Is this article a nothing burger?

[dcut03]

Report: UNLV to Remain in Mountain West Through 2032

UNLV is officially sticking with the Mountain West Conference, locking itself in for the long haul through 2032 with a new deal. The school has signed a “grant

www.si.com

This is a recent article but seemingly has no new information in it. I guess someone saw the signed document that has been signed for weeks now? Am I missing something?

Unless the school has publicly come out to announce that they are officially staying no matter what? But is doesn't seem like it

 

[Meister_Rebel]

Report: UNLV to Remain in Mountain West Through 2032

UNLV is officially sticking with the Mountain West Conference, locking itself in for the long haul through 2032 with a new deal. The school has signed a “grant

www.si.com

This is a recent article but seemingly has no new information in it. I guess someone saw the signed document that has been signed for weeks now? Am I missing something?

Unless the school has publicly come out to announce that they are officially staying no matter what? But is doesn't seem like it

The thing is the MW still has to give us our bonus money. Is it guaranteed? If they come up with 1/2 of what they said we would get then why did we lock ourselves into this mess. I know, I know, we've beat this issue around multiple times but, it is still disconcerting. I'm okay staying if that money comes through.

 

[Meister_Rebel]

The MW seems to be throwing around a lot of promised money. NIU gets an incentive bonus for joining the MW plus the MW is paying for their exit fee from the MAC. They are also paying the exit fee for UC-Davis. I don't know about UTEP or GCU.

Some other stuff I saw recently:
UC-Davis also gets a First Right of Consideration if the MW decides to bring in any FCS football program. It doesn't guarantee them the MW would accept them but, why wouldn't they. For basketball Davis has agreed to minimum annual increases in spending for that sport. They also get less payouts for NCAA tourney units for the conference but, after six year they would be a full share units member. They can shorten that six years if they make it to an NCAA Tourney. The MW really broke it down to what they will earn however, the actual dollar amounts are unknown as the contracts have a lot of that information redacted. Same goes with NIU.

 

[dcut03]

The MW seems to be throwing around a lot of promised money. NIU gets an incentive bonus for joining the MW plus the MW is paying for their exit fee from the MAC. They are also paying the exit fee for UC-Davis. I don't know about UTEP or GCU.

Some other stuff I saw recently:
UC-Davis also gets a First Right of Consideration if the MW decides to bring in any FCS football program. It doesn't guarantee them the MW would accept them but, why wouldn't they. For basketball Davis has agreed to minimum annual increases in spending for that sport. They also get less payouts for NCAA tourney units for the conference but, after six year they would be a full share units member. They can shorten that six years if they make it to an NCAA Tourney. The MW really broke it down to what they will earn however, the actual dollar amounts are unknown as the contracts have a lot of that information redacted. Same goes with NIU.

All of this bonus money is tied to lawsuits.
And a good chunk if not majority of the money the MW has promised to our new member are also tied to that same pot of money.
There is some wiggle room in the maximum possible money (which is almost 0% likely to happen at this point), and the minimum amount they need to make good on their promises to the legacy members. But that margin gets thrown out the window if the poaching fees get reduced, especially if it is thrown out.
I think the primary hearing could say a lot, if the poaching lawsuit is dismissed, the MW is in pretty good shape, if it seems to give some creditability to the PAC whatsoever, you can almost guarantee that the total pot of the poaching fees will at best gets marginally reduced, at worst thrown out completely.
If the MW cannot make good on their financial incentives with the GOR. I'm not sure if UNLV can get out within any additional penalty legally. It seems to me that they would have a very good argument if so. I'm sure the other exit fee situation will remain the same as the other schools that are leaving.
I am very skeptical that this 2026 media contract will be very good. The basketball additions do not add much, if anything they detract at this point, and I really don't think that NIU does anything but meet the mean. Some people are acting that NIU own Chicago, but that is a huge stretch.
I think the MW could get around the same as before, which is a base contract of 3.6 from the media partners alone. Which seems to be the target based off of what the MW has been saying. That isn't great. If the PAC gets a 8 mil base that is a pretty big head start. Even if it is 6.
I think UNLV staying put has everything to do with the poaching fees and lawsuit. if it holds up completely 10-14 mill up front is still a nice equalizer especially given the exit fees.
But if that gets cut in half even? 5-7 mil. Is not much. If the PAC is still willing to give us 6 mil, the break even point could easily be as little as 3 years. IF the poaching fees are thrown out, that break even point could be immediate. or close to it.
There have been multiple exit fees have been 50-65% of a 2 year base media value. That is around 6 mil.

