FSU vs The ACC

[IthacaMatt]

Point 1: If FSU and Clemson believed their line that ESPN is going to cancel the ACCN, their respective lawsuits are a waste of good money as they need only wait a couple years and walk away.

Point 2: Both FSU and Clemson have enjoyed the payments for many years. Voiding the contract which has been ratified legally by board votes and execution of each of the contracts and two by each school's actions. If both FSU and Clemson were to pay back the full payments received plus interest, they might be able to argue the contracts are voidable, though the ratification says otherwise.

Point 3: GORs have been analyzed by virtually every college and conference in D1, their respective outside counsel firms, and every private firm hoping to make easy money. Not one legitimate firm would touch the GOR. UT, OU, USC, and UCLA all decided it was not worth attacking the GOR. That should weigh heavier on people than blowhard fanboys with no legal training. Just a reminder, not one credible attorney or firm agrees with FSU or Clemson. Most of the legal eagles who are fans of FSU or Clemson remain unimpressed with the lawsuits.

I don't disagree that the ACC holds the far better legal position. These are not contracts the universities were made to enter into. They did it voluntarily.

But, do you think Clemson & Florida State will be forced to remain in the league against their will until 2036?

That doesn't seem likely to me. The networks just let the Pac-12 collapse, just this year.

Do you think there is a risk that ESPN decides to de-emphasize the ACC?

Is there a risk they encourage movement of schools from one conference to another?

Because it seems to me that the networks have been encouraging that pretty non-stop for the last 25 years.

The economic future is dynamic, and the available money for college sports is going to go down, unless it is shared among fewer schools.

Just because someone has the better legal position doesn't mean that things turn out the way they want them to.

 

[IthacaMatt]

I think ESPN fired a shot across the FSU now. Also, it is likely moot as the option would have some measurable to ensure both sides are protected and clear about the basis to discontinued the ACCN. Also, the fact that the two schools can save more money by waiting until ESPN plus the plug than they can make suiting the ACC indicates that FSU and Clemson are confident that the ACCN is sticking around until 2036.

Although the contracts are strongly in their favor, and Fla. State lost its first skirmish in this case, politics will probably get involved if too many state schools are left out of the Super Leagues, and then all bets are off.

 

[IthacaMatt]

I think ESPN fired a shot across the FSU now. Also, it is likely moot as the option would have some measurable to ensure both sides are protected and clear about the basis to discontinued the ACCN. Also, the fact that the two schools can save more money by waiting until ESPN plus the plug than they can make suiting the ACC indicates that FSU and Clemson are confident that the ACCN is sticking around until 2036.

But they have to force it to happen. ESPN doesn't just break up the league without schools agitating to do it. But they can facilitate it by making the dollars available so nobody has to really suffer.

 

[HtownOrange]

I don't disagree that the ACC holds the far better legal position. These are not contracts the universities were made to enter into. They did it voluntarily.

But, do you think Clemson & Florida State will be forced to remain in the league against their will until 2036?

That doesn't seem likely to me. The networks just let the Pac-12 collapse, just this year.

Do you think there is a risk that ESPN decides to de-emphasize the ACC?

Is there a risk they encourage movement of schools from one conference to another?

Because it seems to me that the networks have been encouraging that pretty non-stop for the last 25 years.

The economic future is dynamic, and the available money for college sports is going to go down, unless it is shared among fewer schools.

Just because someone has the better legal position doesn't mean that things turn out the way they want them to.

The networks' made offers that the PAC 12 rejected. That the PAC 12 disintegrated was not the responsibility of the networks.

As for the networks, they are for-profit businesses. If they see an opportunity to make more money for their investors, they have a duty to investigate. They do not control the schools, they schools make decisions in their best interest.

FSU and Clemson are likely to stay in the ACC until close to 2036. Neither has the resources to buy their way out, neither will make enough new money to actually buy their way out. As the GOR shortens in duration, the buy back of their rights will lessen and become affordable. The play right now is to intimidate the ACC, which has failed miserably, or get a court to rule that the the withdrawal fee is excessive and the GOR can be broken, neither of which is likely, based on the current facts.

