This FSU news looks like the beginning of a grand bargain.
FSU needs to find out the value of its media rights before it can buy them back, and that looks to me that there might be hopeful side to this unwind. VT might get a good outcome and get more money than now, but probably less than a full B10 or SEC cut.
This language that FSU could possibly buy back their media rights is interesting. One of the biggest issues with realignment and potential ACC unraveling is that it is a bundled product and you can’t figure out what the prices of each piece in the bundle are. Yesterday’s disclosure it looks like there is a process to figure out how much Florida State is worth. What I think is interesting is this looks like a framework for trying to put a dollar sign on all the other unbundled components of the ACC. My guess is that ESPN doesn’t want FSU going to the Big 10 and ESPN owns the ACC GOR. However, there is a limit to how much ESPN values FSU. If FSU determines the value of their rights at a price that ESPN agrees with, then ESPN won’t mind FSU going to the Big 10 as long as ESPN is compensated for the loss due to FSU’s departure.
We know that Washington and Oregon weren’t worth as much to the Big Ten as USC and UCLA, so they took a phased in payout which was basically a form of a haircut.
Once the valuation gets completed for Florida State, then it will be easier to figure out how much UNC’s departure would cost. If the prices of the bundled components can be determined with some degree of certainty, then it becomes pretty easy to engineer a departure of the last six of the seven magnificent seven teams. My guess is that the holdup is due to UVA/VT along with UNC/NCSU jointly managing the ACC unwind. Clemson and Miami don’t have distinct conference linkages to in-
state schools to the degree that the Virginia and North Carolina schools do.
Basically, the way I look at is ….
1. The ESPN has a contract with the SEC
2. The ESPN has a contract with the ACC.
3. If the ACC falls apart then the valuable pieces end up at the SEC and ESPN is no worse off, it simply switched some dollar bills from one pocket to the other.
4. The problem arises when a valuable ACC school doesn’t go to the SEC.
5. My guess is that the next round after FSU’s departure is that the same process occurs for UNC, NCSU, UVA and VT to get the politically contentious part done, then Clemson and Miami will get grabbed. I think the 7 schools saw this coming and agreed to this approach.
6. What a team is worth as in SEC component by ESPN shouldn’t be that much different than what that same team should be worth as a Big Ten component by Fox, and these baselines will be the ground rules for letting these teams separate. It is a thin market and that makes it more difficult to determine prices.
7. It’s sort of like having a divorce but getting everybody to agree for a framework to value all the assets prior to the divorce. If one person thinks the house is priced too low then they have the right to buy it at the calculated price. It is much better to have a process to set pricing parameters in advance, and that’s what the rights buyback language does.
** Edited by TDVick at 2/19/2024, 3:08:59 PM
130 Replies
As a fan of VT and college football, what does all of this mean to me
as a viewer?? I don't have a smart tv "yet" - am I gonna need one? AppleTV works fine for now. Will games be on cable, will they be PPV, will they stream on YouTube... What the hell is my Saturday going to feel like? Will there be more commercials, more games of no consequence, will it all cost more and more every year? I'm not sure I will invest very much more time and money into the whole college football "thing".
(In response to this post by TDVick)
E
EDGEMAN
2y
I have one smart TV, and it only has Amazon Netflix and Hulu built into the "smart" part as shown on the remote. (i.e. one button touch to reach those) My Apple TV can hit those streaming services, and many more. Heck, if you download the apps, I bet it can hit every streaming service on the market.
(In response to this post by astrohokiebob)
V
VTCALS72
2y
My best guess is that when this all shakes out, there will be the P2 with about 90% of all the national TV money. When/if that happens there will most likely be a "minor" league to the P2. That minor leagues will have to produce and sell their own produced streaming productions paid for by fans subscriptions. But that will most likely not be enough to maintain far flung conferences like the ACC will be next year and the B12 already is. End result, 3 conferences survive in the minor league, ACC, B12 and a new PAC.
Those conferences may also add a few teams the Big 2 "culls."
VT is IMHO, still in no mans land as there is a specific set of circumstances that the SEC will see adequate value in us to include us.
(In response to this post by astrohokiebob)
2y
In general, the whole thing will shift to a focus on more premium games and games that will draw more gambling money. The economics of these mega deals can't be supported by ad revenue and I believe the recent streaming moves are about making gambling more integral to the in-game experience.
As for the casual fan, I suspect you'll still be able to watch your favorite team and probably other second tier games as well, but you will pay more for it. But if you're not a gambler, they really don't care if you watch or not, the days of spurtle supported games are pretty much over.
(In response to this post by astrohokiebob)
Thanks VH... ah-ha the gambling angle - never thought I would see this
(In response to this post by Vienna_Hokie)
2y
One of the greatest players in the history of the game is not in the HOF because of gambling, but a sports book is operating in the park where the team he was playing / managing when he did was he's banned for.
Yes, gambling now controls sports media and thus sports because it controls the growth of revenue. Streaming allows direct interaction as well as measurement of moment by moment viewership and engagement. Of course the media companies won't use that influence to impact game play, that would be wrong
(In response to this post by astrohokiebob)
2y
dugout phone while games were still in the early innings. That's just one detail that makes it more than just gambling. He will enter the HOF posthumously.
(In response to this post by Vienna_Hokie)
2y
(In response to this post by 33laszlo99)
2y
Once we start talking about the value of each individual school, then it sets the stage for a potential different approach.
