FSU vs The ACC

[NKR1978]

One of our legal giants weighs in with his opinion:

https://mikefarrellsports.com/featured/florida-state-has-no-shot-at-getting-out-of-acc-law-will-not-protect-a-party-from-a-bad-deal

Okay, this is a garbage web site and Scott Salomon is just UM communications school grad, just a guy with an opinion, but he thinks the ACC is going to win.

What do the lawyers on this board think?

I think the strongest argument is over the punitive nature of the exit fee; but that's a separate issue than the GOR. But I'm more of a glorified social worker than a real lawyer.

 

[Willy75]

I think the strongest argument is over the punitive nature of the exit fee; but that's a separate issue than the GOR. But I'm more of a glorified social worker than a real lawyer.

I'm not sure it is punitive when it serves a legitimate business purpose (keeping the conference stable) and was freely negotiated by FSU.

 

[Cusefan69]

I think the strongest argument is over the punitive nature of the exit fee; but that's a separate issue than the GOR. But I'm more of a glorified social worker than a real lawyer.

Yeah and it would be interesting to hear the arguments on that. While FSU calls it "punitive ", the ACC likely had it framed that way intentionally as a deterrent and again ALL schools had to agree to that multiplier before signing the final version of the contract. This again was not a surprise.

 

[sutomcat]

This article is not optimistic about FSU's chances to succeed with their lawsuit.

Florida State vs. ACC: Answering legal questions on 'dueling lawsuits,' Grant of Rights | Sporting News

Mark Wilhelm, a partner-elect at Troutman Pepper, has a grasp on the Grant of Rights and ACC constitution and offered his opinions about how this legal battle could shake out.

www.sportingnews.com

 

[Consigliere]

That should be open to all kids that qualify academically like FL or GA

It is. First year eligibility is high school graduation or equivalency. Subsequent years require student to have successfully completed thirty hours of higher education in prior years.

 

[BomberOrange]

It is. First year eligibility is high school graduation or equivalency. Subsequent years require student to have successfully completed thirty hours of higher education in prior years.

Gotcha I thought you said it was for those families that make $125k or less.

 

[HtownOrange]

This article is not optimistic about FSU's chances to succeed with their lawsuit.

Florida State vs. ACC: Answering legal questions on 'dueling lawsuits,' Grant of Rights | Sporting News

Mark Wilhelm, a partner-elect at Troutman Pepper, has a grasp on the Grant of Rights and ACC constitution and offered his opinions about how this legal battle could shake out.

www.sportingnews.com

The assessment seems good, of anything it is more generous towards FSU than it should be. FSU pushed for the increased withdrawal fee and pushed for the GOR. This combined with the fact FSU has a top level legal staff and access to state attorneys began the question of how FSU was swindled? FSU has a law school, too. The writer points this out at the end discussing sophistication of both parties.

What is not discussed is that several other schools within the ACC and outside the ACC have scrutinized the GORs and concluded it was not worth the cost and hassle to attempt to break the GOR.

Finally, the Florida court will likely look foolish hearing and ruling on the matter when the agreements plainly declare NC as the jurisdiction and venue for any litigation added to the fact that the first shot was fired by the ACC by filing their lawsuit in NC the day before FSU filed in FL.

In short, FSU has a mountain to climb, has no climbing gear (money to buy back their rights), has no climbing boots (the contract is against them), has no climbing guide (the law is mostly if not completely against them), and has no supplies (idiot for an AD, foolish BoT, and suckered donors and fans). A long legal battle can cost more than the withdrawal fee (you know, the one they fought for).

My guess is that FSU makes this short or key FSU personnel lose their jobs.

 

[Hoo's That]

As long as Notre Dame is an Indy in FB, the ACC can survive.

At the end of the day though I think we are in a 30 team B1G made up of six 5 team divisions: old PAC 8s, old Big 8s, old Big 10 Ws, old Big 10 Es, old East Indies, old ACCs.

The SEC would be 20 teams made up of four 5 team divisions: old SWCs, old SEC Ws, old SEC Es, old ACCs.

