Jump to content
  • Welcome to GoMeanGreen.com!

    Thank you for visiting us!  Registering is easy and free, and provides you with the ability to participate in the discussions along with many cool features and content.

Recommended Posts

49 minutes ago, untjim1995 said:

When A&M and Mizzou left the Big 12, they negotiated a deal to pay less than half of the exit fee, paying only $12.4 million when it was supposedly $30 million per team. Of course, they each played an additional year in the Big XII before leaving, too, while UConn just up and left ASAP.

I seriously doubt that UH, Cincy, and UCF pay anywhere near those reported figures. It'll probably be around $15 million, max. It will be nice to get a cut of that $45 million, but that will get cut into when the new AAC payouts also get negotiated downward. It'll be similar to the Big XII after UT and OU leave...

 

Again, UCONN paid $17m so the bar has already been set by a dead weight program.  Why would the AAC be willing to accept anything less?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Arkstfan said:

MWC is positioned to be stronger than AAC in football, they don’t have a pressing need to expand unless Big 12 turns around and adds Boise and if that happens they probably lose 20% of their revenue.

Jeez, Arkstfan, not so loud 🤫or SMU might change their mind & prefer the MWC! 😆  (And who might take their place in the AAC if that happened)?😇

I think about 5 or 6 of us on GMG have wanted a MWC affiliation almost since its beginning. Of course, having 2 or 3 traveling partners would make it worthwhile.

🦅

Edited by PlummMeanGreen
  • Upvote 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, PlummMeanGreen said:

Jeez, Arkstfan, not so loud 🤫or SMU might change their mind & prefer the MWC! 😆  (And who might take their place in the AAC if that happened)?😇

I think about 5 or 6 of us on GMG have wanted a MWC affiliation almost since its beginning. Of course, having 2 or 3 traveling partners would make it worthwhile.

🦅

The AAC would have to completely and utterly collapse for SMU to entertain going to the MWC.  Exit fees are $10m and 27 months notice.  Why would you do that and leave a conference that is about to reap north of $9m per school in exit fees and a better TV deal to play in a geographically isolated MWC that has a terrible TV deal where Boise rules the roost?

No way no how.  The MWC is a logistics and travel nightmare.  Also, being the lone Texas school in that conference would be beneficial to recruiting how?  The average kid choosing between schools in the AAC and MWC isn't going to care about playing games in Fresno, CA or Laramie, WY.

Edited by SMU2006
  • Upvote 1
  • Haha 1
  • Skeptical Eagle 1
  • Eye Roll 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, SMU2006 said:

The AAC would have to completely and utterly collapse for SMU to entertain going to the MWC.  Exit fees are $10m and 27 months notice.  Why would you do that and leave a conference that is about to reap north of $9m per school in exit fees and a better TV deal to play in a geographically isolated MWC that has a terrible TV deal where Boise rules the roost?

No way no how.  The MWC is a logistics and travel nightmare.  Also, being the lone Texas school in that conference would be beneficial to recruiting how?  The average kid choosing between schools in the AAC and MWC isn't going to care about playing games in Fresno, CA or Laramie, WY.

Why are you on GMG selling SMU’s cause?  We know this could all end disastrously for SMU if yalls Money Boys don’t do a lot of fast-talking convincing B12 powers.  
SMU would crap themselves if they ever perceived UNT came out of all this smelling like a rose (& SMU like an old worn out boot). I don’t worry about it, because there will be other re-alignment opportunities for UNT. If not now, then probably by the time we have reached the state-forecasted  50,000 students at our Denton campus.

 

Yet MWC a bad deal for UNT?   It wasn’t a bad deal for TCU when they joined plus they had no Lone State State travel partner as I recall.  I think SMU recalls quite well that TCU had no MWC travel partner, either. Y’all were still in CUSA.

When TCU entered the MWC they had no idea or even a dream that the Big 12 would ever have an opening, especially for a Texas private university. The SWC was Exhibit A as to why too many private universities in a (then) D1 conference was a bad combo.
Frank Broyles pointed all that out in a widely-read Dallas Times-Herald article by Mickey Spagnola(?) that some say was the first shot heard round the world that would end with the eventual demise of the SWC. His problem with the privates was their home attendance. Frank Broyles said back then there were only 2 rivals in the SWC—-UT vs the rest & Arkansas vs the rest.  

