(12-25-2023 02:43 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(12-25-2023 01:29 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  Ok, so first, I said "settlement". : )

That aside, looking at what you all are talking about, I believe the text of the GoR makes it clear that it's linked to the espn deal.

Which sounds to me like: no deal, no GoR.

Look under the section called "recitals"

https://wwwcache.wralsportsfan.com/asset...d1w2if.pdf

(Apparently the only update to this one was the 2016 extension.)

But that wasn't what I was looking at.

I was thinking that it says a lot about applying to "accepted members". So the settlement could be just that FSU is no longer considered an "accepted member" as far as the extension is concerned, if they just leave before the extension takes effect. (in 2027)

And also, if the contract they signed was to 2027, then that's an easy place to settle upon. Just hold them to that contract, and not to the unilateral expansion.

Doing it this way, yes, it would be the conference voting to let them out of the conference, etc.

But it allows the concept of a GoR to continue to be unchallenged.

I would think the various stake-holders and powers-that-be would jump at this solution.

And honestly - to address "fairness" (ie to avoid other schools' filing follow-up suits) allow any other ACC members who want to leave, to also do so.

The ACC rebuilds, and we go from there.

There's still the exit fee. and if they want out in 2026, and not 2027, there's that cost as well.

So whoever stays in the ACC will likely have some money to play with.

I believe thats where this is headed. If ESPN was smart, they would have re-upped the contract prior to the FSU lawsuit.

Since they did not, the GOR will likely include up to the 2027 season.

A big reason for this is that the ACC signed a deal, not ratified by the schools, that gave ESPN an option to renew or not post 2027. If that is true, then the GOR 2027-2036 is not going to be valid. Had the schools ratified it, then FSU would lose on the GOR grounds.

So the likely result, if what we know is true, is that FSU gets out of the GOR for anything beyond the 2027 timeframe, as their equity on that part of the contract was nullified by the ACC single handidly granting espn a "look-out" period, which removed FSU's equity stake for their GOR.

So, if I had to guess, FSU is out of the GOR in 2027, and will have to pay an exit fee equal to what Maryland paid.

Thats what it will likely come down to.

Question-when did the GOR to 2036 happen? Was that done in 2016 or later?
If it was 2016, FSU did sign it willingly.

Now they could argue misrepresentation from the ACC about whether the ACC let them know ESPN wasn't guaranteeing anything past 2027. They could make an argument about the ACC commissioner unilaterally extending the ESPN option from 2021 to 2025 to extend the contract to 2036. The bizarre way the ACC protects all these contracts would certainly make you question the ACC office motives. I don't know whether any of these things would be enough to win, but they are enough to raise doubt.

The simplest solution would be for Florida State to go ahead and write the Big Check and hope that the ACC accepts it.

(12-25-2023 03:05 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-25-2023 02:43 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(12-25-2023 01:29 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  Ok, so first, I said "settlement". : )

That aside, looking at what you all are talking about, I believe the text of the GoR makes it clear that it's linked to the espn deal.

Which sounds to me like: no deal, no GoR.

Look under the section called "recitals"

https://wwwcache.wralsportsfan.com/asset...d1w2if.pdf

(Apparently the only update to this one was the 2016 extension.)

But that wasn't what I was looking at.

I was thinking that it says a lot about applying to "accepted members". So the settlement could be just that FSU is no longer considered an "accepted member" as far as the extension is concerned, if they just leave before the extension takes effect. (in 2027)

And also, if the contract they signed was to 2027, then that's an easy place to settle upon. Just hold them to that contract, and not to the unilateral expansion.

Doing it this way, yes, it would be the conference voting to let them out of the conference, etc.

But it allows the concept of a GoR to continue to be unchallenged.

I would think the various stake-holders and powers-that-be would jump at this solution.

And honestly - to address "fairness" (ie to avoid other schools' filing follow-up suits) allow any other ACC members who want to leave, to also do so.

The ACC rebuilds, and we go from there.

There's still the exit fee. and if they want out in 2026, and not 2027, there's that cost as well.

So whoever stays in the ACC will likely have some money to play with.

I believe thats where this is headed. If ESPN was smart, they would have re-upped the contract prior to the FSU lawsuit.

Since they did not, the GOR will likely include up to the 2027 season.

A big reason for this is that the ACC signed a deal, not ratified by the schools, that gave ESPN an option to renew or not post 2027. If that is true, then the GOR 2027-2036 is not going to be valid. Had the schools ratified it, then FSU would lose on the GOR grounds.

So the likely result, if what we know is true, is that FSU gets out of the GOR for anything beyond the 2027 timeframe, as their equity on that part of the contract was nullified by the ACC single handidly granting espn a "look-out" period, which removed FSU's equity stake for their GOR.

So, if I had to guess, FSU is out of the GOR in 2027, and will have to pay an exit fee equal to what Maryland paid.

Thats what it will likely come down to.

Question-when did the GOR to 2036 happen? Was that done in 2016 or later?
If it was 2016, FSU did sign it willingly.

Now they could argue misrepresentation from the ACC about whether the ACC let them know ESPN wasn't guaranteeing anything past 2027. They could make an argument about the ACC commissioner unilaterally extending the ESPN option from 2021 to 2025 to extend the contract to 2036. The bizarre way the ACC protects all these contracts would certainly make you question the ACC office motives. I don't know whether any of these things would be enough to win, but they are enough to raise doubt.

If Swofford went back to ESPN and gave them an "option" for the later years, thats going to be an issue if the option wasnt there prior to signing the GOR. If Swofford wanted to do this, any attorney worth their salt would have told him to get that ratified by each school.

But, with that said, this is kinda all over the place, so its hard to tell what happened and when at this point. But my point is that if Swofford or the ACC did anything unilaterally to the equity contract, then each school should have voted on that to ensure they were in agreement for that for giving up their GOR. If any assumptions, equities, or options were changed on the ESPN side, thats going to be a problem.

(12-25-2023 02:47 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(12-25-2023 01:29 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  Ok, so first, I said "settlement". : )

That aside, looking at what you all are talking about, I believe the text of the GoR makes it clear that it's linked to the espn deal.

Which sounds to me like: no deal, no GoR.

Look under the section called "recitals"

https://wwwcache.wralsportsfan.com/asset...d1w2if.pdf

(Apparently the only update to this one was the 2016 extension.)

But that wasn't what I was looking at.

I was thinking that it says a lot about applying to "accepted members". So the settlement could be just that FSU is no longer considered an "accepted member" as far as the extension is concerned, if they just leave before the extension takes effect. (in 2027)

And also, if the contract they signed was to 2027, then that's an easy place to settle upon. Just hold them to that contract, and not to the unilateral expansion.

Doing it this way, yes, it would be the conference voting to let them out of the conference, etc.

But it allows the concept of a GoR to continue to be unchallenged.

I would think the various stake-holders and powers-that-be would jump at this solution.