 

[Masked_rebel]

The new information is the GOR that surfaced yesterday. That officially signs the conference members to 2032 so long as the incentive payments are received... yes, that last part is the big one, no money = no GOR, means we could still go anywhere we want if they can't add the $$$

 

[Bullmastiff 1]

The new information is the GOR that surfaced yesterday. That officially signs the conference members to 2032 so long as the incentive payments are received... yes, that last part is the big one, no money = no GOR, means we could still go anywhere we want if they can't add the $$$

There's also the P4 clause still in intact correct?

Sure we can't leave for the PAC without paying an exit fee, but if BIG12 calls no exit fee correct?

 

[Masked_rebel]

There's also the P4 clause still in intact correct?

Sure we can't leave for the PAC without paying an exit fee, but if BIG12 calls no exit fee correct?

Correct, but we aren't leaving for the Pac unless the money doesn't show up, in which case the GOR with exit fees is voided

 

[dcut03]

Correct, but we aren't leaving for the Pac unless the money doesn't show up, in which case the GOR with exit fees is voided

Do we know that for sure?
I am sure the additional exit fees for leaving for another G5 would be voided, but until the new media contract is signed, I don't know if we can get out of the regular exit fees.
Though an argument does exist if we were to leave with less than 1 year notice that the MW kept us with promises they could not fulfill, that we could get some of those fees reduced.

If the P4 free pass is true for the PAC, which I am pretty sure was NOT a part of the deal when they asked us to join earlier, then staying really does hinge a lot on that poaching fee lawsuit. Even if that gets cut in half, we may want to think about leaving.

I think UNLV in the new PAC has a better shot of making the P4 than by staying in the MW. Overall SOS will be better, so we would have a higher degree of error in the playoff contention race. Not to mention that it probably won't take that long to break even from the bonuses of staying.

 

[Masked_rebel]

Do we know that for sure?
I am sure the additional exit fees for leaving for another G5 would be voided, but until the new media contract is signed, I don't know if we can get out of the regular exit fees.
Though an argument does exist if we were to leave with less than 1 year notice that the MW kept us with promises they could not fulfill, that we could get some of those fees reduced.

If the P4 free pass is true for the PAC, which I am pretty sure was NOT a part of the deal when they asked us to join earlier, then staying really does hinge a lot on that poaching fee lawsuit. Even if that gets cut in half, we may want to think about leaving.

I think UNLV in the new PAC has a better shot of making the P4 than by staying in the MW. Overall SOS will be better, so we would have a higher degree of error in the playoff contention race. Not to mention that it probably won't take that long to break even from the bonuses of staying.

I was referring to future exit fees associated with the new contract through 2032. I imagine if the exit fees get negotiated down or removed and the MWC can't pay us, we wait till the current 2026 media deal expires and leave for free. I'm not a legal mind, but I read the signed deal that was circulated and the clause about incentive payments seems to be a clear get out of this GOR free card. At which point we could just play out next year and jump to Pac 12 starting in 2026. Personally including that clause in the GOR was pretty smart considering how much more financial promises were made to us vs almost everyone else.

 

[dcut03]

I was referring to future exit fees associated with the new contract through 2032. I imagine if the exit fees get negotiated down or removed and the MWC can't pay us, we wait till the current 2026 media deal expires and leave for free. I'm not a legal mind, but I read the signed deal that was circulated and the clause about incentive payments seems to be a clear get out of this GOR free card. At which point we could just play out next year and jump to Pac 12 starting in 2026. Personally including that clause in the GOR was pretty smart considering how much more financial promises were made to us vs almost everyone else.

I have thought from the beginning that we could potentially leave for free at 2026, though I am not so sure. Even though that the exit fees are based off of the media contract, I don't think they are actually related. I think the previous < 1 year exit scenario would still take place. New exit fees are likely to be added with the new media contract as well. To your point, the GOR language may allow us to get out scott free even with a new base media contract signed if that cannot make good on their promises. But I don't know. That would be cool if that were the case. It allows us to sit back and wait for some of these lawsuits to play out and then make a last minute move if it makes sense at that time.

