I encourage people to read all 80 some pages.

The crowing about the fiduciary issue being dismissed misses the real point. The judge rightly concluded the NC General Assembly could put the school on the hook as a fiduciary but specifically chose not to in the way it crafted enabling legislation. It's there to protect that State of NC that does not want to be on the hook via UNC and State. Absent the special legislation a nonprofit like the ACC doesn't have the structure to create a fiduciary, but it does have the structure to penalize the Hell out of member screwing up the value of the contracts once and if that happens.

The judge pointed out that it was the ACC as the rightful injured party, damaged by FSU's breaches and threats.

The attempt to hide behind that falsity that the FSU Board of Trustees and FSU is not the same thing was bush league.

Personal injury attorneys located in states outside NC might think FSU won a few things but the reality is that UNC and NC State won everything regarding FSU. It might take a while for that to sink in.

The judges comments and descriptions of the actions of key personnel at FSU should worry them. With all the talk about Swofford being a liar it would comical if the FSU President was indicted or sued for tortious interefence with a contract.

(04-04-2024 10:31 PM)SouthernConfBoy Wrote:  I encourage people to read all 80 some pages.

The crowing about the fiduciary issue being dismissed misses the real point. The judge rightly concluded the NC General Assembly could put the school on the hook as a fiduciary but specifically chose not to in the way it crafted enabling legislation. It's there to protect that State of NC that does not want to be on the hook via UNC and State. Absent the special legislation a nonprofit like the ACC doesn't have the structure to create a fiduciary, but it does have the structure to penalize the Hell out of member screwing up the value of the contracts once and if that happens.

The judge pointed out that it was the ACC as the rightful injured party, damaged by FSU's breaches and threats.

The attempt to hide behind that falsity that the FSU Board of Trustees and FSU is not the same thing was bush league.

Personal injury attorneys located in states outside NC might think FSU won a few things but the reality is that UNC and NC State won everything regarding FSU. It might take a while for that to sink in.

The judges comments and descriptions of the actions of key personnel at FSU should worry them. With all the talk about Swofford being a liar it would comical if the FSU President was indicted or sued for tortious interefence with a contract.

'Prosperity is just around the corner.'
– Herbert Hoover

Not according to B12 fans

(04-07-2024 07:34 AM)GTFletch Wrote:  

I think the last sentence in this statement from the ACC should be amended to more accurately reflect reality. The following statement would be more appropriate:

We remain committed to acting in the best interests of some of the league’s members and will see this process through to protect the ACC’s position as a mid-tier conference.

Though FSU "won" the fiduciary argument, the ACC probably wins more benefit as both FSU and Clemson allege the ACC has a fiduciary responsibility to them. Contracts are generally deemed to be at arms length, i.e. NOT a fiduciary agreement. FSU and Clemson may soon regret this "victory".

(04-07-2024 01:31 PM)PAW79 Wrote:  

(04-07-2024 07:34 AM)GTFletch Wrote:  

I think the last sentence in this statement from the ACC should be amended to more accurately reflect reality. The following statement would be more appropriate:

We remain committed to acting in the best interests of some the vast majority of the league’s members and will see this process through to protect the ACC’s position as a mid-tier the third highest paid conference.

Top third baby

(04-07-2024 08:36 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(04-07-2024 01:31 PM)PAW79 Wrote:  

(04-07-2024 07:34 AM)GTFletch Wrote:  

I think the last sentence in this statement from the ACC should be amended to more accurately reflect reality. The following statement would be more appropriate:

We remain committed to acting in the best interests of some the vast majority of the league’s members and will see this process through to protect the ACC’s position as a mid-tier the third highest paid conference.

Top third baby

No argument at all with "vast majority" but the ACC, whether 3rd or 4th highest paid, is absolutely a mid-tier conference now. And, that "vast majority" along with the conference commissioner appear to be just fine with being relegated to mid-tier status.