The B12 will be a 20 team leftover conference.

If GoR are made null and void, the B1G and SEC as presently constituted will go away.

Question - Why leave the big-money B1G and SEC?
Answer - For an even bigger money conference of just 16 bluebloods: Ohio State, Penn State, Michigan, Michigan State (or someone else), UCLA, USC, Oregon, Washington, Oklahoma, Texas, LSU, Texas A&M, Alabama, Auburn, Georgia, and Florida. No more Vanderbilts and Nortwesterns to subsidize.

4 pods - 1. Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, Penn State; 2. USC, UCLA, Oregon, Washington; 3. Oklahoma, Texas, LSU, Texas A&M; 4. Alabama, Auburn, Georgia, Florida. Everyone is put into a line and a pod. You play everyone in your pod every year, and the pods rotate after a home-and-home

 

[Toga]

If GoR are made null and void, the B1G and SEC as presently constituted will go away.

Question - Why leave the big-money B1G and SEC?
Answer - For an even bigger money conference of just 16 bluebloods: Ohio State, Penn State, Michigan, Michigan State (or someone else), UCLA, USC, Oregon, Washington, Oklahoma, Texas, LSU, Texas A&M, Alabama, Auburn, Georgia, and Florida. No more Vanderbilts and Nortwesterns to subsidize.

4 pods - 1. Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, Penn State; 2. USC, UCLA, Oregon, Washington; 3. Oklahoma, Texas, LSU, Texas A&M; 4. Alabama, Auburn, Georgia, Florida. Everyone is put into a line and a pod. You play everyone in your pod every year, and the pods rotate after a home-and-home

Me and millions of other CFB fans would not watch even a quarter.

 

[HtownOrange]

Appreciate the tactful response.

What about the angle under the Public Policy, Impossibility area?

In some cases, a contract is deemed unenforceable because it would be impossible or impracticable to carry out its terms -- too difficult or too expensive, for example. To claim impossibility, you would need to show that:

• you can't complete performance under the contract because of some unexpected event that's not your fault
• the contract didn't make the risk of the unexpected event something you needed to shoulder, and
• performing the contract will be much more difficult or expensive now.

Unenforceable Contracts: What to Watch Out For

What kinds of contracts might not hold up in court?

www.nolo.com

Couldn't an "unexpected event" be the demise of the Pac-12 conference spearheading a move towards only having 2 power conferences by those power play entities? Unforeseen, which ultimately has a direct impact on FSU's future of being competitive et al (and all that that encompasses) comprehensively as a public/state flagship institution?

Would the existing contract be more "expensive now" (in the way that if it didn't exist) and how otherwise FSU would be able to relatively seamlessly transfer over to the B1G or SEC and reap the financial benefits of it?

Good question.

DISCLAIMER: I am not a licensed Florida attorney. What I opine on this board is just that, my opinion, and should not be construed as legal advice.

Recall that courts generally will enforce contracts, even perceived bad contracts. The presumption is that all parties to contracts have fairly negotiated the terms and agree on the terms before signing the agreement. The party claiming public policy bears the burden of proving why the contract offends the public.

More specifically, does the contract affect public services? (Think kickbacks, falsified billing, providing less services than competitors would for the same amount, nepotism, etc. Do not think in terms of dollars only. Recall a bad deal is still a deal if both parties agree to it. More specifically, a perceived bad deal looking backwards is hard to prove. I invested in a mutual fund but would be a multi millionaire if I had invested in Microsoft, Amazon and Google; my choices being consequences good and bad.)

Does the agreement cause corruption? Think anything that happens in NJ. (See Rutgers).

Will the agreement obstruct or pervert justice? Do you charge a mother protecting her kids from an attacker because she shoots/kills the S.O.B. attacker? (Son of a biscuit, CL; trying to stay on the good side). Public policy would say no, the mother had a right to defend herself and her kids. Also, think obstruction, like (nevermind, this will get to political to explain).

