Reports are that Clemson has filed suit against the ACC in SC
93 Replies
I
INSIDE99
2y
The fact Clemson filed this lawsuit immediately after the CFP agreement was signed is no coincidence.
The ACC is contractually limited from stopping additional realignment. The ACC has now effectively lost the ability to "control" any school leaving the conference for the P2. The SEC and B1G are in charge of any future additions without regard to any other conference agreements.
(In response to this post by Tailgate Guru)
2
2hhoop3
2y
explain what provisions you are relying on to make the statement that the ACC "is contractually limited from stopping additional realignment." It is hard to believe any conference would agree to those types of provisions that eliminate their ability to defend their own conference.
(In response to this post by INSIDE99)
I
INSIDE99
2y
A few of those provisions have already been posted here. They are in the Clemson lawsuit.
The Clemson lawsuit differs from the FSU lawsuit in that more of the ACC/ESPN Agreement has now been made available - something FSU has been trying to reveal through Discovery. Although much of what is now provided in that contract has been redacted in the Clemson lawsuit filed today. Clemson read it.
As some have speculated in regards to what the actual ESPN agreement states, the GOR can be waived by Fox and ESPN per the CFP agreement announced Friday (much more to come on those CFP agreements). If the purpose and basis for a claimed $500M exit fee is to lock in teams in order to comply with the GOR - that whole basis seems to fall apart now. So it's not a penalty but "media rights" - the ACC doesn't own those rights. The networks control realignment, not the ACC. Deals have already been cut between the networks. Clemson and FSU already have a P2 landing spot. Those deals were already in place with the conferences and the networks.
** Edited by INSIDE99 at 3/19/2024, 3:44:08 PM
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2
2hhoop3
2y
you were asked to cite the SPECIFIC provisions you relied upon. Saying something will be revealed or offering a dissertation on the Clemson lawsuit does not answer the question asked.
(In response to this post by INSIDE99)
I
INSIDE99
2y
Reading the Clemson lawsuit does answer questions as to how the GOR can be interpreted. The timing of the filing was purposeful. Again, ESPN and FOX have the say in ACC realignment...not the ACC or court litigation.
When Jim Phillips signed off on the new playoff payout scheme, the die was cast. There is absolutely no reason the ACC, as a power five conference, should accept an extreme lesser percentage of the playoff revenue from ESPN than other conferences. That alone is a deal breaker. The ACC leadership failed to uphold its fiduciary duty to the member schools.
FSU and Clemson are leaving and already have a landing spot. This will happen long before 2036 and will not cost $500 million. No provisions to show you on that statement. Just common sense.
Also of note, in both the amended two-year agreement and new six-year extension, the CFP provides ESPN with the right to sublicense a select number of games. The horse trading is ongoing. Realignment is on the table. Having FSU, Clemson, ND, UNC in the P2 is worth more to ESPN/FOX/NBC than if they stay in the ACC. If you want to see those charts they are available everywhere. This is a business decision for the networks. Money drives it all. Listen to the money talk.
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2
2hhoop3
2y
Just say you have nothing to support the statement you were originally questioned on and you're guessing like everyone else. No one disputes TV is the big player but, that is a far different statement than your original "contractually limited" assertions and to which you have yet to point to those specific contractually limiting provisions.
(In response to this post by INSIDE99)
I
INSIDE99
2y
Yes everyone is speculating. I just assumed that went without saying.
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2
2hhoop3
2y
when you say "The ACC is contractually limited from stopping additional realignment." That is a definitive statement which you can either support or admit was an erroneous statement when challenged. Not everyone is speculating nor trying to pass off speculation as a definitive statement. There are huge differences in those implications which you seem unable to grasp.
Moreover, some of the deals you claim to be done COULD constitute future suits for tortious interference or amendments to existing suits for breach of contract. You raise a lot of speculation that is questionable and some that is just wrong.
** Edited by 2hhoop3 at 3/20/2024, 2:36:03 PM
(In response to this post by INSIDE99)
I
INSIDE99
2y
Including Greg Sankey, Jim Phillips, ESPN, the ACC, lawyers, etc., etc.