🤔Just curious:  Tulsa seems to be an enigma.  Someone posted on GMG (or the other UNT forum) a year or so back  that sounded like the entire university was almost bankrupt.  Your pretty knowledgeable about your conference mates so—what’s with that? 

🦅

Edited by PlummMeanGreen
  • Upvote 1
  • Pissed 1
  • Eye Roll 1
  • Downvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, PlummMeanGreen said:

Why are you on GMG selling SMU’s cause?  We know this could all end disastrously for SMU if yalls Money Boys don’t do a lot of fast-talking convincing B12 powers.  
SMU would crap themselves if they ever perceived UNT came out of all this smelling like a rose (& SMU like an old worn out boot). I don’t worry about it, because there will be other re-alignment opportunities for UNT. If not now, then probably by the time we have reached the state-forecasted  50,000 students at our Denton campus.

 

Yet MWC a bad deal for UNT?   It wasn’t a bad deal for TCU when they joined plus they had no Lone State State travel partner as I recall.  I think SMU recalls quite well that TCU had no MWC travel partner, either. Y’all were still in CUSA.

When TCU entered the MWC they had no idea or even a dream that the Big 12 would ever have an opening, especially for a Texas private university. The SWC was Exhibit A as to why too many private universities in a (then) D1 conference was a bad combo.
Frank Broyles pointed all that out in a widely-read Dallas Times-Herald article by Mickey Spagnola(?) that some say was the first shot heard round the world that would end with the eventual demise of the SWC. His problem with the privates was their home attendance. Frank Broyles said back then there were only 2 rivals in the SWC—-UT vs the rest & Arkansas vs the rest.  

🤔Just curious:  Tulsa seems to be an enigma.  Someone posted on GMG (or the other UNT forum) a year or so back  that sounded like the entire university was almost bankrupt.  Your pretty knowledgeable about your conference mates so—what’s with that? 

🦅

I'm not selling SMU's cause in any way.  I am simply pointing out that leaving the AAC for the MWC given the economic realities of exit fees, travel costs, horrible start times, etc. makes it astronomically dumb for SMU.  Maybe those same dynamics don't apply to UNT.  I genuinely don't know.

I will say citing enrollment figures of 50,000 doesn't really move the needle a single bit in conference realignment.  TCU got into the Big 12 with an undergrad enrollment of about 9,000.  UCF, Houston, and Cincinnati didn't get invited to the Big 12 b/c of their enrollment numbers.  They got in b/c each have played in a NY6 bowl and have won something significant on the national stage in recent years and have athletic budgets at the very top end of the G5 (including SMU).  I just don't understand attendance smack directed towards SMU when we've got about 6,500 undergrads and roughly 50,000 living alumni in DFW.  The fact that we had 23,500 for Abilene Christian and 29,200 for UNT is admirable IMO.

 

  • Upvote 5
  • Haha 1
  • Eye Roll 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, SMU2006 said:

I will say citing enrollment figures of 50,000 doesn't really move the needle a single bit in conference realignment. 

 

It didn't last time, because everyone thought of markets. but it will from here on out, as alumni are "streaming potential" and markets matter much less in the cord cutting age. Look at who just made it to the Big12. Its 3 of the 4 biggest enrollment schools in the AAC. And yes I DO think that played. You can have some small private schools, but the Dukes,Vanderbilts and Wake Forrests of the world are there to round those conferences out, they are never building blocks.

Edited by outoftown
  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, outoftown said:

It didn't last time, because everyone thought of markets. but it will from here on out, as alumni are "streaming potential" and markets matter much less in the cord cutting age. Look at who just made it to the Big12. Its 3 of the 4 biggest enrollment schools in the AAC. And yes I DO think that played. You can have some small private schools, but the Dukes,Vanderbilts and Wake Forrests of the world are there to round those conferences out, they are never building blocks.

Agree.

