as our official ACC departure was pushing for lower academic standards (shame on us).

Tech was competing well enough in the SEC. Though not officially stated, I would not be surprised if the Darwin Holt hit on Chick Graning played a role in the departure, although likely not the straw that broke it. Dodd also talked about wanting to play a more national schedule.

But my point is that if you consider your league to be regional, you don't expand the footprint.

When Bear Bryant's multi-installment ghost-written article, "I'll Tell You About Football", was published in Sports Illustrated decades ago (first installment - Aug. 15, 1966), Bryant mentioned something about a Tech accusation that one of his players had hit a Tech player in the head. [I possibly misremembered the verbiage as "kicked".] Anyhow, the incident brought rain.

There was also a reference a picture of him coming out onto Grant Field wearing a football helmet in case a liquor bottle was thrown - apparently something that had happened before.



Also mentioned was that, during the years just prior, teams were playing one-platoon football and that was going away. He considered that as a loss of competitive advantage because his teams were so well conditioned and tough.

He averred that teams like Georgia Tech who didn't hit in practice once the season started and played volleyball for fun and conditioning during practice time wouldn't have to work as hard to compete as they had in the past and he decried that.

I got the feeling that he had a measure of contempt for Tech and for Dodd's philosophy. I'm certain the feeling was not concealed.

 

[Rogue Cock]

No lawyer, but I think that's why the 8 team number is so important. it changes the conversation from teams leaving the conference to the conference dissolving. (Or insert another term)

I never read anything concrete, but I read so many people who seem confident the gor is a hurdle, but not an insurmountable one.

This was on the Insider Forum....gives a pretty good explanation regarding all the choices the ACC schools have.

 

[Rogue Cock]

I don't see how they can redistribute the revenue in a way that closes the gap between the top ACC schools and their SEC/Big 10 counterparts without absolutely kneecapping some of the other schools. That's just me. The difference in ACC money is just too great.

It only increases the revenue of the teams that make the CFP as they keep a larger share of the playoff money It will not be near enough to match the SEC and B1G payouts.

 

[Rogue Cock]

There was not a feeling of pressing "need" to leave the ACC until lately. There was dissatisfaction with the contract, but not until the newest numbers that are being discussed by the B1G and SEC that a sense of change was needed. (@18IsTheMan made a good point on this thought on post #66).
3 schools (FSU, Clemson ,Miami) just made the initial push for change, and now have 4 (5) other schools that have aligned themselves for the same. If you happen to pick up on the comments by the AD's of the initial 3, there was a not so veiled message, (and I'm paraphrasing), we're committed "for now"
You should not expect any imminent movement, but you should not expect a status quo for a prolonged period either.

Some discussion that the SEC and B1G are taking different tactics. SEC is looking more at "brands" and matchups due to streaming and are looking at FSU and Clemson....with Miami as a third possibility and thus securing their existing footprint. The B1G is looking a new territory and population and encompassing and expanding their existing footprint and are looking to bring in Oregon and Washington, obviously, and then eastward for UNC and UVA (if they can get out of the GOR). UNC and UVA are supposedly interested in the B1G because of the BTAA research money and academic prestige. The new head of the B1G is Tony Petitti, a big media/maketing executive.

 

[Rogue Cock]

Some of our fans are delusional in thinking that Clemson is going to get left out in the cold in the realignment arms race. It just isn't going to happen. They are too much of a football commodity. The WILL end up somewhere, if not the SEC, then the Big 10. So, either way, they are going to end up getting paid. It benefits us more to have them in the SEC.

I don't know how any of this happens with the GOR, but there is too much sporadic noise about it for it to not eventually happen.

Clemson and FSU are limited to the SEC or the Big 12, neither qualify for the B1G.,,,and from I've read on B1G sites there would be an all out riot if they ever did change their standards.

 

[Harvard Gamecock]

Some discussion that the SEC and B1G are taking different tactics. SEC is looking more at "brands" and matchups due to streaming and are looking at FSU and Clemson....with Miami as a third possibility and thus securing their existing footprint. The B1G is looking a new territory and population and encompassing and expanding their existing footprint and are looking to bring in Oregon and Washington, obviously, and then eastward for UNC and UVA (if they can get out of the GOR). UNC and UVA are supposedly interested in the B1G because of the BTAA research money and academic prestige. The new head of the B1G is Tony Petitti, a big media/maketing executive.