Finally, does the agreement promote litigation? Think along the lines of scumbags taking advantage of illegal aliens, selling personal and/or real property under exorbitant or false schemes and either forcing them into litigation or surrender. (I have had to deal with this, yes it is real).

There is no solid legal definition of "public policy" but this comes close:

The principles, often unwritten, on which social laws are based. (I "benchmarked" -O.K., I stole it- from the interwebs.). Note: this is not the same as a public policy wherein a government creates a solution (or too often so they think) to relieve a social ill. FDR's WPA and CCC, the civil rights laws, Title IX (no, this is not open for debate beyond, start a thread on the proper forum).

Anyway, in my opinion, FSU's perceived bad bargaining does not create bad faith on the part of the ACC, especially as all ACC teams suffer equally under the bargain.

As to the demise of the Pac12, that in reality is merely the completion of their contract. There was no guarantee they would remain together nor fall apart, this it should not have any impact on the lawsuits at hand.

This is too short to give you a full answer but I hope it helps a little.

 

[HtownOrange]

I think the strongest argument is over the punitive nature of the exit fee; but that's a separate issue than the GOR. But I'm more of a glorified social worker than a real lawyer.

I agree. However, FSU pushed for this which undercuts the legitimacy of their claim. If FSU had not pushed for the increased withdrawal fee, their claim would be much stronger. That is how UMD was able to negotiate their withdrawal down because they were against the increase.

 

[Hoo's That]

Florida also has a plan (at least I think it’s different) where in-state parents can pay their kids future tuition at today’s rates and down the road they can attend any state school. Also covers one year of r&b.
UF and FSU are fine academic schools and are increasingly hard to get into even for in-state kids.

Maryland and Virginia also have "529" plans. Put in the full amount now and your child goes tuition free to a state school (like my niece did) when ready or gets reimbursed the equivalent to in-state tuition if they go to a private school (like Hoo's That the Younger did).

 

[Hoo's That]

The NYT and WSJ comments sections are great forums to duke it out with political arguments. Not here please.

So is "The Board that Dare Not Mention Its Name".

 

[Hoo's That]

Me and millions of other CFB fans would not watch even a quarter.

Yes, I and fans of teams wouldn't watch it either, but the casual fans with no real ties and the fans of those schools will watch and some network will pay big bucks for it, more than the football portion of the B1G and SEC contracts pay now.

 

[Toga]

Yes, I and fans of teams wouldn't watch it either, but the casual fans with no real ties and the fans of those schools will watch and some network will pay big bucks for it, more than the football portion of the B1G and SEC contracts pay now.

Maybe but only because fewer teams get paid. I don't think there's any way there will be an overall greater number of eyeballs on those games.

 

[HtownOrange]

Maybe but only because fewer teams get paid. I don't think there's any way there will be an overall greater number of eyeballs on those games.

While I agree with you, this may be what is required to reset CFB TV deals and realize that most people still care only for their school and those of their loved ones.

I hope the long term ends up in a solid deal with all D1 (Bowl Division) share like major professional sports programs do. And all the networks have a slice of the pie, too.

 

[anomander]

The Navigate chart is the one I’ve seen before, which shows the ACC surpassing the Big 12 in overall revenue distribution. I’ve also seen some estimates of the ACC being even significantly higher than the Big 12 in the next few years. You also have to factor in the ACC getting more money for Stanford, Cal and SMU and a good chunk of that will go to increase payouts to the other ACC schools. SMU is forgoing any TV payouts for several years. So the ACC will be ahead of the Big 12 in per school distributions for the foreseeable future. Moreover, the ACC will get a chance to raid the Big 12 of their best programs when their GOR is nearing expiration in 2029 and that will likely prompt another ESPN contract renegotiation for the ACC.

I think whoever raids who depends on where FSU, Clemson, and UNC are. Unless ESPN re-negotiates with the ACC to prevent B10 and FOX from taking programs like FSU, Clemson, UNC, and to a lesser extent UVA, it would be very arguable who has the better conference and just how much a new deal would get the ACC without those programs.

