Conference Realignment

[CEB]

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.

Well, to fair, it wouldn’t cost the state or the tax payers a nickel of the public institution fulfilled the contractual commitments it made.
But when have promises and commitments ever stopped a public “servant” from frivolously spending someone else’s money?

 

[CEB]

...which FSU is contractually bound (by said Grant of Rights) to sign.

Again, back to my Inception perspective of this whole thing - what happens when/if FSU decides they won't sign an updated Grant of Rights with the only change being to include the new members (which they're quite unhappy about, because THEY DIDN'T GET THEIR WAY)? The ACC files another lawsuit, sure, but they're already in breach of contract re: multiple other clauses in the Grant of Rights and their Member Agreement. So will they refuse to sign, because they're being "compelled" to do so?

And why will this take any less time to deal with than the lawsuit that's expected to take years to progress through the courts? Not sure how it all works, but this could hang up the ACC's plans to bring in the new teams. I guess the ACC could prepare a separate-but-identical Grant of Rights for those teams, which might be the easier way to go about it?

I'm going to have a beer and then start drawing flow charts.

With regard to FSU not wanting to sign the GOR again…

My understanding is that they don’t have to. I believe new membership is conditioned upon the new member signing the EXISTING GOR without modification. That’s done specifically so the ACC doesn’t have to obtain all new signatures or give anyone an “out” in the process of adding members.

 

[roadkill]

Well, to fair, it wouldn’t cost the state or the tax payers a nickel of the public institution fulfilled the contractual commitments it made.
But when have promises and commitments ever stopped a public “servant” from frivolously spending someone else’s money?

There’s no direct connection between state taxes paid and AA revenue (or lack of), at least as far as the GTAA is concerned. Not sure about Florida.

I disagreed with another poster earlier over the marginal cost to the Institute of a GT football player, but if GTAA revenue from the conference was lost, I doubt Georgia taxpayers would be on the hook to make up the difference. More likely we would have to start cutting back on scholarships and non-essential personnel not already under contract. And we’d all be getting lots more requests for donations.

 

[CEB]

There’s no direct connection between state taxes paid and AA revenue (or lack of), at least as far as the GTAA is concerned. Not sure about Florida.

I disagreed with another poster earlier over the marginal cost to the Institute of a GT football player, but if GTAA revenue from the conference was lost, I doubt Georgia taxpayers would be on the hook to make up the difference. More likely we would have to start cutting back on scholarships and non-essential personnel not already under contract. And we’d all be getting lots more requests for donations.

I think you’re right.
I also think you misread my post. That was a tongue in cheek response to the assertion that the GOR agreement would cost state taxpayers millions and therefore the state should have a copy. I was just pointing out the fact that, regardless of where revenues come from, it doesn’t cost anyone anything if they honor the agreement.

And I try to work a potshot at bureaucrats /politicians into every fifth post. Personal policy.

 

[Techwood Relict]

I'm not sure that the ACC qualifies as a public entity and thus its contracts are not subject to FoI requests.

This point may be, is?, technically true, that the ACC itself is not a public entity. I would, however, bet that it won't be long before a copy of the GOR becomes public. Most of the members of the ACC are public institutions receiving state funding. The state legislatures will be involved because of the money involved.

Much like federal grants to states, there are always strings to be pulled which grant monetary influence. The states will exert the same influence through the member schools to get a look at the GOR.

The lesson here, if you want to control of your contracts, don't invite a govt entity to be part of the them. Politicians follow money like moths, and eat the money the same way.

 

[Techwood Relict]

No. I’ve thought it through. But I could be wrong. Which is different.

I think I'm wrong quite often. Does that make me right? Asking for a friend @conundrum

 

[orientalnc]

...which FSU is contractually bound (by said Grant of Rights) to sign.

Again, back to my Inception perspective of this whole thing - what happens when/if FSU decides they won't sign an updated Grant of Rights with the only change being to include the new members (which they're quite unhappy about, because THEY DIDN'T GET THEIR WAY)? The ACC files another lawsuit, sure, but they're already in breach of contract re: multiple other clauses in the Grant of Rights and their Member Agreement. So will they refuse to sign, because they're being "compelled" to do so?

And why will this take any less time to deal with than the lawsuit that's expected to take years to progress through the courts? Not sure how it all works, but this could hang up the ACC's plans to bring in the new teams. I guess the ACC could prepare a separate-but-identical Grant of Rights for those teams, which might be the easier way to go about it?