(04-08-2024 06:25 PM)PAW79 Wrote:  

(04-07-2024 08:36 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(04-07-2024 01:31 PM)PAW79 Wrote:  

(04-07-2024 07:34 AM)GTFletch Wrote:  

I think the last sentence in this statement from the ACC should be amended to more accurately reflect reality. The following statement would be more appropriate:

We remain committed to acting in the best interests of some the vast majority of the league’s members and will see this process through to protect the ACC’s position as a mid-tier the third highest paid conference.

Top third baby

No argument at all with "vast majority" but the ACC, whether 3rd or 4th highest paid, is absolutely a mid-tier conference now. And, that "vast majority" along with the conference commissioner appear to be just fine with being relegated to mid-tier status.

At what point in the past 90 years has Clemson been in the SEC or Big 10? You were not invited to move in 1932. You didn't move after the Bowl Ban. You didn't move after 800 SAT rule. You didn't move after the Conference probation laid on you in the 80's. You didn't move after your first national title, you didn't move after your second.

When you say that the Commissioner appears just fine with reality, what should he be ? Should he be like a Professional Wrestler or Scurrilous Politician? Does he have to yell and show his about things that can on change at the margins. When has Georgia or Bama, or even Auburn not had more money than you? When are you breaking ground on expanding memorial by 20K to match or surpass Tennessee, Bama, or LSU?

You move to the SEC and your costs rise 30M a year - minimum. How much more money to you expect to net from moving, not gross, net?

You have the best of all worlds in the ACC. You get to be able to dominate football without the league members despising you. You get to compete at a discount. Your path the playoff is markedly easier than in the SEC.

Who do you want to throw out and why?

The ACC FSU war is escalating, and The Big Mountain is your trusted place for updates and analysis!

Judge Bledsoe gave his order and opinions on FSUs Motion to Dismiss and Motion to Stay Mecklenburg, NC. This can be viewed as a win for the ACC as the lawsuit will move forward in North Carolina, but FSU was given a dismissal on the Fiduciary Duty complaint from the ACC.
The fellas talk about the opinions of the judge and the areas that may have surprised them in his rulings.

Link
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jcQq7yb8cvY

(04-08-2024 07:12 PM)SouthernConfBoy Wrote:  

(04-08-2024 06:25 PM)PAW79 Wrote:  

(04-07-2024 08:36 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(04-07-2024 01:31 PM)PAW79 Wrote:  

(04-07-2024 07:34 AM)GTFletch Wrote:  

I think the last sentence in this statement from the ACC should be amended to more accurately reflect reality. The following statement would be more appropriate:

We remain committed to acting in the best interests of some the vast majority of the league’s members and will see this process through to protect the ACC’s position as a mid-tier the third highest paid conference.

Top third baby

No argument at all with "vast majority" but the ACC, whether 3rd or 4th highest paid, is absolutely a mid-tier conference now. And, that "vast majority" along with the conference commissioner appear to be just fine with being relegated to mid-tier status.

At what point in the past 90 years has Clemson been in the SEC or Big 10? You were not invited to move in 1932. You didn't move after the Bowl Ban. You didn't move after 800 SAT rule. You didn't move after the Conference probation laid on you in the 80's. You didn't move after your first national title, you didn't move after your second.

When you say that the Commissioner appears just fine with reality, what should he be ? Should he be like a Professional Wrestler or Scurrilous Politician? Does he have to yell and show his about things that can on change at the margins. When has Georgia or Bama, or even Auburn not had more money than you? When are you breaking ground on expanding memorial by 20K to match or surpass Tennessee, Bama, or LSU?

You move to the SEC and your costs rise 30M a year - minimum. How much more money to you expect to net from moving, not gross, net?

You have the best of all worlds in the ACC. You get to be able to dominate football without the league members despising you. You get to compete at a discount. Your path the playoff is markedly easier than in the SEC.

Who do you want to throw out and why?

