https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B8jb5kvZ...edit?pli=1

the question revolves around page three #4 retained rights.

i heard someone talk about how that translates as an "out" for schools. i wanna hear what your interpretation of that is.

i wanna hear what you guys say about it first, later in the thread to post how i heard its interpretation


Retained Rights. The Conference and the Member Institutions acknowledge and

agree that each Member Institution retains all such Member Institution’s Retained Rights. For the

avoidance of doubt, no Retained Rights are granted to the Conference pursuant to this Agreement

or otherwise, and no other rights are granted to the Conference pursuant to this Agreement or

otherwise, that would limit, reduce or impair any Member Institution’s Retained Rights. “Retained

Rights” means, collectively, each Member Institution’s rights to produce, distribute and otherwise

exploit the following via its Permitted Member Institution Outlet(s) (as defined in the Telecast

Rights Agreements) on a worldwide basis throughout the Term: (a) any Member Institution

Retained Games (as defined in the Telecast Rights Agreements); (b) highlights and re-telecasts of

Selected Games (as defined in the Telecast Rights Agreements); © ancillary sports-related

programming (including without limitation coaches’ shows, sports highlight shows, and magazinestyle shows); (d) non-athletics programming; and (e) any and all content and programming not

expressly granted to a Telecast Partner in the Telecast Rights Agreements. Should circumstances

dictate, the Conference may propose inclusion of certain Retained Rights in Telecast Rights

Agreements and Member Institutions will consider such proposals in good faith; provided, that a

Member Institution may grant or withhold inclusion of its Retained Rights in any Telecast Rights

2203492.15 3 ORO Lamb 001

Agreement in its sole discretion. The Conference shall not, however, take any action that, directly

or indirectly, limits reduces or otherwise impairs a Member Institution’s Retained Rights or

Permitted Member Institution Outlet(s) without the prior written consent of all Member Institutions

that are then members of the Conference.

I'm not a lawyer. So I couldn't say...

I could be way off... but I read that as stating that a school can block their team from being on TV if they so choose... such as in the case of a NCAA penalty, or an in-house penalty. That does not allow them to leave the Big 12 and retain their rights to sell to another entity or include in another conference's TV rights, however.

If they want to have a game shown on TV, it has to go through the rights deal they have as part of the Big 12.

I don't think that's the "out" as expressed by others. The retained rights are basically all the rights to those games of a school that are not selected by the Tier 1 and Tier 2 TV contracts. In theory, if the Tier 1 and Tier 2 TV networks choose not to broadcast any of a school's games, the school then retains the rights to everything. But that's never going to happen.

We discussed this pretty thoroughly in another thread, but basically the GoR simply prevents another conference from getting the rights to those games, which really just means that if a school were to leave, they would have to buy back those rights from the conference - because no other conference would stand for having their conference games shown on another TV deal where they don't get to control it.

I think this should answer question:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4XT-l-_3y0

It's the inventory the Big 12 intentionally carved out for each school. 1 FB, 6-8 hoops, etc...

It's no loophole despite the multitude of ACC fanboys who have tried to jump through hoops to get there across the internet.

As an ACC fanboy, I don't see this as being a get-out-free clause. The question I have is if Texas were playing Brownsville Community College and the B12 TV partners didn't want the game, would the rights revert back to Texas? If so, it might help Texas.

If Texas were to jump to another conference (ACC, SEC, B10 or P12) or even go independent, would the B12 want Texas taking valuable time slots away from B12 schools? That's comparable to the B12 networks showing a UCLA v Washington game, while the B12 teams are off-air.

But Texas isn't jumping to another conference. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see Texas stand pat, rather than move to another conference where they'd just be another member, and not the top dog...

IMO that's the only option for a program with an ego the size of the State of Texas...

(09-09-2013 03:53 PM)Wolfman Wrote:  If Texas were to jump to another conference (ACC, SEC, B10 or P12) or even go independent, would the B12 want Texas taking valuable time slots away from B12 schools? That's comparable to the B12 networks showing a UCLA v Washington game, while the B12 teams are off-air.

