FSU vs The ACC

[WoadBlue]

I agree with the writer in that the B1G and SEC will keep the option to break off in their back pocket but prefer to stay as happy family with the remaining conferences. I think they realize that with the limited states represented, a Congressional investigation would be forthcoming. Unless there are sufficient schools to ensure one body of Congress can ignore or fly cover for the B1G/SEC, there is a significant and real threat to any break-away from the present format. Though 26 states are covered by the two conferences, several large and powerful states are not yet represented and they can cause significant issues. Further, several states that are covered will have to "kill off' little brother schools in the process. Thus, cooperation remains the better option as the landscape stands now. If the P2 conferences expand and include a few more states, the tipping point is crossed and the goals can be accomplished with far less issues.

I still think this is a bad idea as the long play will harm the lesser and mid-level P2 schools more than most realize. Further, the coverage of the lesser conferences can be covered by streaming or conference networks created by the conferences themselves will drive viewership down from the P2.

Just one fan's take.

They should be forced to break off, to either leave the NCAA or else be their own separate NCAA division for all sports.

 

[WoadBlue]

Interesting item posted on our board.

They them must be forced to use that as their own division for all sports. They should NOT then und3er any circumstances be allowed to play in the NCAA D1 basketball tournament of baseball playoffs, etc.

 

[PhatOrange]

They them must be forced to use that as their own division for all sports. They should NOT then und3er any circumstances be allowed to play in the NCAA D1 basketball tournament of baseball playoffs, etc.

Agreed, just boot them out. No access to any other sports.

I can’t imagine a football championship between two conferences would be more compelling and a bigger draw than a playoff with everyone else.

Outside of those two conference’s fans who else would watch.

 

[CuseGrad94]

Not often in contract law.

Agreed, this isn’t the OJ trial

 

[CousCuse]

Agreed, this isn’t the OJ trial

ESPN owns the contracts of both the SEC and the ACC. It seems to be the general opinion that the ACC is getting significantly shorted while that leagues competitors, the SEC, are getting over compensated. It's causing a discrepancy.

 

[Cheriehoop]

Was reading Clemson’s message board after their loss to Duke in basketball. Many noted that the treatment and bias directed to other teams by the power of the North Carolina teams is the reason they hate the ACC. Was surprised by the degree of hate directed to the conference despite their recent dominance in football. Wonder what or if they thought there were issues they thought the ACC negatively affected their football program?

 

[Bayside44]

Was reading Clemson’s message board after their loss to Duke in basketball. Many noted that the treatment and bias directed to other teams by the power of the North Carolina teams is the reason they hate the ACC. Was surprised by the degree of hate directed to the conference despite their recent dominance in football. Wonder what or if they thought there were issues they thought the ACC negatively affected their football program?

All the flopping calls they got in football they lost in hoop.

 

[TheCusian]

Was reading Clemson’s message board after their loss to Duke in basketball. Many noted that the treatment and bias directed to other teams by the power of the North Carolina teams is the reason they hate the ACC. Was surprised by the degree of hate directed to the conference despite their recent dominance in football. Wonder what or if they thought there were issues they thought the ACC negatively affected their football program?

I think it's all easily explained. The default is UNC, Duke, NC State, WF in that very specific order. You can trump that list if you're in contention for a natty (Clemson in FB, Virginia in BB, FSU in FB).

You can see why we are on the losing end of the stick, mostly.

 

[sutomcat]

Tampa Bay article on the lawsuits. Another legal expert who is puzzled at what the FSU legal team is trying to do.

5 legal thoughts on the Florida State vs. ACC lawsuits, grant of rights

We asked an attorney who has studied grant of rights for his thoughts on the FSU-ACC dispute.

www.tampabay.com

Years before Florida State and the ACC filed dueling lawsuits over the Seminoles’ future in the conference, Mark T. Wilhelm studied a version of the secretive document at the core of this half-a-billion-dollar dispute.

It’s called a grant of rights, and he examined its enforceability in the Harvard Law School Journal of Sports and Entertainment Law.

Wilhelm, a partner who handles mergers and acquisitions at the Philadelphia law firm Troutman Pepper, spoke with the Tampa Bay Times recently to share his insight and personal thoughts on the case (still in its infancy). Here are some takeaways:

If you’re wondering how FSU can escape deals it signed, you’re not alone​

“That’s a great question,” Wilhelm said, “and I don’t have a particularly good answer.”

Wilhelm explained a few options to try to escape contracts like a grant of rights — where FSU and the other schools granted their TV rights to the ACC, which sold them to ESPN and distributed the money back to the schools.