All true. Through the years, the ACC has been a really good home for Clemson. Clemson has done very well in football as a member of the ACC and has done so with fewer $$$ than many others (UGA, Bama, OSU, etc.). But times change. Clemson's athletic department and administration have reached the conclusion that the $$$ disparity between the SEC/BIG and the ACC is something that will ultimately impact their ability to compete with the UGA's, Bama's, and OSU's. As such, they feel it is time to move. The only team Clemson wants to "throw out" of the ACC is Clemson. No ill will at all towards the ACC - I hope the conference does well.

(04-08-2024 08:43 PM)GTFletch Wrote:  The ACC FSU war is escalating, and The Big Mountain is your trusted place for updates and analysis!

Judge Bledsoe gave his order and opinions on FSUs Motion to Dismiss and Motion to Stay Mecklenburg, NC. This can be viewed as a win for the ACC as the lawsuit will move forward in North Carolina, but FSU was given a dismissal on the Fiduciary Duty complaint from the ACC.
The fellas talk about the opinions of the judge and the areas that may have surprised them in his rulings.

Link
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jcQq7yb8cvY

The Biiig!Mountain is one of my favorite podcast.

(04-08-2024 08:55 PM)PAW79 Wrote:  

(04-08-2024 07:12 PM)SouthernConfBoy Wrote:  

(04-08-2024 06:25 PM)PAW79 Wrote:  

(04-07-2024 08:36 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(04-07-2024 01:31 PM)PAW79 Wrote:  I think the last sentence in this statement from the ACC should be amended to more accurately reflect reality. The following statement would be more appropriate:

We remain committed to acting in the best interests of some the vast majority of the league’s members and will see this process through to protect the ACC’s position as a mid-tier the third highest paid conference.

Top third baby

No argument at all with "vast majority" but the ACC, whether 3rd or 4th highest paid, is absolutely a mid-tier conference now. And, that "vast majority" along with the conference commissioner appear to be just fine with being relegated to mid-tier status.

At what point in the past 90 years has Clemson been in the SEC or Big 10? You were not invited to move in 1932. You didn't move after the Bowl Ban. You didn't move after 800 SAT rule. You didn't move after the Conference probation laid on you in the 80's. You didn't move after your first national title, you didn't move after your second.

When you say that the Commissioner appears just fine with reality, what should he be ? Should he be like a Professional Wrestler or Scurrilous Politician? Does he have to yell and show his about things that can on change at the margins. When has Georgia or Bama, or even Auburn not had more money than you? When are you breaking ground on expanding memorial by 20K to match or surpass Tennessee, Bama, or LSU?

You move to the SEC and your costs rise 30M a year - minimum. How much more money to you expect to net from moving, not gross, net?

You have the best of all worlds in the ACC. You get to be able to dominate football without the league members despising you. You get to compete at a discount. Your path the playoff is markedly easier than in the SEC.

Who do you want to throw out and why?

All true. Through the years, the ACC has been a really good home for Clemson. Clemson has done very well in football as a member of the ACC and has done so with fewer $$$ than many others (UGA, Bama, OSU, etc.). But times change. Clemson's athletic department and administration have reached the conclusion that the $$$ disparity between the SEC/BIG and the ACC is something that will ultimately impact their ability to compete with the UGA's, Bama's, and OSU's. As such, they feel it is time to move. The only team Clemson wants to "throw out" of the ACC is Clemson. No ill will at all towards the ACC - I hope the conference does well.

Oh! you young fool.

(04-08-2024 08:55 PM)PAW79 Wrote:  

(04-08-2024 07:12 PM)SouthernConfBoy Wrote:  

(04-08-2024 06:25 PM)PAW79 Wrote:  

(04-07-2024 08:36 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(04-07-2024 01:31 PM)PAW79 Wrote:  I think the last sentence in this statement from the ACC should be amended to more accurately reflect reality. The following statement would be more appropriate:

We remain committed to acting in the best interests of some the vast majority of the league’s members and will see this process through to protect the ACC’s position as a mid-tier the third highest paid conference.

