Conference Realignment

[slugboy]

Please provide a copy of the most current executed GOR with updated amendments. It's not available to the public.

There's copies of the 2013 and 2016 versions floating on the internet (I've linked to it), but not the most recent fully executed one with updated amendments.

The executed copy is the one with the signatures. Why do they have to share that copy?

Here is one copy: https://www.cbs17.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/29/2022/07/ACC-GOR.pdf

 

[Northeast Stinger]

We’ve shared links to the GOR docs on this forum. It’s publicly available. Members of this forum have read it online—that’s proof that the GOR documents are publicly available—we’re members of the public, it was available for us to read, and it’s available for others to read. You can click on that link and read the doc—how much proof do you need that the doc is publicly available when you can read the doc on the internet?

The ESPN contract is between the ACC and ESPN. That’s not the GOR. The ACC is not a government agency. That’s the document that the Florida AG is suing to get access to, because the GOR refers to it.

The Florida AG is saying that North Carolina and Florida laws are clear that those agreements are public records. However, that’s their argument—that’s not established legal fact. Until a judge agrees with him, it’s just the AG’s desired outcome.

Attorneys don’t cite the points that argue against their claim. The ACC’s attorneys are doing that. The ACC’s attorneys are clearly arguing that the Florida AG’s arguments are garbage.

I don’t know how many people on here are lawyers but I certainly am not.

So all of the following is from layman’s ignorance.

If a contract between the ACC and ESPN is essentially privileged information only accessible to the parties involved, and GOR is directly impacted by that contract, and FSU’s legal representation is asking the document to be produced as part of discovery, it seems at least two things would have to happen. Wouldn’t FSU have to be specific about something in the contract they have a question about that is germane to their lawsuit, rather than just fishing? And wouldn’t there need to be a judge’s ruling after some kind of independent review of the document?

I’m beginning to wonder if something about the GOR is unknown to the public because of some way in which the ESPN contract modifies or supersedes some provision of the GOR.

 

[WreckinGT]

In a statement Thursday, Moody said she requested, among other items: An executed copy of the multimedia agreement between the ACC and ESPN; an executed copy of the 2014 amended multimedia agreement; an executed copy of the ACC grant of rights agreement; any other executed agreements with ESPN; and any other executed agreements between the ACC and the Walt Disney Company.

I dont know about the rest of you, but ANY TIME I sign an agreement with a third party company, it is standard practice that everyone gets a signed (AKA Executed Copy). I guarantee you they have one. Unless they lost it somehow during a keg party. They are making themselves sound like complete morons.

Im pretty sure the Florida AG didn't sign the GOR.

 

[CEB]

At the risk of further conflating and confusing…

I was under the impression that the document under lock and key at ACC headquarters is the ACC / ESPN agreement. The ACC makes it available to their members, but won’t give them copies and further requires that they not disclose details of the deal. That seems reasonable to me since the agreement is the ACC’s, not property of each member of the ACC.

I thought the GOR was signed by every member and the conference and that every member and the conference had a copy. I guess I could see an attorney asking the ACC to produce the document as part of discovery, but I was not under the impression that FSU didn’t even have a copy.

 

[Techster]

The executed copy is the one with the signatures. Why do they have to share that copy?

Here is one copy: https://www.cbs17.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/29/2022/07/ACC-GOR.pdf

That's the one I linked to in an earlier post.

That GOR has been updated, and there are new amendments since 2016. Those are not available, and last I checked, amendments and any updated changes to contract language is pretty darn pertinent to any possible legal interpretation. I really don't care about the signatures (no reason to fight over semantics...and I'll concede that point if you want), but the claim that the GOR in its final and current existing form is "available to the public" is false so far as I can find.

Like I said, if it's available to the public, I'm more than happy to admit I'm wrong.

 

[roadkill]

That's the one I linked to in an earlier post.

That GOR has been updated, and there are new amendments since 2016. Those are not available, and last I checked, amendments and any updated changes to contract language is pretty darn pertinent to any possible legal interpretation. I really don't care about the signatures (no reason to fight over semantics...and I'll concede that point if you want), but the claim that the GOR in its final and current existing form is "available to the public" is false so far as I can find.

Like I said, if it's available to the public, I'm more than happy to admit I'm wrong.

