ACC vs. Maryland: Mediation Must be Before July 10, 2014

[Scooch]

Once upon a time, there was a college sports team made up entirely of academically inclined student athletes... Would the SEC be able to field teams?

Perhaps back in the 1920s.

Perhaps.

That hasn't been the case in anyone on this board's lifetime, that's for darn sure.

 

[FAL]

Once upon a time, there was a college sports team made up entirely of academically inclined student athletes...

Would the SEC be able to field teams?

Yeah, sure-- in a field of dreams.

 

[Lou_C]

You must not like the fact that one vote can elect a president.

Are you really saying that EVERY vote should be unanimous? How would anything get done?

No. But you can leave America, can't you? Yes, I would be equally against law that made it (or tried to make it) impossible to leave America as well.

 

[orange79]

No. But you can leave America, can't you? Yes, I would be equally against law that made it (or tried to make it) impossible to leave America as well.

I don't even know how to respond to this. But I'll try.
If you don't see how requiring every vote to be unanimous would prevent ANYTHING from getting done, I don't know what to tell you.
If you're not saying that, I really don't know what you ARE trying to say. You had no choice being born in America. I get it. Leave if you want. But no one forced anyone to join a conference. And by joining that conference, you tacitly agree to abide by the rules of said conference. The rules state that a majority vote can pass rules that all must abide by. You can't have it half way - you either accept the rules, or you don't.

 

[Lou_C]

I am willing to review any l inks to an FSU official. I do recall reading where FSU's position was that they disagreed with the procedure (not the regular procedure but an alternative procedure used only when necessary) and that is why FSU voted no. Again, I have posted this request for FSU officials stating they were against the increase on this board and others and have yet to read any credible source that FSU was against anything other than the procedure of the vote. As for being against high exit fees, with GORs, exit fees are small potatoes.

Sheesh...here you go.

https://floridastate./content.asp?CID=1408459

"President Barron voted against it. I personally think that $50 million is punitive. I'm not sure that holds up," said Bense, who was named the chairman of the Board of Trustees for a two-year term in June. Bense also said that Maryland voted against the increased buyout. "I'm not implying that there's going to be any changes, but $50 million is a lot of money."
The Charlotte Observer's Andrew Carter reported Wednesday that nine of the 12 ACC schools had to vote for the increase for it to be approved.
Bense, the former speaker of the Florida House of Representatives, (2004-06), was clear that he approved of the move to add Notre Dame to the league, saying "it's good for the ACC and Florida State." Bense also emphasized that Florida State has no plans to explore any other conferences. However, the staggering figure could hamstring the school if it had any plans to make changes down the road.
"Don't construe his vote against it to mean anything about anything, it's just that in my business that when you get in something you better figure out a way to get out of something," Bense said. "We have no desire to get out, but $50 million makes it pretty tough to do anything."
According to Bense, if Florida State desired to make a move at any point in the years to come, the payout would make it "very difficult."
"I haven't talked with a lawyer about it, but that's almost punitive, you know?"

I agree with that. You would agree with that too...if UNC, UVA, VT, NC State, FSU and Clemson left the conference, and the B1G was deciding between UCONN and Syracuse, but Pitt, Wake, Duke, BC, etc got together and voted for a $500M exit fee before anyone else could leave, you'd think that was unfair as well.

Now, as I mentioned before, as it turns out $50M was not insurmountable for Maryland, but at the time it was clearly believed that they were putting in an exit fee that would prevent anyone from leaving, not simply compensate for the change. Everyone knew what they were trying to do, and when you say it was for "stability", that's exactly what you are saying as well. And I'm philosophically against that idea, not necessarily against any exit fee, but financially trying to hold a member hostage.

And it's all irrelevant because of the GOR, which I have no problem with in any way.

 

[Lou_C]

I don't even know how to respond to this. But I'll try.
If you don't see how requiring every vote to be unanimous would prevent ANYTHING from getting done, I don't know what to tell you.
If you're not saying that, I really don't know what you ARE trying to say. You had no choice being born in America. I get it. Leave if you want. But no one forced anyone to join a conference. And by joining that conference, you tacitly agree to abide by the rules of said conference. The rules state that a majority vote can pass rules that all must abide by. You can't have it half way - you either accept the rules, or you don't.