Top third baby

No argument at all with "vast majority" but the ACC, whether 3rd or 4th highest paid, is absolutely a mid-tier conference now. And, that "vast majority" along with the conference commissioner appear to be just fine with being relegated to mid-tier status.

At what point in the past 90 years has Clemson been in the SEC or Big 10? You were not invited to move in 1932. You didn't move after the Bowl Ban. You didn't move after 800 SAT rule. You didn't move after the Conference probation laid on you in the 80's. You didn't move after your first national title, you didn't move after your second.

When you say that the Commissioner appears just fine with reality, what should he be ? Should he be like a Professional Wrestler or Scurrilous Politician? Does he have to yell and show his about things that can on change at the margins. When has Georgia or Bama, or even Auburn not had more money than you? When are you breaking ground on expanding memorial by 20K to match or surpass Tennessee, Bama, or LSU?

You move to the SEC and your costs rise 30M a year - minimum. How much more money to you expect to net from moving, not gross, net?

You have the best of all worlds in the ACC. You get to be able to dominate football without the league members despising you. You get to compete at a discount. Your path the playoff is markedly easier than in the SEC.

Who do you want to throw out and why?

All true. Through the years, the ACC has been a really good home for Clemson. Clemson has done very well in football as a member of the ACC and has done so with fewer $$$ than many others (UGA, Bama, OSU, etc.). But times change. Clemson's athletic department and administration have reached the conclusion that the $$$ disparity between the SEC/BIG and the ACC is something that will ultimately impact their ability to compete with the UGA's, Bama's, and OSU's. As such, they feel it is time to move. The only team Clemson wants to "throw out" of the ACC is Clemson. No ill will at all towards the ACC - I hope the conference does well.

https://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances

According to the above numbers in the last full reporting year Clemson made this following amounts less than SEC schools:

81 M Texas
56 M Bama
45 M Georgia
41 M LSU
35 M TAMU
32 M UF
16 M Auburn
+2 M Tennessee

The new but yet to take effect SEC TV contract will boost these numbers by about $15 M annually. They will get about $7 M more from the playoff.

The SEC "only" got $36 m a school for Television in the FY 21-22 - the last reporting year. The ACC "only: got $30 M a school for Television in FY 21-22.

Moving to the SEC gets you the $6 in the current time frame, and the $22 in the next few year. That's near $30 M, but relative to the SEC you only close your gap by $6 M and you stay $30-80 million a year behind Texas, Bama, Georgia, Florida, TAMU, LSU, and OU.

The only way for you to start closing the gap is to add 25K seats to Memorial and fill them. Of course you probably can't put more than 80K in the stands if you are perpetually losing 3-4 games a year can you?

(04-09-2024 11:13 AM)SouthernConfBoy Wrote:  https://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances

According to the above numbers in the last full reporting year Clemson made this following amounts less than SEC schools:

81 M Texas
56 M Bama
45 M Georgia
41 M LSU
35 M TAMU
32 M UF
16 M Auburn
+2 M Tennessee

The new but yet to take effect SEC TV contract will boost these numbers by about $15 M annually. They will get about $7 M more from the playoff.

The SEC "only" got $36 m a school for Television in the FY 21-22 - the last reporting year. The ACC "only: got $30 M a school for Television in FY 21-22.

Moving to the SEC gets you the $6 in the current time frame, and the $22 in the next few year. That's near $30 M, but relative to the SEC you only close your gap by $6 M and you stay $30-80 million a year behind Texas, Bama, Georgia, Florida, TAMU, LSU, and OU.

The only way for you to start closing the gap is to add 25K seats to Memorial and fill them. Of course you probably can't put more than 80K in the stands if you are perpetually losing 3-4 games a year can you?

Going to the SEC nets you a cool $30,000,000/yr more than the ACC. I'll generously assume ACCN in state rates in CA/TX for now will hold the gap at $30m instead of it increasing to $40m fairly soon like I think it will.