In regards to ACC realignment and lawsuits, it's to the point where every person is trying to interpret the GOR. Depends on who is reading it as to what it contractually means. So even that is speculation, even by very high priced attorneys.
UNC will also file a lawsuit, soon. Yes, I am speculating based on current events.
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2
2hhoop3
2y
a better grasp of what constitutes speculation as opposed to a statement of fact or an opinion. Good luck with that.
(In response to this post by INSIDE99)
W
WBGV
2y
“Clemson wants the Court to rule that:
(1) the ACC does not own the broadcasting rights to its games after it *leaves* the league
(2) it is not required to pay the exit fee
(3) it owes no other fiduciary duties to the conference”
That covers just about everything. My guess is the UNC will soon file their own lawsuit against the ACC. There has been a lot of rumors that Clemson and UNC were working closely together to join the SEC. The ACC is now on life support IMO. For those who follow Greg Flugaur, it looks like he was right again about Clemson filing a separate lawsuit against the ACC although he was off by a few weeks.
(In response to this post by Tailgate Guru)
V
Vippie1
2y
Beyond that they probably are unable to file a lawsuit due to their State tying them to NCSU , what would even be the point? Let the FSU and Clemson situations play out either through the legal system or some settlement. They are the safest school in the entire conference- FSU and Clemson at least have to contend with in-state schools who really dont want them in their conference.
(In response to this post by WBGV)
2y
The CFP credits that they will bring with them for previous appearances will be very valuable for the conference that takes them. It will also decrease the ACC”s payout whenever the “look in” occurs. I think Clemson ends up in the SEC with UNC when the dust settles. It will be interesting to see who files the next lawsuit. UNC or Miami?
** Edited by Millpoint at 3/19/2024, 2:36:18 PM
(In response to this post by Tailgate Guru)
What about credit for making the BCS title game? VT, Miami, Tennessee, USC
Auburn and Nebraska made the BCS but never made the 4-team CFP.
Either way, the whole thing is starting to curtains for the ACC as we know it.
** Edited by Maroon Baboon at 3/19/2024, 3:07:35 PM
(In response to this post by Millpoint)
2y
Regarding playoff payout levels:
The ACC was assigned a payout higher than The Big 12 because of their previous playoff appearances.
The payouts will be reconsidered if any realignment occurs.
Who, besides FSU/Clemson has represented ACC in the playoffs?
(In response to this post by Tailgate Guru)
The group of 7 are trying to force uneven distributions on the ACC
Conf leadership, and the other schools are against it. This lawsuit furthers the chance the other school can be brought to heel.
IF FSU/Clemson get out, UNC NCST UVA VT and Miami wont be far behind. Then whats lefts will be BELOW some of the group of 5 conf in value.
This lawsuit is targeted to resolve the exit fee, and media rights issue. Getting either resolved, but not both likely forces other ACC schools to either allow unequal distributions, or realize they will be left behind.
VT/UVA via VA Attorneys Generals office, are keeping a close eye on things. If there was to be a filing I think it would include both school, and would be Richmond.
(In response to this post by Tailgate Guru)
2y
This is going to be a very long process. Remember the saying, "the wheels of justice grind slowly but grind fine".
(In response to this post by 3TechFanz)
2y
“Athletes shall not be oppressed by restrictive conference agreements that do not allow schools to change conferences that benefit the athlete”
(In response to this post by mrcaniac)
2y
The ones that picked their school, are getting scholarship and maybe NIL money, and get a free transfer?
Oh, woe is them. 🙄🙄🙄
(In response to this post by 3TechFanz)
2y
It will take years for there to be a final disposition in these cases.
(In response to this post by 3TechFanz)
2y
Very quickly. I don’t see it taking 4-5 years. 1-2 tops
(In response to this post by mrcaniac)
What ACC school will be next in line to sue? UNC?
or Miami? Will UNC and NC State sue the ACC together? I assume Tech and UVA will be last in line. Louisville was aggressive getting into the ACC, so it wouldn't surprise me if they join in. Oh! The drama! ;)
(In response to this post by Tailgate Guru)
2y
The North Carolina system board must approve a move for any member school, which includes UNC and NCSU.