And honestly - to address "fairness" (ie to avoid other schools' filing follow-up suits) allow any other ACC members who want to leave, to also do so.

The ACC rebuilds, and we go from there.

There's still the exit fee. and if they want out in 2026, and not 2027, there's that cost as well.

So whoever stays in the ACC will likely have some money to play with.

I believe thats where this is headed. If ESPN was smart, they would have re-upped the contract prior to the FSU lawsuit.

Since they did not, the GOR will likely include up to the 2027 season.

A big reason for this is that the ACC signed a deal, not ratified by the schools, that gave ESPN an option to renew or not post 2027. If that is true, the the GOR 2027-2036 is not going to be valid. Had the schools ratified it, then FSU would lose on the GOR grounds.

So the likely result, if what we know is true, is that FSU gets out of the GOR for anything beyond the 2027 timeframe, as their equity on that part of the contract was nullified by the ACC single handidly granting espn a "look-out" period.

So, if I had to guess, FSU is out of the GOR in 2027, and will have to pay an exit fee equal to what Maryland paid.

Thats what it will likely come down to.

If a court were to determine that the ACC Commissioner did not have the authority to agree to extend the time ESPN had to exercise its option to extend the media contract because he didn't ask for a separate vote of ACC schools, it could also rule that it was not unreasonable for ESPN to believe he had that authority and rely on it, especially given that the members had unanimously agreed to extend the GoR.

They could then decide that the appropriate remedy in this case is not to invalidate that and all related contracts in their entirety, but rather to require ESPN to either exercise its option or decline to exercise it as soon as practical (since the original date has already passed). IMO, the court would be loathe to penalize ESPN for a technical error by the ACC Commissioner.

(12-25-2023 01:40 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(12-25-2023 01:29 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  Ok, so first, I said "settlement". : )

That aside, looking at what you all are talking about, I believe the text of the GoR makes it clear that it's linked to the espn deal.

Which sounds to me like: no deal, no GoR.

It's about seven years too late to say "no deal."
It's not a set of 20 one-year deals. The deal was sealed as soon as the ACC took the extra money from ESPN in 2016 and as soon as the schools took their share of that extra money.

Quote:Look under the section called "recitals"


Doing it this way, yes, it would be the conference voting to let them out of the conference, etc.

But it allows the concept of a GoR to continue to be unchallenged.

No it doesn't. Courts aren't idiots. Letting FSU out of the contract makes the Grant Of Rights a dead letter, and Clemson, Notre Dame, Miami, North Carolina or whoever can exit on the same terms.

Quote:I would think the various stake-holders and powers-that-be would jump at this solution.

And honestly - to address "fairness" (ie to avoid other schools' filing follow-up suits) allow any other ACC members who want to leave, to also do so.

The ACC rebuilds, and we go from there.

Would you sign this deal if you were the Wake Forest president? Syracuse? Boston College?

"The ACC rebuilds." There is no "rebuilding." Without your king programs, you're dead in the water. The Big 12 managed to outmaneuver the PAC 12 and survive, but that is a set of circumstances unlikely to recur.

So first, they have not received any money for the 2027-2036 extension. So yes, if espn doesn't extend it, there's no deal.

second, we're talking about a settlement for the current lawsuit. What the other schools may or may not do subsequently, is, I would think, pretty much immaterial to this suit.

third, I disagree about "dead in the water". there are EIGHTEEN schools currently in the ACC. I think they will be fine if they lose a few and backfill.

Will they be at P2 level? likely not, but then, that's already been pretty much established to be currently the case.

I think the remaining conference should be able to get a similar deal to what they have at 40M per. It's not that much more than the Big12 deal, and they still would have premium basketball schools and ND, for that matter.

FSU being let out of jail doesn't end the conference.

What "could" end the conference is if the P2 go on a full-blown shopping spree. But there's no evidence that they will.

So let's avoid the "end of the world" hyperbole stuff.

(12-25-2023 03:51 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(12-25-2023 01:40 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(12-25-2023 01:29 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  Ok, so first, I said "settlement". : )

That aside, looking at what you all are talking about, I believe the text of the GoR makes it clear that it's linked to the espn deal.

Which sounds to me like: no deal, no GoR.

It's about seven years too late to say "no deal."
It's not a set of 20 one-year deals. The deal was sealed as soon as the ACC took the extra money from ESPN in 2016 and as soon as the schools took their share of that extra money.

Quote:Look under the section called "recitals"


Doing it this way, yes, it would be the conference voting to let them out of the conference, etc.

But it allows the concept of a GoR to continue to be unchallenged.

No it doesn't. Courts aren't idiots. Letting FSU out of the contract makes the Grant Of Rights a dead letter, and Clemson, Notre Dame, Miami, North Carolina or whoever can exit on the same terms.

Quote:I would think the various stake-holders and powers-that-be would jump at this solution.

And honestly - to address "fairness" (ie to avoid other schools' filing follow-up suits) allow any other ACC members who want to leave, to also do so.

The ACC rebuilds, and we go from there.

Would you sign this deal if you were the Wake Forest president? Syracuse? Boston College?

"The ACC rebuilds." There is no "rebuilding." Without your king programs, you're dead in the water. The Big 12 managed to outmaneuver the PAC 12 and survive, but that is a set of circumstances unlikely to recur.

So first, they have not received any money for the 2027-2036 extension. So yes, if espn doesn't extend it, there's no deal.

Wrong. They got extra money every year since 2016, either the Network Placeholder Amount money or the ACC Network Revenue. That money is in exchange for the GOR for the 20 year period that ESPN asked for.

It's basically two separate contracts on ESPN's end, but not on the ACC's end.

Quote:second, we're talking about a settlement for the current lawsuit. What the other schools may or may not do subsequently, is, I would think, pretty much immaterial to this suit.

Wrong. Precedent matters.

Quote:third, I disagree about "dead in the water". there are EIGHTEEN schools currently in the ACC.

And only a handful are worth a damn in terms of college football TV rights.

Let's say the SEC and Big Ten go to 20 at the ACC's expense. That takes away the 6 most valuable schools. And very likely the Big 12 picks the next 4 most valuable.

Say the SEC and Big Ten take FSU, Clemson, Notre Dame, Miami, North Carolina, Virginia. Big 12 takes Virginia Tech, Louisville, Pitt, um, idk STanford.

Yes there are enough schools left to be an FBS conference. But not a P4 conference. Let's say the remnant is Georgia Tech, Duke, NC STate, Wake Forest, Syracuse, BC, Cal, SMU. That group is lucky to get an Aresco LEague-level TV deal for football, plus a Big East level deal for basketball. $15M a year, a 50% haircut.

Quote:I think they will be fine if they lose a few and backfill.

Whistling past the graveyard.

Quote:Will they be at P2 level? likely not, but then, that's already been pretty much established to be currently the case.

