|
|
Post by grayman on Jan 4, 2024 18:55:01 GMT -8
When FSU leaves the ACC, it will be up to ESPN to make a decision on extending the broadcast agreement. You can go on thinking that this will keep FSU from leaving. IMO, it won't. Whether the school wins the lawsuit or it gets settled or it just cuts a big check to get out. It’s estimated to be upwards of $572 million between the exit fee and losing their media revenue from wherever they end up. You think they will just cut a check? Hard to see them cutting the check if they lose the lawsuit. No, they won't pay $572 million. That's the number they are using as a main reason for the suit over the GOR. There's not a real high chance that amount would actually be able to be enforced anyway. |
|
|
|
Post by rgeorge on Jan 4, 2024 19:27:40 GMT -8
And... as you read not one other school joined forces. Only Clemson is aligned with FSU and they left them out on their own with this action. Plus Clemson doesn't have the deep pockets to fight this.
So, when FSU loses, and they will as buyout prices as part of a contract aren't cause to break a contract. As the buyout wasn't new, so nothing in the ACC changes.
If the ACC says, OK we'll settle, and pocket another $300-400 mil they split it up with the other members. Suddenly they get rid of the trouble maker and the other schools suddenly have a windfall.
If they win, believe what you want, it's based on the State of FL law. And, it'd be years of appeals. Meaning each and every other ACC team that would have to go through the lengthy process in their own state. If they have similar state laws. Spending millions and pissing off ESPN who'll renew the option at the current price.
FSU is slowly learning they are not the ACC. The new additional CW deal also helps the overall media outlook for the ACC.
The ACC and Pac12 have zero in common. They have a long term stable media contract. Under valued? Sure, maybe. But, the money is there. And, there is no other conferences with media $ offering any/enough of their members a home.
My guess, the ACC isn't going away anytime soon. And, this is one of those lawsuits filed for the hope beyond hope of a settlement.
Your guess may vary.
|
|
|
|
Post by Judge Smails on Jan 4, 2024 19:31:33 GMT -8
It’s estimated to be upwards of $572 million between the exit fee and losing their media revenue from wherever they end up. You think they will just cut a check? Hard to see them cutting the check if they lose the lawsuit. No, they won't pay $572 million. That's the number they are using as a main reason for the suit over the GOR. There's not a real high chance that amount would actually be able to be enforced anyway. So, they’re suing because they signed a stupid contract? Great case! That’s the contract. If they lose, it could be enforced if they leave. Unless the ACC caves and settles with them. It would still cost them hundreds of millions to leave. |
|
|
|
Post by seastape on Jan 4, 2024 19:42:47 GMT -8
News I learned reading the last few posts: - the ACC media suddenly becomes optional in 2027. From reading contract info, NOPE. - if FSU wins a GOR court case the ACC will disband. Again them winning has a negligible chance considering the contract and pocketbook of the media companies. Also, if FSU does win there are many schools still tied to said contract not part of said lawsuit. Are they too going to file and fight?And, will they if they have no other destination? - that $10, $15, $20 million media deal is worse than $0, no media deal that we currently don't have. - if a reverse merger happens the current MWC media deal of $5-6 million per team would stay exactly the same. That OSU would still be getting the "old" media deal amount even though it'd be expired and be negotiated at today's rates/climate with two new teams that are a upgrade. - that despite how dumb the other "10" were to enter these other conferences. Not enough $, extensive travel, not looking out for the welfare if student athletes, etc, it is now the best course of action for OSU. Versus building a conference of similar west coast universities. Similar especially if the NIL continues down an unfettered path. More than future media contracts may influence new conference realignment, NIL policies and who chooses to adopt them might determine the media deals that form conferences. Until the NCAA, and/or whatever organization is formed, sets policies that are enforced by legislation standing pat as the Pac2 might be best?! Rebuilding what we can during the next 2 years may allow time to get a clearer picture. It may allow a clear path without taking multiple paths. Who knows? Ah yes... nobody. That's the sh&t of it. Decent article on FSU/ACC... www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/39161391/florida-state-vs-acc-grant-rights-lawsuit-questions-answeredI think you're spot on about this point. If we go to a Power conference and NIL is unchecked, how is OSU supposed to compete with the bigger schools in those conference? Answer: they can't and they won't. |
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Jan 4, 2024 19:46:53 GMT -8
No, they won't pay $572 million. That's the number they are using as a main reason for the suit over the GOR. There's not a real high chance that amount would actually be able to be enforced anyway. So, they’re suing because they signed a stupid contract? Great case! That’s the contract. If they lose, it could be enforced if they leave. Unless the ACC caves and settles with them. It would still cost them hundreds of millions to leave. There's a lot more to their suit. Pretty sure you understand that, but if you don't, there's a bunch of stories online that can spell it out for you. Again, even if they lose, it's unlikely that those numbers would hold up. The $130 million exit fee alone is unlikely to be deemed reasonable in court. Interesting that you and a few others are so adamant that FSU won't leave. |