Play that forward over a decade. That's $300,000,000 more ESPN deposits at SEC schools. You're talking about a brand new *NICE* basketball arena. Over 20 years you're now talking about a brand new *NICE* football stadium. These are real differences that destabilize and remove the ability to compete. Vanderbilt cashes a football check, doesn't compete in football, and then turns around and fields High-A semi-pro team in college baseball with the money. What are you going to do if you're Virginia Tech and you feel really saucy and want to pay your WBB coach $2,500,000/yr to stay and keep winning at a high level ... then Kentucky walks in, laughs, and puts twice that in "couch change" ESPN money that you don't have on the table. You're going to lose that coach. Duke cannot outpay Kentucky for a MBB staff. I don't care how much they fleece the Iron Dukes ... SEC football money will easily stiff arm them all by itself. Same story for UNC. Same story for all of us. GT had the most improved offense in college football last season. Three different SEC teams offered to nearly double his salary to leave. GT had to fight to keep him. If he keeps fielding offenses that keep lighting everybody up eventually Alabama will write a check GT cannot.

It's not that you can't compete against the SEC with these kind of TV money disadvantages. You can. You can even win natties. But it will be nearly impossible to do so consistently. The cream of your crop ... players, coaches, supporting personnel, all of it ... will be bought away by higher bidders every year. Can you reload in the face of that attrition over and over and over again? Probably not.

(04-09-2024 12:05 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(04-09-2024 11:13 AM)SouthernConfBoy Wrote:  https://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances

According to the above numbers in the last full reporting year Clemson made this following amounts less than SEC schools:

81 M Texas
56 M Bama
45 M Georgia
41 M LSU
35 M TAMU
32 M UF
16 M Auburn
+2 M Tennessee

The new but yet to take effect SEC TV contract will boost these numbers by about $15 M annually. They will get about $7 M more from the playoff.

The SEC "only" got $36 m a school for Television in the FY 21-22 - the last reporting year. The ACC "only: got $30 M a school for Television in FY 21-22.

Moving to the SEC gets you the $6 in the current time frame, and the $22 in the next few year. That's near $30 M, but relative to the SEC you only close your gap by $6 M and you stay $30-80 million a year behind Texas, Bama, Georgia, Florida, TAMU, LSU, and OU.

The only way for you to start closing the gap is to add 25K seats to Memorial and fill them. Of course you probably can't put more than 80K in the stands if you are perpetually losing 3-4 games a year can you?

Going to the SEC nets you a cool $30,000,000/yr more than the ACC. I'll generously assume ACCN in state rates in CA/TX for now will hold the gap at $30m instead of it increasing to $40m fairly soon like I think it will.

Play that forward over a decade. That's $300,000,000 more ESPN deposits at SEC schools. You're talking about a brand new *NICE* basketball arena. Over 20 years you're now talking about a brand new *NICE* football stadium. These are real differences that destabilize and remove the ability to compete. Vanderbilt cashes a football check, doesn't compete in football, and then turns around and fields High-A semi-pro team in college baseball with the money. What are you going to do if you're Virginia Tech and you feel really saucy and want to pay your WBB coach $2,500,000/yr to stay and keep winning at a high level ... then Kentucky walks in, laughs, and puts twice that in "couch change" ESPN money that you don't have on the table. You're going to lose that coach. Duke cannot outpay Kentucky for a MBB staff. I don't care how much they fleece the Iron Dukes ... SEC football money will easily stiff arm them all by itself. Same story for UNC. Same story for all of us. GT had the most improved offense in college football last season. Three different SEC teams offered to nearly double his salary to leave. GT had to fight to keep him. If he keeps fielding offenses that keep lighting everybody up eventually Alabama will write a check GT cannot.

