Conference Realignment

[WreckinGT]

My guy, are we reading the same thing? That is exactly what is argued.

"Florida State alleges that the Grant of Rights, as extended, is also a ‘punitive penalty’ upon a withdrawing member (referring to the ‘additional, crippling penalties’ in the Grant of Rights). But there is no provision in the Grant of Rights that could possibly serve as a penalty and, indeed, there is no reference to a monetary payment at all if a Conference member elects to withdraw from a Conference. Rather, the Grant of Rights simply provides that the media rights of all members will remain with the Conference through the term of the agreement. Florida State imagines that this means it has forfeited future revenue as a ‘penalty.’

My guy, you really need to read that full section.

 

[orientalnc]

"Florida State alleges that the Grant of Rights, as extended, is also a ‘punitive penalty’ upon a withdrawing member (referring to the ‘additional, crippling penalties’ in the Grant of Rights). But there is no provision in the Grant of Rights that could possibly serve as a penalty and, indeed, there is no reference to a monetary payment at all if a Conference member elects to withdraw from a Conference. Rather, the Grant of Rights simply provides that the media rights of all members will remain with the Conference through the term of the agreement. Florida State imagines that this means it has forfeited future revenue as a ‘penalty.’

Theoretically, every asset of value can be sold. What the ACC is saying is the rights the conference owns are an asset they purchased from the ACC member schools. The conference could, if they wanted, listen to an attempt by FSU to buy back the media rights they sold to the ACC. That is the part that is missing from the argument @WreckinGT is making. FSU willingly sold their rights to the ACC in exchange for a 20 year stream of payments. Now, FSU wants to claw back those rights without paying for them. As if they never received the last eight years of payments.

I think FSU has waived their right to make claims against the GOR buy accepting the benefits of the GOR for the past eight years. Surely there is a statute of limitations on claims like that.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

Ill give you an example. Posting lame memes attacking someone personally instead of making useful arguments to the discussion at hand is a form of hyperbole.

That's not hyperbole. The meme seems apropos.

Also, it's not a personal attack. I was simply pointing out that you keep using hyperbole. When your reply was to accuse me, and others, of the same, when there has been scant, if any, hyperbole in their posts, I got the impression that you didn't understand what I meant, hence the meme.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

My guy, you really need to read that full section.

I have. Here is the pertinent text: Rather, the Grant of Rights simply provides that the media rights of all members will remain with the Conference through the term of the agreement.

 

[bobongo]

My guy, you really need to read that full section.

What difference does it make what they call it, anyway? They signed the contract. It's a done deal. The only way out of it is if they can prove some sort of fraud. If they can prove some sort of inside deal, like with Raycom, for example, they might be able to wriggle off the hook. Otherwise, they're in the boat and on ice. They may leave the conference as they wish, as long as they abide by the contract they signed.

 

[yeti92]

My guy, you really need to read that full section.

lol I have, multiple times.

Can you define for us what you think a penalty is?

 

[Richard7125]

Seriously? The whole thing started because FSU couldn’t stomach the thought of being at a $20m annual disadvantage. I guess that was all smokescreen?

Yes, FSU wants more money, but the lawsuits to get out of the ACC were prompted by being snubbed by the CFP. Again, it’s very analogous to firing a coach with huge buyout.

 

[WreckinGT]

That's not hyperbole. The meme seems apropos.

Also, it's not a personal attack. I was simply pointing out that you keep using hyperbole. When your reply was to accuse me, and others, of the same, when there has been scant, if any, hyperbole in their posts, I got the impression that you didn't understand what I meant, hence the meme.

Its only a personal attack if others do it. Got it. And yes telling someone that they don't know the definition of a basic word is a personal attack and hyperbole at the same time. I applaud your efficiency in that matter.

 

[WreckinGT]

lol I have, multiple times.

Can you define for us what you think a penalty is?

That section is a larger section detailing why the GOR is not a penalty which was asserted in FSU's lawsuit. Obviously the ACC does not want this to be seen as a penalty because that increases the likelyhood of relief from the courts. In this section they flat out state that it isn't a penalty because FSU can engage in a commercial transaction to repurchase the rights at a fair market value. Im sure you can understand that the argument that we own the rights and will not allow them to repurchase is different than the argument that they can repurchase, right? Now tell me in your expert legal opinion, how does the the ACC saying that FSU can attempt to repurchase their media rights actually mean that they have no reason to ever allow FSU to attempt to repurchase their media rights? How do those two concepts mean the same thing?

 

[WreckinGT]

What difference does it make what they call it, anyway? They signed the contract. It's a done deal. The only way out of it is if they can prove some sort of fraud. If they can prove some sort of inside deal, like with Raycom, for example, they might be able to wriggle off the hook. Otherwise, they're in the boat and on ice. They may leave the conference as they wish, as long as they abide by the contract they signed.