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Jan 4, 2024 19:50:10 GMT -8
News I learned reading the last few posts: - the ACC media suddenly becomes optional in 2027. From reading contract info, NOPE. - if FSU wins a GOR court case the ACC will disband. Again them winning has a negligible chance considering the contract and pocketbook of the media companies. Also, if FSU does win there are many schools still tied to said contract not part of said lawsuit. Are they too going to file and fight?And, will they if they have no other destination? - that $10, $15, $20 million media deal is worse than $0, no media deal that we currently don't have. - if a reverse merger happens the current MWC media deal of $5-6 million per team would stay exactly the same. That OSU would still be getting the "old" media deal amount even though it'd be expired and be negotiated at today's rates/climate with two new teams that are a upgrade. - that despite how dumb the other "10" were to enter these other conferences. Not enough $, extensive travel, not looking out for the welfare if student athletes, etc, it is now the best course of action for OSU. Versus building a conference of similar west coast universities. Similar especially if the NIL continues down an unfettered path. More than future media contracts may influence new conference realignment, NIL policies and who chooses to adopt them might determine the media deals that form conferences. Until the NCAA, and/or whatever organization is formed, sets policies that are enforced by legislation standing pat as the Pac2 might be best?! Rebuilding what we can during the next 2 years may allow time to get a clearer picture. It may allow a clear path without taking multiple paths. Who knows? Ah yes... nobody. That's the sh&t of it. Decent article on FSU/ACC... www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/39161391/florida-state-vs-acc-grant-rights-lawsuit-questions-answeredI think you're spot on about this point. If we go to a Power conference and NIL is unchecked, how is OSU supposed to compete with the bigger schools in those conference? Answer: they can't and they won't. The NIL presents a problem but OSU and WSU would not have a particularly big disadvantage as opposed to Big 12 schools or ACC schools should they join one of those conferences. The NIL and other money issues don't magically disappear for the schools if they were basically in a G5 conference. Not to mention the very real possibility of a far less lucrative media deal. |
|
|
|
Post by Judge Smails on Jan 4, 2024 19:51:34 GMT -8
So, they’re suing because they signed a stupid contract? Great case! That’s the contract. If they lose, it could be enforced if they leave. Unless the ACC caves and settles with them. It would still cost them hundreds of millions to leave. There's a lot more to their suit. Pretty sure you understand that, but if you don't, there's a bunch of stories online that can spell it out for you. Again, even if they lose, it's unlikely that those numbers would hold up. The $130 million exit fee alone is unlikely to be deemed reasonable in court. Interesting that you and a few others are so adamant that FSU won't leave. You’re the one that said that number was the “main reason” And they are the school that agreed to the contract with that exit fee. So, they’re going to plead stupidity over the exit fee now? Because of what? Did their attorneys not read the contract? |
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Jan 4, 2024 19:52:45 GMT -8
And... as you read not one other school joined forces. Only Clemson is aligned with FSU and they left them out on their own with this action. Plus Clemson doesn't have the deep pockets to fight this. So, when FSU loses, and they will as buyout prices as part of a contract aren't cause to break a contract. As the buyout wasn't new, so nothing in the ACC changes. If the ACC says, OK we'll settle, and pocket another $300-400 mil they split it up with the other members. Suddenly they get rid of the trouble maker and the other schools suddenly have a windfall. If they win, believe what you want, it's based on the State of FL law. And, it'd be years of appeals. Meaning each and every other ACC team that would have to go through the lengthy process in their own state. If they have similar state laws. Spending millions and pissing off ESPN who'll renew the option at the current price. FSU is slowly learning they are not the ACC. The new additional CW deal also helps the overall media outlook for the ACC. The ACC and Pac12 have zero in common. They have a long term stable media contract. Under valued? Sure, maybe. But, the money is there. And, there is no other conferences with media $ offering any/enough of their members a home. My guess, the ACC isn't going away anytime soon. Your guess may vary. Personally, I think that Florida State is going to get the North Carolina lawsuit dismissed based on the 11th Amendment. Both cases will be consolidated in Leon County, Florida. (Fun fact, the county is named after Ponce de Leon.) When there is no ambiguity, contract interpretation is generally a judge's purview. But a jury gets to decide any ambiguities. So, you will have a sitting Leon County jury composed primarily of huge Florida State fans with a Second Judicial Court judge. Judge Cooper, who was assigned to the case, got his BA and JD from Florida State University. Florida State will fast-track it. All of the Courts of Appeal will fast-track it. If the Florida State Supreme Court gets the case, they will probably deny cert, unless the Court of Appeals got it wrong. It will be fast-tracked. When Florida State wins, because they will (their primary argument may fail, but they will win on a secondary or tertiary argument), Clemson and Miami will use the ruling to get out of the GOR. If this drags on into Fall of next year, the Court will probably award damages to Florida State and then add interest on top of it for good measure. It is a matter of time. The ACC can stall, if it would like, but it will lose and then owe damages to Florida State for stalling. Unless Florida State gets dealt a bad ruling, Florida State would be stupid to settle. No way in hell that Florida State pays several hundred million to get out of the ACC. Tens of millions? Sure. They settle that in a heartbeat. But $100+ million. No. |