UCF at 60,000 enrollment was certainly not a negative for their getting in Big 12 Light. I also don’t think I said that enrollment was a clincher of a factor to get into any FBS conference.

At any rate.......being from greater Houston, I religiously followed the UH Coogs & the SWC since 1959.  I got to see UH almost in its football infancy go from having bowl worthy teams (but realistically, w/o the Bluebonnet there would have been no bowls for UH) to a school that was invited to the SWC & then all the glories of Coog basketball, but I just never understood how a school like SMU that used to be in the Southwest Conference would not have built a better fan base with the Horns, Aggies, Hogs, RedRaiders, etc, all coming to Dallas every other year.  What would North Texas have done with such a home scheduling luxury? Not sure, but I think I know. 
 

Below link is a another assessment (among many) as to what happened to cause the demise of the SWC.

https://texasalmanac.com/topics/sports/look-back-southwest-conference

🦅

Edited by PlummMeanGreen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, PlummMeanGreen said:

Agree.

UCF at 60,000 enrollment was certainly not a negative for their getting in Big 12 Light. I also don’t think I said that enrollment was a clincher of a factor to get into any FBS conference.

At any rate.......being from greater Houston, I religiously followed the UH Coogs & the SWC since 1959.  I got to see UH almost in its football infancy go from having bowl worthy teams (but realistically, w/o the Bluebonnet there would have been no bowls for UH) to a school that was invited to the SWC & then all the glories of Coog basketball, but I just never understood how a school like SMU that used to be in the Southwest Conference would not have built a better fan base with the Horns, Aggies, Hogs, RedRaiders, etc, all coming to Dallas every other year.  What would North Texas have done with such a home scheduling luxury? Not sure, but I think I know. 
 

Below link is a another assessment (among many) as to what happened to cause the demise of the SWC.

https://texasalmanac.com/topics/sports/look-back-southwest-conference

🦅

Enrollment size is irrelevant in realignment.  The primary objective for conferences is providing compelling, entertaining content that appeals to the widest possible audience.  If you have 50,000 students and go 4-8 that's not gonna cut it.  I will concede that "markets" were a major piece of the puzzle in previous realignments, but there is one metric and one metric only that matters.  Winning and winning big in football.  

SMU, while being a program on the rise, hasn't accomplished anything close to what the "promoted" AAC schools have done.  A few weeks in the Top 25?  Great.  Several other G5 programs have done that in recent memory.  We still haven't finished better than 3rd in the AAC-West.  That's not enough to leapfrog the other schools despite a Top 60 USNWR ranking, $2.2 billion endowment, Dallas market, billionaire alums, etc.

Sonny and his staff have this thing headed in the right direction, however.  NIL, transfer portal, and vastly improved high school recruiting have allowed SMU to build a roster laden with P5 talent across the board.  You have to hope that the talent and a veteran coaching staff will translate into getting over the "pretty good" hump and into the conversation of being the best G5 program in the country.  He's gotten guys like Clark Hunt and David Miller to pour millions into facilities and staff salaries.  As a private institution SMU doesn't have to disclose these figures but Sonny is north of $3m and Samples turned down OU and Texas for jobs last year with a promotion and raise to make him one of the highest paid Asst. Head Coaches/Recruiting Coordinators in the country.

Programs that have moved up to the P5 table (Rutgers excluded) all won multiple conference champions, NY6 bowl games, and spent the lion's share of the multiple seasons ranked in the Top 25.  No one cares that TCU has 9,000 undergrads.  People cared that they were being talked about nationally and winning big games.  Same goes for Cincy, UH, and UCF.

Edited by SMU2006
  • Upvote 6
  • Haha 2
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/23/2021 at 12:38 AM, Arkstfan said:

The Boise/SDSU talk was flat ridiculous. They were there before, albeit not even a year but at the time Boise’s president said they had to increase revenue by $4 million per year to make it work and after the hoop schools left, AAC couldn’t deliver that. They idea that an AAC lacking Houston, UCF, and Cincinnati could out-earn MWC by $4 million is laughable, especially considering that Boise gets enhanced revenue sharing with an eat what you kill system.

AFA being disgruntled since Utah and BYU left was no secret but now the rumor mill says AFA is no longer interested.