We already know that schools can negotiate and sign contracts directly with media companies (e.g. ND and NBC). Now I don’t see this happening soon, but eventually what could happen is the following.
When conference GORs are close to expiring there will be two options to get to the final consolidation of college sports. Both of these could be done within the existing or proposed NCAA structure since we are talking media contracts
.
1. Conferences vote out the small schools with little value (northwestern, Vanderbilt, etc.) and only keep/invite schools that meet a value threshold.
2. Media companies cut out the middle man and offer an NFL model that each school can apply to join. In this case the conferences are no longer needed for football and basketball.
We all keep assuming the future is a P2. But what if it is really just a P1 NFL type arrangement? In that scenario the current BIG and SEC membership doesn’t matter. It could all be shuffled when the new model is stood up. And all the talk about who ends up in each conference would not matter long term. All that matters is who joins the National College League.
And without conference limitations, it truly becomes how valuable each school is on their own.
(In response to this post by TDVick)
2y
Someone will get PAID though, to come up with some fancy and detailed value generations.
(In response to this post by TDVick)
2y
The problem is that FSU doesn't want to pay that much to the ACC to buy back their media rights.
(In response to this post by TDVick)
2y
Actual fee. So if you start at 572 million, 60% would put you around 340. These sorts of things can be very unpredictable. But I can see that as a good ballpark figure. Of course that assumes everybody can agree on the 572, which would surprise me.
(In response to this post by tarheelblue)
2y
ACC had already withheld from them after they said they were leaving. And there was also no GOR at the time. So that's not really a useful metric for extrapolating what FSU will have to pay to leave.
(In response to this post by wwhokie1)
2
2hhoop3
2y
also had to do with some sloppy paperwork and procedures that left Maryland a loophole. Those were cleaned up but, does not mean there might not be new ones. It is funny to watch some of these guesses and will be even more fun to compare them to the eventual outcome.
(In response to this post by tarheelblue)
D
daveinop
2y
(In response to this post by tarheelblue)
W
WBGV
2y
(In response to this post by 133193Hokie)
W
WBGV
2y
leave only the exit fee which will be negotiated to a lesser amount in the final settlement. The majority of exit fees for schools changing conferences over the last 20 years has been negotiated to a lesser amount. It’s simply not worth the risk to the conference to enter into a legal dispute challenging the enforceability of the exit fee.
(In response to this post by Hokie83)
2y
Nothing holding them to the Big 12
(In response to this post by WBGV)
S
Stech
2y
Is that your opinion?
(In response to this post by WBGV)
W
WBGV
2y
If there was deception and coercion involved like FSU is claiming in their lawsuit, then I believe the GOR could very well be invalidated.
I had been trying to understand why any school would sign a media rights agreement lasting until 2036 with the media rights contract involving the compensation only guaranteed until 2027. FSU in their lawsuit provided the answer by claiming that they were “duped” by the ACC on the terms of the ESPN contract. And if you don’t believe that to be the case then what could possibly be the reason for intelligent well educated people signing such a foolish agreement?
(In response to this post by Stech)
S
SMU Pony
2y
...what a crock. At virtually every other university in America, the board of trustees is stacked with people who have been wildly successful in life who do not get pushed around by anyone.
(In response to this post by WBGV)
S
Stech
2y
They also said at the time they wanted more Conference Security, but they are now clearly the leader in Conference Insecurity. They may win, but I don’t think they are going to be as individually treated as they and you think they are going to be. If you had said in your opinion the GORs will be struck down, I could follow that, but FSU wasn’t treated any differently than anyone else in the Conference. Just because they think they’re wonderful, doesn’t make them wonderful. Ratings come and go with great Coaches, they had a Hall of Fame Coach and so did we, and now we are both searching for the next one, or hope we have one since both are so new.
PS Your post sound more like ACC hate post, by the post. I wish the ACC would have taken WVU, so I get your distaste, but IMHO you are starting to go too far. You might want to lay off a little if you want to stay on the board, this is the exact opposite of a rivalry board.
** Edited by Stech at 2/19/2024, 12:36:56 PM
(In response to this post by WBGV)
W
WBGV
2y
You asked a question and I was considerate enough to reply because you have always seemed to be fair minded. As the board’s moderator, I understand that you have a responsibility to enforce the established rules of the board, but that shouldn’t include admonishing posters who might have a different view about a subject than your own.
** Edited by WBGV at 2/19/2024, 2:23:16 PM
(In response to this post by Stech)
S
Stech
2y
thing you have been doing lately get people removed. I prefer you stay, but recently you have started down a slippery slope IMHO that at a minimum looks like you have an agenda. The B12’s new leader has a history of using people on social media to weaken a Conference, so he can pick them off. He’s been very public about it, I will give him that, but the ACC is safe IMHO even if the Mag 7 leave, the ACC already has 3 new schools. It would not be hard to get 4 more, or less than that if less leave. They have a Conference Channel that both ESPN and the schools invested in. I don’t understand why schools would leave a Conference that doesn’t even have a Conference Channel and has a big investment from ESPN, for any Conference without those two things. So while I think some schools eventually leave the ACC, I don’t think it will be like the PAC, it will be more like the B12, but with a Conference Channel like the other P2.
(In response to this post by WBGV)
W
WBGV
2y
By me incorrectly doing so, I saw your post as a veiled threat rather than what it really was which was just friendly advice from a long time poster.