I'm sorry if I'm not clear...I do not philosophically or ethically agree that you can join a conference under one set of conditions, and then as conditions change, have a majority impose upon individual schools conditions meant to make it impossible to leave. Whether it can be legally done is something else entirely...but it is inappropriate.

I don't think everything has to be unanimous obviously...but I do agree that you should have the option to leave if you don't like it. There should be some exit fee, because there is a lot of costs involved with accommodating a team leaving your conference, but attempting to hamstring them is inappropriate in my mind.

 

[orange79]

I'm sorry if I'm not clear...I do not philosophically or ethically agree that you can join a conference under one set of conditions, and then as conditions change, have a majority impose upon individual schools conditions meant to make it impossible to leave. Whether it can be legally done is something else entirely...but it is inappropriate.

I don't think everything has to be unanimous obviously...but I do agree that you should have the option to leave if you don't like it. There should be some exit fee, because there is a lot of costs involved with accommodating a team leaving your conference, but attempting to hamstring them is inappropriate in my mind.

I guess my thinking is that if something needs to be done to either save the conference, or protect either the conference itself of the investors in that conference (read: ESPN, etc.), the majority represents what the conference as a whole believes. That doesn't mean no one can dissent. But it does mean you have to follow the rules - rules the team in question agreed to when joining. If you didn't think those rules would ever come into play, that is not the conference's fault. You are free to leave. you just need to follow the rules of leaving. Or dig in your heels and sue, sue sue! Which would make you Maryland.

 

[Lou_C]

I guess my thinking is that if something needs to be done to either save the conference, or protect either the conference itself of the investors in that conference (read: ESPN, etc.), the majority represents what the conference as a whole believes. That doesn't mean no one can dissent. But it does mean you have to follow the rules - rules the team in question agreed to when joining. If you didn't think those rules would ever come into play, that is not the conference's fault. You are free to leave. you just need to follow the rules of leaving. Or dig in your heels and sue, sue sue! Which would make you Maryland.

See I think, when something needs to be done to save the conference or protect the investors, the better approach is to...

- Get the investors to pony up from $13m to $17M
- Add Notre Dame commitment games to the schedule
- Get the investors to pony up another $1-2M for ND
- Work out a deal for the Orange Bowl, while not on par with the Rose or Sugar, is a hell of a lot better than anyone thought they'd pull off, to keep the financial impact minimal
- Make sure you've got a full share of the playoff system, and a full seat at the table, with no financial impact based on past (poor) performance
- Go back to 8 conference games to keep the football schools healthy
- Take a bonafide football (and basketball) school with a great athletic department, rather than a basketball school that's been playing FBS football for a decade, academics be damned
- Get a promise from ESPN to strongly consider a network, or additional compensation if no network
- Get the partners to pony up another $1-2M if teams will sign a GOR
- Get the schools to now willingly sign onto a GOR

That's how you save a conference, make sure it's worth saving. That's what stabilized the ACC, not a massive exit fee.

 

[rrlbees]

I'm sorry if I'm not clear...I do not philosophically or ethically agree that you can join a conference under one set of conditions, and then as conditions change, have a majority impose upon individual schools conditions meant to make it impossible to leave

Unless a condition of your joining includes acceptance of by laws that outline how any changes can be made to said conditions and what the voting requirements would be.

 

[HtownOrange]

Sheesh...here you go.

https://floridastate. /content.asp?CID=1408459

"President Barron voted against it. I personally think that $50 million is punitive. I'm not sure that holds up," said Bense, who was named the chairman of the Board of Trustees for a two-year term in June. Bense also said that Maryland voted against the increased buyout. "I'm not implying that there's going to be any changes, but $50 million is a lot of money."
The Charlotte Observer's Andrew Carter reported Wednesday that nine of the 12 ACC schools had to vote for the increase for it to be approved.
Bense, the former speaker of the Florida House of Representatives, (2004-06), was clear that he approved of the move to add Notre Dame to the league, saying "it's good for the ACC and Florida State." Bense also emphasized that Florida State has no plans to explore any other conferences. However, the staggering figure could hamstring the school if it had any plans to make changes down the road.
"Don't construe his vote against it to mean anything about anything, it's just that in my business that when you get in something you better figure out a way to get out of something," Bense said. "We have no desire to get out, but $50 million makes it pretty tough to do anything."
According to Bense, if Florida State desired to make a move at any point in the years to come, the payout would make it "very difficult."
"I haven't talked with a lawyer about it, but that's almost punitive, you know?"