I respectfully disagree with your supposition that the available money is in a smaller circle. As you note, CFB is dynamic. People follow their team. If too many teams are cut out, the big money goes away. The SEC does not want to break away, rather they want the lion's share. The SEC understands that they are a regional conference, the most regional for the P5/4. Though they have rabid fanbases, that will wane and CFB is cyclical. It was not long ago that USC, Miami, UF and FSU were powers. A few years more backwards and SU was a force, VATech a paper tiger, Wiscy was feared, etc. The SEC knows this and wants to stay on top.

The options are to expand extensively or keep the others in the fold. The SEC prefers the latter.

The real answer lies in CFB collectively managing their rights as to the pro leagues. That would require a few greedy bastards giving ups some money but in the long run teams will probably make even more. Just my take on what should be.

 

[HtownOrange]

Although the contracts are strongly in their favor, and Fla. State lost its first skirmish in this case, politics will probably get involved if too many state schools are left out of the Super Leagues, and then all bets are off.

Agreed. Presently, NY, VA and NC will be left out as per most of the interwebs speculators. Also, AZ. The first three have powerful delegations and AZ would likely support them. The. Add in the delegations of the remaining states without a Power team and the situation will get ugly.

 

[HtownOrange]

But they have to force it to happen. ESPN doesn't just break up the league without schools agitating to do it. But they can facilitate it by making the dollars available so nobody has to really suffer.

ESPN will have to ensure a soft landing or a big money payoff going to each ACC school or the real lawsuits will begin.

Honestly, it makes no sense for ESPN to give up the ACC. It would be easy enough to merge the ACC and SEC if they want a power conference. Giving up the northeast in football may not hurt as much but giving up the northeast in hoops would put a major hurt on ESPN. Plus, Fox would snap up some of the teams (Pitt, SU, and others) to squeeze out ESPN from the northeast. It makes good business sense for Fox and horrible sense for ESPN. Recall, ESPN is making profits off both the SECN and the ACCN.

 

[elimunelson]

ESPN will have to ensure a soft landing or a big money payoff going to each ACC school or the real lawsuits will begin.

Honestly, it makes no sense for ESPN to give up the ACC. It would be easy enough to merge the ACC and SEC if they want a power conference. Giving up the northeast in football may not hurt as much but giving up the northeast in hoops would put a major hurt on ESPN. Plus, Fox would snap up some of the teams (Pitt, SU, and others) to squeeze out ESPN from the northeast. It makes good business sense for Fox and horrible sense for ESPN. Recall, ESPN is making profits off both the SECN and the ACCN.

to me this is all happening in a vacuum created by money. we're seeing the gears of commercialism grind crankily while regulation/anti-trust/employer rights find their footing.

ultimately, FSU and Clemson will end up where they should because the market will bear it out. It's going to cost them alot. I agree with Ithaca that a settlement will be in the best interest of everyone. That time isn't now.

 

[oldpinepoint]

I don't blame you.

I enjoy your posts, it’s like I’m watching Suits again but for sports

 

[orange79]

No, the GoR contract is between the schools and the ACC; ESPN is not a party to the GoR. The GoR sets the conditions for leaving (the exit fee and forfeiture of all future TV money payments in the new conference). Once the GoR was in place, the ACC then negotiated with ESPN to form the ACC Network as an adjunct to the "regular", existing contract with ESPN. Getting everyone to sign the GoR was a condition set by ESPN to begin the negotiations. SMU, Cal, and Stanford all had to sign the GoR as a condition of entry.

Because ESPN's contract is with the ACC, not Clemson or Florida State. In wanting to leave early, they are contesting the GoR, their contract with the ACC, to which (as I said before) ESPN is not a party. If they manage to leave, under the terms of ESPN's contract with the ACC, ESPN can (and probably will) lower the payout, which is their only recourse.

