(02-26-2023 01:54 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 01:38 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 12:45 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  In this forum there's a great deal of faith placed in a magical document that NONE of us has seen. Credit where credit is due, our federal government certainly should be studying ACC methods regarding keeping classified materials secure and secret.

On the other hand, we have AD Alford from FSU who didn't mention the GoR when the Board asked about the cost of leaving the ACC. Now if this man hasn't seen the GoR or at least dispatched trusted underlings to do so and report back to him, then he has utterly failed to do the due diligence required by his position and should be removed. Prior to taking the job at FSU, Alford was AD at Central Michigan for 3 years and prior to that was an Associate AD at Oklahoma for 5.

I find it unlikely that just over a year into this job, someone with his background has so utterly failed to look into the relevant contracts OR misled the BoT. Either would, and should, place his job in extreme jeopardy. I think it is far more likely that he knows something we don't know, at least not yet.

We haven’t seen the current ACC GOR. However, we do have access to the ACC GOR from 2013 along with the current Big 12 GOR and they both effectively state the same thing. It’s a simple document. The employment contract paying minimum wage to the locker room attendant is legitimately going to be more complex and several pages longer than the GOR agreement.

The “faith” is coming from the Internet sleuths thinking that the top lawyers in the country being paid over $1000 per hour haven’t already pored over this document for hours and hours on end and didn’t already think about concepts like sovereign immunity, an unenforceable grant, whether damages even exist, various state laws, etc.

There was a report that the ACC GOR was copied from the Big 12 GOR.

From the OUT to SEC several things have been demonstrated:

4) It isn't going to happen until the remaining schools have gotten over their anger and are willing to let go. Negotiations apparently didn't get serious until Yormack was in place and the Big 12 had a new TV deal.

Just leaving and taking it to court is not at all a realistic scenario. That puts the future league's conference games at risk. Even if FSU is willing, the SEC or Big 10 simply will not do that.

Slightly off on that. In Yormark’s first public appearance in August he spoke of finding a win-win in regards to OU UT leaving, which is not surprising because many in B12 had viewed it as their ticket to getting espn as a willing counterparty. It was long viewed as being accommodating on GOR as means to get a deal. In this case, before PAC too

It would be a mistake by all to let it get to court. But sometimes such actions are needed for all parties to redistribute risk.

(02-26-2023 01:23 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 09:16 AM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 08:52 AM)CFBLurker Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 08:49 AM)Soobahk40050 Wrote:  https://thespun.com/.amp/more/top-storie...acc-rumors

Multiple sites reporting this. $120 million seems very low to me especially given OUTs numbers for one year.

FSU can take.it to court and risk it and potentially win, but if they lose they're gonna be broke.

Nope.

FSU has little to lose taking it to court. They can spend up to the cost of being in the ACC rather than SEC before it was a mistake to challenge.

The ACC schools trying to hold up the GOR, particularly the BC types? A lot to lose. An unfavorable ruling, and they lose the one thing keeping the P2 from taking 4-6 schools.

Espn likely wants to avoid this going to court.

The odds of such ruling is non zero, and administrators are risk averse. Remove the disaster scenario as a possibility by finding a settlement.

If there are 6 ACC schools with P2 offer, the madman approach can also be utilized due to the asymmetrical nature of this

Sigh.

The armchair lawyers exhaust me on this issue.

It’s NOT a no-risk situation for FSU.

Challenging the GOR would mean that FSU has announced its intention to withdraw from the ACC.

This would give the right for the ACC to immediately suspend payments to FSU.

If the FSU loses its GOR challenge, that doesn’t mean that FSU can just say, “My bad! We’ll just go back to the ACC and pretend this never happened!”

The fact that FSU attempted to leave the league and breach the GOR agreement would in and of itself breach the ACC by-laws and give the ACC the legal leverage to claim that they can continue to withhold all payments from FSU going forward. So, not only is FSU unable to go to the SEC in that situation, but they’d risk not getting paid for their rights in the ACC until 2036. FSU would get *zero* TV revenue until 2036 and *still* be stuck in the ACC.

The Internet “experts” (invariably all people that have a self-interest in seeing the ACC break apart) that think that you can push the nuclear button from a legal perspective and think that it’s “no risk” and you can avoid the fallout are sorely mistaken.

