SMU2006

Yes (for the most part). Regardless the revenue will be greater despite getting nothing from the media deal than what SMU was slated to receive in the American.

I agree in principle although I think its going to take 5-7 years before being fully implemented. Who knows what will happen in the interim but you can bet there will be some lawyers gobbling up a lot of billable hours b/c the mother of all antitrust lawsuits will likely be coming down the pike.

Speculation as to what? The ACC's motivations for expansion? Its pretty simple. The ACC saw what happened to the PAC-12 and decided to be proactive. There are three schools that are largely linked with potentially leaving the ACC (FSU, UNC, Clemson). If the ACC membership falls below 15 schools ESPN has the right to renegotiate the existing media rights deal which could ultimately lead to the GOR being negated and the ACC goes the way of the PAC-12. The additions of Stanford/CAL/SMU provide additional security "if" there are defections (again unlikely until 2033-2034 at the earliest).

lol. You're allowing your blind hatred of SMU to distort the facts. The additions of CAL/Stanford/SMU was about grabbing the best available programs that fit the ACC's academic and athletic profile. SMU's willingness to forego 9 years of TV revenue demonstrates the importance of getting out of the G5 which is 100% going to be siphoned off into a separate league. This was SMU's last chance and they wanted to make themselves as attractive of an expansion candidate as possible. It also protects the ACC in the event that "if" FSU is able to wiggle off the hook before 2036 they have secured enough additions to keep the league above 14 teams which locks them into their existing media deal with Disney/ESPN. If any other G5 school had the financial resources to put such a proposal together they would have b/c its not hyperbole to say its life and death. SMU was able to leverage several billionaires to bankroll its way to safety. Whether the "brand" is what the ACC desired is irrelevant. We're in. Ultimately that is the only thing that matters.

yet SMU was invited with a supermajority from the ACC... This is entirely about the PAC-2 and permanently closing the door for G5 to P4 movement.

This is correct. SMU will receive around $12m in total revenue (roughly). Obviously could change depending on number of NCAA basketball credits.

LOL. SMU becomes a full revenue share member if any legacy ACC school leaves the league (including the close to $1b it will cost a school to leave the conference as well as the rights to their home games through 2036).

Its the last time SMU will ever play at UNT. If the students want to rush the court let them have a good time.

Now who's revisionist history? Every school that is not in the Big 10 or SEC currently would commit unspeakable acts to get into those leagues. Every single one. The FSU AD last LAST SUMMER it was "a matter of when not if" they leave the ACC. They've had their guns out for the league for years. The additions of CAL/Stanford/SMU puts more money in their pockets and ultimately a super majority of schools voted them in. SO yeah. Nice try. The reality is that the ACC is far and away the premiere academic/athletic conference in the country and a natural fit (geography aside b/c no one cares about that anymore) for CAL and Stanford. They are going after the same prospective students that go to Duke/UVA/WF/BC/GT.

No, Stanford/CAL wanted to be associated with schools that had students who can read above the fourth grade level which eliminates virtually all the schools in the Truck Stop 12.

LOL. This couldn't be more incorrect. The ACC is by every quantifiable measure a superior conference to the new Big 12. Last I checked the ACC will have an auto bid to the expanded playoff. So explain to me again how SMU isn't in a P4 conference? And again (can't believe it as to be reiterated but whatever...) it as already been communicated to SMU and the ACC that this measure will not pass. You need unanimous approval among the ADs and there is absolutely NO WAY that happens.

Try to keep up. They are using SMU as a warning to the PAC-2 that they can't just elevate a gaggle of G5's and expect to get the CFP $$$ and autonomous status. The legal argument for not giving SMU the CFP money is hilarious considering the Big 12 added BYU, Cincinnati, UH, and UCF last year and they received their shares. The issue with SMU will get resolved without any issue which has been communicated both to SMU's administration as well as the ACC. Its all about letting the other conferences know the last life raft from the G5 has been taken.

University Park. Put some respect on UP's name!

This is about sending a message to Wazzu/Oregon State that they can't just elevate a bunch of G5's and expect them to keep "P5" status and get the CFP $$$. This has absolutely nothing to do with SMU and will be resolved accordingly. Not the slightest bit concerned.

Its going to be a complete break from the NCAA. The leagues will then effectively govern themselves without the nuisance of the NCAA and its selective enforcement. Everyone knows this is coming. The antitrust case is an interesting one but you'd have to be able to make the case in court that a program like UL-Monroe should effectively be treated the same as Texas, Michigan, Ohio State, UGA, etc. The reality is there is a clear financial separation that is only going to be more pronounced in the very short term. The separation is an inevitability. The only question is when.

Insecurity is a stinky cologne.

There is going to be a split coming in the next 5-7 years. Financially it just doesn't make sense for the G5 schools to keep it up. G5 will be the new D1AA and have its own championship.

How many people had Texas in the SEC in 2011? Who knows what happens in 12 years. Point being that for the next decade plus you can count on the Noles being in the ACC.

LOL. A petty move by the ACC with zero chance of success (but I love it). This is more about sending a message to the other legacy ACC schools that any attempt to break the GOR is going to be litigious, expensive, and exhausting. FSU did this to themselves with their laugh-out-loud worthy lawsuit against the league. They are going to get DESTROYED in court. All of this is folly. FSU will still be in the ACC in 2035.

Not condescending in the slightest. Chandler is a very good addition and should thrive at the AAC level. Just needs to stay healthy.

Chandler is a good kid and super tough. UNT is a great fit for him. Hope he can stay healthy and upright.

Lets see if they have any billionaires hiding under the couch cushions. They don't have the money. Period. And no hedge fund is getting involved. lol.

PITT, BC, Louisville, GA Tech, CAL, Stanford, Syracuse, Duke, WF..... or UNT, UTSA, Rice, Tulsa, UAB, FAU, Charlotte. Its one thing to be willfully obtuse but blindly ignorant is totally different.