The conference doesn't get a veto over which games ESPN or Fox chooses to televise. Texas FB home games other than a single "Tier 3" game are within the bucket of TV rights that ESPN/Fox purchased from the Big 12, so they can be selected by ESPN or Fox for the life of the TV deal (which expires at the same time as the Big 12's GOR, IIRC). If the conference doesn't like that, they could choose to relinquish Texas' rights for the remainder of the GOR, but there is no chance of that happening (unless someone writes the conference a very large check).

Once Texas hires Nick Saban and starts winning 3 out of the next 4 national championships, their Tier 3 rights will be worth like $30 Million per year.





(just how close does it have to be to be "like"?)

Focus on the core:

Quote: a) any Member Institution Retained Games (as defined in the Telecast Rights Agreements); (b) highlights and re-telecasts of Selected Games (as defined in the Telecast Rights Agreements); {c} ancillary sports-related programming (including without limitation coaches’ shows, sports highlight shows, and magazinestyle shows); (d) non-athletics programming; and (e) any and all content and programming not expressly granted to a Telecast Partner in the Telecast Rights Agreements.

As specified here, retained rights are rights to things that are expressly omitted from the Telecast Rights Agreement.

Now I guess that if the telecast partner wanted to sign a contract that would sabotage the GOR, they could insist on specifying the games covered by the Telecast Rights agrement in a way that left out rights to games of a school that joined a different conference. However, the telecast partner has a stake in the GOR being solid, so I don't see why they would do that. And the telecast partners can afford quite experienced Media Rights lawyers, since media rights is what they trade in, and for the broadcast networks have been what they trade in since before most or all of us were born, so I wouldn't put much hope in the Telecast Partners blundering when writing the contract.

(09-09-2013 04:00 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  But Texas isn't jumping to another conference. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see Texas stand pat, rather than move to another conference where they'd just be another member, and not the top dog...

IMO that's the only option for a program with an ego the size of the State of Texas...

I still think the most viable option for them, given ego, money, and the fact that they'd love to do something that almost no other team could, is football independence. Dodds doesn't want to do that, maybe Brown doesn't, either, but they won't be running that show forever. If LHN can get on enough cable/satellite systems, maybe with ESPN bundling it with SEC network to get LHN into more places, then it might be worth it to ESPN to put more money on the table for the Horns and use independence to get even more live content for LHN.

(09-09-2013 04:12 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  Once Texas hires Nick Saban and starts winning 3 out of the next 4 national championships, their Tier 3 rights will be worth like $30 Million per year.





(just how close does it have to be to be "like"?)

All UT Tier 3 rights and Tier 1 and Tier 2 games not picked up by the television partners go to LHN. Given the difficulty ESPN is having in getting that on DirecTV and many cable systems, I doubt ESPN would be willing to renegotiate.

(09-09-2013 04:18 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(09-09-2013 04:00 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  But Texas isn't jumping to another conference. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see Texas stand pat, rather than move to another conference where they'd just be another member, and not the top dog...

IMO that's the only option for a program with an ego the size of the State of Texas...

I still think the most viable option for them, given ego, money, and the fact that they'd love to do something that almost no other team could, is football independence. Dodds doesn't want to do that, maybe Brown doesn't, either, but they won't be running that show forever. If LHN can get on enough cable/satellite systems, maybe with ESPN bundling it with SEC network to get LHN into more places, then it might be worth it to ESPN to put more money on the table for the Horns and use independence to get even more live content for LHN.

I don't see how anybody can go the independence route with the playoffs looming. If Notre Dame felt the need to become a semi conference member I can't see how Texas would see benefits from independence.
I would guess if there are only going to be 4 teams in the playoffs the conferences would go nuts if an independent got in.
I know that sooner or later the playoffs will expand but Texas would be crazy to go it alone as long as only 4 teams are in.
I'm not sure the powers that be would except an independent Texas and seriously what would they gain that they don't already have?

