Include Raycom, at below market value, than he was likely breaking his Fiduciary responsibility to get the best deal possible. That is a big hill to climb, unless you already have what you need. No one in the ACC is happy with the current TV contract. It would not shock me if someone inside had/was helped FSU get documents/emails ect. IF FSU could show this, it would be enough imo, to potentially threaten the ACC TV contract. This would likely bring ESPN to the table, and imo the best outcome is a NEW TV deal, with FSU staying. Additionally I think the governance structure needs to be improved. IMO University Presidents dont have the time or energy to supervise the conference. Each school should appoint a rep, someone that can meet more than 2 or 3 times a year.

The lack of consideration conclusions are the least plausible. The consideration in these cases is continued membership in the conference, with the attendant scheduling etc. conveniences that have value each year, with the added security of a stable conference ensured by a steep GOR penalty for defectors. If membership had zero value, then FSU should have gone independent, or left for another conference. It would have been irrational to do anything but. But FSU stayed. The law in theory only requires a peppercorn as consideration, and FSU got much more than that. The only legs this case might have are via fraud in the inducement imo. Judges don’t appreciate sophisticated parties that seek relief arguing that they signed a deal with no benefit.

The law is interpreted many ways, by many people.

The sole purpose (read consideration) of a steep exit fee is to ensure that nobody leaves. Since the GOR, nobody left. FSU got exactly what it bargained for. And be 100% certain that least a handful of FSU officials discussed a number sufficient to keep UNC from leaving for the SEC. As an FSU deponent, how do you answer this: Mr. Nole, what is the sole purpose of a GOR exit penalty? ** Edited by lawhokie at 2/29/2024, 9:04:51 AM ** Edited by lawhokie at 2/29/2024, 9:45:39 AM

not all bad. Each side gets their argument and then a judge or arbitrator settles it. It’s not perfect, but it’s better than all the rest the majority of the time. At least each side gets their say in an imperfect world.

last year or two. While many others knew early on that JS AND the ACC U Presidents were in WAY over their heads when it came to big time collegiate sports.

when things counted the most. Even Clemson spent a good deal of time as average until Dabo was hired and got them going. I will admit Swofford’s scheduling model was abominable, but I blame Miami and FSU for trying to easy schedule their way to the top, while the SEC had fierce rivalry games almost every week. Yes Swofford listened to them and let them have their way, but he had an empty hand to play while those two basically ran the football part of the Conference. ** Edited by Stech at 2/28/2024, 10:06:00 PM

I will give Swofford credit for at least trying to turn the ACC ship towards football. But the individual schools just weren't serious enough about it. They seemed oblivious to the changes taking place in college athletics until it was really too late to do anything about it. Swofford certainly did some questionable things, but I'm not sure having anyone else as commissioner would have made the eventual outcome any different. ** Edited by tarheelblue at 2/28/2024, 11:57:13 PM

The football programs was just mediocre and ACC expected them to be top 10... didn't happen.. However, many of these schools were bugging Swofford in getting more $$$ from TV. At the end you said it right 'empty hand to negotiate'.

and facts I have not seen before. Thanks for sharing!

I’m sure it has some subjective aspects to it, but overall it’s a nice view and interesting thread.

with the SEC and Big 10. But is that a reasonable legal standard? I don't think that is a winning argument as within that time the PAC collapsed and the B12 has been relegated to a 2nd tier league. I mean the ACC is still together at this point and 2 of the other supposed Power 4 have done worse.

In 2013, FSU was not wanted by the SEC and probably had no line to the Big Ten. B12 was a nonstarter. So FSU was as anxious as anybody for the ACC to remain intact and in particular to keep the NC, GA, and VA schools locked down. Losing UVa and UNC to the SEC, for example, would have been a crushing blow. So FSU needed the GOR exit penalty to be prohibitively high. Now that the B1G has its eye on FSU, suddenly the penalty is too high. Complete and transparent BS. I hope posters see how this really happened.

and why would losing them be a crushing blow in anything? Yes they have money. Yes they have a really good non rev sports program. But for football, mbb and wbb, they are wholly dependent (as are a lot of schools) on hall of fame level coaches to be highly competitive. I do believe that at both UNC and UVA going to the SEC will make for a big fight between the academic/research side and the athletic side. Heck my guess would be that UVA sponsors way more non rev teams than the SEC has. UVA and UNC are absolute bad fits for the SEC and the SEC for them. Way too many only see the men's basketball brand and whereas that is important, it is not the stick that stirs the drink. I know, I know, that is looking at it in a vacuum and in reality this is not going to be done in a vacuum.

There really aren’t any “secrets” imbedded in the reason for the GOR. All the schools signed knowing the deal.