I enjoy posting here because of the wide array of opinions plus the civility that 95% (not all but most) of posters have to each other even with diametrically opposed views.
We saw the Big 12 go through a conference shakeup and it wasn’t pretty. We saw the PAC-12 go through a conference shakeup and it wasn’t pretty. And we are now seeing the ACC go through a conference shakeup and it likely isn’t going to be pretty either. I’m hoping for best possible outcome for VT even if that means changing conferences. I’m also hoping that this board will continue to be a place where posters can freely share all kinds of conference realignment news (good or bad), opinions, speculations, etc., etc.
(In response to this post by Stech)
2y
any try so far!!
(In response to this post by WBGV)
V
VTCALS72
2y
I think the odds of it being invalidated is way less than many want to believe. I also believe it can be shown that a big portion of the reason for the GOR to exist, not just for the ACC but all conferences, is to be able to both renegotiate the current deals or bargain for new ones.
(In response to this post by WBGV)
2y
reduced in negotiation, but exit fees are classic liquidated damages; entirely legit.
GoR is also legit. But The ACC cannot allow a court the opportunity to declare that this particular GoR is flawed. They will settle with FSU.
(In response to this post by WBGV)
V
VTCALS72
2y
for all of them. GOR may be a hill the ACC (with backing from the media and everybody else} makes their immovable stand.
(In response to this post by 33laszlo99)
S
Stech
2y
the Mag 7 go with them. Then numbers would shrink from 1/2 Billion significantly, but IMHO still a significantly larger number than that.
(In response to this post by Hokie83)
S
SMU Pony
2y
The ACC will almost assuredly contend that if FSU wants their media rights back, it's going to cost a lot more than $572M
(In response to this post by tarheelblue)
2y
has the option to "not renew" ... I think after 2026. This was widely reported. The $572 number was based on the GoR with an end date of 2036. That seems to be way less likely to me. FSU's value has probably risen quite a bit since the amount assumed original negotiation but the question is, "what has happened to the ACC's in general?" I think I has probably dropped. Even if it hasn't, certain attractive elements in it have gone up (assume FSU, UNC and Clemson).
Aren't all the ACC teams being valued at the same amount by this metric? I think they are.
Even if you take the worst case of 13 years and $572, that is $44 million a year. Isn't FSU worth $90 million plus to other conference? Probably much higher, since $90 million is the AVERAGE B10 payout and FSU would be one of its top 3 brands.
Assume for a minute that if FSU left. FSU would keep $12 million more a year by leaving ($90-$44), $56 v $44, and the B10 would gladly compensate them for the $44. It seems to me that the problem IS NOT that FSU is leaving, but that it MIGHT LEAVE to the B10, which hasn't sold it's rights to ESPN. It seems like $44 million is a SMALL price for FSU to pay to the ACC. ESPN on the other hand would try to stick them up for more money. I think this is what you mean by "floor?"
It seems that ESPN wouldn't really care if top ACC teams depart, so long as they don't go to the B10. A team that goes B12 wouldn't be worth keeping anyhow. If ESPN can flip UNC (and maybe UVA, VT and NCSU) to the SEC, they will get more revenue from those brands.
The question is, "Does the SEC want the non-UNC teams?"
FSU seems really angry with ESPN. If ever there seemed to be an anti-trust issue, this seems to be it. ESPN and Fox have a duopoly on CFB rights purchases. Combine this this with ESPN's option to not renew and this looks really abusive. DeSantis hates Disney and the State of Florida has a really good case to go after ESPN/Disney really hard on this one. Plus there seem to be some skeletons in the closet, agency issues or extreme sloppiness going back to the original negotiations.
If FSU can eventually jump for $572 or less, this will be a huge win for them. You can see why they are being so aggressive. The amount above $572 that FSU pays will show how strong a case that ESPN has. The paradox is... if ESPN doesn't renew the ACC in 2026, then the amount they can extract from FSU dwindles.
** Edited by TDVick at 2/17/2024, 1:04:24 PM
(In response to this post by SMU Pony)
2y
in a position to play hardball here. Everything changed when we learned about the ESPN contract, and the unilateral power ESPN has to walk away. If that happens, the GOR is worth zero to the ACC with FSU, or any other school that might get an invite to the P2.
They are currently staking their positions for negotiation, and discovery can be a double edged sword. The ACC, and ESPN can not risk a conference GOR being litigated in court. No matter how strong a case you have, there is just too much at stake, and there is always risk that you will lose. Without a GOR, the media contracts with conferences will all be negotiated differently in the future - especially for any non P2 conference.
I do not pretend to know where the money lands here, but in my opinion, the ACC should find a figure that FSU is willing to pay, and one that is high enough to make other institution pause.
Take the money from FSU now, as an all or nothing strategy is not in the ACC's interest.
(In response to this post by SMU Pony)
D
daveinop
2y
if the ACC thinks they have a good case, they'll play it out. exactly what legal leverage has FSU identified?
I think it's just as likely ESPN bumps $ up a little as pulling the plug.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
H
HOO86
2y
The ACC gives ESPN presence in parts of the US that the SEC doesn't. Plus the network is already at full distribution. I don't see them not renewing. They perhaps could work with the ACC to add Geographic Markets not provided by the SEC or the Big XII.
