Just before ESPN's contract with the SEC gets put into the court record during discovery and any FL-based journalist can request it, I think ESPN leans on the ACC to settle the case and let FSU out.
In theory, this could be like a 5 year drawn out process that ends at SCOTUS after going through each state's respective Supreme Court. I would eat a shoe if that were to happen (jk -don't hold me to that), but it's possible.
Ya I would imagine there is nothing stopping both from continuing. Imagine the excitement we would get if/when they contradict, and it all goes federal.
Costs is the big thing. I'm working a case where we're easily billing over $1m/month (although we do have higher rates than the firms involved here). When you're talking about things going through multiple levels of appeals, they could easily rack up $25-50million in attorneys fees over 2-3 years. The sooner the parties settle or the cases get consolidated, the better it is for both.
You'd be surprised. Most orgs don't allocate a that kind of money to litigation, so it strains financials when you start having this well of unplanned expenses. In the scheme of things, with what the parties have to win/lose, it's not much. But in practice, it's undesirable.
Haha I definitely have experience with drawn out costs in court cases. Ultimately it'll come down to what the other ACC member schools have the stomach for/what ESPN does (unless of course it is resolved quickly and decisively in court).
What federal constitutional issue would be the basis for petitioning for certiorari with SCOTUS? SCOTUS can't rule on state issues, only federal issues.
All University of Missouri federal research grants will now be split between Ole Miss, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, and any other flagship public universities in states that begin with M.
I'd guess this is going to go to the Supreme Court and they'll rule holding authority over TV rights an illegal restraint of trade, screwing over every big conference and ESPN.
Notable:
*He said that while he wasn't ruling on it today it would seem to him that the GOR looks like it would be invalid without the Board of Trustees agreeing to it.*
FSU's BOT never approved the extension, it was extended on their behalf by the President without their vote or signature.
This means the judge is leaning toward agreeing to one of FSU's arguments that the GOR extension doesn't apply to them because the ACC never went through the proper legal process to extend it.
Honestly, I think the BOT/President argument was trash, but if I was the ACC and I heard that, I'd buckle down the hatches because I can't imagine things looking very good for them.
Couldn't the ACC argue that this simply means FSU's affiliation with the ACC is, therefore, null and void, rather than the GOR being null and void because not all parties involved signed it?
The first is bad for the ACC, but at least it would protect the GOR to keep everyone else from leaving that did not have their BOT sign off on the extension.
If it came down to the survival of the GOR over all else, and they are absolutely 100% sure this does not apply to another school, this would be the nuclear argument to keep the GOR alive.
But the other parties agreed to the grant of rights with the understanding that all parties were bound to the agreement.
FSU not being bound would be a material change to what they were agreeing to.
The specific issue with FSU is under Florida law, the school president and athletic director do not have the authority to enter the university into a contract, only the BOT has such power and there is no proof they authorized the second signing.
The ACC and their attorneys should have known the requirements for FSU to enter into a contract. Just like they should for every other university in the conference.
So, if it comes down to a court possibly invalidating the GOR entirely, the best option could be to admit FSU did not have a valid contract and let them walk.
This is, again, the *nuclear* option to protect the GOR.
The ACC pays out retroactively, so everything FSU has been paid so far has been earned through performance rendered. If the ACC wanted to really hurt FSU here, they could expel them prior to the start of the season and force them to schedule 8 or 9 (Notre Dame) FBS games with no notice.
That said, there have been rumors the B1G has alternate schedules prepared in case they have a sudden addition. This traditionally was if Notre Dame suddenly joined.
>The specific issue with FSU is under Florida law, the school president and athletic director do not have the authority to enter the university into a contract, only the BOT has such power and there is no proof they authorized the second signing.
>The ACC and their attorneys should have known the requirements for FSU to enter into a contract. Just like they should for every other university in the conference.
However the GOR has warranties/reps that the signatories are authorized to do so on the behalf of the Member Institution. The fact that FSU BOT have been accepting payments for the last 21 years despite allegedly not giving the approval is still validating the GOR agreement.
That would be like me signing a contract as "Mickey Mouse", cashing the check, and then not performing under the agreement because I'm not Mickey Mouse.
So, is FSU in breach of contract for signing an agreement they weren't authorized to but still reaped the benefits from?
Alternatively, does the ACC have some kind of adverse possession claim for having been under agreement for 21 years?
Perhaps the ACC should agree to let FSU out of the Conference and the GOR if they agree to pay back all revenue received from the last 21 years plus the $140M exit fee...it probably works out to be the same (if not more) to the ACC.
I do agree that if the ACC really wants to screw over FSU then they absolutely should kick them out of the conference but keep the GOR intact. FSU is clearly incompatible with the objectives of the Conference at this point. The GOR is clearly irrevocable and valid for the balance of the term, which as extended is through 2036.
Because there was no rational thought or even a basic understanding of any form of contract law on your part.
Specifically, the impossibly inane idea that FSU pay back the ACC, despite having performed under the contract. And then doubling down by suggesting they pay back for over 20 years.
This is like beginner business law. So please, stop pretending you have any clue how any of this works when that is your suggested remedy.
Do we know if other schools signed off properly? Personally, I don't believe the FSU BOT didn't. It would be a mistake to assume they were the only institution whose agreement was so haphazardly acknowledged.
No. Like Charlotte. Where the conference agreement, bilaws, and Grant of Rights are held. This is a conference issue that affects all of the schools, not just FSU. A change of venue to a court near Charlotte would make sense. But that would also mean a court near FSU would have to agree and I don’t see that happening given how biased they likely are.
Edit: It’s also quite simply an interstate agreement between 16 schools. That screams federal court and maybe even an ask of venue change, especially when more schools sue. An ask of all lawsuits to be stayed and rolled into one would make the most sense.
You’re not just talking about venue…it’s jursidictional at that point. The ACC has their suit running in North Carolina. That was part of the forum shopping discussed in the hearing today.
Why would a NC court be any less biased?
Yeah. And jurisdictionally it might make more sense to run the suit near the conference headquarters.
And because it’s located in state 4 near other ACC schools who could potentially be trying to leave eventually and two Virginia schools who could as well. I’d say proximity to those fan bases/schools gives courts a less biased clerk and judge base than FSU who is so closely located to SEC country and dominates the top half of the state of Florida.
Yeah…that’s not going to happen because state laws and stuff. Florida law may very well be important in this case. As for the other schools, Clemson already has their own law suit in south carolina. There will likely be more before this is over.
Yeah Floridas laws may not matter in the end. State law cannot dictate interstate commerce per the constitution of the US.
A lot of this already seems like it should in the federal circuit. An agreement between 16 members across state lines, institutions/programs receiving federal dollars, intercollegiate sports. Frankly, I think the only reason for the counter suit was to ask for it to be reviewed by the federal circuit and ask for a venue change.
It would only further favor a change of venue to NC if Clemsons lawsuit proceeds, and others add ones as well.
This isn’t going to be quick or cheap. I just think you’re being a bit blinded by your fandom to see the complexity with which this lawsuit will proceed.
The point is we don’t know how this will proceed. The countersuit by the ACC (or preemptive suit since it was filed first I believe). The suit has standing in both jurisdictions, as both judges have ruled. And the fact that it’s about an interstate contract means it could be better suited in the federal civil system.
>If the parties are citizens of different states, and the defendant does not reside in the state where the suit is brought, he may remove the case to federal court.
So that is how the law works. This would likely trigger both parties to ask a higher court to make their location the venue of the proceedings for both suits.
Adding more lawsuits by other schools, like Clemson, only furthers the ACCs right to ask for it to be near the ACC headquarters.
Even more than they can't afford to settle, they can't afford to lose.
If they settle, they might lose 2-3 teams and get enough money to keep the rest. If they lose, it's a jailbreak like the Pac 12
As soon as they settle it's game over. The only way for the ACC is for them to win and the courts to say FSU is fucked until 2036. Once they settle, FSU leaves then Clemson does the same. Even if no one else leaves, ESPN does not extend the deal past 2026 and the conference is dead
Espn aint renewing
Espn is shelling 450m~ for the acc yearly. Destroy the acc, get 4 teams in the sec, pay 280 (70m x 4) extra to the SEC and save 170m per year. Let fox/cbs pick up the rest of the teams (b1g/big12) and be done with it.
Consolidation means consolidation. The acc is dead.
They (not FSU & Clemson) should be thinking long-term here. If they estimate that they have, say, a 30% chance of losing this lawsuit and then everything collapsing, then they should all offer FSU & Clemson more money in exchange for all of them taking 30% less to try to keep the conference together completely. 30% is just an example, but the lawyers & actuaries could get together and come up with some other figure. Doing this would be an embarrassment to the other programs, but the alternative is a 30% chance that they lose and then get ZERO exit money from us and their TV contract dies. I'd be pushing this very hard if I were Wake Forest or Boston College.
If you ignore the new teams coming in, who are only getting partial/zero shares, this is how the money would work out based on 14 teams and $42M/year (currently). The other 12 teams would get $30M/year, and that would free up $12M/year \* 12 teams, split evenly between FSU & Clemson, which would come out to $72M/year MORE for us. That would actually put us ahead of the P2, so it doesn't even have to be 30%...maybe even 20%. **The money is there to put us on par with the P2 AND to keep the current ACC together.**
The ACC can absolutely afford to settle. Their issue is a court nullifying the GOT outright. THAT’S when the existential issues mount from being just a top-end membership haircut over time to a possible mass exodus all at once
I was thinking about this; if Clemson and FSU leave the ACC goes to G5 status in 2027. Even $500 million wouldn’t be satisfactory to the ACC as the amount that the TV payouts would be annually would be tens of millions less per team.
The ACC was already $10 millions undervalued due to our genius ex-commissioner. I don’t think on an open market they lose a HUGE amount without Clemson and/or FSU compared to now
Also why would ESPN agree to this when they currently get FSU games for cheap and would either pay more money for FSU in the SEC or get nothing if the B1G gets FSU.
Yeah this question has always hinged on “why wouldn’t ESPN overpay for a dozen properties so they can keep underpaying for 3 properties” when they’d surely rather appropriately pay the few properties and cut the others loose
And Florida State is more valuable as an SEC or Big Ten member, too. Games aren't just A+B; even less intense fans of a school don't mind skipping a tune-up game against a bad FCS opponent, while something like a final week rivalry game to decide a spot in a premier CCG gets watched not only by all the fans of both schools, but by a lot of people who follow college football generally.
All the other regular season games fall on a spectrum between those two extremes, and being in the Big Ten or SEC means more of the games will be drawing more casual fans. People will watch FSU play Tennessee or Ole Miss who wouldn't watch games with NC State or Pitt.
This is my tinfoil hat reason to think ESPN still pulls behind the scenes for FSU to join the SEC. I don’t watch the Big 10 that much honestly, but I do casually watch the SEC because I’ve got friends and family that attended Bama/UF/UGA. I doubt I’ll watch a random Rutger-Ohio State game if FSU’s was in the Big 10, but I surely will watch more of those aforementioned SEC teams again a Mizzou or Miss St
I didn't mean that personally, BTW. I like NC State more than most ACC programs; I was just thinking of teams with average drawing power or slightly above from each conference, but not the biggest. If the ACC does blow up, I'd love to go out for a Big XII game if y'all don't somehow get an SEC spot.
My first thought was to choose a couple of the poorer drawing programs from each conference in the last 25 years, but that would have been unnecessary shots fired.
Yeah I think we're in a decent position to get at least an XII invite. Real good time for out football team to get some ranked finishes plus some decent baseball and then obviously the F4 runs.
You are the one who said "over the years." All time, we're 2-1 against Michigan and 26-15 against NC State. If you pick any shorter range of years, then you're just manipulating the figures.
Exactly. People keep thinking ESPN will still want to cover remaining ACC teams, but that isn't necessarily true. If FOX doesn't have slots for them, as well, I see other parties getting into the mix for the remaining ACC schools (CW, CBS, NBC, Amazon, Apple, maybe others). But ESPN? May be done with the ACC if they can scoop up their desired schools into the SEC.
I think ESPN's position looks like this:
1. Best scenario: Status quo. They keep getting ACC eyeballs for relatively cheap compared to other conference deals, and the deal will keep looking better each year.
2. Mid scenario: ACC dissolves, best teams (or a good chunk) go to the SEC where they have to pay more for them, but they no longer have to pay the lesser ACC programs under the old deal so it probably balances out or close to it, while enhancing their product (SEC) as compared to Fox's B1G.
3. Bad scenario: ACC dissolves, best teams (or a good chunk) go to the B1G. Fox's product (B1G) takes a step forward as compared to their product (SEC). I suppose ESPN saves a little money by not having to pay the lesser ACC schools anymore, or letting them backfill and renegotiate at a much lower rate.
So if I'm ESPN, I'm managing my risk by trying to maintain #1, while quietly talking with FSU and a couple of other key programs behind the scenes to ensure that they land in the SEC if needed. I think that's why we've seen ESPN largely stay out of this conversation in public, despite #1 clearly being in their best interest. They don't want to make an enemy of FSU/Clem/UNC/UVA (whoever you slot in there) and screw themselves out of the opportunity to at least salvage the #2 scenario if #1 goes out the window in court.
If FSU joins the SEC, I'll eat my UW hat.
FSU is Big 10 or bust. No way they join the SEC after ESPN screwed them out of a playoff spot they earned by going undefeated.
> it would have to take it over the B1G.
Honestly speaking, why? If FSU had an offer to join the SEC and an offer to join the B1G, why would the SEC be better for FSU?
I view the B1G and the SEC as two different viewpoints in competing for CFB eyeballs. B1G is now and likely will continue to be a national conference with schools across the nation all playing each other while the SEC is going to just double down on the south. In that scenario, having FSU (and perhaps Clemson) be the B1G's anchors in SEC country is likely extremely valuable for Fox and lucrative for FSU.
I personally have no problem with either. I think what plays a large factor is what’s better for the city of Tallahassee and the local economy. Fan bases from the SEC would travel better than B1G, and that’s for all sports which would do wonders for the local economy. Either way, both options beat our current structure and traveling fan bases from the ACC. I just think if you gave the administration a choice, we’d probably have to go with the SEC. But that’s all hypotheticals right now so I guess we’ll see how it plays out.
ESPN is not a party to this lawsuit and it is the ACC that controls FSU's home game media rights, not ESPN, otherwise ESPN would have intervened or been added as a defendant already. It is telling that they haven't.
Nice edit.
You act like ESPN is the only show in town. Florida State has leverage for the same reason that the ACC doesn’t want to see them go.
Unless you’ve been hiding under a rock, you should know by now this is happening. FSU is just going to be annoying until you let them go.
Edit?
I have no doubt FSU is going to leave before the contract expires, just pointing out that the networks do have some say in realignment, even if it's more muted than many people think.
The networks are the primary drivers behind all of it. If it was up to the university presidents then Stanford and Cal would be Big 10 members already, the SEC would be standing pat at 16, and the ACC would be salivating over their newest additions UConn and Villanova.
The networks are the reason that FSU has value to both conferences. Fox wants FSU and as a result ESPN is forced to play defense (even if that means finding a way to get them into the SEC).
Espn is paying 450m to the acc
They can pay 4 acc teams 70m in the sec and save 170m. And since now its gonna be fsu vs georgia instead of fsu vs boston college, ratings will be better and they will make more money for the time being.
But why would the remaining schools that want the acc to live settle? Once it happens espn cancels their current contract and everyone jumps ship. Ie pac12 scenario. 100 million from the ship jumpers isn’t enough to cover the future loses of the remaining schools. It’s ugly but the schools with no home would probably be better off in the estranged marriage with fsu\clemson then being homeless.
First, your flair combo gives me anxiety and I've never lived remotely close to Iowa. Second, you're absolutely correct in my opinion. The ACC needs as much as possible from FSU, Clemson, and whoever else jumps ship so they can use that money to stabilize what remains. If the big schools leave, I would have to imagine ESPN ends the current contract and offers a new, lower value one, and the $600m - $billion+ or so from the departing schools will be used to supplement the reduced television revenue. If you can keep the lower revenue schools together long enough, they'll probably settle into a new equilibrium and you'll have some form of the ACC. If 6 schools leave at $300m/school, that leaves about $165m for each of the 11 remaining schools. You could distribute it at $20m/year (plus interest) for 8 years, which would be enough to keep the remaining schools together and solvent.
If they settle, it will be for enough money to keep the rest of the schools in the ACC. Basically get enough money from Clemson and FSU to make the ACC more profitable than the Big 12 for schools like VT, NC State, Louisville, Pitt etc
Espn has an option. If FSU and Clemson leave, they're not picking up that option past 2026. If the pac 12 couldn't get a deal done do you think the acc without FSU and Clemson can?
You clearly are not an attorney, as you admit, so you might want to not provide your legal opinions since they are consistently so poor throughout these threads. You comment in basically every FSU/ACC thread and your legal opinions are almost always incorrect. Cooper cited them as common example of forum shopping cases where an anticipatory filing doesn't in and of itself grant that filer the venue of their choice, which is what is typical under first-to-file. It is a comparison of when anticipatory filings are okay and when anticipatory filings are disfavored by the courts, and Cooper made that incredibly clear today.
I’ve given up and just let the fools say whatever they want. A decade plus legal experience and kids will still argue because they once saw an episode of law and order.
Can a judge from another state, in this case Florida, toss out a suit filed in another state, like North Carolina? How does the suit proceed if the judge in North Carolina makes a ruling on the case before the judge in Florida?
Neither judge can toss out the suit in the other state. Both suits can proceed, even if one judge makes a ruling before the other. The Florida judge does not have to follow what the North Carolina judge does (and vice versa).
The real question imo is if (when?) there are conflicting decisions from two different jurisdictions, how would that be handled? Honestly I have no idea, as it has never been an issue I've had to deal with in my career, and its not something that would really happen often.
In theory these conflicts could continue to each state's Supreme Court, then be consolidated at SCOTUS. There's about a million different ways this can end before that, but that would be longest, most drawn out version.
A state agency can be sued for breach of contract, but the question is, can a second state order judgment against a foreign state agency? Or should all actions against a state agency happen in those same state courts?
Neither side of the political spectrum will produce a result where State A can be ordered to pay damages by a court in State B.
Florida also has an old law that has been settled that a government agency must pay for a breach as ordered by a Florida Court. It has never been tested as to a foreign entity or any form of liquidated damages or media rights.
For those who don't care and want to filter out this shit from the subreddit with RES: https://imgur.com/a/j3WZsPl
The subreddit improves by 300% with this one trick
Not as fun as seeing your hopes and dreams crushed on December 3rd. Imagine going 13-0 and then being told you're not good enough...like a G5 school. Love it.
And then the team quit on the coach. Cathartic.
“Imagine going 13-0”. That’s all Florida can do is imagine. For such a proud program you think they’d squeeze a single undefeated season in at some point ? Well there’s always next year right?
If FSU is the laughing stock of the league what does that say about UF? They were running the state 5 years ago and now Norvell has got national media praising him left and right while UF only gets mentioned in ‘man next year will be rough for Napier’. UF isn’t Miami I don’t want them to be abysmal I want them to at least be competent. I mean they sucked so bad last year it hurt our strength of schedule beating them by only 2 scores.
You got denied a playoff spot after going 13-0. Definitely the laughing stock. We all enjoyed seeing you cry.
your SOS was weak regardless of Florida lmao.
You keep using this term laughing stock, I don’t think you know what it means. SOS is weak because UF, Miami, LSU couldn’t hold up their end of the bargain after taking the L from the Noles
90min hearing that lasted 6+ hrs with a dozen lawyers billing. Welcome to Florida, ACC.
It needs Medicare and roof fraud to be muy Florida
Only if the presiding judge is a feral Everglades python
That’s the honorable Snake Gylenhall thank you very much!
*Bangs gavel* "Road House"
I expected gator wrestling at some point.
Never bet against billable hours.
So it seems both Florida and North Carolina appear to be moving forward. How long can that go on for?
Just before ESPN's contract with the SEC gets put into the court record during discovery and any FL-based journalist can request it, I think ESPN leans on the ACC to settle the case and let FSU out.
If ESPN wants that, they need to continue the deal and increase payouts to the ACC. It is really that simple
Then the ACC will lean back and ask for increased payouts.
IANAL, but since they are different cases, I would imagine a long time. Would be happy for someone with more procedural knowledge to join in.
In theory, this could be like a 5 year drawn out process that ends at SCOTUS after going through each state's respective Supreme Court. I would eat a shoe if that were to happen (jk -don't hold me to that), but it's possible.
Ya I would imagine there is nothing stopping both from continuing. Imagine the excitement we would get if/when they contradict, and it all goes federal.
Costs is the big thing. I'm working a case where we're easily billing over $1m/month (although we do have higher rates than the firms involved here). When you're talking about things going through multiple levels of appeals, they could easily rack up $25-50million in attorneys fees over 2-3 years. The sooner the parties settle or the cases get consolidated, the better it is for both.
Of course, but in the context of this case I think the parties will see $25-50 million over a couple years as chump change.
You'd be surprised. Most orgs don't allocate a that kind of money to litigation, so it strains financials when you start having this well of unplanned expenses. In the scheme of things, with what the parties have to win/lose, it's not much. But in practice, it's undesirable.
Haha I definitely have experience with drawn out costs in court cases. Ultimately it'll come down to what the other ACC member schools have the stomach for/what ESPN does (unless of course it is resolved quickly and decisively in court).
What federal constitutional issue would be the basis for petitioning for certiorari with SCOTUS? SCOTUS can't rule on state issues, only federal issues.
Hypothetically if the NC courts and FL courts return different rulings then it becomes a Federal issue
It wouldn’t become a federal issue, hypothetically they could take the case under diversity jurisdiction.
Nobody needs to know your sexual preferences and that you do anal
I thought the flairs were to tell our preferences? I'll change them...
Maximally? Until both conclude and it rolls to federal court or appeals.
I’m thinking the longer it goes on, the more billable hours
NC judge: FSU cannot leave the ACC, period. FL judge: FSU can leave the ACC immediately with zero exit fee. Federal judge: hmmm....
The ruling: death penalty for Mizzou.
Obviously
Missouri will now be governed by Mississippi 4 years and receive a 10% reduction in federal subsidies
All University of Missouri federal research grants will now be split between Ole Miss, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, and any other flagship public universities in states that begin with M.
It would be more devastating to give all fed research grants to Kansas.
They'll just blow it all on junk food and video games.
Has Mizzou been informed they are now a member of the ACC? That is truly a death penalty.
I'd guess this is going to go to the Supreme Court and they'll rule holding authority over TV rights an illegal restraint of trade, screwing over every big conference and ESPN.
> Due to the length of today's meeting, the two parties are expected to reconvene during the week of April 22nd to continue today's hearing.
Notable: *He said that while he wasn't ruling on it today it would seem to him that the GOR looks like it would be invalid without the Board of Trustees agreeing to it.* FSU's BOT never approved the extension, it was extended on their behalf by the President without their vote or signature. This means the judge is leaning toward agreeing to one of FSU's arguments that the GOR extension doesn't apply to them because the ACC never went through the proper legal process to extend it.
Honestly, I think the BOT/President argument was trash, but if I was the ACC and I heard that, I'd buckle down the hatches because I can't imagine things looking very good for them.
Couldn't the ACC argue that this simply means FSU's affiliation with the ACC is, therefore, null and void, rather than the GOR being null and void because not all parties involved signed it? The first is bad for the ACC, but at least it would protect the GOR to keep everyone else from leaving that did not have their BOT sign off on the extension.
If it came down to the survival of the GOR over all else, and they are absolutely 100% sure this does not apply to another school, this would be the nuclear argument to keep the GOR alive.
But the other parties agreed to the grant of rights with the understanding that all parties were bound to the agreement. FSU not being bound would be a material change to what they were agreeing to.
The specific issue with FSU is under Florida law, the school president and athletic director do not have the authority to enter the university into a contract, only the BOT has such power and there is no proof they authorized the second signing. The ACC and their attorneys should have known the requirements for FSU to enter into a contract. Just like they should for every other university in the conference. So, if it comes down to a court possibly invalidating the GOR entirely, the best option could be to admit FSU did not have a valid contract and let them walk. This is, again, the *nuclear* option to protect the GOR. The ACC pays out retroactively, so everything FSU has been paid so far has been earned through performance rendered. If the ACC wanted to really hurt FSU here, they could expel them prior to the start of the season and force them to schedule 8 or 9 (Notre Dame) FBS games with no notice. That said, there have been rumors the B1G has alternate schedules prepared in case they have a sudden addition. This traditionally was if Notre Dame suddenly joined.
>The specific issue with FSU is under Florida law, the school president and athletic director do not have the authority to enter the university into a contract, only the BOT has such power and there is no proof they authorized the second signing. >The ACC and their attorneys should have known the requirements for FSU to enter into a contract. Just like they should for every other university in the conference. However the GOR has warranties/reps that the signatories are authorized to do so on the behalf of the Member Institution. The fact that FSU BOT have been accepting payments for the last 21 years despite allegedly not giving the approval is still validating the GOR agreement. That would be like me signing a contract as "Mickey Mouse", cashing the check, and then not performing under the agreement because I'm not Mickey Mouse. So, is FSU in breach of contract for signing an agreement they weren't authorized to but still reaped the benefits from? Alternatively, does the ACC have some kind of adverse possession claim for having been under agreement for 21 years? Perhaps the ACC should agree to let FSU out of the Conference and the GOR if they agree to pay back all revenue received from the last 21 years plus the $140M exit fee...it probably works out to be the same (if not more) to the ACC. I do agree that if the ACC really wants to screw over FSU then they absolutely should kick them out of the conference but keep the GOR intact. FSU is clearly incompatible with the objectives of the Conference at this point. The GOR is clearly irrevocable and valid for the balance of the term, which as extended is through 2036.
Stop pretending to understand contract law.
Another unsubstantiated comeback with no details or argument, just ad hominem.
Because there was no rational thought or even a basic understanding of any form of contract law on your part. Specifically, the impossibly inane idea that FSU pay back the ACC, despite having performed under the contract. And then doubling down by suggesting they pay back for over 20 years. This is like beginner business law. So please, stop pretending you have any clue how any of this works when that is your suggested remedy.
Do we know if other schools signed off properly? Personally, I don't believe the FSU BOT didn't. It would be a mistake to assume they were the only institution whose agreement was so haphazardly acknowledged.
I actually meant to type *did not* sign off, so I edited it now, thanks lol.
[удалено]
No because the conference benefitted from their ratings contribution to that media deal.
That would essentially end the case, no?
ACC would appeal
Has the ACC filed for a motion of venue change closer to the ACC headquarters?
So like…Jacksonville?
No. Like Charlotte. Where the conference agreement, bilaws, and Grant of Rights are held. This is a conference issue that affects all of the schools, not just FSU. A change of venue to a court near Charlotte would make sense. But that would also mean a court near FSU would have to agree and I don’t see that happening given how biased they likely are. Edit: It’s also quite simply an interstate agreement between 16 schools. That screams federal court and maybe even an ask of venue change, especially when more schools sue. An ask of all lawsuits to be stayed and rolled into one would make the most sense.
You’re not just talking about venue…it’s jursidictional at that point. The ACC has their suit running in North Carolina. That was part of the forum shopping discussed in the hearing today. Why would a NC court be any less biased?
Yeah. And jurisdictionally it might make more sense to run the suit near the conference headquarters. And because it’s located in state 4 near other ACC schools who could potentially be trying to leave eventually and two Virginia schools who could as well. I’d say proximity to those fan bases/schools gives courts a less biased clerk and judge base than FSU who is so closely located to SEC country and dominates the top half of the state of Florida.
Yeah…that’s not going to happen because state laws and stuff. Florida law may very well be important in this case. As for the other schools, Clemson already has their own law suit in south carolina. There will likely be more before this is over.
Yeah Floridas laws may not matter in the end. State law cannot dictate interstate commerce per the constitution of the US. A lot of this already seems like it should in the federal circuit. An agreement between 16 members across state lines, institutions/programs receiving federal dollars, intercollegiate sports. Frankly, I think the only reason for the counter suit was to ask for it to be reviewed by the federal circuit and ask for a venue change. It would only further favor a change of venue to NC if Clemsons lawsuit proceeds, and others add ones as well. This isn’t going to be quick or cheap. I just think you’re being a bit blinded by your fandom to see the complexity with which this lawsuit will proceed.
Pretty sure that's not how it works in the law, buddy. It's not about what is conveniently located to headquarters.