I think the remaining conference should be able to get a similar deal to what they have at 40M per. It's not that much more than the Big12 deal, and they still would have premium basketball schools and ND, for that matter.

No they wouldn't, not if the Grant of Rights doesn't shackle the P2 level schools and bind them to the ACC.

Quote:FSU being let out of jail doesn't end the conference.

What "could" end the conference is if the P2 go on a full-blown shopping spree. But there's no evidence that they will.

So let's avoid the "end of the world" hyperbole stuff.

I think Oklahoma, Texas, USC, UCLA, Washington, ORegon, and now Florida State consitute a "full blown shopping spree."

(12-25-2023 04:09 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(12-25-2023 03:51 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(12-25-2023 01:40 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(12-25-2023 01:29 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  Ok, so first, I said "settlement". : )

That aside, looking at what you all are talking about, I believe the text of the GoR makes it clear that it's linked to the espn deal.

Which sounds to me like: no deal, no GoR.

It's about seven years too late to say "no deal."
It's not a set of 20 one-year deals. The deal was sealed as soon as the ACC took the extra money from ESPN in 2016 and as soon as the schools took their share of that extra money.

Quote:Look under the section called "recitals"


Doing it this way, yes, it would be the conference voting to let them out of the conference, etc.

But it allows the concept of a GoR to continue to be unchallenged.

No it doesn't. Courts aren't idiots. Letting FSU out of the contract makes the Grant Of Rights a dead letter, and Clemson, Notre Dame, Miami, North Carolina or whoever can exit on the same terms.

Quote:I would think the various stake-holders and powers-that-be would jump at this solution.

And honestly - to address "fairness" (ie to avoid other schools' filing follow-up suits) allow any other ACC members who want to leave, to also do so.

The ACC rebuilds, and we go from there.

Would you sign this deal if you were the Wake Forest president? Syracuse? Boston College?

"The ACC rebuilds." There is no "rebuilding." Without your king programs, you're dead in the water. The Big 12 managed to outmaneuver the PAC 12 and survive, but that is a set of circumstances unlikely to recur.

So first, they have not received any money for the 2027-2036 extension. So yes, if espn doesn't extend it, there's no deal.

Wrong. They got extra money every year since 2016, either the Network Placeholder Amount money or the ACC Network Revenue. That money is in exchange for the GOR for the 20 year period that ESPN asked for.

It's basically two separate contracts on ESPN's end, but not on the ACC's end.

Quote:second, we're talking about a settlement for the current lawsuit. What the other schools may or may not do subsequently, is, I would think, pretty much immaterial to this suit.

Wrong. Precedent matters.

Quote:third, I disagree about "dead in the water". there are EIGHTEEN schools currently in the ACC.

And only a handful are worth a damn in terms of college football TV rights.

Let's say the SEC and Big Ten go to 20 at the ACC's expense. That takes away the 6 most valuable schools. And very likely the Big 12 picks the next 4 most valuable.

Say the SEC and Big Ten take FSU, Clemson, Notre Dame, Miami, North Carolina, Virginia. Big 12 takes Virginia Tech, Louisville, Pitt, um, idk STanford.

Yes there are enough schools left to be an FBS conference. But not a P4 conference. Let's say the remnant is Georgia Tech, Duke, NC STate, Wake Forest, Syracuse, BC, Cal, SMU. That group is lucky to get an Aresco LEague-level TV deal for football, plus a Big East level deal for basketball. $15M a year, a 50% haircut.

Quote:I think they will be fine if they lose a few and backfill.

Whistling past the graveyard.

Quote:Will they be at P2 level? likely not, but then, that's already been pretty much established to be currently the case.

I think the remaining conference should be able to get a similar deal to what they have at 40M per. It's not that much more than the Big12 deal, and they still would have premium basketball schools and ND, for that matter.

No they wouldn't, not if the Grant of Rights doesn't shackle the P2 level schools and bind them to the ACC.

Quote:FSU being let out of jail doesn't end the conference.

What "could" end the conference is if the P2 go on a full-blown shopping spree. But there's no evidence that they will.

So let's avoid the "end of the world" hyperbole stuff.

I think Oklahoma, Texas, USC, UCLA, Washington, ORegon, and now Florida State consitute a "full blown shopping spree."

most of what you said above is a matter of perspective. For example, while WF (for example) may care about XYZ, the judge is unlikely to care about the same XYZ in the same way.

This case isn't about what's best for WF, or any other individual school though.

And I think everyone agrees that the GoR is intended to prevent schools from leaving. But that's what this case is to determine.

But here's the thing. I don't think that espn, fox, the NCAA, most of the conferences, etc. WANT this case to happen. Because no matter what the result, it will shine many lights on things that I think they don't want lights shined on. Case in point? the deal and the GoR being Fort Knoxxed at the ACC HQ.

So with sincere apologies to WF who is currently getting football money that you seem to feel that they won't get if FSU leaves the conference, I would be surprised if this isn't settled in some way.

And an easy way to do that is to let FSU escape, without actually "testing" the GoR in court.

The big question to this point was always "will they or won't they". Well FSU did. So now decisions will have to be made.

As for your "shopping spree" examples. That's already happened. And even those were slow adds. So that's not much of an arguement.

I think the current chatter is that the Big10/Fox may want both FSU and Miami, and that the SEC/espn want NC and a partner or 3.

I highly doubt any school will jump from M-conference to M-conference, to join the Big12. That just seems unlikely.

So like I said, let's dial down the hyperbole a bit. If the P2 decide to take a dozen schools or so, then yes, we might be seeing a BigEast/PAC scenario. But otherwise, I think the ACC will continue on just fine.

I don't know why Florida St signed the grant of rights to 2036 if they don't like it. They cannot regret iafter they signed it.

(12-25-2023 04:29 PM)Blust3 Wrote:  I don't know why Florida St signed the grant of rights to 2036 if they don't like it. They cannot regret iafter they signed it.

From what we are starting to hear, they apparently didn't - 2027.

(12-25-2023 04:29 PM)Blust3 Wrote:  I don't know why Florida St signed the grant of rights to 2036 if they don't like it. They cannot regret iafter they signed it.

It's like telling a passenger on a plane that lost controls that they should have jumped out sooner. Now that they have found a parachute, they can jump out and you are asking why?

(12-25-2023 04:27 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(12-25-2023 04:09 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(12-25-2023 03:51 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(12-25-2023 01:40 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(12-25-2023 01:29 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  Ok, so first, I said "settlement". : )

That aside, looking at what you all are talking about, I believe the text of the GoR makes it clear that it's linked to the espn deal.

Which sounds to me like: no deal, no GoR.

It's about seven years too late to say "no deal."
It's not a set of 20 one-year deals. The deal was sealed as soon as the ACC took the extra money from ESPN in 2016 and as soon as the schools took their share of that extra money.

Quote:Look under the section called "recitals"


Doing it this way, yes, it would be the conference voting to let them out of the conference, etc.