I agree with that. You would agree with that too...if UNC, UVA, VT, NC State, FSU and Clemson left the conference, and the B1G was deciding between UCONN and Syracuse, but Pitt, Wake, Duke, BC, etc got together and voted for a $500M exit fee before anyone else could leave, you'd think that was unfair as well.

Now, as I mentioned before, as it turns out $50M was not insurmountable for Maryland, but at the time it was clearly believed that they were putting in an exit fee that would prevent anyone from leaving, not simply compensate for the change. Everyone knew what they were trying to do, and when you say it was for "stability", that's exactly what you are saying as well. And I'm philosophically against that idea, not necessarily against any exit fee, but financially trying to hold a member hostage.

And it's all irrelevant because of the GOR, which I have no problem with in any way.

Thank you for responding. Over the past couple of years, you are the FIRST person to post a serious comment via an FSU official opposing the matter due to the excessive exit fee. I would like the BOT Chair to comment now that the GOR is in place and is far more excessive than the 3X annual TV payout exit fee (the exit fee is now $62.4MM, 3 X $20.8MM payout). My guess is that he was playing to the base and had not actually reviewed any real data, thus his admission that he was making a personal statement and had not talked to lawyers. Cheesy at best and not a member of the negotiating team, but I give you some credit as he was the incoming chair at the time.

Also, I point out that ND was part of the deal. ND wanted everyone to commit and is under the same $50MM exit fee as every other school, even though they get a proportional payout and are not members in football. I think if ND has a much higher proportional exit fee than every other school since their football is not a part of the equation. Do you honestly believe the B1G would not sign an exit fee of $50MM to get ND? I think they would sign a $100MM exit fee if Delaney could have landed ND.

Your stability argument is irrelevant. The ACC wanted a better TV deal and had to provide some show of security. The ACC wanted this and this is how they decided to provide security and to show they were serious partners for a better TV deal. The exit fee is not a simple exit fee in a vacuum. There are far more variables in the equation and the exit fee is way of simplifying total damages, called liquidated damages, wherein each party agrees that if they break the deal, this is what they will pay. Both Maryland and FSU had approved of the bylaws and the vote used an alternative voting method (upheld in court), so in the net effect, both approved the increased exit fee as neither notified the ACC they would withdraw over the issue (or shortly thereafter).

 

[HtownOrange]

See I think, when something needs to be done to save the conference or protect the investors, the better approach is to...

- Get the investors to pony up from $13m to $17M
- Add Notre Dame commitment games to the schedule
- Get the investors to pony up another $1-2M for ND
- Work out a deal for the Orange Bowl, while not on par with the Rose or Sugar, is a hell of a lot better than anyone thought they'd pull off, to keep the financial impact minimal
- Make sure you've got a full share of the playoff system, and a full seat at the table, with no financial impact based on past (poor) performance
- Go back to 8 conference games to keep the football schools healthy
- Take a bonafide football (and basketball) school with a great athletic department, rather than a basketball school that's been playing FBS football for a decade, academics be damned
- Get a promise from ESPN to strongly consider a network, or additional compensation if no network
- Get the partners to pony up another $1-2M if teams will sign a GOR
- Get the schools to now willingly sign onto a GOR

That's how you save a conference, make sure it's worth saving. That's what stabilized the ACC, not a massive exit fee.

I agree in principle, but recall that rumors were all over the place and the TV partners were NOT going to play the game your way. They wanted something substantive to make it worth their while to negotiate. Even as is, UMD was double dealing, which is exactly WHY the TV bidders would not have made the current deal.

 

[orange79]

See I think, when something needs to be done to save the conference or protect the investors, the better approach is to...