MWC is positioned to be stronger than AAC in football, they don’t have a pressing need to expand unless Big 12 turns around and adds Boise and if that happens they probably lose 20% of their revenue.

Arkstfan, your words have been the most reliable & unbiased of any non—UNT alum or MG fan who has posted on GMG for years.  You are an attorney who is very close to the the NCAA scene, correct? 
 

🦅

Edited by PlummMeanGreen
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SMU2006 said:

Enrollment size is irrelevant in realignment.  The primary objective for conferences is providing compelling, entertaining content that appeals to the widest possible audience.  If you have 50,000 students and go 4-8 that's not gonna cut it.  I will concede that "markets" were a major piece of the puzzle in previous realignments, but there is one metric and one metric only that matters.  Winning and winning big in football.  

SMU, while being a program on the rise, hasn't accomplished anything close to what the "promoted" AAC schools have done.  A few weeks in the Top 25?  Great.  Several other G5 programs have done that in recent memory.  We still haven't finished better than 3rd in the AAC-West.  That's not enough to leapfrog the other schools despite a Top 60 USNWR ranking, $2.2 billion endowment, Dallas market, billionaire alums, etc.

Sonny and his staff have this thing headed in the right direction, however.  NIL, transfer portal, and vastly improved high school recruiting have allowed SMU to build a roster laden with P5 talent across the board.  You have to hope that the talent and a veteran coaching staff will translate into getting over the "pretty good" hump and into the conversation of being the best G5 program in the country.  He's gotten guys like Clark Hunt and David Miller to pour millions into facilities and staff salaries.  As a private institution SMU doesn't have to disclose these figures but Sonny is north of $3m and Samples turned down OU and Texas for jobs last year with a promotion and raise to make him one of the highest paid Asst. Head Coaches/Recruiting Coordinators in the country.

Programs that have moved up to the P5 table (Rutgers excluded) all won multiple conference champions, NY6 bowl games, and spent the lion's share of the multiple seasons ranked in the Top 25.  No one cares that TCU has 9,000 undergrads.  People cared that they were being talked about nationally and winning big games.  Same goes for Cincy, UH, and UCF.

Don’t smdisagree with anything said here.  Perhaps Seth and Wren could emulate what Sonny is doing with SMU?

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Jonnyeagle said:

Don’t smdisagree with anything said here.  Perhaps Seth and Wren could emulate what Sonny is doing with SMU?

When SMU gets caught buying players (again) the punishment publicity will cause them to (ultimately) go into another losing cycle (like the 10 consecutive losing years before they got invited to CUSA in 2004)? Yeah, that’s right—they were .500 & less in wins 10 years in a row & still got a CUSA invite in 2004 to begin conference play in 2005.  So much for W/L records as a criteria to get in a conference, eh? 

SMU & their condescending arrogance will always be their self-induced problem because after all—THEY’VE ONLY RECENTLY BEEN TURNED DOWN BY THE BIG 12—AGAIN. (That’s 2 times they’ve been turned down, but there are reasons for that which Big 12 powers just won’t discuss in public media outlets). 

🦅

Edited by PlummMeanGreen
  • Eye Roll 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SMU2006 said:

Samples turned down OU and Texas for jobs last year with a promotion and raise to make him one of the highest paid Asst. Head Coaches/Recruiting Coordinators in the country.

Guess he paid off with the recruitment and signing of Siggers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Green Otaku said:

SMU2006 hasn't said anything demeaning or antagonizing about our school in any posts, yet you guys feel the need to berate him/her. Let's be better than this. There is nothing wrong with disagreeing with what they are posting, but keep it to the argument. 

(Lighten up, man, this forum is mostly a guilty pleasure kind of thing or time-consuming hobby for many.  GMG.com to some can be a contact sport, but it’s not really mean’t to be.😇

🐎🦅Yet SMU guy mostly comes over here to brag & (basically) say any conference we seek won’t be nearly as good as one SMU may end up;  a conference they’ll use the past in trying to make an impression. They will have to go back in time & talk up Doak Walker, Kyle Rote & depend on a National Championship that was closer to the night the Titanic sank than present day.  
I’m sure all the more recent times they were on probation will not come up.