Lol. Frank the Fanboy. Which low grade law school did you go to? Stick to getting coffee Frank.

ACC without FSU playing football for a couple years isn’t a win for the ACC. It’s the next chapter in end of the ACC. Kicking out FSU in the case of a legal win is at best a lose-lose for ACC. Which means litigation helps FSU redistribute risk.

That gets to the madman approach. Which can better afford to ride through the pause in ACC play by top football schools more- the schools with no P2 on the other side, or those challenging the GOR to make half a billion more over 10 years? There’s a reason why it was leaked that several schools legally challenging would be end of ACC. The BC types would capitulate, and end up with less than the offered settlement.

I wouldn’t say no risk for FSU- little to lose is the preferred phrase and the one you quoted.

(02-26-2023 02:21 PM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 01:54 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 01:38 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 12:45 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  In this forum there's a great deal of faith placed in a magical document that NONE of us has seen. Credit where credit is due, our federal government certainly should be studying ACC methods regarding keeping classified materials secure and secret.

On the other hand, we have AD Alford from FSU who didn't mention the GoR when the Board asked about the cost of leaving the ACC. Now if this man hasn't seen the GoR or at least dispatched trusted underlings to do so and report back to him, then he has utterly failed to do the due diligence required by his position and should be removed. Prior to taking the job at FSU, Alford was AD at Central Michigan for 3 years and prior to that was an Associate AD at Oklahoma for 5.

I find it unlikely that just over a year into this job, someone with his background has so utterly failed to look into the relevant contracts OR misled the BoT. Either would, and should, place his job in extreme jeopardy. I think it is far more likely that he knows something we don't know, at least not yet.

We haven’t seen the current ACC GOR. However, we do have access to the ACC GOR from 2013 along with the current Big 12 GOR and they both effectively state the same thing. It’s a simple document. The employment contract paying minimum wage to the locker room attendant is legitimately going to be more complex and several pages longer than the GOR agreement.

The “faith” is coming from the Internet sleuths thinking that the top lawyers in the country being paid over $1000 per hour haven’t already pored over this document for hours and hours on end and didn’t already think about concepts like sovereign immunity, an unenforceable grant, whether damages even exist, various state laws, etc.

There was a report that the ACC GOR was copied from the Big 12 GOR.

From the OUT to SEC several things have been demonstrated:

4) It isn't going to happen until the remaining schools have gotten over their anger and are willing to let go. Negotiations apparently didn't get serious until Yormack was in place and the Big 12 had a new TV deal.

Just leaving and taking it to court is not at all a realistic scenario. That puts the future league's conference games at risk. Even if FSU is willing, the SEC or Big 10 simply will not do that.

Slightly off on that. In Yormark’s first public appearance in August he spoke of finding a win-win in regards to OU UT leaving, which is not surprising because many in B12 had viewed it as their ticket to getting espn as a willing counterparty. It was long viewed as being accommodating on GOR as means to get a deal. In this case, before PAC too

It would be a mistake by all to let it get to court. But sometimes such actions are needed for all parties to redistribute risk.

Well it is conceivable they take it to court while still in the ACC. But leaving and hoping for the best is not going to happen. The SEC or Big 10 aren't going to participate in that lottery.

For a school to move from one conference to another, three things must happen. The school has to want to move, the conference they want to move to must want them to, and most important of all, the media partner(s) of the gaining conference must want the change to happen.

There is little doubt in my mind that FSU wants to leave the ACC. The SEC probably would like to have them in their conference. What's not clear is whether ESPN wants this change to happen. If they do, it is entirely within their power to make it happen, and it will almost certainly cost them something. They would have to decide if the value to them gained by facilitating the move is greater than the cost to them to do so.

Under the right circumstances, the B1G would probably also like to have FSU in their conference. Less clear is whether FSU wants (or at least is willing) to make that move. I think it's a good bet that FOX, NBC et al would be willing to approve the move, and they would pay the B1G more than ESPN is currently paying the ACC for the Noles'. But in this case, there's fourth "must" in the equation. The losing media partner, ESPN, must be made whole in order to avoid a costly and lengthy court battle.

That's a lot of ifs, and nobody knows if ESPN is even sending signals to the parties about what prices they are willing to pay for different scenarios.