- Get the investors to pony up from $13m to $17M
- Add Notre Dame commitment games to the schedule
- Get the investors to pony up another $1-2M for ND
- Work out a deal for the Orange Bowl, while not on par with the Rose or Sugar, is a hell of a lot better than anyone thought they'd pull off, to keep the financial impact minimal
- Make sure you've got a full share of the playoff system, and a full seat at the table, with no financial impact based on past (poor) performance
- Go back to 8 conference games to keep the football schools healthy
- Take a bonafide football (and basketball) school with a great athletic department, rather than a basketball school that's been playing FBS football for a decade, academics be damned
- Get a promise from ESPN to strongly consider a network, or additional compensation if no network
- Get the partners to pony up another $1-2M if teams will sign a GOR
- Get the schools to now willingly sign onto a GOR

That's how you save a conference, make sure it's worth saving. That's what stabilized the ACC, not a massive exit fee.

OK, most (or all) of which the ACC did. In addition, they imposed a massive exit fee. If you're committed to the conference, and willingly signed the GOR, this shouldn't matter. Because it would never apply to you.

 

[Lou_C]

OK, most (or all) of which the ACC did. In addition, they imposed a massive exit fee. If you're committed to the conference, and willingly signed the GOR, this shouldn't matter. Because it would never apply to you.

Yep, that's the point, the ACC did all that. That's what brought stability...read about the national reaction to the raised buyout, with two members voting against it...stability wasn't the key theme.

But absolutely, as I've stated, it doesn't matter any more because of the grant of rights, which everyone signed on to.

 

[Lou_C]

Thank you for responding. Over the past couple of years, you are the FIRST person to post a serious comment via an FSU official opposing the matter due to the excessive exit fee. I would like the BOT Chair to comment now that the GOR is in place and is far more excessive than the 3X annual TV payout exit fee (the exit fee is now $62.4MM, 3 X $20.8MM payout). My guess is that he was playing to the base and had not actually reviewed any real data, thus his admission that he was making a personal statement and had not talked to lawyers. Cheesy at best and not a member of the negotiating team, but I give you some credit as he was the incoming chair at the time.

Also, I point out that ND was part of the deal. ND wanted everyone to commit and is under the same $50MM exit fee as every other school, even though they get a proportional payout and are not members in football. I think if ND has a much higher proportional exit fee than every other school since their football is not a part of the equation. Do you honestly believe the B1G would not sign an exit fee of $50MM to get ND? I think they would sign a $100MM exit fee if Delaney could have landed ND.

Your stability argument is irrelevant. The ACC wanted a better TV deal and had to provide some show of security. The ACC wanted this and this is how they decided to provide security and to show they were serious partners for a better TV deal. The exit fee is not a simple exit fee in a vacuum. There are far more variables in the equation and the exit fee is way of simplifying total damages, called liquidated damages, wherein each party agrees that if they break the deal, this is what they will pay. Both Maryland and FSU had approved of the bylaws and the vote used an alternative voting method (upheld in court), so in the net effect, both approved the increased exit fee as neither notified the ACC they would withdraw over the issue (or shortly thereafter).

FSU signed the GOR willingly. There's been no opposition to that from FSU officials, nothing but a show of ACC solidarity.

But to get FSU on board, Swofford had to personally go to the key players at FSU and show his cards and lay out his vision. Who knows, maybe there was some accommodation on Swofford's part to certain concerns of FSU. The ACC certainly had shown they were thinking about football, by taking Louisville over UConn. But in any case, to get the GOR, Swofford got everyone on board and got consensus. There hasn't been a whiff of instability since that moment. That's how you do it.

As opposed to ramming through an (at that time) unprecedented exit fee, over the public opposition of two members (one of which was at the top of all realignment speculation), that did NOTHING to quiet the talk and speculation. Swofford admitted it himself, that he needed the GOR to put an end to the talk.

He got the GOR the right way, by addressing concerns and building consensus. The exit fee was the wrong way, by attempting to ram through shackles on a few schools that might not be totally happy, rather than addressing concerns. Instead, he got the GOR by convincing the schools not that "you'll leave over your dead body", but by making sure they would not want to leave.

It all worked out. It might net the ACC a few more millions from MD that it wouldn't have, but it did nothing to stop speculation (or movement). But the failure of it to accomplish it's goals forced the hand of the ACC to do it the right way instead of the easy way, and the conference is stabilized as a result.