The problem is, they can't leave the conference. The GOR is a hostage document. If the ACC attempts to refuse the ability to buy back rights then the ACC bylaws have been superseded. Therefore Jim Philips essentially owns one of the largest Athletic Departments in the country for 12 years.

 

[Richard7125]

FSU is leaving. As much as everyone here wants to force them to stay until 2036, they almost certainly aren't going to. There will be some negotiation of the exit fees, as well as the media rights. That has always been my stance. If anyone here who is convinced that the ACC will fight tooth and nail in court for 12 years to prevent them from leaving would like to place a large wager that FSU will still be in the ACC in 2035 the I will be happy to take the action.

I agree with this. FSU is leaving and it will be negotiated; not forced by lawsuits. The lawsuits are pawns in the negotiating process. Whether that's a good strategy is very debatable. At some point FSU is going to offer a big enough buyout that the ACC will say OK.

 

[WreckinGT]

Can we place bets here? I want to see who is brave enough to claim that FSU will be in the ACC in 2035. I assume everyone here thinks so.

 

[Richard7125]

Can we place bets here? I want to see who is brave enough to claim that FSU will be in the ACC in 2035. I assume everyone here thinks so.

Obviously, not everyone. Here's an example of your hyperbole

 

[orientalnc]

Can we place bets here? I want to see who is brave enough to claim that FSU will be in the ACC in 2035. I assume everyone here thinks so.

I am not going to place any bets, but I betcha, to quote a politician who was prominent for a while, that FSU will still be in the ACC if the conference still owns their media rights. Or, they will be an independent with little or no TV exposure.

 

[Dman374]

 

[CEB]

Yes, FSU wants more money, but the lawsuits to get out of the ACC were prompted by being snubbed by the CFP. Again, it’s very analogous to firing a coach with huge buyout.

I think this was all set in motion well before the CFP snub… and the sums of money we’re talking about are analogous to firing a coach with a huge buyout ANNUALLY.
I agree that FSU wants more money but a lot of the stuff flying around the internet doesn’t result in positive cash flow for a long time. There’s obviously more to the story than we know, because no one is in this for a financial loss…

 

[Richard7125]

I think this was all set in motion well before the CFP snub… and the sums of money we’re talking about are analogous to firing a coach with a huge buyout ANNUALLY.
I agree that FSU wants more money but a lot of the stuff flying around the internet doesn’t result in positive cash flow for a long time. There’s obviously more to the story than we know, because no one is in this for a financial loss…

SMU is foregoing roughly $280m to join the ACC. They are spending that money for prestige. FSU wants to be in either the SEC or Big10 for prestige., but first they need to get out of the ACC. They will spend a lot of money to do that. Is that $500m; is it $750m? I don't know what the number is, but it will be a big number.

 

[WreckinGT]

I am not going to place any bets, but I betcha, to quote a politician who was prominent for a while, that FSU will still be in the ACC if the conference still owns their media rights. Or, they will be an independent with little or no TV exposure.

lol. That's not an answer. Yes or no. Do you think FSU is a member of the ACC to start the 2035 season?

 

[CEB]

Can we place bets here? I want to see who is brave enough to claim that FSU will be in the ACC in 2035. I assume everyone here thinks so.

Speaking of hyperbole… is this it?
Did you mean 2025?
Very few are talking 2035 by my estimation.
My unscientific polling of this site puts 90% of us in the 2030-2033 range for dissensions.
I would be surprised if anyone is gone in the next five years and SHOCKED if we are intact in 2035.

 

[RonJohn]

That section is a larger section detailing why the GOR is not a penalty which was asserted in FSU's lawsuit. Obviously the ACC does not want this to be seen as a penalty because that increases the likelyhood of relief from the courts. In this section they flat out state that it isn't a penalty because FSU can engage in a commercial transaction to repurchase the rights at a fair market value. Im sure you can understand that the argument that we own the rights and will not allow them to repurchase is different than the argument that they can repurchase, right? Now tell me in your expert legal opinion, how does the the ACC saying that FSU can attempt to repurchase their media rights actually mean that they have no reason to ever allow FSU to attempt to repurchase their media rights? How do those two concepts mean the same thing?

Where does the ACC filing say ANYTHING about fair market value? It simply says they can attempt to purchase the media rights. It doesn't say that the ACC will sell them. It doesn't say that the ACC will even entertain an offer to purchase them. It simply says that it is a commercial transaction and FSU can attempt to purchase those rights if they want to.

And before you change what I am saying into something else. The ACC will most certainly entertain offers if it is advantageous to the ACC. If FSU secures $1 trillion and wants to pay that for the media rights, the other members of the ACC will definitely sign as soon as they can. If FSU offers ten dollars, the ACC will not sell. Most on this thread seem to believe that the ACC will not sell for a lowball number, because if they don't sell the ACC will receive those payments anyway. You seem to think that the ACC can be negotiated down from the ESPN contracted numbers.