(In response to this post by daveinop)
D
daveinop
2y
but if they did pull out, I do believe they'd need to amend the GOR to apply it to a different contract. The 2013 GOR stated that rights granted are those necessary to fulfill the ESPN agreement. It did not list any specific rights the schools granted to the conference. So can you do a new contract based on the prior contract? Can the ACC parse out what those rights wound up being and then claim they still have them? It also required ALL members to agree on amendments to the GOR. So unless the 2016 amendments deviated from the original language (and it could, none of us has seen it), then anyone interested in leaving could block update of the GOR to accommodate a new post-ESPN contract.
Again, I don't think ESPN pulls the plug for the same reasons you do...it's a good deal for them. But if they did, I think anyone who wants out would have a much better chance than FSU currently has to make that happen for "just" the exit fee and with their media rights in tow.
** Edited by daveinop at 2/18/2024, 1:52:14 PM
** Edited by daveinop at 2/18/2024, 1:53:26 PM
(In response to this post by HOO86)
2y
ESPN is getting the most bang for its buck with the ACC. Particularly if ESPN believes that the ACC has not upheld its end of the arrangement. ESPN could be better served to reallocate that money to be used for either the SEC, CFP, a P1/P2 league, or even its new streaming service. Now that it appears the NFL will have an equity stake in ESPN, I will be curious to see what influence (if any) the NFL will have on ESPN's future decisions.
If a P1/P2 league ever does become a reality, then I could see the NFL decide to use it as its minor league in the traditional sense because the owners wouldn't have to pony up the money to cover the startup cost. The schools have already taken care of that issue for them.
(In response to this post by daveinop)
2y
ESPN will take the brunt of the hit.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
S
SMU Pony
2y
That's not necessarily true. As Frank the Tank has said on Twitter, the length of the GOR and the length of the media deal doesn't have to be in sync; the Big Ten's GOR and media deals have not been for the same terms.
The GOR states that it is to effectuate the ESPN media rights deal and for "other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged"
That's boilerplate legalese, but it's far from meaningless. The Big Ten sniffed around on Georgia Tech and other ACC schools when Maryland left, but they elected to stay in the ACC because they thought they'd be tied together with FSU and other ACC schools until 2036. Every ACC school forwent the opportunity to join the Big Ten or SEC because wanted to be tied together with their current membership for the next twenty years. If FSU wants out, they've gotta pay for that.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
GOR's are useless. It is also my understanding that the 2036 date of the GOR is because that is when the contract with ESPN expires. We have since learned that ESPN does not have to honor the contract through 2036 - so ya - I'm assuming that if ESPN elects to not renew the contract, the GOR isn't worth anything until and unless a new contract is negotiated and signed. FSU is not obligated to be a part of that process if the current media contract expires.
(In response to this post by SMU Pony)
2y
Wherever they are. If the ACC owns their media rights, then whatever media payments FSU receives, would be owned by the ACC. Now the ACC and FSU can negotiate something different, but unless that happens, even if the ACC loses their media deal, the GOR is not useless. It gives the ACC the rights to whatever media income FSU receives.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
Because the ACC has sold the rights to broadcast those games to ESPN. So hypothetically if FSU goes to the B1G, then ESPN still gets to broadcast all of FSU's home games. And if FSU's ratings against B1G teams winds up being higher than their ratings against ACC teams, then presumably ESPN would be able to charge advertisers more for those games. But the ACC would still get the same amount of money under their contract with ESPN.
(In response to this post by wwhokie1)
2y
The ACC owns FSU's media rights. If FSU goes to another conference, the ACC's contract with ESPN becomes irrelevant for how much money FSU brings in. FSU would no longer be allowed to make money off of their media appearances. Any money made off of those appearances, money based on contracts owned by their new conference, would be owed to the ACC, not to FSU.
** Edited by wwhokie1 at 2/17/2024, 7:21:08 PM
(In response to this post by tarheelblue)
2y
So ESPN technically owns them.
(In response to this post by wwhokie1)
H
HOO86
2y
Should ESPN not renew, the ACC would be required to take their media rights to other bidders. FSU would be obligated to what follows. FSU's media rights belong to the ACC until the fall of 2037. This is regardless of any action by ESPN.
** Edited by HOO86 at 2/17/2024, 3:00:08 PM
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
S
SMU Pony
2y
...and those rights are granted through 2035-36. I realize that you are a Big 12 fan with your own agenda, but that doesn't change what the contract says.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
I lived in Boston for 5 years in the heyday of Big East basketball, Lived and worked in Charlotte for 10 years, and my roommate was a Mississippi State grad - grew up in Indiana as a Bobby Knight fan, and my high school in Indianapolis were the fighting Irish. Transferred to KC, and married a die hard KU basketball fan - "when in Rome"
I do not have a B12 agenda, and I would prefer to turn the clock back on the PAC. I have always been a college football/basketball fan, and have been to several ACC, BIG, B12, and SEC venues. It gives me a perspective that is not in a bubble - and is why I find this board interesting.
I can talk smack with the best of them, but that isn't why I'm here. I hate Texas with a passion, and dislike many, if not all, SEC schools. The ACC schools have never risen to the level of being emotional for me, except for UNC. I'm a fan of the old Big East, and wish we could turn the clock back on that conference as well.
-------------------------------------------
I understand the GOR is with the ACC, not ESPN - but it has monetary value because of the media contract. It was also signed by FSU assuming that the media contract lasted until 2036 - when apparently, it may not. If FSU's media rights are not tied to the media contract, why does it expire in 2036, and not 2040? Or any other year that has nothing to do with the media contract?