(02-26-2023 02:53 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 02:21 PM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 01:54 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 01:38 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 12:45 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  In this forum there's a great deal of faith placed in a magical document that NONE of us has seen. Credit where credit is due, our federal government certainly should be studying ACC methods regarding keeping classified materials secure and secret.

On the other hand, we have AD Alford from FSU who didn't mention the GoR when the Board asked about the cost of leaving the ACC. Now if this man hasn't seen the GoR or at least dispatched trusted underlings to do so and report back to him, then he has utterly failed to do the due diligence required by his position and should be removed. Prior to taking the job at FSU, Alford was AD at Central Michigan for 3 years and prior to that was an Associate AD at Oklahoma for 5.

I find it unlikely that just over a year into this job, someone with his background has so utterly failed to look into the relevant contracts OR misled the BoT. Either would, and should, place his job in extreme jeopardy. I think it is far more likely that he knows something we don't know, at least not yet.

We haven’t seen the current ACC GOR. However, we do have access to the ACC GOR from 2013 along with the current Big 12 GOR and they both effectively state the same thing. It’s a simple document. The employment contract paying minimum wage to the locker room attendant is legitimately going to be more complex and several pages longer than the GOR agreement.

The “faith” is coming from the Internet sleuths thinking that the top lawyers in the country being paid over $1000 per hour haven’t already pored over this document for hours and hours on end and didn’t already think about concepts like sovereign immunity, an unenforceable grant, whether damages even exist, various state laws, etc.

There was a report that the ACC GOR was copied from the Big 12 GOR.

From the OUT to SEC several things have been demonstrated:

4) It isn't going to happen until the remaining schools have gotten over their anger and are willing to let go. Negotiations apparently didn't get serious until Yormack was in place and the Big 12 had a new TV deal.

Just leaving and taking it to court is not at all a realistic scenario. That puts the future league's conference games at risk. Even if FSU is willing, the SEC or Big 10 simply will not do that.

Slightly off on that. In Yormark’s first public appearance in August he spoke of finding a win-win in regards to OU UT leaving, which is not surprising because many in B12 had viewed it as their ticket to getting espn as a willing counterparty. It was long viewed as being accommodating on GOR as means to get a deal. In this case, before PAC too

It would be a mistake by all to let it get to court. But sometimes such actions are needed for all parties to redistribute risk.

Well it is conceivable they take it to court while still in the ACC. But leaving and hoping for the best is not going to happen. The SEC or Big 10 aren't going to participate in that lottery.

IANAL, but I think that's when a court dismisses a case for "lack of ripeness"

First google hit uses the term "judicial review" a lot, so that might mean that ripeness is only a thing at the appelate court level. But maybe "judicial review" here just means courts doing court things, not consitutional law type things.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/ripe

(02-26-2023 02:56 PM)ken d Wrote:  For a school to move from one conference to another, three things must happen. The school has to want to move, the conference they want to move to must want them to, and most important of all, the media partner(s) of the gaining conference must want the change to happen.

There is little doubt in my mind that FSU wants to leave the ACC. The SEC probably would like to have them in their conference. What's not clear is whether ESPN wants this change to happen. If they do, it is entirely within their power to make it happen, and it will almost certainly cost them something. They would have to decide if the value to them gained by facilitating the move is greater than the cost to them to do so.

Under the right circumstances, the B1G would probably also like to have FSU in their conference. Less clear is whether FSU wants (or at least is willing) to make that move. I think it's a good bet that FOX, NBC et al would be willing to approve the move, and they would pay the B1G more than ESPN is currently paying the ACC for the Noles'. But in this case, there's fourth "must" in the equation. The losing media partner, ESPN, must be made whole in order to avoid a costly and lengthy court battle.

That's a lot of ifs, and nobody knows if ESPN is even sending signals to the parties about what prices they are willing to pay for different scenarios.

(02-26-2023 02:35 PM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  Which can better afford to ride through a bad Covid-like pause in play more- schools with no P2 on the other side or those challenging the GOR to make half a billion more over 10 years? There’s a reason why it was leaked that several schools legally challenging would be end of ACC

Yeah, it's interesting athletic directors from FSU and Clemson would speak to their thus far fruitless effort to move the ACC toward an unequal revenue-sharing model (which, Alford and Neff also acknowledge, is much closer to a Band-Aid than a cure for the financial handicap ACC schools face compared to their SEC counterparts that also prioritize football success)

One thing that seems odd is seemingly every mention of "breaking the GoR" includes only the potential massive financial risk to the institution making the challenge.