 

[Ottoble]

Sheesh...here you go.

https://floridastate. /content.asp?CID=1408459

"President Barron voted against it. I personally think that $50 million is punitive. I'm not sure that holds up," said Bense, who was named the chairman of the Board of Trustees for a two-year term in June. Bense also said that Maryland voted against the increased buyout. "I'm not implying that there's going to be any changes, but $50 million is a lot of money."
The Charlotte Observer's Andrew Carter reported Wednesday that nine of the 12 ACC schools had to vote for the increase for it to be approved.

Hey Lou thanks for adding your side of the debate good to hear from the FSU fan side of things. Based on this info though it needed to be a 3/4 majority for the exit fee to be approved and you oppose being held to it? That's a very high bar and the vote cleared it 10 to 2. I hear your argument of being forced to do something you voted against but that's how governance works. The other side is that argument is that a clear and vast majority (ie 3/4+) of members can't be held hostage by one or two members as this would lead to very high conference volatility. A 3/4 membership vote seems good enough bar for me and the vote took place when there were 12 members, right before the ACC officially added Pitt and Syracuse as voting members, they would have been 2 more yes votes if this was voted at a later date extending the clear majority. Implicitly they are yes votes as they continued proceedings to enter the conference after the vote was taken, accepting the terms.

 

[SU68]

Pretty sure they would since they were harmed by Maryland leaving.

How is SU harmed by Maryland leaving? They were replaced by Louisville without any break in scheduling and now have a stronger opponent in most sports. I have also been told that Louisville fans travel better than do Maryland fans.

 

[TexanMark]

How is SU harmed by Maryland leaving? They were replaced by Louisville without any break in scheduling and now have a stronger opponent in most sports. I have also been told that Louisville fans travel better than do Maryland fans.

SU is losing out on marketing SU to the MD market. Lots of students come from the DC to SE PA area. Losing Media coverage and penetration there is worth more than gaining Louisville.

 

[HtownOrange]

FSU signed the GOR willingly. There's been no opposition to that from FSU officials, nothing but a show of ACC solidarity.

But to get FSU on board, Swofford had to personally go to the key players at FSU and show his cards and lay out his vision. Who knows, maybe there was some accommodation on Swofford's part to certain concerns of FSU. The ACC certainly had shown they were thinking about football, by taking Louisville over UConn. But in any case, to get the GOR, Swofford got everyone on board and got consensus. There hasn't been a whiff of instability since that moment. That's how you do it.

As opposed to ramming through an (at that time) unprecedented exit fee, over the public opposition of two members (one of which was at the top of all realignment speculation), that did NOTHING to quiet the talk and speculation. Swofford admitted it himself, that he needed the GOR to put an end to the talk.

He got the GOR the right way, by addressing concerns and building consensus. The exit fee was the wrong way, by attempting to ram through shackles on a few schools that might not be totally happy, rather than addressing concerns. Instead, he got the GOR by convincing the schools not that "you'll leave over your dead body", but by making sure they would not want to leave.

It all worked out. It might net the ACC a few more millions from MD that it wouldn't have, but it did nothing to stop speculation (or movement). But the failure of it to accomplish it's goals forced the hand of the ACC to do it the right way instead of the easy way, and the conference is stabilized as a result.

The point is that you do not get to the GOR unless you have the exit fee increase to stabilize the ACC, which was facing rumors of everyone leaving except Wake Forest. You cannot count UMD in this equation because of self dealing (perhaps FSU was doing so also, who knows). As I have mentioned and you have mentioned, the GOR far exceeds the exit fee so much of the talk regarding the exit fee being too high is immaterial. Another point missed by many and by UMD themselves is that if they leave the B1G, they will lose far more than the exit fee! (Juries don't like being fed a line of bull: UMD's claiming the exit fee is too high then join the B1G with an exponentially higher cost to leave)

 

[SU68]

Unfortunately I have been muzzled...not many jacks & coke going down lately...but an ear to the ground (STEALTH side if you will) has indicated that the court forced Mediation between The ACC and Maryland will take place/has taken place prior to July 10th, 2014.

The Whisper I hear is that the ACC fully expects to keep the $30,000,000+ in distribution that Univ of Maryland was due for the past two years distribution...and that the ACC is going for more.