ESPN is Not involved with any of the three lawsuits except to inform the court that FSU has violated confidentiality/industrial secrets. FSU KNOWS they cannot sue ESPN even though the GOR is the deal the must be broken for them to move. FSU likely hopes that they can withdraw from the ACC on the cheap and con ESPN to pay them more in the SEC. Yes, FSU's brain trust is as ignorant as this sounds.

EDIT: NOTE: While Hoo'sThat and I disagree a little (I think we are closer than it may appear), the point remains that FSU must defeat the GOR. I differ from Hoo's in that ESPN is the practical holder of the GOR rights and they will need to be properly brought in. ESPN is the beneficiary and at some point courts will likely want to know how this affects ESPN.

You are correct, FSU must break the GOR but cannot attack ESPN directly so they must do so through the ACC. The intimidation failed. First FSU failed with a low-ball number (the $100MM offer last summer, even though FSU had no money to pay the $100MM floating the concept of paying it out of FSU's new money -assuming they end up in the B1G or SEC). Again, yes, FSU's brain trust is as ignorant as this sounds. Anyway, FSU hopes that they can force their way out of the ACC and leverage ESPN into paying more for the rights ESPN already holds. The opportunity to jump to the B1G is less likely because ESPN would have to give up their rights completely to FSU. Recall, FSU believes the ACC world revolves around FSU, if this is so, ESPN would dump the ACC to keep FSU.

ESPN has no duty to do anything to defend their IP rights, they are not a party to any of the lawsuits. Yes, FSU and Clemson will need to bring ESPN into one or more of the lawsuits. U tim then, ESPN isn't wasting time and money worrying about the lawsuits. Most attorneys agree that the lawsuits will likely fail based on contract and IP law. The easier task is to ask an FSU believer to point out two IP cases on point that support FSU. Throw in Clemson for the bonus. You are not likely to find one case directly on point supporting either position.

ESPN has a very favorable deal. Yes, it sucks for the ACC. However, most of the ignorant web mouthpieces use old projections to "prove" the Big 12 will receive more money. This while the ACC is receiving more than the projected payouts. And no projection of Big12 payouts shows the Big 12 staying ahead of the ACC. Many "factor" in FSU and Clemson bringing more money to the Big12. Like OU and UT did to the SEC, but miss the point that the Big 12 has a clause that any new teams will only receive a pro rata share, there will not be an increase. Thus, FSU and Clemson are leaving the ACC for a pay cut. Stop me if you have heard this: The Big 12 trolls are as ignorant as this sounds.

Finally, I have yet to see a business entity destroy a profit center, especially when only one division is profitable for the parent corporation.


Bonus: Now that two states, possibly soon to be three, are hearing the same issue, unless they agree, the chances are that this will end up in Federal court, where most IP matters belong, and it is not likely to go well for FSU and Clemson. Contract law and IP law are fairly well settled. Law must be stable for business to continue. This is not political, this is reality.

Apologies for the worst response. Hope it helps a little.

Please, please, PLEASE stop using facts. You're getting in the way of an IthacaMatt rant.

He's right and you're wrong, you know. Even if all he can provide is casually-related nuggets and specious assumptions all spun together to convince himself that ESPN is the enemy here, it doesn't matter. He knows.

Arguing is futile.

 

[qdawgg]

Yeah I ain't reading all of this

And I refuse to respond to your comment…..

 

[Hoo's That]

And where is Miami in this pipe dream?

Sitting on the sideline waiting things out. As a small private school, they've got to be careful.

I don't think their administration or their fanbase believes that their being in the ACC has hurt them or held them back. Their fanbase believes much more that decisions by their administration, notably Wahoo Ted Foote and Donna Shalala, has put Da U in the position that it's in.