I'm going to have a beer and then start drawing flow charts.

According to my UNC neighbor, FSU (and GT) do not have to sign the GOR again for it to include Cal, Stanford and SMU.

 

[roadkill]

This point may be, is?, technically true, that the ACC itself is not a public entity. I would, however, bet that it won't be long before a copy of the GOR becomes public. Most of the members of the ACC are public institutions receiving state funding. The state legislatures will be involved because of the money involved.

Much like federal grants to states, there are always strings to be pulled which grant monetary influence. The states will exert the same influence through the member schools to get a look at the GOR.

The lesson here, if you want to control of your contracts, don't invite a govt entity to be part of the them. Politicians follow money like moths, and eat the money the same way.

I was thinking more of the ESPN agreement with my statement about the ACC not having to share it, but to your point, I won't be surprised to see everything out in public before long.

 

[slugboy]

But why would ND walk into the playoff when FSU didn't (excluding the obvious expansion to 12 teams)? heck under a 12 team scenario FSU has every bit the chance of making it as does ND.

Study finds Notre Dame football to have second largest fanbase in nation // The Observer

Despite an undergraduate student population far smaller than that of other traditional college football powerhouses, a study from this past summer found Notre Dame to have the second largest fanbase in college football at an estimated 8.21 million. The study, put together by strategy consultant...

ndsmcobserver.com

Ohio State #1
Then Notre Dame
Then Texas
Then Penn State
Then Michigan

Ironically, B1G teams should be the ones getting in more often if it’s for the viewers ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[Northeast Stinger]

Well, this was fun.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

Bottom line, what is FSU going to get out of this?

 

[forensicbuzz]

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.

The Florida AG has no right to those contracts.

 

[forensicbuzz]

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.

That's not what's happening. There is no discovery right now. The Florida AG, who is not a party to the suit has asked for documents that she doesn't have the right to have.

 

[forensicbuzz]

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.

The request didn't come from FSU, but from the Florida Attorney General. That's my understanding.

 

[forensicbuzz]

...which FSU is contractually bound (by said Grant of Rights) to sign.

Again, back to my Inception perspective of this whole thing - what happens when/if FSU decides they won't sign an updated Grant of Rights with the only change being to include the new members (which they're quite unhappy about, because THEY DIDN'T GET THEIR WAY)? The ACC files another lawsuit, sure, but they're already in breach of contract re: multiple other clauses in the Grant of Rights and their Member Agreement. So will they refuse to sign, because they're being "compelled" to do so?

And why will this take any less time to deal with than the lawsuit that's expected to take years to progress through the courts? Not sure how it all works, but this could hang up the ACC's plans to bring in the new teams. I guess the ACC could prepare a separate-but-identical Grant of Rights for those teams, which might be the easier way to go about it?

I'm going to have a beer and then start drawing flow charts.

To allow additional teams into the ACC does not require a unanimous vote.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

That's not what's happening. There is no discovery right now. The Florida AG, who is not a party to the suit has asked for documents that she doesn't have the right to have.

I tend to agree but Florida has been finding “unique” ways to bend the judicial system the last few years.

But, let me play devil’s advocate, and forgive me for going over old ground. The AG can argue the state has a vested interest in this trial because there is a lawsuit originating from a party within the state that is also a public institution supported by state funds. I know it’s flimsy but just explaining what I think the AG rationale would be. And, perhaps, FSU lawyers even requested the AG look into it.

The real question, as always, is why. So far the most plausible theory is to kick up enough stink that the ACC decides to settle in some way rather than have the ongoing bad PR.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

The Florida AG has no right to those contracts.

The war on Disney continues….

 

[leatherneckjacket]

The Florida AG has no right to those contracts.

Actually, since FSU is a public school, he has every right to them. Everyone does.

 

[CEB]

Actually, since FSU is a public school, he has every right to them. Everyone does.

The GOR that FSU is a party to? Absolutely.

The ACC / ESPN contract? I don’t think so. That’s between two private entities; neither of which are FSU.

 

[leatherneckjacket]

The GOR that FSU is a party to? Absolutely.

The ACC / ESPN contract? I don’t think so. That’s between two private entities; neither of which are FSU.

The previous font specifically highlighted the GOR contract to which FSU is a party. The Florida AG has a right to any document signed by FSU.