I'm interpreting your statements to mean that there is a post-2016 amendment to the GOR. If this is a fact, can you link or quote anything that supports this?

 

[Randy Carson]

At the risk of further conflating and confusing…

I was under the impression that the document under lock and key at ACC headquarters is the ACC / ESPN agreement. The ACC makes it available to their members, but won’t give them copies and further requires that they not disclose details of the deal. That seems reasonable to me since the agreement is the ACC’s, not property of each member of the ACC.

I thought the GOR was signed by every member and the conference and that every member and the conference had a copy. I guess I could see an attorney asking the ACC to produce the document as part of discovery, but I was not under the impression that FSU didn’t even have a copy.

Ben steals the GOR document in order to save it.

 

[orientalnc]

I don’t know how many people on here are lawyers but I certainly am not.

So all of the following is from layman’s ignorance.

If a contract between the ACC and ESPN is essentially privileged information only accessible to the parties involved, and GOR is directly impacted by that contract, and FSU’s legal representation is asking the document to be produced as part of discovery, it seems at least two things would have to happen. Wouldn’t FSU have to be specific about something in the contract they have a question about that is germane to their lawsuit, rather than just fishing? And wouldn’t there need to be a judge’s ruling after some kind of independent review of the document?

I’m beginning to wonder if something about the GOR is unknown to the public because of some way in which the ESPN contract modifies or supersedes some provision of the GOR.

I am trying to think of situation where party A and party B can agree to change an agreement between party B and party C.

Think about if for a moment. The GOR irrevocably grants to the ACC 100% of the media rights of each ACC member institution until 2036. Is FSU and @Techster convinced it could be more strident than that? Or that the ACC decided to slip in a loophole just for Clemson? No, maybe just for UNC. Who would notice that itty bitty change. If FSU missed it, woe unto them.

 

[stech81]

Y’all are going to worry yourself to death on this matter.

 

[WreckinGT]

I was under the impression that the document under lock and key at ACC headquarters is the ACC / ESPN agreement. The ACC makes it available to their members, but won’t give them copies and further requires that they not disclose details of the deal. That seems reasonable to me since the agreement is the ACC’s, not property of each member of the ACC.

This part I struggle with. How can contracts that can cost public institutions and subsequently tax payers hundreds of millions of dollars not be made public? It feels like ESPN and the ACC would have trouble fighting the release of this if someone pushes hard enough.

 

[orientalnc]

I'm interpreting your statements to mean that there is a post-2016 amendment to the GOR. If this is a fact, can you link or quote anything that supports this?

I believe he is saying there might be a later change and that it's being kept under wraps. It's like saying if you cannot prove you didn't steal my BMW last year, then you must have it squirreled away somewhere.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

Huh? You're kind of contradicting yourself.

Because it doesn't make rational sense to you or I, FSU's decision is irrational...even if it's rational to them? By the same token, while others may view GT's decisions as irrational, it's actually rational because GT can discern and explain it? FSU is literally explaining the reasons for their actions (ACC payout is not competitive to their "peers" so they want out), and the way they're going about it is irrational to you and I, but that doesn't make it irrational. Desperate and juvenile? Most likely, but not irrational because they have an economic explanation for their actions.

The logic in your explanation is cloudy.

No. Not cloudy.

A rational explanation follows a rational decision making process. I don’t have to agree with the decision to understand that it was arrived at rationally.

What we’ve established so far is that Tech’s decision to leave the SEC was a thought out process over time that arrived at a logical conclusion and course of action. Everybody understands why Tech did this even if we think the logic was faulty. It was not irrational.

The descriptions of FSU’s actions so far, and that’s all I can go by, are that they have reacted in a heated manner, taking action quickly, while making lots of inflammatory remarks, impugning character and suggesting almost criminal negligence on the part of the ACC. All of this may prove to have been a carefully thought out strategy but for now it is nowhere even in the same universe as decisions Tech has made in the past. And, unlike Tech leaving the SEC, even people who side with FSU over the ACC can’t figure out what in the world they are thinking.

 

[Techster]

I'm interpreting your statements to mean that there is a post-2016 amendment to the GOR. If this is a fact, can you link or quote anything that supports this?