(In response to this post by SMU Pony)
S
SMU Pony
2y
Oh wait, it did, until the schools all agreed to extend it until 2036. The 2036 extension is NOT conditioned on ESPN extending the TV deal past 2027. If they wanted it to be conditioned upon that, they would have written it as such.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
Their focus Was trying to maintain stability in the league. The GOR accomplished that. It's only in hindsight that we see the problems those decisions created.
(In response to this post by SMU Pony)
2
2hhoop3
2y
but, that doesn't mean the court will actually see it that way. FSU's rights and value are solely determined by what anyone would pay FSU. IF the B1G or the SEC was willing to pay them more then that is the rights value to be received. All the ACC deal does is set the floor that the league is entitled to receive under the grant.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
I think there will be a settlement.
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2
2hhoop3
2y
you assess that risk to be. You are entitled to your opinion as am I. What do you evaluate and consider the real risks to be?
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
media contracts. If the ruling comes down that they are not enforceable, the entire business model is at risk. None of these GOR agreements have been challenged in a court of law, and the conferences and networks have far more to lose than FSU. Really, what does FSU lose if they are ruled enforceable? They are already stuck in a conference they don't want to be in. Sure, it would make it expensive if they want to leave - but I don't think they will pay 1/2 a billion - it will be more likely that they wait it out. Think about it, 500M ++ is 50M a year - if they have that kind of money laying around, they can just fund themselves.
The ones that can lose here are the conferences, as there would be no long term contracts in the foreseeable future if they do not know who will be in the conference from year to year. That $80M a year that the BIG is getting for instance. What would prevent another entity taking the top 8 brands, and paying them $100M a year - or more? Do you think that FOX would be stuck paying the Indiana's $80M a year till the contract expires?
The ACC could lose (not a prediction), and even if they win, it doesn't change anything except the timeline.
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2
2hhoop3
2y
you just made the case for why the ACC has very little, if any, risk in contesting. As a conference most view with little long term prospects they owe the P2 nothing in terms of fighting versus settling. If the networks or the P2 are concerned about GORs or media rights that is their problem. If the ACC loses all they have done is modified the timeline. If they win, they have likely lengthened their timeline and maintained, maybe enhanced the revenue pie for their remaining members. I think you would serve yourself well to revisit your understanding and theories surrounding the GOR, the current litigation and the potential future impacts.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
they can win litigation, and force them to stay until 2036. If this goes to trial, and the GOR is deemed not enforceable, then the ACC gets nothing.
Are you telling me that you a comfortable going to a trial with a judge or jury determining whether or not the GOR is valid? From where I'm sitting, that is what is at stake. No matter where opinions fall, there is never a 100% guarantee of winning at trial. I just don't see the ACC risking a court ruling here.
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2
2hhoop3
2y
about a 100% guarantee of winning at trial. It is all about understanding and accurately quantifying the risks. Reread what I wrote and ask yourself what the ACC ultimately risks and when?
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
already lost FSU - they are just litigating the when.
Are you comfortable with the GOR going to trial?
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2
2hhoop3
2y
you more than once I am comfortable with that and WHY. So far you have yet to tell me what the ACC ULTIMATELY loses at trial. Here is a hint for you, if your existence is in question you really have nothing to lose.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
lot of really good schools in it, and they will be fine if FSU leaves. If the GOR is unenforceable however, they lose everything.
It's FSU that has nothing to lose. If the courts rule in the ACC;s favor, what does FSU lose? They will just have to go with the status quo until the GOR expires. They are under no obligation to buy their rights, or pay any kind of exit fee if the ruling goes against them, unless they leave. There are opportunity costs for the FSU to stay in the ACC, and that is all FSU has at stake.
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2
2hhoop3
2y
summed it up pretty well below, with the exception of a 3rd alternative of FSU paying $500+ million and leaving. I'm done trying to explain it to you.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
hasn't shifted my opinion.
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2
2hhoop3
2y
You can think as you wish, however, your mistake is believing that the GOR being nullified is a big risk to the ACC. Whether it goes away in 2036 or before and whether the entire model implodes is no risk at all to a conference that could cease to exist or whose future landing spot would be the equivalent of the current Big 12.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
than they currently have, and are invited to the P2, we will all be in the equivalent of the B12. I don't see anyway around that. Apparently, FSU has an invite, and a few others would get one - whether sooner, or later (2036). This court case will resolve that.
You keep taking jabs at the B12, yet, if the top teams leave the ACC, do you think the leftovers will get a similar contract? Remember, ESPN only pays a reported $20M for the B12 - the rest is supported by FOX for a reported $31M.
Do you think the leftovers of the ACC can stay together, and do you think they will get a contract in the 30's? I mean, I hope they do, and the ACC as it is configured is worth more than the B12 in my opinion, but take the top 4 brands off the table, and the conference has too many brands that people don't watch or support. Houston and Kansas were the only teams that do not fill their stadiums no matter who they play. Add ASU, Arizona, and one could argue, Colorado to that list.
I've been to the stadiums in the Carolinas, and was extremely underwhelmed with the game day atmosphere in all of them except South Carolina and Clemson. That was before the Big East imploded, but even back then, no one in the ACC seemed to care about football. Maybe things are different now, but there were always open seats in those stadiums. It's different out here in flyover country. Every stadium is filled, and the populations out here are watching them.