I don't know if UNC-CH could sue to challenge the GOR and exit fee even if that by itself is not leaving the ACC. But certainly UNC-CH would not do so unless it was assured of system board approval. Such approval is unlikely unless UNC is taking NCSU to the new conference.
(In response to this post by Old Line Hokie)
2y
seemingly wants both schools to move together. But I don't see where it says a move by either school would automatically be rejected by the board. I think they just want be involved in negotiations and to make sure UNC doesn't sneak out secretly. Those two will not necessarily move a pair. (In fact I think it's unlikely.)
(In response to this post by LeadingEdge)
2y
Let the out of state schools with favorable judges do the dirty work. SC and FL courts will determine the true boundaries of the ACC power. I don’t think anyone else needs to sue after this Clemson suit.
Once the schools know what it takes and costs to exit, then it will be a mass event.
(In response to this post by Old Line Hokie)
2y
The one filed by the ACC against FSU.
Why file your own when the ACC is paying for it?
Also, FSU and Miami are in the 11th Federal Court District, CU/UNC/NCSU/VT/UVA are in the 4th Federal Court District. While these now 3 cases have been filed in state courts, they will ultimately be decided in Federal court, especially the copyright issues which are the basis of the GOR.
(In response to this post by HokieAl)
How do you expect them to get to federal court?….
On the FSU/ACC suits the time for removal has come and gone. Has there been any effort by any party to invoke federal question jurisdiction?
(In response to this post by mrcaniac)
Ok……I’m not seeing it unless the state actions are dismissed
(In response to this post by mrcaniac)
V
VTCALS72
2y
It sure appears to me this should now be transferred to federal court as so many different states are involved. Then it is the big mean old rich people who signed a share and share alike agreement but now want to screw over the smaller schools/athletic depts.
(In response to this post by HokieAl)
2y
(In response to this post by VTCALS72)
V
VTCALS72
2y
fight this all the way through court? After all this might be their last big payday and if the court rules for something like $400 mil for every team that leaves, that goes into the pockets of the remainder.
(In response to this post by 33laszlo99)
2y
gutted. Wow!
(In response to this post by Tailgate Guru)
2y
(In response to this post by goldendomer)
2y
Playing other eastern and midwestern Catholic schools seems to be perfect for ND if they choose not to join the Big Ten. However this may be the game changer to get them in the Big Ten. I'm sure NBC can easily fold their contract into the Big Ten's. It's going to be an interesting few months for sure.
(In response to this post by Old Line Hokie)
2y
would be happy with a watered down ACC.
(In response to this post by Old Line Hokie)
H
HOO86
2y
I could see NBC forcing a 5 game contract with the B1G at the same time. That leaves 2 games of independence.
(In response to this post by goldendomer)
S
Stech
2y
Those in a Conference have 3-4 independent games compared to their 2, if that happens it’s being in 2 Conferences, but it’s a joke to call it Independence.
However, if it happens, they will sell that joke to keep the big donors writing checks for their joke of 2 game independence.
** Edited by Stech at 3/19/2024, 5:36:52 PM
(In response to this post by HOO86)
2y
Why would they give Notre Dame's football independence a life line?
(In response to this post by HOO86)
H
HOO86
2y
NBC will push it, and has leverage with the B1G. This way NBC won't complain about the ACC games so much, and they will get more quality B1G games. Given both the B1G and ACC are out west, and the ACC is in Texas, ND would then be able to cover the country pretty well.
(In response to this post by TerryD)
2y
I just can't see them bailing the Irish out here when they want them so badly in the conference as all sports members.
(In response to this post by TerryD)
T
TerryD
2y
...in whole or in part.