You good with all at from SMU guy?

  (I’m not).  


❇️GMG!❇️
 

Edited by PlummMeanGreen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Cougar King said:

UNT trending towards 50k students and not being able to fill up a 30k seat stadium isn't the flex @PlummMeanGreen thinks it is.

 

 

Your school will be in Big 12 Light—why you still here spreading your special kind of joy? 😂

Attendance?  Even you would know on any given Saturday TDECU Stadium could be half empty. 
Back in the day, I remember UH games in the Astrodome not having the kind of attendance numbers to write home about.  

UH did better than Rice with attendance, but in 1960 when the Cowboys & Oilers came to Dallas & Houston, respectively, the slow demise of the SWC began, especially with the private schools. 

Edited by PlummMeanGreen
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, PlummMeanGreen said:

(Lighten up, man, this forum is mostly a guilty pleasure kind of thing or time-consuming hobby for many.  GMG.com to some can be a contact sport, but it’s not really mean’t to be.😇

🐎🦅Yet SMU guy mostly comes over here to brag & (basically) say any conference we seek won’t be nearly as good as one SMU may end up;  a conference they’ll use the past in trying to make an impression. They will have to go back in time & talk up Doak Walker, Kyle Rote & depend on a National Championship that was closer to the night the Titanic sank than present day.  
I’m sure all the more recent times they were on probation will not come up.

You good with all at from SMU guy?

  (I’m not).  


❇️GMG!❇️
 

 

Seems pretty clear what he's saying is what's best for UNT isn't what's best for SMU. SMU is already in a respected conference, moving to the MWC would be a lateral and expensive move for them. AAC has had an $8 mil. per team pay out, IIRC double what the MWC has. Just looking at the facts, that's where things currently stand. For us, the MWC is a great opportunity, and it will definitely beat a CUSA that will likely lose some programs. 

Now where there is room for debate is which conference will be the king of the G5s. If MWC stays together or only loses AF and CSU there is a good possibility they beat out the AAC as the better conference. Those two aren't the headliners in the MW, the've been average to poor. It's certainly not like losing Cincy, UCF, and Houston. Most people on their board seem pretty indifferent to them leaving. No one knows where the media deals will land after it's all said and done, the future wide open right now. It's up to the conferences to make the right choices to get the most $$$. 

Personally I don't think the AAC will keep it's current media deal, they've lost too much and with not enough viable candidates to replace them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, SMU2006 said:

Enrollment size is irrelevant in realignment.  The primary objective for conferences is providing compelling, entertaining content that appeals to the widest possible audience.  If you have 50,000 students and go 4-8 that's not gonna cut it.  I will concede that "markets" were a major piece of the puzzle in previous realignments, but there is one metric and one metric only that matters.  Winning and winning big in football.  

Contradictory statements here. SMU will never appeal to a wide audience, even if you won 10 games a year til 2030. You aren't going to have local support because not that many people go there and not that many locals identify with your school or care. There's no growth for SMU, because the wide audience (t-shirt fans) in DFW already celebrate and/or identify with UT, OU, Big12, SEC, Big10 schools, etc.

So this is where enrollment matters. UNT has students and former students who can fill up the stadium if we win. Same with UTSA. Same with a handful of other schools. We don't have to pull in a bunch of casuals to make it work. We just have to win at football. Conferences know that. Otherwise, neither UTSA nor UNT would be mentioned AT ALL in conference realignment discussions. We never would have moved "up" to CUSA. 

TCU got added 10 years ago, and the world has changed with regards to media. BUT TCU also had tremendous support historically from Tarrant, Parker, and Johnson county. TCU was getting 40,000 people to their games when they were winning in the MWC, they were getting 30,000 people when they were in CUSA, and they were getting high 20s in the WAC in the late 90s. I used to work their football games in my teen years, and you'd see people from Weatherford and Cleburne at their games, even if they didn't go there or have kids there.  They had support, and winning INCREASED that support, and that's what got them into the Big12. They got in because of the TV market, recruiting area they were in, and because they'd shown that they could get people to games DESPITE their enrollment, conference, and opponents. Very few programs have that built in, and it's partly just because of how the western counties have aligned and identified with TCU for at least the last 35 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Monkeypox said:

Contradictory statements here. SMU will never appeal to a wide audience, even if you won 10 games a year til 2030. You aren't going to have local support because not that many people go there and not that many locals identify with your school or care. There's no growth for SMU, because the wide audience (t-shirt fans) in DFW already celebrate and/or identify with UT, OU, Big12, SEC, Big10 schools, etc.