 

[Scooch]

34 pages. Good gravy.

I still don’t care. Whatever happens, happens. SU is along for this ride.

 

[IthacaMatt]

One of our legal giants weighs in with his opinion:

https://mikefarrellsports.com/featured/florida-state-has-no-shot-at-getting-out-of-acc-law-will-not-protect-a-party-from-a-bad-deal

Okay, this is a garbage web site and Scott Salomon is just UM communications school grad, just a guy with an opinion, but he thinks the ACC is going to win.

What do the lawyers on this board think?

I believe that ESPN will be impleaded, and that they should be a defendant.

It was their decisions, which constitute breach of contract, to twice delay the launch of the ACC Network, and then to unilaterally exercise an option to extend the ACC contract by 9 years with no increase in compensation.

ESPN should be put on the stand to answer those questions, why they did what they did.

 

[Consigliere]

Gotcha I thought you said it was for those families that make $125k or less.

It is, but there are also educational eligibility requirements

 

[capeorange]

Excuse me. Florida is an absolute mess politically. Those shots at Florida aren’t outdated.

NY is a state with negative population growth and a lower graduation rate than Arkansas, Kentucky, West Virginia, Tennessee while sitting firmly in the bottom 20% and you're throwing stones at Florida?

 

[kcsu]

Appreciate the tactful response.

What about the angle under the Public Policy, Impossibility area?

In some cases, a contract is deemed unenforceable because it would be impossible or impracticable to carry out its terms -- too difficult or too expensive, for example. To claim impossibility, you would need to show that:

• you can't complete performance under the contract because of some unexpected event that's not your fault
• the contract didn't make the risk of the unexpected event something you needed to shoulder, and
• performing the contract will be much more difficult or expensive now.

Unenforceable Contracts: What to Watch Out For

What kinds of contracts might not hold up in court?

www.nolo.com

Couldn't an "unexpected event" be the demise of the Pac-12 conference spearheading a move towards only having 2 power conferences by those power play entities? Unforeseen, which ultimately has a direct impact on FSU's future of being competitive et al (and all that that encompasses) comprehensively as a public/state flagship institution?

Would the existing contract be more "expensive now" (in the way that if it didn't exist) and how otherwise FSU would be able to relatively seamlessly transfer over to the B1G or SEC and reap the financial benefits of it?

FSU has to compete within the ACC conference. Not the Big the Pac the SEC the AAC the Mac the Sun
They just won the ACC championship. They just by their own proclamation signed one of the best classes not only in the ACC but in the entire country. They beat teams from other conferences. I would say that they are doing just fine competitively. Argument doesn't hold any water.

 

[HtownOrange]

FSU has to compete within the ACC conference. Not the Big the Pac the SEC the AAC the Mac the Sun
They just won the ACC championship. They just by their own proclamation signed one of the best classes not only in the ACC but in the entire country. They beat teams from other conferences. I would say that they are doing just fine competitively. Argument doesn't hold any water.

Sorry, KCSU, you know it does not fit their narrative and we all know the world, the sun, the galaxy, the universe all revolve around the moron of an AD at FSU. Thus, their argument holds water.







...until a judge slaps the moron back into reality...

 

[Toga]

FSU has to compete within the ACC conference. Not the Big the Pac the SEC the AAC the Mac the Sun
They just won the ACC championship. They just by their own proclamation signed one of the best classes not only in the ACC but in the entire country. They beat teams from other conferences. I would say that they are doing just fine competitively. Argument doesn't hold any water.

The defense is wrong!

 

[qdawgg]

NY is a state with negative population growth and a lower graduation rate than Arkansas, Kentucky, West Virginia, Tennessee while sitting firmly in the bottom 20% and you're throwing stones at Florida?

Their standards of living seem to indicate something about “whom” is allowed to graduate and that’s knowing NYS standards for graduating aren’t too high. It’s pretty easy to move the goalposts from state to state and tout grad rates. They’re meaningless as a standard for many reasons.