 

[SilverSpoon]

I have thought from the beginning that we could potentially leave for free at 2026, though I am not so sure. Even though that the exit fees are based off of the media contract, I don't think they are actually related. I think the previous < 1 year exit scenario would still take place. New exit fees are likely to be added with the new media contract as well. To your point, the GOR language may allow us to get out scott free even with a new base media contract signed if that cannot make good on their promises. But I don't know. That would be cool if that were the case. It allows us to sit back and wait for some of these lawsuits to play out and then make a last minute move if it makes sense at that time.

If it comes down to a 2026 PAC same-year jump, UNLV goes in with very little negotiating power. If we were to decide to jump before March of this year, we get the same package the traitor 4 are getting. A jump after the PAC has a media deal in place and was forced to bring in a Texas St/NMSU to complete their conference, UNLV gets totally wrecked should they reach out to the PAC at that point.

Unless the PAC preemptively has the media contract read that it'll go up should a UNLV/Memphis/Tulane join during their current contract. I don't see that happening as they're already having a hard enough time negotiating and the more PAC stipulations added could scare a few of their suitors away.

I personally think It's BIG12 or Bust with one possible scenario. If the PAC wins the poaching fees suit (even getting them cut in half) and can't pay UNLV what was promised, UNLV has a very simple lawsuit for damages and loss of revenue. That at the very least, should erase the exit fees through a settlement.

 

[dcut03]

If it comes down to a 2026 PAC same-year jump, UNLV goes in with very little negotiating power. If we were to decide to jump before March of this year, we get the same package the traitor 4 are getting. A jump after the PAC has a media deal in place and was forced to bring in a Texas St/NMSU to complete their conference, UNLV gets totally wrecked should they reach out to the PAC at that point.

Unless the PAC preemptively has the media contract read that it'll go up should a UNLV/Memphis/Tulane join during their current contract. I don't see that happening as they're already having a hard enough time negotiating and the more PAC stipulations added could scare a few of their suitors away.

I personally think It's BIG12 or Bust with one possible scenario. If the PAC wins the poaching fees suit (even getting them cut in half) and can't pay UNLV what was promised, UNLV has a very simple lawsuit for damages and loss of revenue. That at the very least, should erase the exit fees through a settlement.

Stay in the MW or go to the PAC it is still Big 12 or bust in my eyes.

The PAC could have added Texas state for a while now. It feels like they are waiting for a bigger fish, and that Texas State is their fall back option. I don't think that Texas State has them by the balls and demanding more, I think it is more the other way around. The PAC are stringing them along

I think we are the more attainable big fish. I know many of their fans think they can still make a run at Memphis, but I don't see it happening. Even if they could pay their fees completely, the per year pay would likely not be much different, if it is better at all, and the cross country travel is not worth it to them. We are one of the few schools that would at least be their current mean, if not raise the total.

I do think that UTSA could be an option still. They don't currently make the full 9 mil like the legacy AAC teams and travel is more manageable for them. UNT could be next for the same reasons.

 

[SilverSpoon]

Stay in the MW or go to the PAC it is still Big 12 or bust in my eyes.

The PAC could have added Texas state for a while now. It feels like they are waiting for a bigger fish, and that Texas State is their fall back option. I don't think that Texas State has them by the balls and demanding more, I think it is more the other way around. The PAC are stringing them along

I think we are the more attainable big fish. I know many of their fans think they can still make a run at Memphis, but I don't see it happening. Even if they could pay their fees completely, the per year pay would likely not be much different, if it is better at all, and the cross country travel is not worth it to them. We are one of the few schools that would at least be their current mean, if not raise the total.

I do think that UTSA could be an option still. They don't currently make the full 9 mil like the legacy AAC teams and travel is more manageable for them. UNT could be next for the same reasons.

I agree about Memphis. They only join with atleast one travel partner. Which means the PAC media deal would have to be massive to offset the added travel expenses. Let's say they get the media deal that would entice two AAC schools, now the PAC would have to come up with a big enough signing bonus to take care of two schools huge exit fees. That's not happening this time around.

