I hope we grab just one school and stick to 8. No reason to expand with crappy additions if not needed

Masked_rebel said:

55 million dollar poaching fee is pretty solid, the Pac 12 lawsuit is BS...
18 million exit fee x 5 teams is 90 million... take a negotiated settlement and call it 60% at 54 million... technically exit fees are paid out of future payouts, etc. But it's still money not going to those 5 schools.
That's 109 let's say 110 million dollars. Take 25 million to AFA, 30 million to UNLV, and distribute 5 million to the other 5 is 80 million so there's still 30 million dollars to distribute as well or use to help buyout or FCS elevation.
The Pac 2 are ridiculous to think they can tear a conference apart and not pay anything while sitting on 200+ million from the exact same situation. That's where the money is coming from

Click to expand...

Disagree a bit on the solidity of it. The exit fees that are going to be withheld are solid in my opinion. $6 mil per year per leaving team = $60 mil

The remainder of the exit fees I think would get negotiated away, but maybe you collect half… $15 mil at some point in the future.

My guess is half the PAC penalty, so what’s that 1/2 of $55 mil… round up to $28 mill.

You’re up to $103 mil. $60 mil to AF and UNLV and the rest split $43 mil?

Maybe… but I’d bet it won’t end up being that much.

His completion rate as a senior at Cambell is over 70%. I think if he can complete over 60% of his pass and without a TO, UNLV will blow the f*ck out off FSU.

RebelMan5000 said:

The new format is highest rated G5 conference champion gets a seat at the table.

Strength of schedule matters.

Playing in some WAC/CUSA/MWC hybrid will be a detriment in my opinion.

I know this isn't UNLVs fault, nobody saw this coming, but there's no way the vision in place with all the new facilities was to be the flagship program of a middling G5 conference. It just wasn't.

Click to expand...

Does that mean, the champion of the highest rated G5 conference? Or does that mean the highest rated team out of the G5 schools? I'd think it would be the 2nd one. Which is how a school like Liberty could get in over the AAC/MWC etc conferences

55 million dollar poaching fee is pretty solid, the Pac 12 lawsuit is BS...
18 million exit fee x 5 teams is 90 million... take a negotiated settlement and call it 60% at 54 million... technically exit fees are paid out of future payouts, etc. But it's still money not going to those 5 schools.
That's 109 let's say 110 million dollars. Take 25 million to AFA, 30 million to UNLV, and distribute 5 million to the other 5 is 80 million so there's still 30 million dollars to distribute as well or use to help buyout or FCS elevation.
The Pac 2 are ridiculous to think they can tear a conference apart and not pay anything while sitting on 200+ million from the exact same situation. That's where the money is coming from

RebelMan5000 said:

The new format is highest rated G5 conference champion gets a seat at the table.

Strength of schedule matters.

Playing in some WAC/CUSA/MWC hybrid will be a detriment in my opinion.

I know this isn't UNLVs fault, nobody saw this coming, but there's no way the vision in place with all the new facilities was to be the flagship program of a middling G5 conference. It just wasn't.

Click to expand...

I agree that does matter if it comes down to it. Absolutely will if 2 G5 teams are undefeated or similar records. My point, and perhaps I’m not being clear enough (apologies if so), is that 9 time out of 10 (if not more) it will not come down who has a stronger schedule. I think beating a couple of P4 schools out of conference, like we did this year will look better to the committee than worrying about whether or not we beat San Diego St vs Wyoming. Hope that makes sense.

These last couple games have been trying times for Coach O and UNLV football. The Traitorous 4 departed 2 days before the KU game and Sluka news broke right before FSU game. I hope that they can stay focused once again.

RebNReno said:

Both conferences have to add members now. It will be interesting to see who the PAC lands vs who the MWC lands. I would guess that the PAC ends up pulling the better options but who knows where they turn with the AAC and MWC out.

I think Texas State is the obvious best add for them but after that I don’t know. Do they have to look at a UTEP now? Could the PAC have to dip into the FCS ranks?

If the MWC has a plan for someone they might be best served getting them signed on tomorrow before the PAC moves.

Click to expand...

WYNN or Dye said:

I'll be happy, to just get in the MWC Tournament Semis.

Click to expand...

UNLV basketball is beyond dead

RebelMan5000 said:

What the hell is going on with this site? When did I become RebelMan 5000?

This is bizarre.

Click to expand...

Login to view embedded media
Haven’t heard that song since the 90’s..

RebelMan5000 said:

I think it is pretty clear they are better and in terms of potential down the road.

Let's take top 3 remaining schools in each right now.

WSU
FRESO.
BOISE

Vs

UNLV
SJSU
AFA (typically good)

On paper not that close.

Let's take Potenial. What schools you think could potentially get better..

SDSU (Who was really good just a few short years ago)

CSU

OSU

Vs

Wyoming

UNM

Reno

Again I think PAC is better.

That conference in football as it sits is head and shoulders better than the MWC in my opinion.

I disagree that a new PAC team would have to go undefeated.

This year if UNLV goes 11 - 1 vs this schedule and wins conference title they will get the nod over an undefeated Liberty because of strength of schedule.

Click to expand...

I’m not debating that the PAC isn’t better. They certainly are top to bottom, I just don’t think it matters much. Your scenario could be true, but you have to go 12-1 first. That is going to be extremely difficult to do. It is much more likely that the MW champion has 2-3 losses, than only 1 loss. If that is true an undefeated champion of another conference is going to get in.

Oddly from all this, the fresno game probably gets more eyeballs, by quite a bit, than it would have initially. Win the game and Sluka will be old news.

Shame! Shame! Shame! Shame! Shame!

What the hell is going on with this site? When did I become RebelMan 5000?

This is bizarre.