But it allows the concept of a GoR to continue to be unchallenged.

No it doesn't. Courts aren't idiots. Letting FSU out of the contract makes the Grant Of Rights a dead letter, and Clemson, Notre Dame, Miami, North Carolina or whoever can exit on the same terms.

Quote:I would think the various stake-holders and powers-that-be would jump at this solution.

And honestly - to address "fairness" (ie to avoid other schools' filing follow-up suits) allow any other ACC members who want to leave, to also do so.

The ACC rebuilds, and we go from there.

Would you sign this deal if you were the Wake Forest president? Syracuse? Boston College?

"The ACC rebuilds." There is no "rebuilding." Without your king programs, you're dead in the water. The Big 12 managed to outmaneuver the PAC 12 and survive, but that is a set of circumstances unlikely to recur.

So first, they have not received any money for the 2027-2036 extension. So yes, if espn doesn't extend it, there's no deal.

Wrong. They got extra money every year since 2016, either the Network Placeholder Amount money or the ACC Network Revenue. That money is in exchange for the GOR for the 20 year period that ESPN asked for.

It's basically two separate contracts on ESPN's end, but not on the ACC's end.

Quote:second, we're talking about a settlement for the current lawsuit. What the other schools may or may not do subsequently, is, I would think, pretty much immaterial to this suit.

Wrong. Precedent matters.

Quote:third, I disagree about "dead in the water". there are EIGHTEEN schools currently in the ACC.

And only a handful are worth a damn in terms of college football TV rights.

Let's say the SEC and Big Ten go to 20 at the ACC's expense. That takes away the 6 most valuable schools. And very likely the Big 12 picks the next 4 most valuable.

Say the SEC and Big Ten take FSU, Clemson, Notre Dame, Miami, North Carolina, Virginia. Big 12 takes Virginia Tech, Louisville, Pitt, um, idk STanford.

Yes there are enough schools left to be an FBS conference. But not a P4 conference. Let's say the remnant is Georgia Tech, Duke, NC STate, Wake Forest, Syracuse, BC, Cal, SMU. That group is lucky to get an Aresco LEague-level TV deal for football, plus a Big East level deal for basketball. $15M a year, a 50% haircut.

Quote:I think they will be fine if they lose a few and backfill.

Whistling past the graveyard.

Quote:Will they be at P2 level? likely not, but then, that's already been pretty much established to be currently the case.

I think the remaining conference should be able to get a similar deal to what they have at 40M per. It's not that much more than the Big12 deal, and they still would have premium basketball schools and ND, for that matter.

No they wouldn't, not if the Grant of Rights doesn't shackle the P2 level schools and bind them to the ACC.

Quote:FSU being let out of jail doesn't end the conference.

What "could" end the conference is if the P2 go on a full-blown shopping spree. But there's no evidence that they will.

So let's avoid the "end of the world" hyperbole stuff.

I think Oklahoma, Texas, USC, UCLA, Washington, ORegon, and now Florida State consitute a "full blown shopping spree."

most of what you said above is a matter of perspective. For example, while WF (for example) may care about XYZ, the judge is unlikely to care about the same XYZ in the same way.

You're talking about a settlement, not a judge. So what Wake Forest, who can block any changes to the GOR, thinks matters a lot.

Quote:This case isn't about what's best for WF, or any other individual school though.

And I think everyone agrees that the GoR is intended to prevent schools from leaving. But that's what this case is to determine.

But here's the thing. I don't think that espn, fox, the NCAA, most of the conferences, etc. WANT this case to happen. Because no matter what the result, it will shine many lights on things that I think they don't want lights shined on. Case in point? the deal and the GoR being Fort Knoxxed at the ACC HQ.

ESPN treats all their contracts like that. Unless discovery would involve current ACC or ESPN executives having orgies on Epstein Island, I don't think they're too worried that we'll think that they're slimy weasels. We already know that.

Quote:So with sincere apologies to WF who is currently getting football money that you seem to feel that they won't get if FSU leaves the conference, I would be surprised if this isn't settled in some way.

And an easy way to do that is to let FSU escape, without actually "testing" the GoR in court.

That IS a test of the GOR. And it failed the test.

Quote:The big question to this point was always "will they or won't they". Well FSU did. So now decisions will have to be made.

As for your "shopping spree" examples. That's already happened. And even those were slow adds. So that's not much of an arguement.

Within the last year, 7 ACC schools thought highly enough of their P2 chances that they conspired to see if they could break the Grant of Rights or something.

Quote:I think the current chatter is that the Big10/Fox may want both FSU and Miami, and that the SEC/espn want NC and a partner or 3.

I highly doubt any school will jump from M-conference to M-conference, to join the Big12. That just seems unlikely.

The ACC and the Big 12 are at about the same level, with the current lineups. If the ACC loses Florida State and more, they're probably not at the same level. And if they're not at the same level, it's no longer a lateral move. Just like the Four Corners schools to the Big 12.

Quote:So like I said, let's dial down the hyperbole a bit. If the P2 decide to take a dozen schools or so, then yes, we might be seeing a BigEast/PAC scenario. But otherwise, I think the ACC will continue on just fine.

A half dozen. Which puts the ACC in a world of hurt, and the Big 12 starts poaching.

Now maybe the networks don't have the money to finance P2 expansion, maybe they're not obligated. But the ACC doesn't have access to the SEC or Big Ten media contracts, so they're not going to take that chance.

(12-25-2023 04:53 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(12-25-2023 04:27 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(12-25-2023 04:09 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(12-25-2023 03:51 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(12-25-2023 01:40 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  It's about seven years too late to say "no deal."
It's not a set of 20 one-year deals. The deal was sealed as soon as the ACC took the extra money from ESPN in 2016 and as soon as the schools took their share of that extra money.


No it doesn't. Courts aren't idiots. Letting FSU out of the contract makes the Grant Of Rights a dead letter, and Clemson, Notre Dame, Miami, North Carolina or whoever can exit on the same terms.


Would you sign this deal if you were the Wake Forest president? Syracuse? Boston College?

"The ACC rebuilds." There is no "rebuilding." Without your king programs, you're dead in the water. The Big 12 managed to outmaneuver the PAC 12 and survive, but that is a set of circumstances unlikely to recur.

So first, they have not received any money for the 2027-2036 extension. So yes, if espn doesn't extend it, there's no deal.

Wrong. They got extra money every year since 2016, either the Network Placeholder Amount money or the ACC Network Revenue. That money is in exchange for the GOR for the 20 year period that ESPN asked for.

It's basically two separate contracts on ESPN's end, but not on the ACC's end.

Quote:second, we're talking about a settlement for the current lawsuit. What the other schools may or may not do subsequently, is, I would think, pretty much immaterial to this suit.

Wrong. Precedent matters.

Quote:third, I disagree about "dead in the water". there are EIGHTEEN schools currently in the ACC.