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Jan 4, 2024 19:56:35 GMT -8
There's a lot more to their suit. Pretty sure you understand that, but if you don't, there's a bunch of stories online that can spell it out for you. Again, even if they lose, it's unlikely that those numbers would hold up. The $130 million exit fee alone is unlikely to be deemed reasonable in court. Interesting that you and a few others are so adamant that FSU won't leave. You’re the one that said that number was the “main reason” And they are the school that agreed to the contract with that exit fee. So, they’re going to plead stupidity over the exit fee now? Because of what? Did their attorneys not read the contract? It is debatable that the exit fee is enforceable against Florida State, because of the 11th Amendment. |
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Jan 4, 2024 20:09:54 GMT -8
News I learned reading the last few posts:
- the ACC media suddenly becomes optional in 2027. From reading contract info, NOPE.- if FSU wins a GOR court case the ACC will disband. Again them winning has a negligible chance considering the contract and pocketbook of the media companies. Also, if FSU does win there are many schools still tied to said contract not part of said lawsuit. Are they too going to file and fight?And, will they if they have no other destination? - that $10, $15, $20 million media deal is worse than $0, no media deal that we currently don't have. - if a reverse merger happens the current MWC media deal of $5-6 million per team would stay exactly the same. That OSU would still be getting the "old" media deal amount even though it'd be expired and be negotiated at today's rates/climate with two new teams that are a upgrade. - that despite how dumb the other "10" were to enter these other conferences. Not enough $, extensive travel, not looking out for the welfare if student athletes, etc, it is now the best course of action for OSU. Versus building a conference of similar west coast universities. Similar especially if the NIL continues down an unfettered path. More than future media contracts may influence new conference realignment, NIL policies and who chooses to adopt them might determine the media deals that form conferences. Until the NCAA, and/or whatever organization is formed, sets policies that are enforced by legislation standing pat as the Pac2 might be best?! Rebuilding what we can during the next 2 years may allow time to get a clearer picture. It may allow a clear path without taking multiple paths. Who knows? Ah yes... nobody. That's the sh&t of it. Decent article on FSU/ACC... www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/39161391/florida-state-vs-acc-grant-rights-lawsuit-questions-answeredThe issue with the extension of the GOR past 2027 is that Florida State alleges that there was no valid conference-wide vote to extend the GOR past 2027. Florida State may be applying spin there, e.g., there was a vote but it was invalid, because every single issue was not disclosed to Florida State before the vote occurred. We will see how the ACC responds. |
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Jan 4, 2024 20:20:19 GMT -8
There's a lot more to their suit. Pretty sure you understand that, but if you don't, there's a bunch of stories online that can spell it out for you. Again, even if they lose, it's unlikely that those numbers would hold up. The $130 million exit fee alone is unlikely to be deemed reasonable in court. Interesting that you and a few others are so adamant that FSU won't leave. You’re the one that said that number was the “main reason” And they are the school that agreed to the contract with that exit fee. So, they’re going to plead stupidity over the exit fee now? Because of what? Did their attorneys not read the contract? Yes. Well, the endgame is obviously to get out of the ACC, but the $572 million is the major bone of contention. There's a few reasons why FSU sees this as absurd. One is, as stated earlier, the $130 million exit fee. The remaining $432 million is the loss of media payouts through 2036. One part of that is that ACC commissioner Jim Phillips allegedly acted without the approval of two-thirds of the ACC membership to move ESPN's deadline to extend the media contract (from 2027 to 2036), which was originally slated for 2021 and moved to 2025. "The complaint concludes there is currently no guarantee of media rights revenue for the conference beyond June 2027. (The Athletic). Also from The Athletic: "Florida State alleges that it was duped into signing the longer-term grant of rights in 2016 because of what it calls a feigned “ESPN Ultimatum,” believing the extension of the grant of rights was not a real precondition because ESPN was not guaranteeing revenue for its duration. The school also states that the language of the 2016 ESPN extension requires the ACC have at least 15 members, but that the members could be interchangeable. That, Florida State believes, is why the league added Stanford, Cal and SMU in August — a move that the complaint calls “self-serving and defensive, as opposed to strategic.” |