Financially it'll be costly, but UNLV is their ONLY face-saving option without absolutely breaking the bank for Memphis & Tulane. They need to save the PAC brand. It's already considered the generic version of the original, however it's the closest you can get to a P5 conference there is out there. If they add any team outside of the MWC or the AAC to complete their conference, their brand will forever be tarnished a failed experiment.

 

[Meister_Rebel]

I agree about Memphis. They only join with atleast one travel partner. Which means the PAC media deal would have to be massive to offset the added travel expenses. Let's say they get the media deal that would entice two AAC schools, now the PAC would have to come up with a big enough signing bonus to take care of two schools huge exit fees. That's not happening this time around.

Financially it'll be costly, but UNLV is their ONLY face-saving option without absolutely breaking the bank for Memphis & Tulane. They need to save the PAC brand. It's already considered the generic version of the original, however it's the closest you can get to a P5 conference there is out there. If they add any team outside of the MWC or the AAC to complete their conference, their brand will forever be tarnished a failed experiment.

With the GOR contract signed we've basically given up our media rights to the MWC for July 1, 2026 thru June 30, 2032. So, yes going to the PAC would be financially costly. That plus we lose all our promised incentives. Unless a P4 school comes calling we are not going anywhere. With what we signed away we would be pretty stupid to make that move. It's over. The PAC is a dead dream.

 

[dcut03]

With the GOR contract signed we've basically given up our media rights to the MWC for July 1, 2026 thru June 30, 2032. So, yes going to the PAC would be financially costly. That plus we lose all our promised incentives. Unless a P4 school comes calling we are not going anywhere. With what we signed away we would be pretty stupid to make that move. It's over. The PAC is a dead dream.

IF the MW can make good on their promise. Which is by no means a sure thing right now.
I would be surprised if UNLV got the money that was mentioned at the very beginning. It is still possible that we get what was in the range that they mentioned, closer to 10 mil up front, and 1.5 extra after that.
But if the poaching fees get drastically reduced or thrown out, then the total bonus will be peanuts to what they promised, which would be grounds for leaving without penalty.
Gun to my head, I think the poaching fees get reduced, but not by much. I also think that the exit fees will also be negotiated down to about 60%. Depending on how much the MW has spent on acquisitions and legal fees. There may be barely enough to make good on their promises, at least enough where a lawsuit would be tough to prove that the MW didn't hold up their end. So we may get 10 up front a 1.2 extra a year.

 

[dcut03]

I agree about Memphis. They only join with atleast one travel partner. Which means the PAC media deal would have to be massive to offset the added travel expenses. Let's say they get the media deal that would entice two AAC schools, now the PAC would have to come up with a big enough signing bonus to take care of two schools huge exit fees. That's not happening this time around.

Financially it'll be costly, but UNLV is their ONLY face-saving option without absolutely breaking the bank for Memphis & Tulane. They need to save the PAC brand. It's already considered the generic version of the original, however it's the closest you can get to a P5 conference there is out there. If they add any team outside of the MWC or the AAC to complete their conference, their brand will forever be tarnished a failed experiment.

The PAC will be fine. Even if they add Texas State, they will be in decent shape. Their per year media deal will likely be one of the best if not THE best in G5. Remember the AAC will be getting a paycut eventually since their top 4 left to the Big 12. Their new teams are taking less temporarily, but will meet in the middle at some point.
They won't be a P5 conference, no matter what happens. Everyone knows it, including them, even though they were hard selling the P5 thing early on. I think they were going to try to trick Stanford and Cal to coming back, but even then they wouldn't be P5.
I don't see Memphis and Tulane but I could see UTSA and or UNT, either would be significantly better than Texas State.
The PAC would be much, much better with UNLV that is for sure. If Utah State is your bottom, that is a very, very good conference.

 

[Meister_Rebel]

IF the MW can make good on their promise. Which is by no means a sure thing right now.
I would be surprised if UNLV got the money that was mentioned at the very beginning. It is still possible that we get what was in the range that they mentioned, closer to 10 mil up front, and 1.5 extra after that.
But if the poaching fees get drastically reduced or thrown out, then the total bonus will be peanuts to what they promised, which would be grounds for leaving without penalty.
Gun to my head, I think the poaching fees get reduced, but not by much. I also think that the exit fees will also be negotiated down to about 60%. Depending on how much the MW has spent on acquisitions and legal fees. There may be barely enough to make good on their promises, at least enough where a lawsuit would be tough to prove that the MW didn't hold up their end. So we may get 10 up front a 1.2 extra a year.