(In response to this post by Millpoint)
Wake, Duke, Syracuse, BC...
and SMU may be the only remaining members after the P-2 and Big 12 pick through the conference. I guess many of the AAC schools end up in the ACC, so throw in Memphis, Tulane, Army, Navy, Rice, ECU.... Probably UConn. You're right, NBC wouldn't be happy. There's always the Big 10 but we here have all heard about your school desiring football independence. I guess Notre Dame would have to wait until TerryD passes away before they join the Big 10. ;)
(In response to this post by goldendomer)
T
TerryD
2y
Since my Dad lived until 85 and my Mom until, 100, that may be quite a while (I hope !).
(I am 66).
** Edited by TerryD at 3/19/2024, 2:27:36 PM
(In response to this post by Old Line Hokie)
2y
against that slate of games. This is gonna be an interesting SUmmer.
(In response to this post by Old Line Hokie)
T
TerryD
2y
I look for NBC to broker a four game ND/Big Ten football scheduling deal.
(In response to this post by goldendomer)
How about the Big 12? I'm sure they would take the same deal...
the ACC did.
(In response to this post by goldendomer)
H
HouClone
2y
They don't want to go back to that again, even if it makes the conference a few more bucks.
(In response to this post by Old Line Hokie)
2y
I hated it when WVU was in the Big East and I've been glad we're not in the ACC because of it. Just say no Yormark!
They need to either join the Big Ten or be part of the Big East or a reconfigured ACC.
** Edited by Millpoint at 3/19/2024, 3:23:16 PM
(In response to this post by HouClone)
2y
All of their fans were basically tarred and feathered at the 2000 game in Morgantown. I was there and didn't see anything like that. I was also in Buffalo in 2017 when we played them in the second round of the NCAA basketball tournament. Their fans there were way worse than anything I saw at the game in Morgantown.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
football strings if they are serious about adding a Gonzaga.
(In response to this post by HouClone)
2y
It has a different flavor than the FSU one. Makes me wonder if they worked together. FSU to take the focus of the ACC and draw out their legal arguments. Then Clemson to follow with a targeted suit to counter the specific ACC stance.
(In response to this post by Tailgate Guru)
D
daveinop
2y
Clemson should win on the first half of item 1 (which is verbatim from the GOR) as well as item 3 (it isn't in trouble for filing this) in its Prayer for Relief.
(In response to this post by HokieAl)
2y
They focused in on “necessary for the conference to perform the contractual obligations…” which is the airing of ACC games. So they argue that it does not carry over to games after a team leaves the ACC. And the ACC view of the scope is wrong. (Not unfair, but actually wrong)
(In response to this post by HokieAl)
2y
That kills the argument that the GOR becomes inapplicable to a school that leaves.
(In response to this post by HokieAl)
H
HOO86
2y
Clemson doesn't have to be playing another ACC team for the ACC to own the rights to air the games. The ACC would also own the rights when Clemson plays a B1G team or a SEC team. The ACC-ESPN contract is separate from the GOR. Clemson could join the B1G and FOX/NBC/CBS pay the ACC for showing the Clemson home games until the GOR is over.
(In response to this post by HokieAl)
D
daveinop
2y
only the rights necessary to carry out the ESPN agreement. But I think the duration of the ESPN agreement is also part of that. Perhaps the real purpose of this suit is to clarify that when the ESPN contract vanishes; then so does the GOR.
Clemson voted for the withdrawal fee; they have the same problem FSU has on that front. First Q the judge will ask is "have you proposed to modify the withdrawal fee?".
(In response to this post by HokieAl)
S
Stech
2y
(In response to this post by Tailgate Guru)
2y
They might have the votes to leave before Cal Stanford and SMU come in
(In response to this post by Stech)
2y
to see which schools join the suit moving forward.
(In response to this post by Tailgate Guru)
S
Stech
2y
ESPN was upset FSU released the documents showing they didn’t have to renew their contract with the ACC. My educated guess is that FSU and Clemson are trying to go the B1G. It’s just a guess, but if I had to bet, that’s where my money is being placed.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
H
HOO86
2y
But FSU does have a medical school, and probably is on a path for the AAU. Clemson does not have a medical school, and is on no path to the AAU. I know Kevin Warren said that AAU wasn't a requirement. But I've never seen any non-AAU receive a B1G invitation from B1G Presidents. Nebraska was AAU close to when they joined the B1G.