|
|
|
Post by Judge Smails on Jan 4, 2024 20:34:15 GMT -8
You’re the one that said that number was the “main reason” And they are the school that agreed to the contract with that exit fee. So, they’re going to plead stupidity over the exit fee now? Because of what? Did their attorneys not read the contract? Yes. Well, the endgame is obviously to get out of the ACC, but the $572 million is the major bone of contention. There's a few reasons why FSU sees this as absurd. One is, as stated earlier, the $130 million exit fee. The remaining $432 million is the loss of media payouts through 2036. One part of that is that ACC commissioner Jim Phillips allegedly acted without the approval of two-thirds of the ACC membership to move ESPN's deadline to extend the media contract (from 2027 to 2036), which was originally slated for 2021 and moved to 2025. "The complaint concludes there is currently no guarantee of media rights revenue for the conference beyond June 2027. (The Athletic). Also from The Athletic: "Florida State alleges that it was duped into signing the longer-term grant of rights in 2016 because of what it calls a feigned “ESPN Ultimatum,” believing the extension of the grant of rights was not a real precondition because ESPN was not guaranteeing revenue for its duration. The school also states that the language of the 2016 ESPN extension requires the ACC have at least 15 members, but that the members could be interchangeable. That, Florida State believes, is why the league added Stanford, Cal and SMU in August — a move that the complaint calls “self-serving and defensive, as opposed to strategic.” I’m not saying there aren’t other arguments. I’m just saying their main argument is not an unreasonable exit fee. Despite if the agreement was extended or not, they were well aware of the $130 million exit fee. |
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Jan 4, 2024 20:43:06 GMT -8
Yes. Well, the endgame is obviously to get out of the ACC, but the $572 million is the major bone of contention. There's a few reasons why FSU sees this as absurd. One is, as stated earlier, the $130 million exit fee. The remaining $432 million is the loss of media payouts through 2036. One part of that is that ACC commissioner Jim Phillips allegedly acted without the approval of two-thirds of the ACC membership to move ESPN's deadline to extend the media contract (from 2027 to 2036), which was originally slated for 2021 and moved to 2025. "The complaint concludes there is currently no guarantee of media rights revenue for the conference beyond June 2027. (The Athletic). Also from The Athletic: "Florida State alleges that it was duped into signing the longer-term grant of rights in 2016 because of what it calls a feigned “ESPN Ultimatum,” believing the extension of the grant of rights was not a real precondition because ESPN was not guaranteeing revenue for its duration. The school also states that the language of the 2016 ESPN extension requires the ACC have at least 15 members, but that the members could be interchangeable. That, Florida State believes, is why the league added Stanford, Cal and SMU in August — a move that the complaint calls “self-serving and defensive, as opposed to strategic.” I’m not saying there aren’t other arguments. I’m just saying their main argument is not an unreasonable exit fee. Despite if the agreement was extended or not, they were well aware of the $130 million exit fee. No. I said the $572 million was the main reason and that they would not cut a check for that amount to leave. The exit fee is a part of that total. The fact that they are aware of that number isn't relevant to how it might be seen in court. "Again, even if they lose, it's unlikely that those numbers would hold up. The $130 million exit fee alone is unlikely to be deemed reasonable in court." |
|
|
|
Post by Judge Smails on Jan 4, 2024 20:45:34 GMT -8
I’m not saying there aren’t other arguments. I’m just saying their main argument is not an unreasonable exit fee. Despite if the agreement was extended or not, they were well aware of the $130 million exit fee. No. I said the $572 million was the main reason and that they would not cut a check for that amount to leave. The exit fee is a part of that total. The fact that they are aware of that number isn't relevant to how it might be seen in court. "Again, even if they lose, it's unlikely that those numbers would hold up. The $130 million exit fee alone is unlikely to be deemed reasonable in court." So if I don’t like the interest rate on my house, I don’t have to pay it? What kind of argument is reasonable? |
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Jan 4, 2024 20:53:02 GMT -8
No. I said the $572 million was the main reason and that they would not cut a check for that amount to leave. The exit fee is a part of that total. The fact that they are aware of that number isn't relevant to how it might be seen in court. "Again, even if they lose, it's unlikely that those numbers would hold up. The $130 million exit fee alone is unlikely to be deemed reasonable in court." So if I don’t like the interest rate on my house, I don’t have to pay it? What kind of argument is reasonable? You contracted for a 15-year fixed rate and your mortgage company procured you a 30-year variable rate mortgage without having you agree to it. Do you have to pay on the latter mortgage? Plus, you don't have the same 11th Amendment rights that Florida State University enjoys. |
|