And only a handful are worth a damn in terms of college football TV rights.

Let's say the SEC and Big Ten go to 20 at the ACC's expense. That takes away the 6 most valuable schools. And very likely the Big 12 picks the next 4 most valuable.

Say the SEC and Big Ten take FSU, Clemson, Notre Dame, Miami, North Carolina, Virginia. Big 12 takes Virginia Tech, Louisville, Pitt, um, idk STanford.

Yes there are enough schools left to be an FBS conference. But not a P4 conference. Let's say the remnant is Georgia Tech, Duke, NC STate, Wake Forest, Syracuse, BC, Cal, SMU. That group is lucky to get an Aresco LEague-level TV deal for football, plus a Big East level deal for basketball. $15M a year, a 50% haircut.

Quote:I think they will be fine if they lose a few and backfill.

Whistling past the graveyard.

Quote:Will they be at P2 level? likely not, but then, that's already been pretty much established to be currently the case.

I think the remaining conference should be able to get a similar deal to what they have at 40M per. It's not that much more than the Big12 deal, and they still would have premium basketball schools and ND, for that matter.

No they wouldn't, not if the Grant of Rights doesn't shackle the P2 level schools and bind them to the ACC.

Quote:FSU being let out of jail doesn't end the conference.

What "could" end the conference is if the P2 go on a full-blown shopping spree. But there's no evidence that they will.

So let's avoid the "end of the world" hyperbole stuff.

I think Oklahoma, Texas, USC, UCLA, Washington, ORegon, and now Florida State consitute a "full blown shopping spree."

most of what you said above is a matter of perspective. For example, while WF (for example) may care about XYZ, the judge is unlikely to care about the same XYZ in the same way.

You're talking about a settlement, not a judge. So what Wake Forest, who can block any changes to the GOR, thinks matters a lot.

Quote:This case isn't about what's best for WF, or any other individual school though.

And I think everyone agrees that the GoR is intended to prevent schools from leaving. But that's what this case is to determine.

But here's the thing. I don't think that espn, fox, the NCAA, most of the conferences, etc. WANT this case to happen. Because no matter what the result, it will shine many lights on things that I think they don't want lights shined on. Case in point? the deal and the GoR being Fort Knoxxed at the ACC HQ.

ESPN treats all their contracts like that. Unless discovery would involve current ACC or ESPN executives having orgies on Epstein Island, I don't think they're too worried that we'll think that they're slimy weasels. We already know that.

Quote:So with sincere apologies to WF who is currently getting football money that you seem to feel that they won't get if FSU leaves the conference, I would be surprised if this isn't settled in some way.

And an easy way to do that is to let FSU escape, without actually "testing" the GoR in court.

That IS a test of the GOR. And it failed the test.

Quote:The big question to this point was always "will they or won't they". Well FSU did. So now decisions will have to be made.

As for your "shopping spree" examples. That's already happened. And even those were slow adds. So that's not much of an arguement.

Within the last year, 7 ACC schools thought highly enough of their P2 chances that they conspired to see if they could break the Grant of Rights or something.

Quote:I think the current chatter is that the Big10/Fox may want both FSU and Miami, and that the SEC/espn want NC and a partner or 3.

I highly doubt any school will jump from M-conference to M-conference, to join the Big12. That just seems unlikely.

The ACC and the Big 12 are at about the same level, with the current lineups. If the ACC loses Florida State and more, they're probably not at the same level. And if they're not at the same level, it's no longer a lateral move. Just like the Four Corners schools to the Big 12.

Quote:So like I said, let's dial down the hyperbole a bit. If the P2 decide to take a dozen schools or so, then yes, we might be seeing a BigEast/PAC scenario. But otherwise, I think the ACC will continue on just fine.

A half dozen. Which puts the ACC in a world of hurt, and the Big 12 starts poaching.

Now maybe the networks don't have the money to finance P2 expansion, maybe they're not obligated. But the ACC doesn't have access to the SEC or Big Ten media contracts, so they're not going to take that chance.

Much of what you said above, I disagree with, but I won't try to convince you, after all, we're both just guessing about the future and likelihoods.

But whether it's 6, as I mentioned, or the M7, as you just now mentioned, or a half dozen, which you also mentioned, the ACC will continue on just fine.

Look at the Big12 after TX/OK announced leaving. And they got 31.5M per.

It's basically a combination of the leftovers of the Big8, the SWC, and the BigEast. plus BYU.

And what would the ACC be? The leftovers of the ACC, the Metro, the BigEast, plus ND - with likely backfill of former BigEast and SEC schools.

Seems rather comparable to me. Their current roughly 40M per, seems in the ballpark.

So again - panic-time? - I don't think so.

What it does do is clearly state that the ACC is not part of a P3. That I won't disagree with.

But they'd still be M2...

(12-25-2023 02:42 PM)Garrettabc Wrote:  

(12-25-2023 02:19 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(12-31-1969 07:00 PM)random asian guy/03531876' Wrote:  The exit fee will be negotiated and settled. [b]The ACC is not going to settle for the GoR, though.[b]

Then there's no exit.

FSU will pay an exit fee, ethically it's a rip, but hopefully the ACC will accept a reduced payment and in return FSU could schedule some OOC games vs it's former conference members and still maintain a good relationship. Personally I think this is way more valuable, even in the short run.

Why is it ethically a rip? No enforced FSU to sign it. ESPN relied on the grant of rights to set up. The ACC network did all of the other ACC conference members. If you don’t wanna be tied to a long-term contract, then don’t sign a long-term contract

(12-25-2023 05:01 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(12-25-2023 04:53 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(12-25-2023 04:27 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(12-25-2023 04:09 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(12-25-2023 03:51 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  So first, they have not received any money for the 2027-2036 extension. So yes, if espn doesn't extend it, there's no deal.

Wrong. They got extra money every year since 2016, either the Network Placeholder Amount money or the ACC Network Revenue. That money is in exchange for the GOR for the 20 year period that ESPN asked for.

It's basically two separate contracts on ESPN's end, but not on the ACC's end.

Quote:second, we're talking about a settlement for the current lawsuit. What the other schools may or may not do subsequently, is, I would think, pretty much immaterial to this suit.

Wrong. Precedent matters.

Quote:third, I disagree about "dead in the water". there are EIGHTEEN schools currently in the ACC.

And only a handful are worth a damn in terms of college football TV rights.

Let's say the SEC and Big Ten go to 20 at the ACC's expense. That takes away the 6 most valuable schools. And very likely the Big 12 picks the next 4 most valuable.

Say the SEC and Big Ten take FSU, Clemson, Notre Dame, Miami, North Carolina, Virginia. Big 12 takes Virginia Tech, Louisville, Pitt, um, idk STanford.

Yes there are enough schools left to be an FBS conference. But not a P4 conference. Let's say the remnant is Georgia Tech, Duke, NC STate, Wake Forest, Syracuse, BC, Cal, SMU. That group is lucky to get an Aresco LEague-level TV deal for football, plus a Big East level deal for basketball. $15M a year, a 50% haircut.