Indy might work for texas if

1) Texas joins acc with same deal as ND
2) playoffs expand to 8 teams

thus, texas football could play

1) 5 acc school's
2) ND + OU long term deals
3) 5 texas school's, texas tech, baylor, tcu, smu, houston ,rice, UTEP, UTSA, Texas state, N Texas, etc

some from group 3 would h/a, some would just be in austin or 2 for 1

(09-09-2013 02:53 PM)S11 Wrote:  It's the inventory the Big 12 intentionally carved out for each school. 1 FB, 6-8 hoops, etc...

It's no loophole despite the multitude of ACC fanboys who have tried to jump through hoops to get there across the internet.

It's not a loophole in the sense of getting out of the contract. It's a "loophole" in the sense that people assume if you are under a GOR you cannot profit from a move to another conference. The first thing to remember is that no matter which conference you are in, if a conference enforces its GOR, it can only do so by continuing to pay you for the use of your rights. There are no ifs, ands, or buts about that. The Loophole is that it puts the Big 12 in a precarious position. For one, it allows the school to still sell their Tier 3 rights, or even assign them to a new conference, allowing them to be of value to a new conference, and still make additional money on top of the money they receive for their assigned rights. But since any game not picked up for tier one or two TV reverts back to the school, it prevents the Big XII from "punishing" a school by retaining the rights, and burying them by not broadcasting the games. Those are two big hammers the Big Ten, the Pac 12, and the ACC have if they wish to convince a team to stay, and obstacles another conference would have to overcome to invite a new team.

So it's not a loophole that undermines the GOR at all. It is a loophole that undermines the notion that a school is chained to the conference.

(09-10-2013 05:14 AM)lofi Wrote:  

(09-09-2013 04:18 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(09-09-2013 04:00 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  But Texas isn't jumping to another conference. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see Texas stand pat, rather than move to another conference where they'd just be another member, and not the top dog...

IMO that's the only option for a program with an ego the size of the State of Texas...

I still think the most viable option for them, given ego, money, and the fact that they'd love to do something that almost no other team could, is football independence. Dodds doesn't want to do that, maybe Brown doesn't, either, but they won't be running that show forever. If LHN can get on enough cable/satellite systems, maybe with ESPN bundling it with SEC network to get LHN into more places, then it might be worth it to ESPN to put more money on the table for the Horns and use independence to get even more live content for LHN.

I don't see how anybody can go the independence route with the playoffs looming. If Notre Dame felt the need to become a semi conference member I can't see how Texas would see benefits from independence.
I would guess if there are only going to be 4 teams in the playoffs the conferences would go nuts if an independent got in.
I know that sooner or later the playoffs will expand but Texas would be crazy to go it alone as long as only 4 teams are in.
I'm not sure the powers that be would except an independent Texas and seriously what would they gain that they don't already have?

Notre Dame is an indy and was in the BCS title game last year. Nobody went nuts about that. Also, ND's deal with the ACC is about bowl games and being in the ACC for other sports, not about the need to be a semi-anything in football. Texas could get the same deal any time they want it.

Any further movement will be network driven, so all of the "rights" issues will be worked out beforehand.

(09-10-2013 12:04 PM)XLance Wrote:  Any further movement will be network driven, so all of the "rights" issues will be worked out beforehand.

That's right. And it is exactly what the Networks needed to be able to organize things as they see fit. Movement between the ACC or SEC for instance (not saying it will happen) could almost be handled in house by ESPN with some minor dealings with CBS. Movement from the Big 12 however would likely be a brokered deal with FOX representing their stake in the Big 10 and ESPN representing theirs in the ACC and SEC with some deference to the Big 10 for any stake they might still have there after the next contract. The PAC could get some assistance from either ESPN or FOX but neither of those networks are going to feel compelled to work for the PAC. This will be especially true if the interests of the PAC conflict with properties held by FOX or ESPN. I also think that this is why nobody will hear much about realignment from hear on out.

If we have further realignment it will be brokered and finalized before it is announced. So we will have no real information at all. We'll rock along and if it happens it happens. If it doesn't the interest will be left silently hanging in the air. So IMO there are no pundits or rumor mongers who can possibly have any credibility now.

The only problem with that theory is the networks don't exactly like this. Think about it: Realignment results in more TV for the conferences, right? Who do you think is paying that extra money? The networks. So why would they help the conferences to be in a position to charge them more money?