You will like being in the B12, and you deserve that statement.
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2
2hhoop3
2y
5 to 7 brands leave the ACC it will cease to exist and those without a fixed landing spot will have to make the best decision for their institution. I do not see the Big 12 being the best decision for many, if any, nor do I see the Big 12 with its current membership roster having the ability to absorb many, if any, of those teams and make it work financially.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
to the P2 conferences. I see 2-4.
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2y
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2y
It's like what I did back when I was a student at UNC and I had to write a 6-page paper for a class. I would write a 4-page paper and then adjust the font type and size until it became a 6-page paper.
** Edited by tarheelblue at 2/17/2024, 6:14:57 PM
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
If the ACC wins, then I get the joy of seeing FSU lose.
If the ACC loses, then we rip the band-aid off and all the schools just get to where they are ultimately going anyway, just faster.
Either outcome would be better than settling the case, in my opinion.
** Edited by tarheelblue at 2/17/2024, 4:45:33 PM
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
Even if ESPN were to not renew the contract, that does not automatically release FSU from the GOR. In the modern media rights environment you have to have a GOR in place to negotiate a new media rights contract.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
W
WBGV
2y
2027 because the ACC “duped” them about the terms of the ESPN contract? Deception certainly seems plausible because why would FSU sign over their media rights until 2036 when the compensation for those rights could end in 2027. I think that the media rights contract with ESPN were under “lock and key” at the corporate offices for more reasons than just trade secrets. If multiple schools make the same claim during discovery then that would be compelling evidence backing up FSU’s claims. And if schools knowingly signed the GOR for 9 years longer than the length of the media rights contract then someone at or previously associated with those universities will have a lot of explaining to do. I find it hard to believe that an educated person would be that foolish.
(In response to this post by tarheelblue)
2y
if this is actually put into a judges hands. I just do not think the ACC would risk it. You make my point with a GOR and media contract. The GOR's have never gone to trial and been ruled on by a judge or jury. It's an all or nothing scenario, and in the end of all of this, FSU will move to another conference - no matter the decision by a trial.
This is now a shotgun marriage with the ACC and FSU. A court ruling only gives a date of the divorce.
(In response to this post by tarheelblue)
2y
I don't think there is enough incentive to settle, as the dollar amount that the ACC would be willing to settle for ($600+ Million) is much greater than FSU is willing to pay.
** Edited by tarheelblue at 2/17/2024, 3:46:32 PM
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
court.
(In response to this post by tarheelblue)
2y
(In response to this post by tarheelblue)
2
2hhoop3
2y
they could not risk litigating it in court. I also think you cannot say everything changed with learning about the ESPN contract. It COULD change if the GOR can be linked but, if it is a separate document it still stands and media rights are worth in excess of zero even if the argument is made they are worth less than before. Both the ACC and FSU may have challengeable positions in their argument but, saying they cannot afford to play hardball misunderstands the situation. FSU's strength is they only have to account for FSU's wishes and best interests while the ACC has to balance the interests of all of its members.
** Edited by 2hhoop3 at 2/17/2024, 12:37:00 PM
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
We do not know what vulnerabilities each side has. If it is just a simple negotiation on the merits of the GoR, and neither side has a fear of discovery, The ACC would gladly go to court and get a favorable outcome. I think, even then, they would make a deal with FSU for the rights, but the price would be painfully high.
I’ll speculate, just because of the latest news, that The ACC wants to avoid a court fight. Why else would they introduce the idea of a settlement. I’ll take an unscientific guess that there will be an agreement reached very soon, and FSU will pay less than $200 million total. The conference may be more aware than we are of any more indelicate secrets that FSU could expose. (Just based on what we’ve seen so far.)
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2
2hhoop3
2y
the ACC should fire Jim Phillips and the lawyers to save money and close up shop as fast as they can because everybody that can is likely running for the doors anyway.
(In response to this post by 33laszlo99)
2y
The P2 do not want to take a big chunk of ACC right now. I can see something like this: FSU signs-up with The B1G. SEC invites UNC, but not State... long delay for bargaining. SEC might also invite UVa and face the same snag re. VT... long delay. Clemson put on hold pending resolution in NC and VA. Miami put on hold while The B1G pleads with Notre Dame.
All ACC schools have surely made plans for all eventualities. The most important event is one year away. In Feb. '25 ESPN will declare their intentions regarding the media contract and if the answer is "no extension," negotiations will begin. If the early signs are not positive the conference will fracture, just as The PAC did.
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2y
was required for the contract and the ACCN. While the GOR is with the conference, not with ESPN, it is most defiantly tied to the media contract.
It's why sitting out here in flyover country, in a conference that lost all of their premier programs, I'm saying a negotiated settlement is in the best interest of the rest of the schools in the ACC. All the GOR does is put a date on FSU's exit at this point. They are leaving either way this litigation goes - it's a matter of if, not when - and it's a matter of how much money is involved in their departure.
Unless the ACC gets a competitive contract in the P2 neighborhood, the conference will change. I assume that no contract like that will be offered to the ACC. The question then becomes whether or not ESPN makes more money by canceling their existing contract, and puts the more valuable brands in other conferences, or they make more money keeping the ACC intact.
WSU and Oregon State are not in a power conference because ESPN will not pay $30M a year for their media rights. How many schools in the ACC are like that?