Not mentioned is the financial challenge and risk to the ACC itself if/when these disputes becomes a legal matter as opposed to just a verbal threat. Those legal bills will mount up for Jim Phillips and his office as well.

One difference: The ACC itself doesn't have the deep pockets or millionaire boosters of an FSU and a Clemson (and likely other schools, too) pushing this matter forward. That means the ACC "have-nots" would have to decide whether or not they'd want to chip in to help pay the costs for a matter that may or may not be resolved to their liking.

At least that's what the commish said last summer regarding the ironcladness of John Swofford's GoR

"I think it holds, but your guess is as good as mine."

Jim Phillips, July 20, 2022

(02-26-2023 01:23 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 09:16 AM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 08:52 AM)CFBLurker Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 08:49 AM)Soobahk40050 Wrote:  https://thespun.com/.amp/more/top-storie...acc-rumors

Multiple sites reporting this. $120 million seems very low to me especially given OUTs numbers for one year.

FSU can take.it to court and risk it and potentially win, but if they lose they're gonna be broke.

Nope.

FSU has little to lose taking it to court. They can spend up to the cost of being in the ACC rather than SEC before it was a mistake to challenge.

The ACC schools trying to hold up the GOR, particularly the BC types? A lot to lose. An unfavorable ruling, and they lose the one thing keeping the P2 from taking 4-6 schools.

Espn likely wants to avoid this going to court.

The odds of such ruling is non zero, and administrators are risk averse. Remove the disaster scenario as a possibility by finding a settlement.

If there are 6 ACC schools with P2 offer, the madman approach can also be utilized due to the asymmetrical nature of this

Sigh.

The armchair lawyers exhaust me on this issue.

It’s NOT a no-risk situation for FSU.

Challenging the GOR would mean that FSU has announced its intention to withdraw from the ACC.

This would give the right for the ACC to immediately suspend payments to FSU.

If the FSU loses its GOR challenge, that doesn’t mean that FSU can just say, “My bad! We’ll just go back to the ACC and pretend this never happened!”

The fact that FSU attempted to leave the league and breach the GOR agreement would in and of itself breach the ACC by-laws and give the ACC the legal leverage to claim that they can continue to withhold all payments from FSU going forward. So, not only is FSU unable to go to the SEC in that situation, but they’d risk not getting paid for their rights in the ACC until 2036. FSU would get *zero* TV revenue until 2036 and *still* be stuck in the ACC.

The Internet “experts” (invariably all people that have a self-interest in seeing the ACC break apart) that think that you can push the nuclear button from a legal perspective and think that it’s “no risk” and you can avoid the fallout are sorely mistaken.

https://rubbingtherock.com/2021/08/02/cl...ghts-mean/

https://www.wralsportsfan.com/here-s-a-c.../20361234/

I dunno about that.

It's interesting how this is apparently intertwined with the ESPN agreement.

I think espn could rather easily facilitate a move - possibly without even needing the conference's permission, simply by selectively determining its "needs"

(02-26-2023 03:22 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 02:35 PM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  Which can better afford to ride through a bad Covid-like pause in play more- schools with no P2 on the other side or those challenging the GOR to make half a billion more over 10 years? There’s a reason why it was leaked that several schools legally challenging would be end of ACC

Yeah, it's interesting athletic directors from FSU and Clemson would speak to their thus far fruitless effort to move the ACC toward an unequal revenue-sharing model (which, Alford and Neff also acknowledge, is much closer to a Band-Aid than a cure for the financial handicap ACC schools face compared to their SEC counterparts that also prioritize football success)

One thing that seems odd is seemingly every mention of "breaking the GoR" includes only the potential massive financial risk to the institution making the challenge.

Not mentioned is the financial challenge and risk to the ACC itself if/when these disputes becomes a legal matter as opposed to just a verbal threat. Those legal bills will mount up for Jim Phillips and his office as well.

One difference: The ACC itself doesn't have the deep pockets or millionaire boosters of an FSU and a Clemson

No, the ACC legal fees get paid before distributions to the schools. so they have an almost unlimited legal budget.

