ACC needs to act

[All4SU]

http://campuscorner.kansascity.com/node/2633 This one is the Kansas City Star that says the grant of rights for 13 years has been agreed to with just deals being ironed out.

Is Bob Bowlsby the best name for a conference Commish ever or what!

 

[All4SU]

That entire article smacks of B12 puffery.

 

[Madbiker]

Is Bob Bowlsby the best name for a conference Commish ever or what!

Sure is. I keep waiting for UK to get an AD with a name like Tom Cheater.

 

[omniorange]

While a GOR certainly has the look of stability, I am amazed in this day and age that posters believe a good lawsuit couldn't wiggle someone out of that, if they really wanted to go. Especially amongst educational institutions who hate the publicity of lawsuits.

The fact that UT and OU signed the GOR simply means they are willing to stick around for a while. Which is a good thing for the likes of Baylor, Iowa State, etc.

Cheers,
Neil

 

[normaliswear]

While a GOR certainly has the look of stability, I am amazed in this day and age that posters believe a good lawsuit couldn't wiggle someone out of that, if they really wanted to go. Especially amongst educational institutions who hate the publicity of lawsuits.

The fact that UT and OU signed the GOR simply means they are willing to stick around for a while. Which is a good thing for the likes of Baylor, Iowa State, etc.

Cheers,
Neil

Who said it was impossible to break? Anything can be done but to make it sound like a GOR is a minor speed bump doesn't demonstrate a realistic legal understanding. It cost WVU 20 mill the break their 27 month waiting period... well an extra 10 mill. Sure a GOR isn't a guarentee, but to break it would be very costly.

 

[DoctorBombay]

Its not unreasonable to consider the scenario that normal is presenting- its just good business.
Why not get solid commits from Clemson & FSU by way of the GOR? Its a fact that FSU especially doesn't like the tilt towards more bball centric programs, and might want to explore greener pastures. Why not add another deterrent to ensure more stability?
I think it'd be a good idea.

 

[rrlbees]

That entire article smacks of B12 puffery.

the original article came from dennis dodd.

 

[Chip]

When Texas and Oklahoma sign their rights away for 13 yrs in blood, then you can at least believe they will stay in the Big 12 for awhile. All this stuff about rights for 13 years comes mostly from West Virginia boards. When the presidents of Texas and Oklahoma say they have signed the papers then it will possibly be believable. I'd still want to see the signed, and notorized document with signatures verified by my lawyer, before i would accept their word. Even then if in their best interests they would breach the contract.

It's not an equal share revenue league. Once Texas locks all those teams in, it can concentrate on how much of the conference TV money they want to keep.

People forget that this is a league that schools like Nebraska, Colorado, Missouri, Texas A&M couldn't run from fast enough. The other schools are now stuck because they have no choice.

 

[baggerbob]

No-one has signed from any article I have seen thus far , they all say it has been agreed to with details to be worked out. Texas could still decide at the last moment not to sign.

 

[rrlbees]

No-one has signed from any article I have seen thus far , they all say it has been agreed to with details to be worked out. Texas could still decide at the last moment not to sign.

i think that is why it has been said it isn't cast in concrete.

 

[AlaskaSU]

What does this mean? "This past week the Big 12 increased its grant of rights term to 13 years, meaning any school leaving the conference leaves its TV rights behind for 13 years." When a team leaves it obviously has no claim on revenues from the old league. Is the intent to make the team that leaves pay its share of what would have been future revenue over the next 13 years. No team would ever agree to incorporate such an amendment into its league. Schools want some flexibility.

"IE Texas leaves the Big 12, then all TV revenue for Longhorn games go to the Big 12 for 13 years." If Texas leaves the Big 12 it no longer generates TV revenue. TV contracts are amended when teams change and no TV contract is for 12 or 13 years. If you are talking about revenue that would have been generated, I repeat, no team is going to submit to a possible decades long penalty. Teams agree to a million dollar penalty. To think they would agree to a $20 million/open ended penalty is silly. This does not pass the smell test.

 

[omniorange]

Who said it was impossible to break? Anything can be done but to make it sound like a GOR is a minor speed bump doesn't demonstrate a realistic legal understanding. It cost WVU 20 mill the break their 27 month waiting period... well an extra 10 mill. Sure a GOR isn't a guarentee, but to break it would be very costly.