I have heard similar but with a twist. B1G looking eastward before taking the schools out west. Also, B1G would make a move of 4 schools. Some names but not limited to, UNC, UVA, Miami and 1 other. The thinking that the B1G would make a new footprint, particularly in Florida. Big market with a very big alumni population in Florida.
FSU and Clemson most likely to SEC.
There may one big surprise that no one has yet to think of in terms of conference and schools, that may indeed be the catalyst to the next realignment moves.

Side note; There appears to be 2 camps, Matchups vs Streaming that will decide who goes where. Well, both can be true at once. Although more games will be streaming vs CATV, basically one is going from one platform to another but still delivering the same basic content, which a customer will pay for that app/channel.

 

[Lurker123]

This was on the Insider Forum....gives a pretty good explanation regarding all the choices the ACC schools have.

Interesting read, thanks. One comment I found interesting (that was not on topic) was this increase in money being used for NIL deals. On the surface, I thought that was illegal. But we all know how that stops people.

 

[Lurker123]

Clemson and FSU are limited to the SEC or the Big 12, neither qualify for the B1G.,,,and from I've read on B1G sites there would be an all out riot if they ever did change their standards.

I had a link sent to me for something called an Elevate initiative or something at Clemson. In it, it states they are pushing for AAU membership in the next decade.

Not sure if that's something every school puts as a target though.

 

[Harvard Gamecock]

Clemson and FSU are limited to the SEC or the Big 12, neither qualify for the B1G.,,,and from I've read on B1G sites there would be an all out riot if they ever did change their standards.

It's no secret the B1G wants to expand into Florida (smart business move), but keeping it's academic requirements.

With that said, the following may prove to interesting, and an item to consider:

While all of these universities would like to be in the AAU, only a few are viable. AAU considers research scholarship, university prestige, research funding, university ranking, etc. Also, one criteria is having a strong medical school.
the following four universities are likely to be invited to AAU in the next 10 years:

Boston College
Georgetown University
George Washington University
University of Miami (U. Miami medical school ranked #43)

https://www.econjobrumors.com/topic/predicting-the-next-aau-members
https://physician-news.umiamihealth...s-world-reports-best-medical-school-rankings/

 

[KingWard]

Interesting read, thanks. One comment I found interesting (that was not on topic) was this increase in money being used for NIL deals. On the surface, I thought that was illegal. But we all know how that stops people.

You got the "illegal" part right. It definitely is and I think will be.

 

[Rogue Cock]

I had a link sent to me for something called an Elevate initiative or something at Clemson. In it, it states they are pushing for AAU membership in the next decade.

Not sure if that's something every school puts as a target though.

That was what Dr. Palms was striving to attain when he was President here. Lots of hurdles from what I have understood. Would be surprised if Clemson could attain it.

It's no secret the B1G wants to expand into Florida (smart business move), but keeping it's academic requirements.

With that said, the following may prove to interesting, and an item to consider:

While all of these universities would like to be in the AAU, only a few are viable. AAU considers research scholarship, university prestige, research funding, university ranking, etc. Also, one criteria is having a strong medical school.
the following four universities are likely to be invited to AAU in the next 10 years:

Boston College
Georgetown University
George Washington University
University of Miami (U. Miami medical school ranked #43)

https://www.econjobrumors.com/topic/predicting-the-next-aau-members
https://physician-news.umiamihealth...s-world-reports-best-medical-school-rankings/

Interesting....I haven't seen that. However I wonder if the fact that Miami's Medical School isn't on campus will hurt them in their application. Reportedly that was one of the 2 main reasons that Nebraska lost their AAU status (there medical school is in Omaha)....the other was that most of their large research was in agreiculture which has been of lower importance more recently.

 

[Harvard Gamecock]

That was what Dr. Palms was striving to attain when he was President here. Lots of hurdles from what I have understood. Would be surprised if Clemson could attain it.