Quote:I think they will be fine if they lose a few and backfill.

Whistling past the graveyard.

Quote:Will they be at P2 level? likely not, but then, that's already been pretty much established to be currently the case.

I think the remaining conference should be able to get a similar deal to what they have at 40M per. It's not that much more than the Big12 deal, and they still would have premium basketball schools and ND, for that matter.

No they wouldn't, not if the Grant of Rights doesn't shackle the P2 level schools and bind them to the ACC.

Quote:FSU being let out of jail doesn't end the conference.

What "could" end the conference is if the P2 go on a full-blown shopping spree. But there's no evidence that they will.

So let's avoid the "end of the world" hyperbole stuff.

I think Oklahoma, Texas, USC, UCLA, Washington, ORegon, and now Florida State consitute a "full blown shopping spree."

most of what you said above is a matter of perspective. For example, while WF (for example) may care about XYZ, the judge is unlikely to care about the same XYZ in the same way.

You're talking about a settlement, not a judge. So what Wake Forest, who can block any changes to the GOR, thinks matters a lot.

Quote:This case isn't about what's best for WF, or any other individual school though.

And I think everyone agrees that the GoR is intended to prevent schools from leaving. But that's what this case is to determine.

But here's the thing. I don't think that espn, fox, the NCAA, most of the conferences, etc. WANT this case to happen. Because no matter what the result, it will shine many lights on things that I think they don't want lights shined on. Case in point? the deal and the GoR being Fort Knoxxed at the ACC HQ.

ESPN treats all their contracts like that. Unless discovery would involve current ACC or ESPN executives having orgies on Epstein Island, I don't think they're too worried that we'll think that they're slimy weasels. We already know that.

Quote:So with sincere apologies to WF who is currently getting football money that you seem to feel that they won't get if FSU leaves the conference, I would be surprised if this isn't settled in some way.

And an easy way to do that is to let FSU escape, without actually "testing" the GoR in court.

That IS a test of the GOR. And it failed the test.

Quote:The big question to this point was always "will they or won't they". Well FSU did. So now decisions will have to be made.

As for your "shopping spree" examples. That's already happened. And even those were slow adds. So that's not much of an arguement.

Within the last year, 7 ACC schools thought highly enough of their P2 chances that they conspired to see if they could break the Grant of Rights or something.

Quote:I think the current chatter is that the Big10/Fox may want both FSU and Miami, and that the SEC/espn want NC and a partner or 3.

I highly doubt any school will jump from M-conference to M-conference, to join the Big12. That just seems unlikely.

The ACC and the Big 12 are at about the same level, with the current lineups. If the ACC loses Florida State and more, they're probably not at the same level. And if they're not at the same level, it's no longer a lateral move. Just like the Four Corners schools to the Big 12.

Quote:So like I said, let's dial down the hyperbole a bit. If the P2 decide to take a dozen schools or so, then yes, we might be seeing a BigEast/PAC scenario. But otherwise, I think the ACC will continue on just fine.

A half dozen. Which puts the ACC in a world of hurt, and the Big 12 starts poaching.

Now maybe the networks don't have the money to finance P2 expansion, maybe they're not obligated. But the ACC doesn't have access to the SEC or Big Ten media contracts, so they're not going to take that chance.

Much of what you said above, I disagree with, but I won't try to convince you, after all, we're both just guessing about the future and likelihoods.

But whether it's 6, as I mentioned, or the M7, as you just now mentioned, or a half dozen, which you also mentioned, the ACC will continue on just fine.

Look at the Big12 after TX/OK announced leaving. And they got 31.5M per.

With some luck and good management. With some bad luck and bad management, the PAC 10 was looking at under $25M from Apple, which wasn't enough to keep them together.

Quote:It's basically a combination of the leftovers of the Big8, the SWC, and the BigEast. plus BYU.

Or more importantly, it's replacement level P5 filler, who signed a contract when ESPN and Fox needed some more content to fill out their Saturday game windows.

Quote:And what would the ACC be? The leftovers of the ACC, the Metro, the BigEast, plus ND - with likely backfill of former BigEast and SEC schools.

Seems rather comparable to me. Their current roughly 40M per, seems in the ballpark.

Don't know where you're getting $40M per school for the Big 12, they're getting about $32M per.

Quote:So again - panic-time? - I don't think so.

What it does do is clearly state that the ACC is not part of a P3. That I won't disagree with.

But they'd still be M2...

They would be lucky to still be a P4 conference on par with the Big 12. With some bad luck, they'd be a pure G5 conference.

(12-25-2023 05:22 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(12-25-2023 05:01 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(12-25-2023 04:53 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(12-25-2023 04:27 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(12-25-2023 04:09 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  Wrong. They got extra money every year since 2016, either the Network Placeholder Amount money or the ACC Network Revenue. That money is in exchange for the GOR for the 20 year period that ESPN asked for.

It's basically two separate contracts on ESPN's end, but not on the ACC's end.


Wrong. Precedent matters.


And only a handful are worth a damn in terms of college football TV rights.

Let's say the SEC and Big Ten go to 20 at the ACC's expense. That takes away the 6 most valuable schools. And very likely the Big 12 picks the next 4 most valuable.

Say the SEC and Big Ten take FSU, Clemson, Notre Dame, Miami, North Carolina, Virginia. Big 12 takes Virginia Tech, Louisville, Pitt, um, idk STanford.

Yes there are enough schools left to be an FBS conference. But not a P4 conference. Let's say the remnant is Georgia Tech, Duke, NC STate, Wake Forest, Syracuse, BC, Cal, SMU. That group is lucky to get an Aresco LEague-level TV deal for football, plus a Big East level deal for basketball. $15M a year, a 50% haircut.


Whistling past the graveyard.


No they wouldn't, not if the Grant of Rights doesn't shackle the P2 level schools and bind them to the ACC.


I think Oklahoma, Texas, USC, UCLA, Washington, ORegon, and now Florida State consitute a "full blown shopping spree."

most of what you said above is a matter of perspective. For example, while WF (for example) may care about XYZ, the judge is unlikely to care about the same XYZ in the same way.

You're talking about a settlement, not a judge. So what Wake Forest, who can block any changes to the GOR, thinks matters a lot.

Quote:This case isn't about what's best for WF, or any other individual school though.

And I think everyone agrees that the GoR is intended to prevent schools from leaving. But that's what this case is to determine.

But here's the thing. I don't think that espn, fox, the NCAA, most of the conferences, etc. WANT this case to happen. Because no matter what the result, it will shine many lights on things that I think they don't want lights shined on. Case in point? the deal and the GoR being Fort Knoxxed at the ACC HQ.