As background here are two articles that lay the groundwork--both written in June this year in case you missed them. Basically the ACC has a home court advantage...importantly a Court of Appeals panel, rejected unanimously Univ Maryland attempt to throw out the case...Implication is that Univ of Maryland cannot go to NC State Supreme court to appeal to dismiss the case since the Appeals panel voted unanimously...although the NC Supreme court could hear the case if it wanted to...secondly there was no submission made--that anyone knows of--requesting a stop to or date in future for the mediation meeting--that notification needed to be sent to the court in late June. As such the mediation meeting will take place.

Note that the B1G is providing University of Maryland with a $30,000,000 travel advance...is that a coincidence to the fact The ACC is withholding roughly this amount...I do not believe in coincidence and neither Rutgers nor Nebraska received this travel advance...I believe that the B1G had projected a loss in the range of $30,000,000+ to settle the case. Several of us have previously projected the cost to end this suit would be approximately $33,000,000 or more.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"According to a source, no meeting date has been finalized yet, but the order mandates it must happen before July 10, nine days after Maryland officially migrates from the ACC to the Big Ten, a move announced in November 2012. Shortly thereafter, the ACC filed suit against its longtime member institution, seeking enforcement of a withdrawal payment worth approximately $52 million".

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...mediator-assigned-in-maryland-vs-acc-lawsuit/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"A state Court of Appeals panel rejected Maryland's bid to dismiss the lawsuit. It was filed in Greensboro, where the ACC is headquartered. The three-judge panel's unanimous decision means Maryland has no automatic right to a state Supreme Court appeal. But the higher state court could choose to hear an appeal".

http://msn.foxsports.com/collegefoo...eserves-acc-lawsuit-over-maryland-exit-111913

________________________________________________________________
Bottom line appears that if a settlement is not negotiated, the trial will begin in North Carolina within the next 3 months...The ACC is expected to win...although then Univ Maryland can try Federal Court appeal...and if taken, lots of dirty laundry from both sides will come out...Univ Maryland, The ACC and B1G...although that would be interesting, it potentially causes more headaches...I hear whispers that the ACC and Univ of Maryland--supported by B1G interests...will settle. What do you think (other lawyers please respond)?

It's Good to be 'Cuse!! The Order of the 'Cuse Orange..

Regarding Maryland trying a Federal Court appeal, both parties declined to apply for Federal status and opted for state courts. It ended up in the North Carolina system because that is where the alleged tort occurred.

It is possible that some parties could end up in fed ct on a fed law, issues of which were not decided in st ct. However, "res judicata" precludes if the parties had a full and fair opportunity to litigate issues in st ct. Would be rare as jurisprudence discourages forum shopping.

 

[orangepassion]

How is SU harmed by Maryland leaving? They were replaced by Louisville without any break in scheduling and now have a stronger opponent in most sports. I have also been told that Louisville fans travel better than do Maryland fans.

I live in maryland for one thing. What about my needs?

 

[Hokie Mark]

How is SU harmed by Maryland leaving? They were replaced by Louisville without any break in scheduling and now have a stronger opponent in most sports. I have also been told that Louisville fans travel better than do Maryland fans.

IMO, Syracuse was injured by Maryland in 3 ways:
1) loss of the Baltimore TV market
2) perception that B1G can poach ACC teams
3) increased travel costs (Lousville is further away, 677 vs 364 miles)

I expanded upon all 3 in my blog back in May - http://accfootballrx.blogspot.com/2014/05/how-maryland-damaged-acc.html

 

[texascpa]

So, it's July 11th, what happened? Did they mediate?

 

[javadoc]

So, it's July 11th, what happened? Did they mediate?

There was a typo in the order so this is all that happened:

 

[texasorange]

There was a typo in the order so this is all that happened:

I somehow feel so calm right now...

 

[SU68]

IMO, Syracuse was injured by in the MDaryland in 3 ways:
1) loss of the Baltimore TV market
2) perception that B1G can poach ACC teams
3) increased travel costs (Lousville is further away, 677 vs 364 miles)

I expanded upon all 3 in my blog back in May - http://accfootballrx.blogspot.com/2014/05/how-maryland-damaged-acc.html

I understand your passion, Mark, but you would still have to prove a net loss in the Md/Ville swap

BTW I miss your blog!