 

[PeteCalvin]

From a purely business perspective, ESPN doesn't have to do a thing. They have a valuable commodity at a discount, for another 12 years. Why should they volunteer to payout more money?
Sure the Big 12 is lurking, as well as the P2, but the WWL is banking on the likelihood that nothing will change under this contract, and the GOR will hold up in court.
Maybe they'll act once we get closer to 2036, but for now, better to sit tight and milk the ACC teat for a few more years. Though it sucks for college athletics, it's smart business sense. JMHO

This. I’ve asked my guy a few times about this situation over the past many months. ESPN is not going to shell out more money to the ACC because they have a great deal going. They are making a damn good profit off the conference and getting it all for below the current market value. The ACC is a valuable commodity to the WWL, and they will not allow the conference to fall apart. The network’s GOR with the schools is ironclad, it’s not going anywhere, and therefore the ACC has the full backing of the network in these legal matters. FSU and Clemson are just spinning their wheels and bleeding cash unnecessarily hoping someone will flinch. They won’t.

 

[IthacaMatt]

Please, please, PLEASE stop using facts. You're getting in the way of an IthacaMatt rant.

He's right and you're wrong, you know. Even if all he can provide is casually-related nuggets and specious assumptions all spun together to convince himself that ESPN is the enemy here, it doesn't matter. He knows.

Arguing is futile.

Still no substance from you. Disappointed, because I've enjoyed you as a poster.

 

[DoctorBombay]

Apparently so.
You don't see them trying to do anything from stopping it from happening, do you?

Again. ESPN doesn't have to do squat, at least for another 5-7 years, and the status quo remains the same. They have 12 more years left on that ACC contract.
As for the extra pay to the Big12, the PAC teams joined because there was literally no other place to put them, so why not pony up a little extra to secure the programs under the WWL umbrella.
For years Big12 had fewer members than the other P5 conferences, that's why their payout was on par. Once they started sucking up the leftovers and expanding, maybe ESPN figures they'll put all those programs on ice until the ACC contract comes due? That way the ACC, with it's network and other valuable commodities, can grab the best pieces and incorporate them in a revamped ACC.
The big mistake was FSU/Clemson jumping the gun and looking for an out. If the ACC had stuck together, we'd be in a much stronger position to negotiate a new agreement but unfortunately that would've taken patience and foresight...so here we are. JMHO

 

[cuse62]

Quick question for those of you smarter than myself. Which is probably everyone. If college football becomes semi pro football, union and colleges paying the players, can the NFL start playing on saturdays? I will just stop watching the college games except when Syracuse is playing; and I will watch more NFL.

 

[orangecuse]

Still no substance from you. Disappointed, because I've enjoyed you as a poster.

I found his passive aggressive/slighting post, especially as an administrator (be better) peculiar as well. Quite interesting. In my view, you were just offering your opinion, right, wrong or indifferent. I didn't interpret any of your post as a matter of fact.

 

[kcsu]

Still no substance from you. Disappointed, because I've enjoyed you as a poster.

Imatt. Sometimes you just need to fold. Cut your losses. We all get your take. Its fine but it's time to call it a day.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

There are so many permutations that it isn't worth spending time worrying about. There are plenty of scenarios where SU comes out in a good place.

Now by all means it is fun to speculate, but no one should lose any sleep.

As to the B12 vs ACC, IMO the ACC teams are better off sticking together. Regional Conference > National. Being with like minded schools > being in a franken conference. The net $ difference (have to factor in added costs) will be minimal at best.

I know BBall doesn't move the needle but if the ACC one day added UConn and Nova, the teams in the ACC would have 17 of the last 25 BBall titles, 15 of the last 21, and 12 of the last 15. Yes the schools would be football 2nd citizens in the ACC, but that would also be the case in the B12.

 

[JRHEETER]

Honestly it all lies within ESPNs hands

Whatever they want, will happen

 

[rocklloyd]

I don't blame you.

i love the analysis. keep it coming.

 

[Toga]

FWIW

 

[elimunelson]

FWIW

i read that whole thing and it makes no sense if you are the teams left behind who would seem to be very attractive to the BIG like UNC and UVA. I don't get his simple solution.

 

[OrangeXtreme]

FWIW

They'd rather face Bama and Georgia every year than Fran Brown.

 

[NKR1978]

FWIW

I don't have twitter, what does he say?

 

[Bayside44]

I don't have twitter, what does he say?

David Hale's retort: