has suggested their next steps will be to take over Fort Sumter and aims its canons toward Charlotte.

The state related entity (FSU here) entered into a series of contracts with the apparent authority to do so. The entity operates for a decade under these contracts and collects substantial payments under those deals. A decade later....the entity is unhappy and raises a sovereign immunity defense. Courts usually say "too late", you are estopped from raising that defense so late in the game. Now, the ACC was crazy not to get an express waiver of sovereign immunity in the documents, but I don't think immunity is really at play here. (How can anyone ever contract with a state entity if the entity can enjoy the benefits of the deal until they decide to unilaterally pull the plug and argue the contract is now unenforceable due to immunity and the lack of capacity to enter into the deal in the first place ??) ** Edited by TerryD at 4/23/2024, 1:40:03 PM

The GOR that FSU will sign with the B1G will be totally fine for the state I'm sure. Tongue firmly planted in cheek I would think this moves Miami up the list for the B1G and FSU down the list

They're welcome to repay the last 10 years of revenue, plus interest. I'm sure the ACC would listen. That would be in the neighborhood of $400MM.😆

big mystery of this. It never gets talked about until the contract gets pried open in the state of FL. Did schools give someone at HQ the greenlight to negotiate, did that person lie about the final characteristics? Do you see my point? It seems that this unattractive element of the contract had been suppressed or covered up. Why did it only get reported after the FL legal situation? Why did ESPN go on the warpath and try to threaten people with violation of trade secrets? If the school administrators and ACC people did know about it, they look like people who took a bad deal and possibly deceived people about the merits of the deal. Perhaps they did it for competitive reasons. If a lot of school administrators did not know about it, that is even weirder and even dirtier. If a deal got done with this really bad element not being disclosed, that sounds like contract that shouldn't be honored. Can you reconcile this? It looks to me like some very negative elements were hidden. How do you explain that the early cancellation clause was just reported recently and seemed to surprise some schools? I think FSU might have been lied to. ** Edited by TDVick at 4/26/2024, 1:55:16 PM

If they do, it's hard to see FSU winning, but if they don't, then conference defections will happen. My question to you Counselor, is why is ESPN mad that FSU let the contract out clause out? What did ESPN lose by this getting out there? I would love to hear your opinion on that.

from FSU's departure until 2036, rather it ends in 2027 - or sooner.

They don't want other conferences to know what they agreed to in the contract, and the "out" clause might just be in their other contracts with other conferences, and they don't want to give other media properties that info.

future. Plus it makes ESPN looks sleazy that they were being very preferential to the SEC at the ACC's expense in hopes of unraveling it.

I can also see why the SEC would be very angry about it too. Especially if I were a ride along school in football like Vandy. It takes away some of the security you were feeling about always being in the SEC. ** Edited by Stech at 4/24/2024, 1:24:27 PM

As much as the talking heads scratch their heads why Vandy is in the SEC, the school Presidents and AD's know that without Vandy, most of the things that they need to be done in private will be subject to Freedom of Information, Vandy is not subject to that. So, when the SEC schools want to vet a school, Vandy is the one that does it. They do the dirty work of the conference much like WFU does for the ACC.

I simply don't have an opinion on that. I have no idea why ESPN is mad about that, or at whom.

they don’t say it too much. 🤣

Not NY, MA, or TX Omitting NC is understandable.

The schools in the states you cite or not public. She did this to raise concern in those states about the diminution of sovereign immunity. Her claim of sovereign immunity is BS, though. As noted elsewhere in this thread, Florida State waived that by entering into the very agreements it is now challenging. Fun fact: Even though she wrote to the AG of Pennsylvania, Pitt is not a public school. It is public-private hybrid.

not too long ago had mutterings about going private. I heard from a highly successful professor at Tech in the Grant World (in front of Congress repeatedly getting Grants) that the University of Virginia and Virginia Tech, with William and Mary on some things got together and started helping each other out in the General Assembly and in Congress. They would discuss and agree who would be the best in something and lead that area. However, they would support each other even if it didn’t help their school. This cooperation was/has been extremely valuable to both, but it also made the discussion of UVA going private pretty much go away. So back to Pitt, I believe they once were private, but now they are taking public school money from the state (Commonwealth) aren’t they really a public School?

states in the list. California is the most surprising to me, as Cal and Stanford have not even joined the conference yet!

IMHO. I never thought that FSU and Clemson could go it alone. IMHO they need at least the Mag 7 to jump in, and they won't do it IMHO without a P2 landing spot. This is why the FSU and B12 Podcasters keep trying to get schools to run for the gate like the PAC 12 did, but the ACC has a network and a TV contract with ESPN, the Pac had neither. I know ESPN could pull the plug on the contract, but they would not recover the money they put in the ACCN and are they are better off without some schools? Maybe, but maybe not too. The question is how does ESPN make more money keeping the ACC or dissolving it? ** Edited by Stech at 4/23/2024, 12:47:07 PM

them and a bunch of states will join them. ESPN should have to pay damages for their tactics. A bipartisan consensus in FL, VA, NC and some other states will hammer them. ** Edited by TDVick at 4/26/2024, 2:09:00 PM

Right now, ACC is a bargain for them, their is no need to do anything. Now, I got a 3rd scenario. If NBA takes a chunk of the current TV package and give it to Amazon, ESPN frees up more more money and slots. (would it be prudent to them, to up the ACC, just to make them happy, and move on) I always heard Whit say, while it would be great to have SEC money, but we could be competetive on a 70 percent

it is currently. I, a Big 12 fan, would much rather see them promote ACC basketball than the NBA. Hands down.

They have their big bet with the SEC, they own part of the B12, most of the G4/5/6 conferences (whatever the count is now), and completely own the ACC. And if the ACC were to shrink or disappear, then ESPN shifts funds over to other conferences and takes a tax write off for any losses. There is no realignment scenario where ESPN loses. Their only concern is to keep their contract details secret and out of the courts.

Take look back to 2022. Which P5 schools were in the ESPN footprint? ALL of them. ESPN had shared rights to B1G, PAC, Big 12, and total rights for ACC and SEC. For 2023 they were squeezed out of The B1G and replaced by CBS and NBC. That loss was not really from realignment but this season we'll see more changes. The PAC 12 evaporated and ESPN managed to salvage Cal, Stanford and a share of the "four corners." Fox, meanwhile added Oregon, Washington, and the SoCal sisters. Was that a loss? Yes ESPN has a plenty of G5 and FCS content, but the most prominent one, The AAC, has been poached of its three most valuable schools. Those schools moved to The Big 12, where ESPN will soon be paying them quadruple the price. A loss, or no? The only remaining FBS conference in the MST and PST time zones is The MWC under contract to CBS and Fox. On an uncertain timeline we will see the Southeastern monopoly spoiled by The B1G. Even if it is only FSU/Miami, that is a wound to mighty ESPN. Their footprint is not growing unless they can steal some ACC content in NC and VA. ESPN has suffered losses and they deserve it.

They are going to do what is best for them and I want to see the argument that makes that case. They are a business and they are not doing that great, or at least they have been cutting things. This to me is what companies do right before they get bought to get the buyer to pay more for the stock. I think someone like Amazon is going to buy a significant share, if someone like that gets in the game, what are they looking for out of this asset? To me if it is Amazon, it is to expand TV sales during broadcast, millions could buy with a QR Code during a broadcast. I am saying this is so much bigger than Conference Business, this is much bigger than that, and ESPN has an end game that is best for them, That's how you figure out where the puck is going, and not where it is at right now. That is what I want to know, not where people want to go, which is natural to forecast.

for FSU in their let's sling whatever we can against the wall and see if we can get something to stick strategy and not unexpected with Cooper's latest decision to kick it to mediation.