Interesting....I haven't seen that. However I wonder if the fact that Miami's Medical School isn't on campus will hurt them in their application. Reportedly that was one of the 2 main reasons that Nebraska lost their AAU status (there medical school is in Omaha)....the other was that most of their large research was in agreiculture which has been of lower importance more recently.

The Medical School is not technically on the main campus, but the Miller School of Medicine is considered its own campus.
The distance is about 9 miles.

 

[TN-Gamecock]

This from the B1G Nebraska camp:

Shatel: NU President Ted Carter: 'Big changes', more realignment coming to college football (omaha.com)

 

[TN-Gamecock]

This from ACC Athletic Directors Meeting:

Greg: ACC Viability Returns to Forefront (247sports.com)

 

[Deleted11512]

This from ACC Athletic Directors Meeting:

Greg: ACC Viability Returns to Forefront (247sports.com)

Good stuff. This writer noted the GOR as "ironclad". And it sounds like it is. There are a couple of things to consider that haven't gotten too much attention:

1. The ADs don't get a vote. It's not their decision. They can complain, argue, cry, convince, etc...but the presidents (who got them into this stupid deal) are the ones that will ultimately decide what is acceptable. The AD will either have to live with that or find another job. Dissolve the conference will 100% result in a massive litigation, that will divert $$ and resources away from what the presidents would rather be doing. Football is a side hustle. The Clem president is concerned with getting into the Association of American Universities. He's trying to nail down research funding. The LAST thing he wants is a 3 year lawsuit that gets in the way of that. If you think any of these Presidents would put football ahead of academia you are mistaken. And there is waaaay too much risk in blowing it up. Remember, Jimbo left FSU b/c they didn't care about the football program.

2. ESPN will have a say as well. They love this deal. There is no way they're going to just stand by and let it fail, which could result in losing media rights to Fox. At the least, they would have to pay more for some teams than they're currently paying. So the institutions that try to blow it up will not only be hit with lawsuits from the ACC, but also ESPN. It would be very ugly. This would also probably prevent other conferences from adding them. Who wants to sign up for that?? When Maryland left the GOR wasn't created yet. So it was just an exit fee that was litigated, and B10 didn't care about that. But when the rights to televise games are hindered, it's a whole new ballgame.

So, either do nothing and just make less money. Or go nuclear and risk blowing through millions, and still be stuck with less money. My guess is they're just going to continue applying maximum pressure to keep getting more $$ in the unequal share model.

 

[Prestonyte]

ACC approves new revenue distribution model

The ACC board of directors endorsed a new revenue distribution model Wednesday that will reward success based on postseason performance.

www.espn.com

 

[Deleted11512]

I'm going to quote myself from post #10. "It is problematic, but not insurmountable."

Side note: It could be crippling for one or 2 schools HOWEVER,
Should 8 schools leave en masse, the dissolution of the ACC would be imminent, therefore any contracts would be to an entity that no longer exists.

Maryland left early, and did not pay nearly the amount of the exit fee that was in place at the time.

When Maryland left they didn’t have a GOR deal either. It was just an exit fee. The GOR complicates things immensely bc now ESPN is involved. And you can bet your *** they’re going to do everything legally possible to keep them together for the term.

 

[18IsTheMan]

When Maryland left they didn’t have a GOR deal either. It was just an exit fee. The GOR complicates things immensely bc now ESPN is involved. And you can beat your *** they’re going to do everything legally possible to keep them together for the term.

Yeah, ESPN does not want to lose teams to the Big 10 since they have a TV rights with ESPN's rivals.

 

[TN-Gamecock]

If i'm not mistaken Nebraska is not in the AAU. The AAU may be prestigious but there are schools in the association that are not ranked high in the US News and World Report as we are. UGA is ranked high but not in the AAU. It would be nice to get into the AAU.

 

[Deleted11512]

If i'm not mistaken Nebraska is not in the AAU. The AAU may be prestigious but there are schools in the association that are not ranked high in the US News and World Report as we are. UGA is ranked high but not in the AAU. It would be nice to get into the AAU.