It's why I say the ACC should negotiate a settlement with FSU while they still have the leverage.
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2y
So it is certainly not in the interests of schools like Wake Forest or Boson College to let FSU out one second earlier than they are contractually bound to be in the ACC. The only schools that benefit from letting FSU out early at any price are the other schools that want to leave the conference early too.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
of the GOR, then those schools you mentioned are hung out to dry. If you wait until 2036, those schools will be hung out to dry. Any way you slice this, there will be schools on the outside looking in. That includes anyone not in the P2.
Take FSU's money now while you have the leverage. $100-$250M is not chump change, and if there are 3 other teams willing to pay that, then all the better - because they are leaving, it's just a matter of when in my opinion.
(In response to this post by tarheelblue)
2
2hhoop3
2y
in looking for another home. ESPN already paid $30 MM for schools just like them. It's called the Big 12 with the 4 corners additions and it is the reason the B1G 12 ultimately was able to fulfill that for all its members. I think the ACC should roll the dice with the facts as they presently exist, unless they are looking to negotiate with all schools that might look to leave.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
Your post is interesting for sure. Some big challenges though:
1. Determine fair market value for FSU is virtually impossible, due to entanglements you mentioned, as well as consolidation / duopoly network issues.
2. I believe Washington and Oregon were significantly and purpopesefly undervalued, as the Big10 always wanted them. The Big10 played it well and gained massive leverage over these isolated Pac10 schools. Again, another fair market value issue due to consolidation.
3. It will be interesting to see the overall impact of consolidation to the product. There's a strong argument that what made college football so valuable was the sum of the parts (eg: rivalries, traditions, inter-conference, upsets, new matchups, etc), and destroying that fabric diminishes the overall value. Advertising dollars is the main economic unit, and you can't disenfranchise too many eyeballs. Maybe the top schools will make even more now, or maybe it's the start of a downward spiral where less money advertising dollars coms in and more money goes out (eg: NIL, salaries, etc)
Interesting times for sure
(In response to this post by TDVick)
The B1G went full Robber Baron on UO and UW.
Sold short. Manipulated the market with the USC merger and fueling the Colorado to Big XII angle. Isolating Oregon and Washington. Then buying on the dip. It ain't right.
** Edited by Maroon Baboon at 2/17/2024, 12:33:02 PM
(In response to this post by jesuisvtguy)
2y
divide and conquer and have been ruthless about it to differing degrees of success - but they learned along the way.
(1) tried with adding Neb - thought they could get others like Tex, Okl
(2) tried the ACC by adding UMD and GT - but GT got cold feet at the last minute
(3) destroyed the PAC by successfully adding USC and UCLA - they could have done it by adding USC and any 1 of UCLA, Org, Wash
(In response to this post by jesuisvtguy)
2
2hhoop3
2y
very much on the field or the court competition wise your only option is to kneecap your competitors financially and the B1G has shown quite the knack for doing that.
(In response to this post by 133193Hokie)
S
SMU Pony
2y
Regionality was always such an important aspect in college football. We've completely shed that now, and the people who benefit are...college administrators who get a 25% raise? No one wants to see USC play Purdue (or SMU play Wake Forest, for that matter).
(In response to this post by 133193Hokie)
2y
BigTen bylaws state that there needs to be a 70% vote to expel a school. Right now, that's 10 of 14 votes needed. Now that they have added 4 very desperate and very grateful schools, how hard would it be to now get the 13 of 18 necessary votes? If I'm one of the bottom feeders in that Big, I'm very concerned about being allowed to stay. Purdue, Northwestern, Rutgers, Maryland, and even Indiana better start thinking about how to make their FB programs more relevant.
SEC is even worse. They only need a 2/3 vote. Today, there would need to be 10 of 14 votes to expel Vandy or MSU. Probably hard to get as Vandy, MSU, Arkansas, Kentucky, and USC would vote as a block to ensure nobody is expelled. with UT and OU joining, you only need 11 of 16 and that block doesn't mean crap anymore.
(In response to this post by SMU Pony)
2y
They were added for market, academics, research cred, and alumni base. They will remain B1G members long-term for those same reasons. Somebody has to be last-place in every conference. If you expel a school for being last, you just cause someone new to replace them as the tail-end.
(In response to this post by HokieToph)
2y
Money and greed have been driving expansion. But once schools can no longer increase their payday through adding schools, some will want to do it through expelling the teams that don't add value. If the B1G ever adds ND they would have 3 schools in Indiana, and that's 2 schools too many.
** Edited by tarheelblue at 2/17/2024, 6:10:42 PM
(In response to this post by HokieToph)
2y
Irish following is greater in the Northeast and Chicago than it is in Indiana.
(In response to this post by tarheelblue)
2y
(In response to this post by 33laszlo99)
2y
league/conference. That is why I posted from the beginning that the B1G was ALWAYS going to add more western teams - they were NEVER going to leave USC/UCLA on an island by themselves. And I think there is a possibility that the B1G will still add ( 2ish) more "western" teams - Az, Kan, Col, Utah.
(In response to this post by SMU Pony)
2y
or maybe Colorado, they would be looking great. The B1G is too top heavy in the Midwest and too light out West.