After going through the GOR document the "effective" date was the date we signed. And, Whitfield signed that this past December. The "Term" covers 7-1-26 through 6-30-32 which means any revenue we earn during this period belongs to the MWC. Aside from any amount of incentives via the poaching or exit fees we've already given away our media revenue if we leave. That and we lose those incentives as well. We might have some grounds to leaving like you say if the incentives don't come through as promised but, the bad thing is we compounded our problems if we do leave in that they still own our media rights. We would be useless to the PAC because we can't earn them any media dollars as all that money will still go to the MWC. It's the same problem Florida State and Clemson and even NC have if they were to leave as the ACC owns their media rights.

At least that is my understanding of all of that. I'm not a lawyer so any attorney on here please jump in.

 

[dcut03]

After going through the GOR document the "effective" date was the date we signed. And, Whitfield signed that this past December. The "Term" covers 7-1-26 through 6-30-32 which means any revenue we earn during this period belongs to the MWC. Aside from any amount of incentives via the poaching or exit fees we've already given away our media revenue if we leave. That and we lose those incentives as well. We might have some grounds to leaving like you say if the incentives don't come through as promised but, the bad thing is we compounded our problems if we do leave in that they still own our media rights. We would be useless to the PAC because we can't earn them any media dollars as all that money will still go to the MWC. It's the same problem Florida State and Clemson and even NC have if they were to leave as the ACC owns their media rights.

At least that is my understanding of all of that. I'm not a lawyer so any attorney on here please jump in.

You may be right, but that seems wonky.
What is enough to null and void the rights? From what @Masked_rebel inferred that the entire GOR would be null and void if they don't make good on their promises with that agreement.
I mean you could argue that the way you understand it that even with the "free pass" that the MW would get all of our media rights?
Obviously there some parameters that would give the school back their own rights. The P4 free pass seems to be one, and failure to meet a minimum set of bonus money with the MW seems to be another. If not there is at least grounds for a lawsuit.

 

[Meister_Rebel]

You may be right, but that seems wonky.
What is enough to null and void the rights? From what @Masked_rebel inferred that the entire GOR would be null and void if they don't make good on their promises with that agreement.
I mean you could argue that the way you understand it that even with the "free pass" that the MW would get all of our media rights?
Obviously there some parameters that would give the school back their own rights. The P4 free pass seems to be one, and failure to meet a minimum set of bonus money with the MW seems to be another. If not there is at least grounds for a lawsuit.

Correct on the Free Pass. I don't remember off the top of my head the exact wording but the GOR releases us if we go to a P4 conference. I tried to copy and paste that specific section but, I would have to subscribe to get it. But, it is clear that if we leave for a P4 conference we are released from the GOR.

 

[Masked_rebel]

Correct on the Free Pass. I don't remember off the top of my head the exact wording but the GOR releases us if we go to a P4 conference. I tried to copy and paste that specific section but, I would have to subscribe to get it. But, it is clear that if we leave for a P4 conference we are released from the GOR.

It also specifies where the payments are coming from, where the money goes, and how the payments are being made as in percentages, lump sums, and in addition too.. Im not a contract lawyer, but seems like if you signed a contract(or a grant of rights agreement) stipulating payment and that money isn't received as stipulated, the contract would become either enforceable through lawsuit, or rendered null and void.

 

[Meister_Rebel]

It also specifies where the payments are coming from, where the money goes, and how the payments are being made as in percentages, lump sums, and in addition too.. Im not a contract lawyer, but seems like if you signed a contract(or a grant of rights agreement) stipulating payment and that money isn't received as stipulated, the contract would become either enforceable through lawsuit, or rendered null and void.

We definitely need a lawyers interpretation for sure.

All those incentives and their designations and percentages of distributions in specific dollar amounts are not guaranteed even in that GOR. All it says is that the incentives themselves are contingent upon collecting a sufficient portion. They don't even say what that amount is that would be sufficient. I hate contracts like this that leave holes for interpretation. I don't understand why UNLV lawyers allow that to happen. There is nothing in writing that I see that says that if we don't receive those incentives the GOR is null and void. That is what is troubling to me. Is there a specific section you are looking at and rendering your opinion that would help me. I'm not making any assumptions I just want to see it in writing via the GOR.