And another thing…

Where in the f*** is the MW going to get money for these “bonuses” that are supposedly to be paid for the seven remaining teams?

First off I find the idea hilarious that everyone is supposedly getting a bonus… no you’re not dip $hits… it’s your effing money! Aside from UNLV and AFA the rest of you are getting penalties, cuz their money is coming out of yours morons!

Second, no money has been effing paid or collected aside from MAYBE the small fee that was due from the departing teams… $5,000 each… and I’m not even positive about that. Media rights payments that would be paid to the leaving members is forfeited. But that annual payment is made on June 1st, so all those fu**ers already got paid this year. I’m sure that payment coincides with when the MW is paid so where the f*** is this “bonus” money going to come from?

IF the annual payments are as I’ve heard at $6 million per team then that’s $30 mil next year and $30 mil the year after… so that’s $60 mil you can actually count on. Everything else is up in the air and will likely get negotiated down imho.

Well you just promised ALL or MOST of what you can count on to UNLV and AFA.

Chris Murray from the RGJ reported that UNR is set to get “high seven figures”… why? Who the hell knows, but you’d have to expect that at a bare minimum everybody else other than Hawaii is getting the same…

Where. Are. They. Getting. The. Money.

Sure they may collect on a good portion, but none of that is a given.

If the money is not guaranteed then it shouldn’t be used to factor in to your decision.

unlv7163 said:

Understand, but don’t think comparing G5 teams will be at the top of the agenda for the committee. The SOS will matter for the at large teams. At the end of the day, I don’t know how it will play out and what decision would have been best. Just don’t think that this particular point is really that big of a deal. If UNLV (or any other MW team) goes undefeated, they very likely get in.

Click to expand...

The new format is highest rated G5 conference champion gets a seat at the table.

Strength of schedule matters.

Playing in some WAC/CUSA/MWC hybrid will be a detriment in my opinion.

I know this isn't UNLVs fault, nobody saw this coming, but there's no way the vision in place with all the new facilities was to be the flagship program of a middling G5 conference. It just wasn't.

Sure hope we have several out clauses to give us options down the road, especially if it’s a lengthy commitment.

unlv7163 said:

I understand that, not arguing otherwise. There just isn’t much precedent that the current MWC is better, and therefore allows more room for error, than any other conference. When was the last time a MW team went to a BCS bowl? Been well over a decade. And the 2 current teams that do have an appearance (Boise and Hawaii) were members of the WAC when they went. Why? Because our conference champion always has 2-3 losses while the smaller conferences have an unbeaten team that goes. The same will continue to hold true in my opinion.

Click to expand...

I think it is pretty clear they are better and in terms of potential down the road.

Let's take top 3 remaining schools in each right now.

WSU
FRESO.
BOISE

Vs

UNLV
SJSU
AFA (typically good)

On paper not that close.

Let's take Potenial. What schools you think could potentially get better..

SDSU (Who was really good just a few short years ago)

CSU

OSU

Vs

Wyoming

UNM

Reno

Again I think PAC is better.

That conference in football as it sits is head and shoulders better than the MWC in my opinion.

I disagree that a new PAC team would have to go undefeated.

This year if UNLV goes 11 - 1 vs this schedule and wins conference title they will get the nod over an undefeated Liberty because of strength of schedule.

Thisistheyear! said:

Login to view embedded media

Click to expand...

Paul Finebaum is a lying POS and will always be a lying POS.

dcut03 said:

I was talking about SMU specifically. Their reduction of the exit fees was not much, but there was still a reduction.

Click to expand...

There was no reduction at all for SMU. It was a 100% negotiated deal, as per the AAC bylaws. They didn't meet the 27 month notice, which would require a $10 million buyout. They settled for paying $24 million

dcut03 said:

It is a bit different now because the NEW playoff format has a bigger emphasis on strength of schedule. The new PAC is going to at least initially be much stronger than every other G5 conference.

Click to expand...

Understand, but don’t think comparing G5 teams will be at the top of the agenda for the committee. The SOS will matter for the at large teams. At the end of the day, I don’t know how it will play out and what decision would have been best. Just don’t think that this particular point is really that big of a deal. If UNLV (or any other MW team) goes undefeated, they very likely get in.

Claims of an agreement are the basis for lawsuits. I suspect attorneys are advising UNLV to remain quiet beyond its official statement. Also agree that discussing it at this point only prolongs the talkings heads another day or two. Get to the Fresno game and use as much of this as possible to fuel the team and win the game. Do that and any public discussions switches to “I guess UNLV didn’t need to pay Sluka after all” and hopefully “How about that Hajj kid!”

dcut03 said:

Good Point
But, hat 27 month notice is a pretty stark difference, don't you think? We have no such clause.

Also look at the exit fee. 10 million for a yet another conference with a better media deal than us

The fact that the MW is asking nearly double? That can't be talked down?

Click to expand...

The MWC has a two tiered exit fee, Give 1 year notice, it's $18 million. Give 2 years, I believe it's $36 million.

Yes, those fees are quite high, but the whole reason that they put those in the bylaws was to try to stop this sort of thing from happening. And all of the schools agreed to it and signed it. So at that point, does it matter if it 'seems too high'?

Sure, it's possible that the MWC could work with the departing schools and/or the PAC on a reduced fee, but when you're fighting for your conference life, why would you? If it goes into litigation, then ultimately the courts will decide it. I don't know what sort of leeway they're likely to get when the stipulations are clearly spelled out.

This 'poaching fee' probably has a better chance of being negotiated, if I had to guess, but IDK.

Masked_rebel said:

He can't do that. Doing do would put UNLV potentially in a verbal pay for play violation and investigation where it's one players word vs program. That's why he won't speak directly about it.

Click to expand...

Thats just one of many he should keep his mouth closed