(05-17-2019 05:15 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-17-2019 04:14 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-17-2019 03:30 PM)ken d Wrote:  I suppose it's possible that schools could decline to sign GoRs in the future. But then, their conference's media partners will reduce the amounts and/or years they are willing to commit to based on the increased instability that results. If a school doesn't want to sign a GoR or agree to litigate disputes in another because they want to leave their present conference they could have done so more cheaply in the past.

We know that schools will decline to sign GORs in the present, because it is clear that Aresco wanted the AAC schools to sign a GOR, or at least floated that idea, during the recently concluded TV negotiations, but that idea was quickly torpedoed by the membership, all of whom have aspirations of being invited to a P5 conference.

That said, I'm not sure that future willingness to sign or not sign a GOR will be impacted much by this SCOTUS decision. Those decisions are made by schools based on their perceptions of what is in their interest. I do think that if conferences attempt to get members to sign an agreement waiving their right not to be sued in other states, the membership will reject that, as there is no earthly reason to voluntarily give the conference a legal "home field advantage" in a dispute.

Moreover, nobody needs a GOR including the networks. Clauses in the contract and bylaws of the conference determining a reasonable means of withdrawal worked fine for decades without the hysteria which was really promulgated by conference employees afraid of losing their jobs who in turn whipped up the fear among the college presidents.

A conference can easily require a two year notice for withdrawal and expect it to be upheld because 2 years is about what it takes to work out the paper work and legal issues anyway. Networks can put a clause in every contract that allows them to renegotiate value upon a departure or acquisition. It's just part of the process of doing business. And every conference that thought a long term contract was beneficial has gotten screwed so the duration of these contracts has no real business being longer than 10 years.

If the GOR for state schools is cracked it becomes a worthless tool anyway. And IMO all state schools everywhere and at all times should be able to operate in their self interest on behalf of the taxpayers of their states.

I agree with this, but ... it does seem that the TV networks do think that GORs have legal teeth. I think that e.g. networks made it clear to Aresco that there would be a bit more money on the table for the AAC if they signed a GOR, which would only be the case if media felt that a GOR provided more protection for their investment, i.e., did raise barriers to exit.

Oftentimes, perception can overcome reality, or is reality.