ESPN treats all their contracts like that. Unless discovery would involve current ACC or ESPN executives having orgies on Epstein Island, I don't think they're too worried that we'll think that they're slimy weasels. We already know that.

Quote:So with sincere apologies to WF who is currently getting football money that you seem to feel that they won't get if FSU leaves the conference, I would be surprised if this isn't settled in some way.

And an easy way to do that is to let FSU escape, without actually "testing" the GoR in court.

That IS a test of the GOR. And it failed the test.

Quote:The big question to this point was always "will they or won't they". Well FSU did. So now decisions will have to be made.

As for your "shopping spree" examples. That's already happened. And even those were slow adds. So that's not much of an arguement.

Within the last year, 7 ACC schools thought highly enough of their P2 chances that they conspired to see if they could break the Grant of Rights or something.

Quote:I think the current chatter is that the Big10/Fox may want both FSU and Miami, and that the SEC/espn want NC and a partner or 3.

I highly doubt any school will jump from M-conference to M-conference, to join the Big12. That just seems unlikely.

The ACC and the Big 12 are at about the same level, with the current lineups. If the ACC loses Florida State and more, they're probably not at the same level. And if they're not at the same level, it's no longer a lateral move. Just like the Four Corners schools to the Big 12.

Quote:So like I said, let's dial down the hyperbole a bit. If the P2 decide to take a dozen schools or so, then yes, we might be seeing a BigEast/PAC scenario. But otherwise, I think the ACC will continue on just fine.

A half dozen. Which puts the ACC in a world of hurt, and the Big 12 starts poaching.

Now maybe the networks don't have the money to finance P2 expansion, maybe they're not obligated. But the ACC doesn't have access to the SEC or Big Ten media contracts, so they're not going to take that chance.

Much of what you said above, I disagree with, but I won't try to convince you, after all, we're both just guessing about the future and likelihoods.

But whether it's 6, as I mentioned, or the M7, as you just now mentioned, or a half dozen, which you also mentioned, the ACC will continue on just fine.

Look at the Big12 after TX/OK announced leaving. And they got 31.5M per.

With some luck and good management. With some bad luck and bad management, the PAC 10 was looking at under $25M from Apple, which wasn't enough to keep them together.

Quote:It's basically a combination of the leftovers of the Big8, the SWC, and the BigEast. plus BYU.

Or more importantly, it's replacement level P5 filler, who signed a contract when ESPN and Fox needed some more content to fill out their Saturday game windows.

Quote:And what would the ACC be? The leftovers of the ACC, the Metro, the BigEast, plus ND - with likely backfill of former BigEast and SEC schools.

Seems rather comparable to me. Their current roughly 40M per, seems in the ballpark.

Don't know where you're getting $40M per school for the Big 12, they're getting about $32M per.

Quote:So again - panic-time? - I don't think so.

What it does do is clearly state that the ACC is not part of a P3. That I won't disagree with.

But they'd still be M2...

They would be lucky to still be a P4 conference on par with the Big 12. With some bad luck, they'd be a pure G5 conference.

ok, so you seem to be misunderstanding my words. I'll try to clarify.

In particular, 40M refers to ACC, which is what was in the sentence directly above it.

As for the PAC, they were apparently looking at 35M. Then they made the decision (mistake?) to take things on the open market because one or more schools had the idea they could get 50M that way.

That risk by the PAC, failed.

But espn has no reason at the moment to change the ACC's current deal.

And while $40M per has been said to be a bad deal for the top few schools, I think the rest of the schools are just fine with that.

And espn already has the deal in place. As long as the ACC has a certain minimum of members, I think the deal is likely to continue on. I think it's highly unlikely that the ACC would make the same mistake the PAC did. You can try to tell me that espn will want to end the deal, and I'll just disagree with you. Neither of us knows for certain.

As for luck - I think USF, UConn, and Tulane keep them in the ballpark. There's also Memphis, Navy, Temple, Rice, and so on, beyond those.

The simplest solution is 6 ACC go to P2, with espn losing one or two ACC, but maintaining its ND games and shedding some of the ACC deadweight to Fox. Say UNC, UVa, FSU, Clemson to SEC. Miami and Duke to BIG

ESPN/SEC avoids ACC free agency (now or closer to expiration of GoR) and gets ACC schools to pay for consolidation of south behind SEC brand, and frees up premium linear bandwidth for premium SEC.

Fox/BIG get more market share and a step closer to ND

Big 12 fans won’t like this, but they’ll need to take a lot of ACC. It is easier to get 6 ACC to P2, if the Big 12 looks the other way and takes 8 ACC

(12-25-2023 05:41 PM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  The simplest solution is 6 ACC go to P2, with espn losing one or two ACC, but maintaining its ND games and shedding some of the ACC deadweight to Fox. Say UNC, UVa, FSU, Clemson to SEC. Miami and Duke to BIG

ESPN/SEC avoids ACC free agency (now or closer to expiration of GoR) and gets ACC schools to pay for consolidation of south behind SEC brand, and frees up premium linear bandwidth for premium SEC.

Fox/BIG get more market share and a step closer to ND

Big 12 fans won’t like this, but they’ll need to take a lot of ACC. It is easier to get 6 ACC to P2, if the Big 12 looks the other way and takes 8 ACC

Well, there's another option to your scenario.

That espn decides to not exercise the 2036 option.

then the SEC does as you suggest, and then espn decides to not re-bid for ACC rights.

espn is half media partner on the Big12. They might just say no there too.

That puts Fox in the position of "take it or leave it" on the left-over ACC as a conference.

This would be bad for the ACC, because they need multiple bidders to get a decent deal.

This scenario is pretty much exactly what happened to the PAC.

So I really doubt that the ACC will do anything to jeopardize their continued contract with espn.

(12-25-2023 03:51 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(12-25-2023 02:47 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(12-25-2023 01:29 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  Ok, so first, I said "settlement". : )

That aside, looking at what you all are talking about, I believe the text of the GoR makes it clear that it's linked to the espn deal.

Which sounds to me like: no deal, no GoR.

Look under the section called "recitals"

https://wwwcache.wralsportsfan.com/asset...d1w2if.pdf

(Apparently the only update to this one was the 2016 extension.)

But that wasn't what I was looking at.

I was thinking that it says a lot about applying to "accepted members". So the settlement could be just that FSU is no longer considered an "accepted member" as far as the extension is concerned, if they just leave before the extension takes effect. (in 2027)

And also, if the contract they signed was to 2027, then that's an easy place to settle upon. Just hold them to that contract, and not to the unilateral expansion.

Doing it this way, yes, it would be the conference voting to let them out of the conference, etc.

But it allows the concept of a GoR to continue to be unchallenged.

I would think the various stake-holders and powers-that-be would jump at this solution.

And honestly - to address "fairness" (ie to avoid other schools' filing follow-up suits) allow any other ACC members who want to leave, to also do so.

The ACC rebuilds, and we go from there.