The were in until 2011. So maybe that's how they rationalized it? They're the only B10 school no in the AAU. It doesn't necessarily mean you're a top university. There are all kinds of requirements. Neb got booted b/c their medical school was not on campus and they focused their research $$ on agriculture, which the AAU doesn't value all that much.

 

[Lurker123]

If i'm not mistaken Nebraska is not in the AAU. The AAU may be prestigious but there are schools in the association that are not ranked high in the US News and World Report as we are. UGA is ranked high but not in the AAU. It would be nice to get into the AAU.

I got curious, so I looked it up. Nebraska WAS aau, but the literally lost it during their transition to the b10.

Made me wonder if the aau talk from clemson was an olive branch to appease those in the b10 that insist on that.

 

[Harvard Gamecock]

I got curious, so I looked it up. Nebraska WAS aau, but the literally lost it during their transition to the b10.

Made me wonder if the aau talk from clemson was an olive branch to appease those in the b10 that insist on that.

A university must receive an invitation from the AAU for membership. A school can not just arbitrarily apply.

 

[Lurker123]

A university must receive an invitation from the AAU for membership. A school can not just arbitrarily apply.

Understood. I was referring to some doc put out by clemson that has aau membership as a goal for the next decade.

I have no idea if that's just a thing lots of schools put as a goal though.

 

[atl-cock]

Good stuff. This writer noted the GOR as "ironclad". And it sounds like it is. There are a couple of things to consider that haven't gotten too much attention:

1. The ADs don't get a vote. It's not their decision. They can complain, argue, cry, convince, etc...but the presidents (who got them into this stupid deal) are the ones that will ultimately decide what is acceptable. The AD will either have to live with that or find another job. Dissolve the conference will 100% result in a massive litigation, that will divert $$ and resources away from what the presidents would rather be doing. Football is a side hustle. The Clem president is concerned with getting into the Association of American Universities. He's trying to nail down research funding. The LAST thing he wants is a 3 year lawsuit that gets in the way of that. If you think any of these Presidents would put football ahead of academia you are mistaken. And there is waaaay too much risk in blowing it up. Remember, Jimbo left FSU b/c they didn't care about the football program.

2. ESPN will have a say as well. They love this deal. There is no way they're going to just stand by and let it fail, which could result in losing media rights to Fox. At the least, they would have to pay more for some teams than they're currently paying. So the institutions that try to blow it up will not only be hit with lawsuits from the ACC, but also ESPN. It would be very ugly. This would also probably prevent other conferences from adding them. Who wants to sign up for that?? When Maryland left the GOR wasn't created yet. So it was just an exit fee that was litigated, and B10 didn't care about that. But when the rights to televise games are hindered, it's a whole new ballgame.

So, either do nothing and just make less money. Or go nuclear and risk blowing through millions, and still be stuck with less money. My guess is they're just going to continue applying maximum pressure to keep getting more $$ in the unequal share model.

And the presidents should be primarily concerned with academia. This is why FSU ultimately joined the ACC and we joined the SEC.

This is probably the finest post I've seen from you, DaboSits2PeePee.

 

[Harvard Gamecock]

Good stuff. This writer noted the GOR as "ironclad". And it sounds like it is. There are a couple of things to consider that haven't gotten too much attention:

1. The ADs don't get a vote. It's not their decision. They can complain, argue, cry, convince, etc...but the presidents (who got them into this stupid deal) are the ones that will ultimately decide what is acceptable. The AD will either have to live with that or find another job. Dissolve the conference will 100% result in a massive litigation, that will divert $$ and resources away from what the presidents would rather be doing. Football is a side hustle. The Clem president is concerned with getting into the Association of American Universities. He's trying to nail down research funding. The LAST thing he wants is a 3 year lawsuit that gets in the way of that. If you think any of these Presidents would put football ahead of academia you are mistaken. And there is waaaay too much risk in blowing it up. Remember, Jimbo left FSU b/c they didn't care about the football program.

2. ESPN will have a say as well. They love this deal. There is no way they're going to just stand by and let it fail, which could result in losing media rights to Fox. At the least, they would have to pay more for some teams than they're currently paying. So the institutions that try to blow it up will not only be hit with lawsuits from the ACC, but also ESPN. It would be very ugly. This would also probably prevent other conferences from adding them. Who wants to sign up for that?? When Maryland left the GOR wasn't created yet. So it was just an exit fee that was litigated, and B10 didn't care about that. But when the rights to televise games are hindered, it's a whole new ballgame.