(02-26-2023 02:16 PM)GTFletch Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 08:49 AM)Soobahk40050 Wrote:  https://thespun.com/.amp/more/top-storie...acc-rumors

Multiple sites reporting this. $120 million seems very low to me especially given OUTs numbers for one year.

The ACC has a grant-of-rights deal in place through the 2035-36 season that guarantees, essentially, that even if a school jumps ship for another league, its television revenue still goes to the ACC.

So while the buyout to leave the ACC is only 120M. The GOR buyout is another story, as the conference's grant of rights makes it untenable financially for a school to leave, guaranteeing in the 20 years of the deal that a school's media rights, including revenue, for all home games would remain with the ACC regardless of the school's affiliation. (probably another 500M to get out of the GOR) Also if the Irish forgo football independence in the next 20 years, they are contracted to join the ACC.

Link
https://abc11.com/sports/acc-network-to-...9/1432489/

13 years, not 20.

ND's football rights are not subject to the ACC GOR, since NBC has a contract to broadcast those games (not ESPN/ACC).

ND's contract to join the ACC if it gives up independence is not part of the GOR, it is a separate contract (which can be more easily broken and then subject to damages negotiations).

I just wanted to make those corrections for the record.

(02-26-2023 02:35 PM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 01:23 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 09:16 AM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 08:52 AM)CFBLurker Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 08:49 AM)Soobahk40050 Wrote:  https://thespun.com/.amp/more/top-storie...acc-rumors

Multiple sites reporting this. $120 million seems very low to me especially given OUTs numbers for one year.

FSU can take.it to court and risk it and potentially win, but if they lose they're gonna be broke.

Nope.

FSU has little to lose taking it to court. They can spend up to the cost of being in the ACC rather than SEC before it was a mistake to challenge.

The ACC schools trying to hold up the GOR, particularly the BC types? A lot to lose. An unfavorable ruling, and they lose the one thing keeping the P2 from taking 4-6 schools.

Espn likely wants to avoid this going to court.

The odds of such ruling is non zero, and administrators are risk averse. Remove the disaster scenario as a possibility by finding a settlement.

If there are 6 ACC schools with P2 offer, the madman approach can also be utilized due to the asymmetrical nature of this

Sigh.

The armchair lawyers exhaust me on this issue.

It’s NOT a no-risk situation for FSU.

Challenging the GOR would mean that FSU has announced its intention to withdraw from the ACC.

This would give the right for the ACC to immediately suspend payments to FSU.

If the FSU loses its GOR challenge, that doesn’t mean that FSU can just say, “My bad! We’ll just go back to the ACC and pretend this never happened!”

The fact that FSU attempted to leave the league and breach the GOR agreement would in and of itself breach the ACC by-laws and give the ACC the legal leverage to claim that they can continue to withhold all payments from FSU going forward. So, not only is FSU unable to go to the SEC in that situation, but they’d risk not getting paid for their rights in the ACC until 2036. FSU would get *zero* TV revenue until 2036 and *still* be stuck in the ACC.

The Internet “experts” (invariably all people that have a self-interest in seeing the ACC break apart) that think that you can push the nuclear button from a legal perspective and think that it’s “no risk” and you can avoid the fallout are sorely mistaken.

Lol. Frank the Fanboy. Which low grade law school did you go to? Stick to getting coffee Frank.

ACC without FSU playing football for a couple years isn’t a win for the ACC. It’s the next chapter in end of the ACC. Kicking out FSU in the case of a legal win is at best a lose-lose for ACC. Which means litigation helps FSU redistribute risk.

That gets to the madman approach. Which can better afford to ride through the pause in ACC play by top football schools more- the schools with no P2 on the other side, or those challenging the GOR to make half a billion more over 10 years? There’s a reason why it was leaked that several schools legally challenging would be end of ACC. The BC types would capitulate, and end up with less than the offered settlement.

I wouldn’t say no risk for FSU- little to lose is the preferred phrase and the one you quoted.

Certified Clown

It's not happening. Get over yourself.

(02-26-2023 03:41 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  No, the ACC legal fees get paid before distributions to the schools. so they have an almost unlimited legal budget.

Just imo, but pretty sure BC, Syracuse, Wake et al. are not gonna tell Jim Phillips to keep their shares of the media rights money to fight a legal battle that Phillips himself isn't sure the ACC wins.