One is that the deal is, essentially, unfair. FSU said it would lose out on $572 million as part of a “draconian” process to leave the ACC. But Florida State previously agreed to those figures, which could hurt its argument.

Another is that the ACC broke the deal’s terms. FSU brings up this one, too, arguing the conference failed to live up to its financial and competitive promises. But if those promises were made elsewhere — like the conference’s mission statement — does that apply to a financial contract?

A third option: what looks like a contract isn’t a contract after all.

Remember this word: considerations​

Valid contracts must have three parts: an offer, an acceptance and a consideration. Suppose you offer to buy a neighbor’s old bike for $10. He accepts, and you give him the consideration ($10). That satisfies all three requirements.

But Wilhelm said a consideration must be new. It doesn’t work if you borrowed $10 from your neighbor last week, then give him $10 for the bike; your neighbor isn’t getting a new consideration.

FSU argues in its complaint that it “received no new consideration” by signing the grant of rights. If a court accepts that argument, then there’s no contract. And if there’s no contract, then Florida State could save hundreds of million of dollars on its way out.

It matters how you slice (and characterize) $572 million​

One of the two major chunks, according to FSU, is a $130 million fee to leave the ACC. The other is $429 million in TV money the conference will withhold until 2036.
...

 

[WoadBlue]

Agreed, just boot them out. No access to any other sports.

I can’t imagine a football championship between two conferences would be more compelling and a bigger draw than a playoff with everyone else.

Outside of those two conference’s fans who else would watch.

In hard times behind the 8 ball, you either give up and or else go for broke. All the rest of the 1A leagues need to vote together to demand that the BT and SEC have their now division, just them. And they must play all their sports in that division. And then we have an NCAA sponsored football playoff.

What do we (ACC and Big 12) offer the G5 leagues to vote that way? The football playoff will have 16 teams, and each league champ gets an auto bid. So that means 7 conference champ slots and 9 at large offers. And then to prevent the problem we have seen arise in the basketball tournament, we close that arrangement - no new conference gets an auto bid.

Each of the G5 leagues would get much more from that than they ever can with a Super 2 hoarding almost all the playoff money from their playoff and then also using their Superior wealth to fund the richest basketball programs as well.

 

[swish7]

Tampa Bay article on the lawsuits. Another legal expert who is puzzled at what the FSU legal team is trying to do.

5 legal thoughts on the Florida State vs. ACC lawsuits, grant of rights

We asked an attorney who has studied grant of rights for his thoughts on the FSU-ACC dispute.

www.tampabay.com

Years before Florida State and the ACC filed dueling lawsuits over the Seminoles’ future in the conference, Mark T. Wilhelm studied a version of the secretive document at the core of this half-a-billion-dollar dispute.

It’s called a grant of rights, and he examined its enforceability in the Harvard Law School Journal of Sports and Entertainment Law.

Wilhelm, a partner who handles mergers and acquisitions at the Philadelphia law firm Troutman Pepper, spoke with the Tampa Bay Times recently to share his insight and personal thoughts on the case (still in its infancy). Here are some takeaways:

If you’re wondering how FSU can escape deals it signed, you’re not alone​

“That’s a great question,” Wilhelm said, “and I don’t have a particularly good answer.”

Wilhelm explained a few options to try to escape contracts like a grant of rights — where FSU and the other schools granted their TV rights to the ACC, which sold them to ESPN and distributed the money back to the schools.

One is that the deal is, essentially, unfair. FSU said it would lose out on $572 million as part of a “draconian” process to leave the ACC. But Florida State previously agreed to those figures, which could hurt its argument.

Another is that the ACC broke the deal’s terms. FSU brings up this one, too, arguing the conference failed to live up to its financial and competitive promises. But if those promises were made elsewhere — like the conference’s mission statement — does that apply to a financial contract?

A third option: what looks like a contract isn’t a contract after all.

Remember this word: considerations​

Valid contracts must have three parts: an offer, an acceptance and a consideration. Suppose you offer to buy a neighbor’s old bike for $10. He accepts, and you give him the consideration ($10). That satisfies all three requirements.

But Wilhelm said a consideration must be new. It doesn’t work if you borrowed $10 from your neighbor last week, then give him $10 for the bike; your neighbor isn’t getting a new consideration.

FSU argues in its complaint that it “received no new consideration” by signing the grant of rights. If a court accepts that argument, then there’s no contract. And if there’s no contract, then Florida State could save hundreds of million of dollars on its way out.

It matters how you slice (and characterize) $572 million​

One of the two major chunks, according to FSU, is a $130 million fee to leave the ACC. The other is $429 million in TV money the conference will withhold until 2036.
...

The 'consideration' is the conference payouts.