 

[Masked_rebel]

We definitely need a lawyers interpretation for sure.

All those incentives and their designations and percentages of distributions in specific dollar amounts are not guaranteed even in that GOR. All it says is that the incentives themselves are contingent upon collecting a sufficient portion. They don't even say what that amount is that would be sufficient. I hate contracts like this that leave holes for interpretation. I don't understand why UNLV lawyers allow that to happen. There is nothing in writing that I see that says that if we don't receive those incentives the GOR is null and void. That is what is troubling to me. Is there a specific section you are looking at and rendering your opinion that would help me. I'm not making any assumptions I just want to see it in writing via the GOR.

I thought it gave very specific dollar amounts.
"First 61 million of collected fees"
"Next 18 million for recruiting reserve"- costs to bring in new members
"Next 21 million to current member"- potentially the remainder of credits and current media rights through 2026?
"Payment of remaining fees" This is the one that's pretty vague has the largest impact to the $$ UNLV receives. 15.83% of the remaining fees whatever that sum is after legal fees, etc.. If that's the scheduling/poaching agreement $$ then that could be almost 0 if legal battles dont go well..

 

[Meister_Rebel]

I thought it gave very specific dollar amounts.
"First 61 million of collected fees"
"Next 18 million for recruiting reserve"- costs to bring in new members
"Next 21 million to current member"- potentially the remainder of credits and current media rights through 2026?
"Payment of remaining fees" This is the one that's pretty vague has the largest impact to the $$ UNLV receives. 15.83% of the remaining fees whatever that sum is after legal fees, etc.. If that's the scheduling/poaching agreement $$ then that could be almost 0 if legal battles dont go well..

It is exactly as you write. However, it also says "the incentives themselves are contingent upon collecting a sufficient portion". Those whole dollar amounts they wrote are still not guaranteed. I can't believe we signed such a horrible contract. What the MW seems to be saying is that look we are going to give you all this incentive money IF WE CAN COLLECT IT. Zero guarantees. Yet, there is no written OUT for us even if we don't see a dime of incentives. It's really troubling for me to understand how we can sign such a thing.

Edit: Just to make a clarification I did mention previously that the only Written Out for us is if we go to a P4 conference. That is very specific in the contract.

 

[Masked_rebel]

It is exactly as you write. However, it also says "the incentives themselves are contingent upon collecting a sufficient portion". Those whole dollar amounts they wrote are still not guaranteed. I can't believe we signed such a horrible contract. What the MW seems to be saying is that look we are going to give you all this incentive money IF WE CAN COLLECT IT. Zero guarantees. Yet, there is no written OUT for us even if we don't see a dime of incentives. It's really troubling for me to understand how we can sign such a thing.

Its like buying or selling a house... Its contingent on receipt of funds. If that money isn't paid as stipulated, you can usually walk away, and collect some escrow dollars.. albeit Im not a relator either. Seems like same concept here, "Hey were going to pay you, this agreement says how we will do it. This allows us to show you're committed to us upon receipt of those payments..." I imagine that if they dont come, you've got an unenforceable contract.

 

[dcut03]

Its like buying or selling a house... Its contingent on receipt of funds. If that money isn't paid as stipulated, you can usually walk away, and collect some escrow dollars.. albeit Im not a relator either. Seems like same concept here, "Hey were going to pay you, this agreement says how we will do it. This allows us to show you're committed to us upon receipt of those payments..." I imagine that if they dont come, you've got an unenforceable contract.

There is a chance that we don't receive the first threshold until the total amount of exit fees are collected, if the poaching fees get thrown out, maybe longer if the departing schools agree to pay over time, which is common in these situations. Which again will cut heavily into our per year bonus or potentially eliminate it altogether.
I would "hope" that the promises and the dollar amounts that were heavily publicized gives some room for litigation. Perhaps some sort of entrapment, or something to that effect? Not technically that, but you know what I mean.
Because essentially they held us hostage and prevented us from leaving for the PAC with promises they could not keep. We could at least sue them maybe?