So, either do nothing and just make less money. Or go nuclear and risk blowing through millions, and still be stuck with less money. My guess is they're just going to continue applying maximum pressure to keep getting more $$ in the unequal share model.

The majority of the current presidents were not at their current positions so they are not the one's who got them into this contract.
I can tell you that there are 3 AD's in particular that are the front line or acting as "agents of change" to make significant changes to the current situation. There is one AD in particular (highly regarded by his peers) that is working behind the scenes that will in all likelihood become the "spear" that will make major changes. Do not be surprised of a major change to the current makeup of conferences within 2-3 years.
It is going to happen

 

[Deleted11512]

The majority of the current presidents were not at their current positions so they are not the one's who got them into this contract.
I can tell you that there are 3 AD's in particular that are the front line or acting as "agents of change" to make significant changes to the current situation. There is one AD in particular (highly regarded by his peers) that is working behind the scenes that will in all likelihood become the "spear" that will make major changes. Do not be surprised of a major change to the current makeup of conferences within 2-3 years.
It is going to happen

I don't doubt that the ADs are working every angle the can. So I believe you on that. I'm just doubtful that it will matter. If we were just talking about negotiating their way around an exit fee that's one thing. But you're talking about messing around with rights to televise your games as well. So that can severely impact your value to another conference. You have nothing to sell to be able to get that money you just paid in an exit fee back. I also know a lot of folks in Academia view the AD offices as a nuisance. It's a massive revenue stream that they don't have access to. Yes, they bring in a ton of money, but also spend a ton of money. And unless the AD wants to be benevolent and send some of that to the U, they never see it.

When you add in massive amounts of legal costs due to a certain legal challenge to any action they take to dissolve the conference, in addition to whatever penalties (if any) are levied, I just don't think Presidents are going to be willing to put that much university funds at risk. And it will likely go beyond that to BOT level.

 

[Harvard Gamecock]

I don't doubt that the ADs are working every angle the can. So I believe you on that. I'm just doubtful that it will matter. If we were just talking about negotiating their way around an exit fee that's one thing. But you're talking about messing around with rights to televise your games as well. So that can severely impact your value to another conference. You have nothing to sell to be able to get that money you just paid in an exit fee back. I also know a lot of folks in Academia view the AD offices as a nuisance. It's a massive revenue stream that they don't have access to. Yes, they bring in a ton of money, but also spend a ton of money. And unless the AD wants to be benevolent and send some of that to the U, they never see it.

When you add in massive amounts of legal costs due to a certain legal challenge to any action they take to dissolve the conference, in addition to whatever penalties (if any) are levied, I just don't think Presidents are going to be willing to put that much university funds at risk. And it will likely go beyond that to BOT level.

Only the 2nd time I've ever done this, but here goes
I'm going to quote myself from post #196. last line.
"It's going to happen"

 

[Deleted11512]

Only the 2nd time I've ever done this, but here goes
I'm going to quote myself from post #196. last line.
"It's going to happen"

So in 2-3 years, you’re saying the ACC will be dissolved?

 

[Anon1658788697]

I don't doubt that the ADs are working every angle the can. So I believe you on that. I'm just doubtful that it will matter. If we were just talking about negotiating their way around an exit fee that's one thing. But you're talking about messing around with rights to televise your games as well. So that can severely impact your value to another conference. You have nothing to sell to be able to get that money you just paid in an exit fee back. I also know a lot of folks in Academia view the AD offices as a nuisance. It's a massive revenue stream that they don't have access to. Yes, they bring in a ton of money, but also spend a ton of money. And unless the AD wants to be benevolent and send some of that to the U, they never see it.

When you add in massive amounts of legal costs due to a certain legal challenge to any action they take to dissolve the conference, in addition to whatever penalties (if any) are levied, I just don't think Presidents are going to be willing to put that much university funds at risk. And it will likely go beyond that to BOT level.

They won’t right now but let that 50+ millions dollar deficit kick in.