** Edited by tarheelblue at 2/18/2024, 11:06:40 PM
(In response to this post by 133193Hokie)
2y
(In response to this post by tarheelblue)
S
SMU Pony
2y
They kept the Big 12 alive as a true power conference a lot longer than they could have. The new SEC is still a regional conference with contiguous states and only two time zones.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
S
SMU Pony
2y
(In response to this post by tarheelblue)
Good post. Two things.
1. If this notion of finding a value on an individual school becomes a thing, the B1G and the SEC might start to fracture down the roads at the nearest sight of a money crunch. Michigan might say, "Hey. How much is Purdue worth, anyway?" Or SEC schools might say, "Why do we have two schools from Mississippi when we could have one from Arizona?" Anyway, you see where I am going with this.
2. I think the B1G should be interested in Virginia Tech. We have a lot to offer them. Especially if UNC goes to the SEC and brings UVa with them.
** Edited by Maroon Baboon at 2/17/2024, 10:26:50 AM
(In response to this post by TDVick)
2y
VT will be with FSU, the U, Clemson. So it be interesting scheduling. I still think VT and UVA with both NC schools go SEC. Duke and Wake will be interesting.
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
E
EDGEMAN
2y
They are the opposite of everything the SEC values.
(In response to this post by MrFantastic!)
S
SMU Pony
2y
They would love a second presence in Florida and Miami would be much more palatable to Florida than FSU.
(In response to this post by EDGEMAN)
E
EDGEMAN
2y
It's a small private school...probably smaller than Vandy (and less prestigious).
They are known for gold teeth, and hookers & blow.
(In response to this post by SMU Pony)
2y
of most good B1G teams vs Miami matchups - makes great content that people will pay to watch
(In response to this post by SMU Pony)
S
SMU Pony
2y
...Miami checks all of their boxes. But they would have value to the SEC as well. At the end of the day, everyone wants a presence in that market.
(In response to this post by 133193Hokie)
2y
A POD of MIAMI, FSU, Clemson , GT , State and VT. That puts BIG at 24. It also takes a part of the Southeast . With that said. I do not see the SEE allowing this. Thus UNC, STate, VT and UVA to the SEC. I think rivalries win out. I also think a Purdue or lets say a VANDY are important. Two thoughts. Both represent well in other sports. The other reason they are easy wins in football. These bigtime schools are still going to desire easy weeks.
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
2y
I know - WVU..... OK - replace WVU with Mizz, Ole Miss, Ms St, or Ark.
I would take that pod ALL DAY LONG over a B1G pod that looks like the ACC/Big East re-do
** Edited by 133193Hokie at 2/17/2024, 10:33:49 AM
(In response to this post by MrFantastic!)
2y
I get your point with SEC.
(In response to this post by 133193Hokie)
2y
Neither side wants litigation and CERTAINLY neither side wants to be deposed. All the stuff that has been flying back and forth is each side taking jabs at each other to better their perceived hand. Neither side was ever going to deliver a knock out blow. The only question has ever been when and how much.
(In response to this post by TDVick)
2y
And I suspect that is the way it will work out for those 2
(In response to this post by MrFantastic!)
2y
But FSU will have friends with it going to BIG. I just wonder how the SEC takes on BIG coming to the Southeast?
(In response to this post by 133193Hokie)
2y
(1) I would go to 24 teams - meaning add (8)
(2) I would add two more "western" schools - Az and Kansas
(3) I would add WVU - SEC is all about compelling content and rabid fans - NOT about big cities/states
(4) I would add (5) ACC schools - but probably not any Fla schools, and certainly not GT - so that leaves UNC, NCST, UVA, VT, Clemson
(In response to this post by MrFantastic!)
2y
I do almost exactly as you state. One thing if timing is right I would try and poach Nebraska from BIG.
Nebraska, KU, OU, Mizzou, Texas and TAMU---If not Nebraska maybe Colorado or Ok State. AZ I thinnk is possible.
Bama, Auburn, Ole Miss, MSU, LSU and Arkansas
GA, Tennessee, KY, Vandy, Florida and South Carolina
Clemson, UNC, VT, UVA, State and WVU
(In response to this post by 133193Hokie)
2y
to Az. But I could see Okl St instead of Az.
Lets all pray to the college football baby Jesus now ;-)
(In response to this post by MrFantastic!)
2y
Appalachian - VT, WVU, Tenn, KY, NCST, USC
Coastal - UVA, UNC, UGA, FLA, Vandy, Clemson
Southern - Auburn, OleMiss, Ms St, LSU, Bama, Ark
Western - aTm, UT, Az, Kan, Mizz, Okl
(In response to this post by 133193Hokie)
E
EDGEMAN
2y
I would knock that down $500M every year.
Basically punitive damages for harm to the conference. It's one thing to discuss things in private, but once you start screaming to every media outlet...screw you!
(In response to this post by TDVick)
V
Vippie1
2y
It can be all economically solved.
The highest value to the the P2 is to split in-state rivals so they both have footprints in each state. If that happens the payouts to respective schools involved are modestly higher.
However UVA-VT and UNC-NCSU (or possibly all four prefer- will be required by their states to stay together). Easily solved- those schools , at least in the short term, get smaller payouts from their new conferences . As soon as some independent entities can establish the delta on these things, problem solved. My guess is the delta isnt all that large.
IMO Uva/VT leave some money on the table to stay together - and preferably if the ACC implodes , I'd strongly prefer all 4 being in the same P2 , even if it means smaller payout for awhile.
(In response to this post by TDVick)