Are they arguing they didn't get conference payouts? Or didn't get 'new' payouts?

None of their argument makes sense

 

[sutomcat]

The 'consideration' is the conference payouts.

Are they arguing they didn't get conference payouts? Or didn't get 'new' payouts?

None of their argument makes sense

I think they are saying they didn't get more money for signing the GOR so it is not a legal contract.

Of course, the GOR wasn't a device to get more money. It was a device to get stability.

This was common knowledge to everyone. I think even FSU knows this. But they are desperate to find something to sue about so this was one of the straws they grasped.

 

[kcsu]

I believe that the continuation of payments was based on the GOR being signed.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

I believe that the continuation of payments was based on the GOR being signed.

And the creation of an ACC Network.

 

[WoadBlue]

Agreed, just boot them out. No access to any other sports.

I can’t imagine a football championship between two conferences would be more compelling and a bigger draw than a playoff with everyone else.

Outside of those two conference’s fans who else would watch.

Over time, very few others outside those states and those school's alums would watch more than here and there. Those 2 still would have larger TV audiences that anybody else, but they would lose audience too.

 

[swish7]

I think they are saying they didn't get more money for signing the GOR so it is not a legal contract.

Of course, the GOR wasn't a device to get more money. It was a device to get stability.

This was common knowledge to everyone. I think even FSU knows this. But they are desperate to find something to sue about so this was one of the straws they grasped.

Crazy

 

[jgeorge322]

Tampa Bay article on the lawsuits. Another legal expert who is puzzled at what the FSU legal team is trying to do.

5 legal thoughts on the Florida State vs. ACC lawsuits, grant of rights

We asked an attorney who has studied grant of rights for his thoughts on the FSU-ACC dispute.

www.tampabay.com

Years before Florida State and the ACC filed dueling lawsuits over the Seminoles’ future in the conference, Mark T. Wilhelm studied a version of the secretive document at the core of this half-a-billion-dollar dispute.

It’s called a grant of rights, and he examined its enforceability in the Harvard Law School Journal of Sports and Entertainment Law.

Wilhelm, a partner who handles mergers and acquisitions at the Philadelphia law firm Troutman Pepper, spoke with the Tampa Bay Times recently to share his insight and personal thoughts on the case (still in its infancy). Here are some takeaways:

If you’re wondering how FSU can escape deals it signed, you’re not alone​

“That’s a great question,” Wilhelm said, “and I don’t have a particularly good answer.”

Wilhelm explained a few options to try to escape contracts like a grant of rights — where FSU and the other schools granted their TV rights to the ACC, which sold them to ESPN and distributed the money back to the schools.

One is that the deal is, essentially, unfair. FSU said it would lose out on $572 million as part of a “draconian” process to leave the ACC. But Florida State previously agreed to those figures, which could hurt its argument.

Another is that the ACC broke the deal’s terms. FSU brings up this one, too, arguing the conference failed to live up to its financial and competitive promises. But if those promises were made elsewhere — like the conference’s mission statement — does that apply to a financial contract?

A third option: what looks like a contract isn’t a contract after all.

Remember this word: considerations​

Valid contracts must have three parts: an offer, an acceptance and a consideration. Suppose you offer to buy a neighbor’s old bike for $10. He accepts, and you give him the consideration ($10). That satisfies all three requirements.

But Wilhelm said a consideration must be new. It doesn’t work if you borrowed $10 from your neighbor last week, then give him $10 for the bike; your neighbor isn’t getting a new consideration.

FSU argues in its complaint that it “received no new consideration” by signing the grant of rights. If a court accepts that argument, then there’s no contract. And if there’s no contract, then Florida State could save hundreds of million of dollars on its way out.

It matters how you slice (and characterize) $572 million​

One of the two major chunks, according to FSU, is a $130 million fee to leave the ACC. The other is $429 million in TV money the conference will withhold until 2036.
...

no contract is a real knee slapper... that attorney can't be serious thinking that's a valid defense. any first year law student could conjure up 50 different types of consideration that fsu received in that deal.

to be clear, these cases typically always settle out of court, but not because of that crazy defense. this one might actually go further just because of the dollars at play... acc isn't going to settle for less than $200m and fsu isn't going to pay that much either. maybe they will finance it - if they can get out for $300m or so and would make $30m or more per year in sec or big 10, then probably worth just taking out a loan and securing it by receivable in future revenue stream from future conference. if they make $50m more per year in sec or big 10, then its really a no brainer - because you could pay that loan off in 5-10 years.

thats my guess how this ends. fsu finds its next conference, then takes out financing to pay off a $300 - 400m exit fee.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

no contract is a real knee slapper... that attorney can't be serious thinking that's a valid defense. any first year law student could conjure up 50 different types of consideration that fsu received in that deal.