Especially not if Yappy Yormark sends word he has openings where those schools can make about the same amount of money with a whole lot more peace of mind

(02-26-2023 03:41 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 03:22 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 02:35 PM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  Which can better afford to ride through a bad Covid-like pause in play more- schools with no P2 on the other side or those challenging the GOR to make half a billion more over 10 years? There’s a reason why it was leaked that several schools legally challenging would be end of ACC

Yeah, it's interesting athletic directors from FSU and Clemson would speak to their thus far fruitless effort to move the ACC toward an unequal revenue-sharing model (which, Alford and Neff also acknowledge, is much closer to a Band-Aid than a cure for the financial handicap ACC schools face compared to their SEC counterparts that also prioritize football success)

One thing that seems odd is seemingly every mention of "breaking the GoR" includes only the potential massive financial risk to the institution making the challenge.

Not mentioned is the financial challenge and risk to the ACC itself if/when these disputes becomes a legal matter as opposed to just a verbal threat. Those legal bills will mount up for Jim Phillips and his office as well.

One difference: The ACC itself doesn't have the deep pockets or millionaire boosters of an FSU and a Clemson

No, the ACC legal fees get paid before distributions to the schools. so they have an almost unlimited legal budget.

Which will cut into every members distributions, which are already far behind the P2...another reason to settle on a reasonable departure fee and let those who want out go.

(02-26-2023 03:22 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 02:35 PM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  Which can better afford to ride through a bad Covid-like pause in play more- schools with no P2 on the other side or those challenging the GOR to make half a billion more over 10 years? There’s a reason why it was leaked that several schools legally challenging would be end of ACC

Yeah, it's interesting athletic directors from FSU and Clemson would speak to their thus far fruitless effort to move the ACC toward an unequal revenue-sharing model (which, Alford and Neff also acknowledge, is much closer to a Band-Aid than a cure for the financial handicap ACC schools face compared to their SEC counterparts that also prioritize football success)

One thing that seems odd is seemingly every mention of "breaking the GoR" includes only the potential massive financial risk to the institution making the challenge.

Not mentioned is the financial challenge and risk to the ACC itself if/when these disputes becomes a legal matter as opposed to just a verbal threat. Those legal bills will mount up for Jim Phillips and his office as well.

One difference: The ACC itself doesn't have the deep pockets or millionaire boosters of an FSU and a Clemson (and likely other schools, too) pushing this matter forward. That means the ACC "have-nots" would have to decide whether or not they'd want to chip in to help pay the costs for a matter that may or may not be resolved to their liking.

At least that's what the commish said last summer regarding the ironcladness of John Swofford's GoR

"I think it holds, but your guess is as good as mine."

Jim Phillips, July 20, 2022

"The ACC" will the total number of schools who have not sued to break the GOR.

They all will be paying the legal fees of "the ACC" in that litigation.

(02-26-2023 03:22 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 02:35 PM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  Which can better afford to ride through a bad Covid-like pause in play more- schools with no P2 on the other side or those challenging the GOR to make half a billion more over 10 years? There’s a reason why it was leaked that several schools legally challenging would be end of ACC

Yeah, it's interesting athletic directors from FSU and Clemson would speak to their thus far fruitless effort to move the ACC toward an unequal revenue-sharing model (which, Alford and Neff also acknowledge, is much closer to a Band-Aid than a cure for the financial handicap ACC schools face compared to their SEC counterparts that also prioritize football success)

One thing that seems odd is seemingly every mention of "breaking the GoR" includes only the potential massive financial risk to the institution making the challenge.

Not mentioned is the financial challenge and risk to the ACC itself if/when these disputes becomes a legal matter as opposed to just a verbal threat. Those legal bills will mount up for Jim Phillips and his office as well.

One difference: The ACC itself doesn't have the deep pockets or millionaire boosters of an FSU and a Clemson (and likely other schools, too) pushing this matter forward. That means the ACC "have-nots" would have to decide whether or not they'd want to chip in to help pay the costs for a matter that may or may not be resolved to their liking.

At least that's what the commish said last summer regarding the ironcladness of John Swofford's GoR

"I think it holds, but your guess is as good as mine."

Jim Phillips, July 20, 2022

Or maybe Pete, they don't have anywhere to go and they want to make as much money as possible?

Certainly it holds, unless they buy the future rights from ESPN and go... well where? That's not even guaranteed. The SEC can live without FSU and Clemson. So can the Big Ten. What's their rush? They certainly aren't going to meddle in another conference's affairs.

(02-26-2023 03:49 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 02:35 PM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 01:23 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 09:16 AM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 08:52 AM)CFBLurker Wrote:  FSU can take.it to court and risk it and potentially win, but if they lose they're gonna be broke.

Nope.

FSU has little to lose taking it to court. They can spend up to the cost of being in the ACC rather than SEC before it was a mistake to challenge.

The ACC schools trying to hold up the GOR, particularly the BC types? A lot to lose. An unfavorable ruling, and they lose the one thing keeping the P2 from taking 4-6 schools.

Espn likely wants to avoid this going to court.

The odds of such ruling is non zero, and administrators are risk averse. Remove the disaster scenario as a possibility by finding a settlement.

If there are 6 ACC schools with P2 offer, the madman approach can also be utilized due to the asymmetrical nature of this

Sigh.

The armchair lawyers exhaust me on this issue.

It’s NOT a no-risk situation for FSU.

Challenging the GOR would mean that FSU has announced its intention to withdraw from the ACC.

This would give the right for the ACC to immediately suspend payments to FSU.

If the FSU loses its GOR challenge, that doesn’t mean that FSU can just say, “My bad! We’ll just go back to the ACC and pretend this never happened!”

The fact that FSU attempted to leave the league and breach the GOR agreement would in and of itself breach the ACC by-laws and give the ACC the legal leverage to claim that they can continue to withhold all payments from FSU going forward. So, not only is FSU unable to go to the SEC in that situation, but they’d risk not getting paid for their rights in the ACC until 2036. FSU would get *zero* TV revenue until 2036 and *still* be stuck in the ACC.

The Internet “experts” (invariably all people that have a self-interest in seeing the ACC break apart) that think that you can push the nuclear button from a legal perspective and think that it’s “no risk” and you can avoid the fallout are sorely mistaken.

Lol. Frank the Fanboy. Which low grade law school did you go to? Stick to getting coffee Frank.

ACC without FSU playing football for a couple years isn’t a win for the ACC. It’s the next chapter in end of the ACC. Kicking out FSU in the case of a legal win is at best a lose-lose for ACC. Which means litigation helps FSU redistribute risk.

That gets to the madman approach. Which can better afford to ride through the pause in ACC play by top football schools more- the schools with no P2 on the other side, or those challenging the GOR to make half a billion more over 10 years? There’s a reason why it was leaked that several schools legally challenging would be end of ACC. The BC types would capitulate, and end up with less than the offered settlement.

I wouldn’t say no risk for FSU- little to lose is the preferred phrase and the one you quoted.

Certified Clown

It's not happening. Get over yourself.

Frank can defend himself, but I believe that he graduated from the University of Illinois and from DePaul Law School.

What law school did this guy graduate from?

(02-26-2023 03:52 PM)TerryD Wrote:  They all will be paying the legal fees of "the ACC" in that litigation.

How many of those schools would rather pay those legal fees to preserve the GoR if they have an option to move to the SEC, B1G or Big XII?

(02-26-2023 03:55 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 03:52 PM)TerryD Wrote:  They all will be paying the legal fees of "the ACC" in that litigation.

How many of those schools would rather pay those legal fees to preserve the GoR if they have an option to move to the SEC, B1G or Big XII?

They don't have any choice unless they join FSU in suing "the ACC".

(02-26-2023 03:50 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 03:41 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  No, the ACC legal fees get paid before distributions to the schools. so they have an almost unlimited legal budget.

Just imo, but pretty sure BC, Syracuse, Wake et al. are not gonna tell Jim Phillips to keep their shares of the media rights money to fight a legal battle that Phillips himself isn't sure the ACC wins.

Especially not if Yappy Yormark sends word he has openings where those schools can make about the same amount of money with a whole lot more peace of mind

(02-26-2023 03:55 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  

(02-26-2023 03:52 PM)TerryD Wrote:  They all will be paying the legal fees of "the ACC" in that litigation.

How many of those schools would rather pay those legal fees to preserve the GoR if they have an option to move to the SEC, B1G or Big XII?

when I was a kid, Sesame Street had a recurring segment where they sang

one if these things us not like the others
one of these things does not belong