There's still the exit fee. and if they want out in 2026, and not 2027, there's that cost as well.

So whoever stays in the ACC will likely have some money to play with.

I believe thats where this is headed. If ESPN was smart, they would have re-upped the contract prior to the FSU lawsuit.

Since they did not, the GOR will likely include up to the 2027 season.

A big reason for this is that the ACC signed a deal, not ratified by the schools, that gave ESPN an option to renew or not post 2027. If that is true, the the GOR 2027-2036 is not going to be valid. Had the schools ratified it, then FSU would lose on the GOR grounds.

So the likely result, if what we know is true, is that FSU gets out of the GOR for anything beyond the 2027 timeframe, as their equity on that part of the contract was nullified by the ACC single handidly granting espn a "look-out" period.

So, if I had to guess, FSU is out of the GOR in 2027, and will have to pay an exit fee equal to what Maryland paid.

Thats what it will likely come down to.

If a court were to determine that the ACC Commissioner did not have the authority to agree to extend the time ESPN had to exercise its option to extend the media contract because he didn't ask for a separate vote of ACC schools, it could also rule that it was not unreasonable for ESPN to believe he had that authority and rely on it, especially given that the members had unanimously agreed to extend the GoR.

They could then decide that the appropriate remedy in this case is not to invalidate that and all related contracts in their entirety, but rather to require ESPN to either exercise its option or decline to exercise it as soon as practical (since the original date has already passed). IMO, the court would be loathe to penalize ESPN for a technical error by the ACC Commissioner.

The issue with that is that ESPN is not a part of the GOR. The GOR is strictly between FSU and the ACC. So that would be an issue between ESPN, ACC, and Acc schools on the media contract, but it would not involve the GOR, which is only between the schools and the ACC.

So, if what we are understanding is true, FSU granted GOR through 2036 because there was a contract in place where the ACC was being paid by ESPN for the rights. Now it turns out that wasnt exactly the case. (Actually, it sounds like it WAS the case, but Swofford/ESPN amended the deal.)

So FSU is potentially exposed to severe damages because they are being held to their side of the GOR, whereas the equity side of the GOR no longer exists. Its now an "option." FSU could literally find itself in 2027 without a media contract for their GOR.

What this sounds like is a fast one pulled by the ACC, where they locked teams in the conference into a longer term GOR than ESPN was willing to be a part of. In other words, the GOR was SUPPOSED to match the term of the media deal, but it doesnt.

(12-25-2023 05:51 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(12-25-2023 03:51 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(12-25-2023 02:47 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(12-25-2023 01:29 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  Ok, so first, I said "settlement". : )

That aside, looking at what you all are talking about, I believe the text of the GoR makes it clear that it's linked to the espn deal.

Which sounds to me like: no deal, no GoR.

Look under the section called "recitals"

https://wwwcache.wralsportsfan.com/asset...d1w2if.pdf

(Apparently the only update to this one was the 2016 extension.)

But that wasn't what I was looking at.

I was thinking that it says a lot about applying to "accepted members". So the settlement could be just that FSU is no longer considered an "accepted member" as far as the extension is concerned, if they just leave before the extension takes effect. (in 2027)

And also, if the contract they signed was to 2027, then that's an easy place to settle upon. Just hold them to that contract, and not to the unilateral expansion.

Doing it this way, yes, it would be the conference voting to let them out of the conference, etc.

But it allows the concept of a GoR to continue to be unchallenged.

I would think the various stake-holders and powers-that-be would jump at this solution.

And honestly - to address "fairness" (ie to avoid other schools' filing follow-up suits) allow any other ACC members who want to leave, to also do so.

The ACC rebuilds, and we go from there.

There's still the exit fee. and if they want out in 2026, and not 2027, there's that cost as well.

So whoever stays in the ACC will likely have some money to play with.

I believe thats where this is headed. If ESPN was smart, they would have re-upped the contract prior to the FSU lawsuit.

Since they did not, the GOR will likely include up to the 2027 season.

A big reason for this is that the ACC signed a deal, not ratified by the schools, that gave ESPN an option to renew or not post 2027. If that is true, the the GOR 2027-2036 is not going to be valid. Had the schools ratified it, then FSU would lose on the GOR grounds.

So the likely result, if what we know is true, is that FSU gets out of the GOR for anything beyond the 2027 timeframe, as their equity on that part of the contract was nullified by the ACC single handidly granting espn a "look-out" period.

So, if I had to guess, FSU is out of the GOR in 2027, and will have to pay an exit fee equal to what Maryland paid.

Thats what it will likely come down to.

If a court were to determine that the ACC Commissioner did not have the authority to agree to extend the time ESPN had to exercise its option to extend the media contract because he didn't ask for a separate vote of ACC schools, it could also rule that it was not unreasonable for ESPN to believe he had that authority and rely on it, especially given that the members had unanimously agreed to extend the GoR.

They could then decide that the appropriate remedy in this case is not to invalidate that and all related contracts in their entirety, but rather to require ESPN to either exercise its option or decline to exercise it as soon as practical (since the original date has already passed). IMO, the court would be loathe to penalize ESPN for a technical error by the ACC Commissioner.

The issue with that is that ESPN is not a part of the GOR. The GOR is strictly between FSU and the ACC. So that would be an issue between ESPN, ACC, and Acc schools on the media contract, but it would not involve the GOR, which is only between the schools and the ACC.

So, if what we are understanding is true, FSU granted GOR through 2036 because there was a contract in place where the ACC was being paid by ESPN for the rights. Now it turns out that wasnt exactly the case. (Actually, it sounds like it WAS the case, but Swofford/ESPN amended the deal.)

So FSU is potentially exposed to severe damages because they are being held to their side of the GOR, whereas the equity side of the GOR no longer exists. Its now an "option." FSU could literally find itself in 2027 without a media contract for their GOR.

What this sounds like is a fast one pulled by the ACC, where they locked teams in the conference into a longer term GOR than ESPN was willing to be a part of. In other words, the GOR was SUPPOSED to match the term of the media deal, but it doesnt.

https://wwwcache.wralsportsfan.com/asset...d1w2if.pdf

espn is a part the GoR. Or at least their media deal is.

(12-25-2023 01:23 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  1. Even if FSU leaves, ESPN would likely consider the contract worth the money for the remaining teams.
2. Should ESPN decide not to renew, the rights revert to the ACC, not the schools. The ACC could then go to the open market - not necessarily a bad thing.
3. The GoR remains in place until 2036 regardless of what ESPN does. The only ones who could invalidate the GoR would be (a) a court with jurisdiction, or (b) the ACC member schools (but it might take 100% of them to end the GoR, as any who vote against it risk losing their voting rights).

This is not the case. Each members grants its rights to the conference for the conference to fill it’s Contractual obligations as set forth in espn’s agreement. No more, no less.

if espn declines to exercise its unilateral option, walks, or the espn agreement is aside by courts, the GOR becomes null and void.