So this is where enrollment matters. UNT has students and former students who can fill up the stadium if we win. Same with UTSA. Same with a handful of other schools. We don't have to pull in a bunch of casuals to make it work. We just have to win at football. Conferences know that. Otherwise, neither UTSA nor UNT would be mentioned AT ALL in conference realignment discussions. We never would have moved "up" to CUSA. 

TCU got added 10 years ago, and the world has changed with regards to media. BUT TCU also had tremendous support historically from Tarrant, Parker, and Johnson county. TCU was getting 40,000 people to their games when they were winning in the MWC, they were getting 30,000 people when they were in CUSA, and they were getting high 20s in the WAC in the late 90s. I used to work their football games in my teen years, and you'd see people from Weatherford and Cleburne at their games, even if they didn't go there or have kids there.  They had support, and winning INCREASED that support, and that's what got them into the Big12. They got in because of the TV market, recruiting area they were in, and because they'd shown that they could get people to games DESPITE their enrollment, conference, and opponents. Very few programs have that built in, and it's partly just because of how the western counties have aligned and identified with TCU for at least the last 35 years.

You don't have to have mass appeal and you certainly don't have to have 50,000 undergraduates.  You have to win.  SMU had one 10 win season and in that season played an ABC prime time game at Memphis (College GameDay) and got 28,100 for Tulsa, 23,200 for Temple, and 29,500 for ECU.  That's one year.  If you honestly think that if 9 plus win seasons became the norm at SMU that it wouldn't translate into consistent crowds north of 27k regardless of opponent then you're divorced from reality.  SMU (and Dallas generally) loves a winner.  We had 29K for the UNT game this year.  Its trending in the right direction.

There are also a myriad of other factors that come into play like academics, endowment, political influence, athletic department spending, etc.  way before undergraduate enrollment enters the realignment equation.

At the end of the day all of this is window dressing b/c WINNING, and winning at the national level consistently, is what will get programs noticed by perceived better conferences.

Edited by SMU2006
  • Upvote 1
  • Eye Roll 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, just to clarify:

7 hours ago, SMU2006 said:

 widest possible audience. 

3 minutes ago, SMU2006 said:

You don't have to have mass appeal

7 hours ago, SMU2006 said:

 but there is one metric and one metric only that matters.  Winning and winning big in football.  

5 minutes ago, SMU2006 said:

There are also a myriad of other factors that come into play like academics, endowment, political influence, athletic department spending, etc.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, UNTLifer said:

Guess he paid off with the recruitment and signing of Siggers.

This is a tired and lazy argument.

Siggers has said a lot of complimentary things about his time at UNT.  He was sort of lost in the shuffle and was battling injuries.  He wanted a fresh start somewhere else.  The portal giveth and the portal taketh away.  Insinuating that Samples is a modern day Sherwood Blount is petty.

He's probably going to be the next HC at SMU.

  • Eye Roll 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Monkeypox said:

So, just to clarify:

 

What is contradictory?  There is really only one metric that matters.  WINNING.  Whether you are a small, private school like TCU or a commuter school with 60,000 students like UCF.  You have to win.  Are there are other factors worthy of consideration?  Yes, but to a far lesser degree.  

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Green Otaku said:

Personally I don't think the AAC will keep it's current media deal, they've lost too much and with not enough viable candidates to replace them. 

Yes, I was previously unaware of the composition clauses in ESPN's media deals. With the AAC, named schools are Cincinnati, Houston, Memphis, UCF, and USF (what?).  It's not a full renegotiation trigger, but ESPN can go back to the table and adjust the numbers/payouts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Please review our full Privacy Policy before using our site.