So Clemson must expect SEC somehow. Not sure if ESPN would pay for that, but maybe.
(In response to this post by Stech)
I
INSIDE99
2y
Those deals are already brokered.
That's why both have now filed while other ACC programs have not yet. You don't spend large sums of money to try and exit a conference unless you know where you can land. No school is trying to buy their way out to be an Independent or go to the Big XII.
** Edited by INSIDE99 at 3/19/2024, 2:54:43 PM
(In response to this post by HOO86)
2y
...got the boot shortly after becoming a B1G member. You can bet most, if not all, B1G presidents knew this long before it was announced.
For eleventy millionth time, AAU membership is not remotely a mission critical factor for the B1G. And there is almost no evidence it is - but plenty of evidence it isn't. It is just a desired qualification, not a requirement - like the crap you put at the end of a job description. But the B1G will do what will make the B1G stronger - and if that means taking a non-AA member, it won't blink an eye in doing so.
(In response to this post by HOO86)
H
HOO86
2y
No one has seen B1G Presidents extend invitations to Non AAU someone said since Michigan State in 1949. And other AAU remain as options for them. Even more now with Miami, ND, and USF joining AAU along with more West Coast Options.
(In response to this post by marcbvtgm)
2y
So most of the possible candidates will also be AAU. But if a non-AAU school is otherwise the better alternative, the B1G can and will go with the non-AAU school.
AAU membership is one of the most overrated credentials in academia. Nobody really cares about it and it has no meaningful impact on academic or research efforts. It’s just a club.
** Edited by marcbvtgm at 3/20/2024, 10:59:51 AM
(In response to this post by HOO86)
V
VTCALS72
2y
is AAU
(In response to this post by HOO86)
2y
Florida, Vanderbilt, Mizzou, Texas and Texas A&M. Adding North Carolina and Virginia would be an asset for their academics.
(In response to this post by VTCALS72)
V
VTCALS72
2y
Put another way, is the SEC still beneath UVA's academic standard.
(In response to this post by Millpoint)
H
HOO86
2y
UVA is ACC, and UVA voted for Syracuse, BC, VT, Miami, Louisville, etc. who were not. It's not a UVA requirement. It has been the only thing I've seen the B1G invite since I guess Michigan State or 1949, which someone pointed out. That's a dry spell of a while to today.
I hear and read people telling me it's not a requirement. When I see it I'll be able to be certain of that.
(In response to this post by VTCALS72)
V
Vippie1
2y
After jumping over two time zones for USC and UCLA you really think the B1G values anything at this point other dollars and power. The ship has long sailed on basing any of this on anything other than financial dollars. They would add a barber and cosmetologist college at this point if it increased take home pay for its membership.
(In response to this post by HOO86)
2y
seems like a better landing spot for them, but I don't even think it matters.
(In response to this post by Stech)
2y
UNC would sue in North Carolina. Tech and UVa would sue in Virginia. And so forth.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
Didn't Virginia join Tennessee's lawsuit regarding NIL?
(In response to this post by Tailgate Guru)
2y
Apart from the desire to pursue home cooking, there are often specific state law doctrines pertaining to public entities and contracts that may be advantageous in a given state. If you have a unique claim or defense - such as sovereign immunity - you want that issue addressed by your own State's courts.
(In response to this post by Culpeper Hokie)
H
Hokie 04
2y
Along those same lines, I don't see Wake or BC clamoring to get out of this deal, either 😂
(In response to this post by Tailgate Guru)
2y
their own lawsuit, in which ever State. Pretty sure Y'all knew what i meant.
** Edited by Big12 guy at 3/19/2024, 12:26:34 PM
(In response to this post by Tailgate Guru)
A copy of the suit filed in Columbia
is referenced in Clemson's 247 Board.
(In response to this post by Tailgate Guru)