to be clear, these cases typically always settle out of court, but not because of that crazy defense. this one might actually go further just because of the dollars at play... acc isn't going to settle for less than $200m and fsu isn't going to pay that much either. maybe they will finance it - if they can get out for $300m or so and would make $30m or more per year in sec or big 10, then probably worth just taking out a loan and securing it by receivable in future revenue stream from future conference. if they make $50m more per year in sec or big 10, then its really a no brainer - because you could pay that loan off in 5-10 years.

thats my guess how this ends. fsu finds its next conference, then takes out financing to pay off a $300 - 400m exit fee.

It is going to take them about 10 years to break even. Why leave the ACC and put yourself at a competitive disadvantage vs your peer conference schools for 10 years vs staying in the ACC where you have a competitive advantage for the next 10 years? It is completely irresponsible.

 

[PhatOrange]

no contract is a real knee slapper... that attorney can't be serious thinking that's a valid defense. any first year law student could conjure up 50 different types of consideration that fsu received in that deal.

to be clear, these cases typically always settle out of court, but not because of that crazy defense. this one might actually go further just because of the dollars at play... acc isn't going to settle for less than $200m and fsu isn't going to pay that much either. maybe they will finance it - if they can get out for $300m or so and would make $30m or more per year in sec or big 10, then probably worth just taking out a loan and securing it by receivable in future revenue stream from future conference. if they make $50m more per year in sec or big 10, then its really a no brainer - because you could pay that loan off in 5-10 years.

thats my guess how this ends. fsu finds its next conference, then takes out financing to pay off a $300 - 400m exit fee.

why would the ACC settle?

 

[jgeorge322]

why would the ACC settle?

Because thats how our litigation system works. Its a process for settling disputes.

 

[jgeorge322]

It is going to take them about 10 years to break even. Why leave the ACC and put yourself at a competitive disadvantage vs your peer conference schools for 10 years vs staying in the ACC where you have a competitive advantage for the next 10 years? It is completely irresponsible.

Youd have to present value the future cash flows of the two conferences to appreciate the value in what it is doing.

 

[PhatOrange]

Because thats how our litigation system works. Its a process for settling disputes.

It's only how the system works if the side being sued decides to settle. The ACC has too much at stake to settle.

 

[tipphill]

ESPN and Fox are like old dinaosaurs right now. The NFL basically put a playoff game on a streaming network and said FU to fans and the Fans bought it up anyway,

The Future of Big time college football is not going to be tied to old leagues and old TV contracts, Its likely ESPN gets spun off from ABC and Disney and will have to stand on its own and maybe allows for Any agreements that were signed with them to be broken anyway.

Young people are fast movers and will only pay for what they want and will demand that from whatever Form future programming takes(bless there heart).

The infinity stones are being found and put together for big time football. Once the power is concentrated enough the haves and big boys are going to steam roll the have nots. Streaming networks are the way to the future but you have to have hat people want to watch and will pay for . If you dont think big and act big and most of all perform big you are gone. By performing i mean Eyes that watch and support you, people that come and pay money to watch you, people that are willing to put up money for you to have players that people want to watch. Its that simple its not a hard formula at all.

Nobody who pays for games gives a damn about AAU and academic identity, thats not what they are paying for . Big time college football is now a huge business no if ands or buts.

FSU as detestable as they are knows the path forward for them is playing games against Alabama and Michigan or USC, people will pay for that, They are not going to pay for games against Duke or Pitt or dare i say Syracuse in it last ten year form.

If they can break the GOR its another infinity stone for the high powers and a quicker way to push out the excess who cash check off the back of the big boys.

sad but very true

 

[HRE Otto IV]

Youd have to present value the future cash flows of the two conferences to appreciate the value in what it is doing.

Not even close to answering the question.

FSU is better off financially the next 10 years staying in the ACC if the exit fee costs anywhere near what the ACC is expecting.

The B1G's contract runs through 2029-30. The SEC's contract runs through 2033/34. Neither has an incentive to take on FSU before the start of new TV negotiations. And if they did take FSU, it would be at a reduced share.

If FSU takes out a loan it will take 10 years to pay off, maybe longer. The principal minus the conference payout won't be any more than they make now in the ACC. It will actually probably be less money. So FSU would need to compete with $40M against schools making $80M in their new conference. That is a huge disadvantage.

Or they can stay in the ACC and make playoff money more often than not.

 

[jgeorge322]

It's only how the system works if the side being sued decides to settle. The ACC has too much at stake to settle.

Let's revisit once whatever will happen happens.