It's not that you can't compete against the SEC with these kind of TV money disadvantages. You can. You can even win natties. But it will be nearly impossible to do so consistently. The cream of your crop ... players, coaches, supporting personnel, all of it ... will be bought away by higher bidders every year. Can you reload in the face of that attrition over and over and over again? Probably not.

GT's financial issues are not Clemson's. In return for the cool $30 m you get 2 extra football losses a year, you cease to be at the top of your conference. You become middle of the pack in the SEC. That's not really how IPTAY works - as middle of the pack football booster organization. GTAA might survive that, the Wolfpack Club might survive that. The Rams Club and IPTAY would not. GTAA's problem is not the Calculus of Money, it has been Calculus itself.

It's not the TV money that makes the difference, it's the Football Stadium money. It's the 40K to 55K seat advantage over 7 annual games advantage. TV money does not fix that.

Face value of Bama football tickets for next year run $500-$775 for seven games. Individually they charge as little as 35/37 for Mercer and Western Kentucky, and 200 for Auburn and Georgia. But you need points to get good tickets so lets it also take a annual contribution of $500. The result is about $170 a ticket. The face value of an individual ticket may be less or may be more, but the reality is that most are bought as season tickets making individual prices meaningless.

What does that mean for a GT or Clemson revenue stream versus Bama if Bama can get $170 a ticket on average? It means Clemson runs $22 M behind Bama on a 7 game season because they have 19K fewer seats. GT is going to run $53 M a year behind Bama, selling on average 45,000 less tickets, across 7 games.

(04-09-2024 12:29 PM)SouthernConfBoy Wrote:  It's not the TV money that makes the difference, it's the Football Stadium money. It's the 40K to 55K seat advantage over 7 annual games advantage. TV money does not fix that.

Face value of Bama football tickets for next year run $500-$775 for seven games. Individually they charge as little as 35/37 for Mercer and Western Kentucky, and 200 for Auburn and Georgia. But you need points to get good tickets so lets it also take a annual contribution of $500. The result is about $170 a ticket. The face value of an individual ticket may be less or may be more, but the reality is that most are bought as season tickets making individual prices meaningless.

What does that mean for a GT or Clemson revenue stream versus Bama if Bama can get $170 a ticket on average? It means Clemson runs $22 M behind Bama on a 7 game season because they have 19K fewer seats. GT is going to run $53 M a year behind Bama, selling on average 45,000 less tickets, across 7 games.

It's not as simple as it would seem. The wait list for box seating at Bobby Dodd Stadium has been over 10 years long even through the Geoff Collins Error. Bobby Dodd Stadium does not meet market demand for premium seating options. Is GT going to put 100k in the seats at $75/ticket + donation requirements for better seats? No. But there's a world where GT can charge $250-$400/ticket for 20,000-30,000 premium tickets, then an array of more conventionally priced tickets. Is Bama going to come out ahead anyway in ticket revenue? Of course. But the disparity isn't at big as a first blush look might indicate. And right now TV revenue is either the #1 or #2 revenue line item at most schools. Factor in the relative ticket revenue strength of schools and the TV revenue disparity is going to be worse than the ticket money disparity at most places.

The argument of you're going to be moving loses down the ladder pole only applies if you're an ACC team joining an SEC of 18 teams. If this gets to be a full blown SoCon Reunion with the SEC going to 24 teams, mostly out of the ACC + Kansas, balance is restored across football and the strength of *all* sports in the SEC is enhanced.

Florida State may be leading the jail break. But as we saw from the Pac-12, when the walls are breached the place can empty out surprisingly quickly. I hope GT can be in SoCon 2.0 SEC of 24 teams. If not I hope GT can be in a B1G with as many other ACC southern teams as possible. I suspect either way, everybody from the ACC getting a P2 invite is going to be getting the Stanford-Cal-Maryland-Rutgers treatment and be weened into a full share over a decade. Maybe that should be the real gripe by SCB that has bite ... even if you're FSU or Clemson you're going to get a partial share for awhile no matter which P2 you go to.