And what teams are likely to break a GOR? It isn't the Baylors, Iowa States, Wakes, BCs, SUs, etc. It's the teams with the $$$.

Btw, the BiG and the Pac have GORs as well. But guess what. For their GORs they get something in return, an equity share in the BTN or PTN. That's real tangible stability.

Cheers,
Neil

 

[normaliswear]

And what teams are likely to break a GOR? It isn't the Baylors, Iowa States, Wakes, BCs, SUs, etc. It's the teams with the $$$.

Btw, the BiG and the Pac have GORs as well. But guess what. For their GORs they get something in return, an equity share in the BTN or PTN. That's real tangible stability.

Cheers,
Neil

And the reason they would consider leaving would be to make MORE money. The more you raise the cost of leaving, the less likely anyone is to leave. For the hundredth time, nobody is saying GOR is unbreakable. But it provides as much stability as anything possibly can.

 

[omniorange]

And the reason they would consider leaving would be to make MORE money. The more you raise the cost of leaving, the less likely anyone is to leave. For the hundredth time, nobody is saying GOR is unbreakable. But it provides as much stability as anything possibly can.

The BTN has an estimated value of over $3 billion, of which the Big Ten gets 51% of that value, which means the 12 teams each have an equity share valued at $127,500,000 (assuming Nebraska gets a full equity share from the get go). I don't see any Big Ten president walking away from that tangible asset.

And that is a huge difference from the rather simplistic GOR we are talking about with the Big 12. If you want to say that a GOR is better than a simple exit fee and a waiting period to leave the conference fine, I don't have a problem with that. But the Big East could have remained stubborn and not settled with WVU in terms of the exit fee and the waiting period (particularly the waiting period). They simply chose not to do so because lawsuits are expensive and bring bad publicity.

If Texas wants to leave the Big 12 for the BiG or the Pac prior to the 13 years , they will do so, regardless of a GOR. It might mean, like WVU, they'll have to pay more for leaving, but when an institution wants to leave badly enough, they'll pay that price especially if they have something worth more waiting.

One thing I will say now, the LHN will be dead within 3-5 years. Not getting to show Texas high school football games on the network virtually guaranteed it. So will the Big 12 try their own network or will Texas start getting roving eyes again.

Cheers,
Neil

 

[kyleslamb]

My understanding is the grant of rights will only extend to ESPN & Fox. Now, ESPN/Fox owns the rights to all major conferences at this point in time, but if in five years someone were to jump to Comcast, for instance, any school could leave the Big 12 without the G.O.R. applying. Really, the only conferences that have rights coming up soon are the Big East and Big Ten (in 2015). The Big East won't be a viable destination for Big 12 schools, and only one or two teams in the Big 12 would be on the Big Ten's radar. So really, Texas is the only school this loophole could impact. But if you're a believer like I am that Texas is a sinister, yet clever negotiator, I think this is an important point. I don't still believe Texas is going to the Big Ten like I did through last summer, as the league certainly has more stability and better revenue than it did before, but I think it's an interesting loophole nonetheless. If, in fact, this G.O.R. only applies to ESPN/Fox, then Texas could join the Big Ten without any consequence in 2016 if the Big Ten goes to NBC/NBC Sports for its tier-1 media rights. That's something the Big Ten has most certainly entertained.

Florida State and Maryland have been operating at a major shortfall the past few years. If a league can step up and offer significantly more money, I believe either would seriously entertain it. Maryland has aspirations of landing in the Big Ten. I don't know what Florida State is planning, but there's a whole lot of chatter that they're playing footsie with the Big 12.

 

[MaxwellCuse]

Mary land has aspirations of landing in the Big Ten???? According to?

What a coach or block of fans aspire to and what a school's governing board and president aspire to are often very different. And guess whose opinion really counts?

 

[kyleslamb]

Mary land has aspirations of landing in the Big Ten???? According to?

What a coach or block of fans aspire to and what a school's governing board and president aspire to are often very different. And guess whose opinion really counts?

You're exactly right. And I'm not referring to their coaches or fans.

 

[arbitragegls]

if the FSU post is really accurate, the ACC could be in some trouble...with FSU, Clemson, MD maybe going elsewhere...what a cluster f..k.

 

[Niastri]

Well, the ACC could use Boise State in a pinch.