Guest Post: Legal Analysis on ACC Stability

Do Cal fans need to fear that the ACC will fall apart as quickly as the Pac-12 fell apart?

writeforcalifornia.com

Here is a REALLY good link that discusses the ACC GOR, and it even talks about amendments of 2016. Even they admit they aren't fully confident if it is or isn't different from the final copy. So this VERY WELL might be in it's final form (@slugboy @orientalnc ...trying to be fair and keep you aware of what I find). However, we don't know for certain because the final copy isn't available

 

[roadkill]

I believe he is saying there might be a later change and that it's being kept under wraps. It's like saying if you cannot prove you didn't steal my BMW last year, then you must have it squirreled away somewhere.

I'm re-reading @Techster's post "That GOR has been updated, and there are new amendments since 2016." and don't see the word "might".

 

[Techster]

No. Not cloudy.

A rational explanation follows a rational decision making process. I don’t have to agree with the decision to understand that it was arrived at rationally.

What we’ve established so far is that Tech’s decision to leave the SEC was a thought out process over time that arrived at a logical conclusion and course of action. Everybody understands why Tech did this even if we think the logic was faulty. It was not irrational.

The descriptions of FSU’s actions so far, and that’s all I can go by, are that they have reacted in a heated manner, taking action quickly, while making lots of inflammatory remarks, impugning character and suggesting almost criminal negligence on the part of the ACC. All of this may prove to have been a carefully thought out strategy but for now it is nowhere even in the same universe as decisions Tech has made in the past. And, unlike Tech leaving the SEC, even people who side with FSU over the ACC can’t figure out what in the world they are thinking.

You're being irrational about your cloudiness.

 

[roadkill]

Guest Post: Legal Analysis on ACC Stability

Do Cal fans need to fear that the ACC will fall apart as quickly as the Pac-12 fell apart?

writeforcalifornia.com

Here is a REALLY good link that discusses the ACC GOR, and it even talks about amendments of 2016. Even they admit they aren't fully confident if it is or isn't different from the final copy. So this VERY WELL might be in it's final form (@slugboy @orientalnc ...trying to be fair and keep you aware of what I find). However, we don't know for certain because the final copy isn't available

Still don't see how "There's a later amendment" follows from speculation that there might be changes to documents simply because we haven't seen one.

 

[bobongo]

In a statement Thursday, Moody said she requested, among other items: An executed copy of the multimedia agreement between the ACC and ESPN; an executed copy of the 2014 amended multimedia agreement; an executed copy of the ACC grant of rights agreement; any other executed agreements with ESPN; and any other executed agreements between the ACC and the Walt Disney Company.

I dont know about the rest of you, but ANY TIME I sign an agreement with a third party company, it is standard practice that everyone gets a signed (AKA Executed Copy). I guarantee you they have one. Unless they lost it somehow during a keg party. They are making themselves sound like complete morons.

Exactly.

 

[Techster]

Y’all are going to worry yourself to death on this matter.

I enjoy these discussions...even if I may turn out to be wrong. LOTS of really smart and informed posters on here, and as long as we can keep it civil, it's a great way to exercise your mind and learn something new.

In the end none of this means anything, but it's a great place for mental exercise.

 

[bobongo]

Still don't see how "There's a later amendment" follows from speculation that there might be changes to documents simply because we haven't seen one.

Yeah, the idea they would amend the agreement in secret is ludicrous. Their lawyers are even dumber than ours.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

I am trying to think of situation where party A and party B can agree to change an agreement between party B and party C.

Think about if for a moment. The GOR irrevocably grants to the ACC 100% of the media rights of each ACC member institution until 2036. Is FSU and @Techster convinced it could be more strident than that? Or that the ACC decided to slip in a loophole just for Clemson? No, maybe just for UNC. Who would notice that itty bitty change. If FSU missed it, woe unto them.

Yeah, my head hurts trying to imagine the permutations.

But, and I’m not saying I believe this or that I’m siding with FSU, but the ACC has a contract with ESPN, and the ACC has a GOR with the members of the ACC. If in any way the members have given the ACC free rein to negotiate the media rights with ESPN there might be a way in which the ACC negotiates this private contract that modifies or interprets in some way something in the GOR.

I’m way out of my depth here but I’m trying to figure some rational way in which FSU can claim a breach of contract. Otherwise this all looks like so much horse fertilizer.