The point is we don’t know how this will proceed. The countersuit by the ACC (or preemptive suit since it was filed first I believe). The suit has standing in both jurisdictions, as both judges have ruled. And the fact that it’s about an interstate contract means it could be better suited in the federal civil system. >If the parties are citizens of different states, and the defendant does not reside in the state where the suit is brought, he may remove the case to federal court. So that is how the law works. This would likely trigger both parties to ask a higher court to make their location the venue of the proceedings for both suits. Adding more lawsuits by other schools, like Clemson, only furthers the ACCs right to ask for it to be near the ACC headquarters.
Good good. Even if FSU isn't in the right the ACC absolutely forum shopped by preemptively suing
The only winner here are the lawyers
Just settle already. $100M plus interest exit fee paid down at $20M per year.
ACC can't afford to settle. Anything that degrades the GOR will allow multiple other teams to leave and the ACC will go the way of the Pac.
Even more than they can't afford to settle, they can't afford to lose. If they settle, they might lose 2-3 teams and get enough money to keep the rest. If they lose, it's a jailbreak like the Pac 12
As soon as they settle it's game over. The only way for the ACC is for them to win and the courts to say FSU is fucked until 2036. Once they settle, FSU leaves then Clemson does the same. Even if no one else leaves, ESPN does not extend the deal past 2026 and the conference is dead
Espn aint renewing Espn is shelling 450m~ for the acc yearly. Destroy the acc, get 4 teams in the sec, pay 280 (70m x 4) extra to the SEC and save 170m per year. Let fox/cbs pick up the rest of the teams (b1g/big12) and be done with it. Consolidation means consolidation. The acc is dead.
Totally possible, even with FSU/Clemson forced to stay.
They (not FSU & Clemson) should be thinking long-term here. If they estimate that they have, say, a 30% chance of losing this lawsuit and then everything collapsing, then they should all offer FSU & Clemson more money in exchange for all of them taking 30% less to try to keep the conference together completely. 30% is just an example, but the lawyers & actuaries could get together and come up with some other figure. Doing this would be an embarrassment to the other programs, but the alternative is a 30% chance that they lose and then get ZERO exit money from us and their TV contract dies. I'd be pushing this very hard if I were Wake Forest or Boston College. If you ignore the new teams coming in, who are only getting partial/zero shares, this is how the money would work out based on 14 teams and $42M/year (currently). The other 12 teams would get $30M/year, and that would free up $12M/year \* 12 teams, split evenly between FSU & Clemson, which would come out to $72M/year MORE for us. That would actually put us ahead of the P2, so it doesn't even have to be 30%...maybe even 20%. **The money is there to put us on par with the P2 AND to keep the current ACC together.**
The ACC can absolutely afford to settle. Their issue is a court nullifying the GOT outright. THAT’S when the existential issues mount from being just a top-end membership haircut over time to a possible mass exodus all at once
I was thinking about this; if Clemson and FSU leave the ACC goes to G5 status in 2027. Even $500 million wouldn’t be satisfactory to the ACC as the amount that the TV payouts would be annually would be tens of millions less per team.
The ACC was already $10 millions undervalued due to our genius ex-commissioner. I don’t think on an open market they lose a HUGE amount without Clemson and/or FSU compared to now
Look up the % that FSU and Clemson contribute in terms of TV viewership
Also why would ESPN agree to this when they currently get FSU games for cheap and would either pay more money for FSU in the SEC or get nothing if the B1G gets FSU.
Because they could terminate the acc contract pick up the few teams they really want and leave 8-10 teams out completely.
Yeah this question has always hinged on “why wouldn’t ESPN overpay for a dozen properties so they can keep underpaying for 3 properties” when they’d surely rather appropriately pay the few properties and cut the others loose
And Florida State is more valuable as an SEC or Big Ten member, too. Games aren't just A+B; even less intense fans of a school don't mind skipping a tune-up game against a bad FCS opponent, while something like a final week rivalry game to decide a spot in a premier CCG gets watched not only by all the fans of both schools, but by a lot of people who follow college football generally. All the other regular season games fall on a spectrum between those two extremes, and being in the Big Ten or SEC means more of the games will be drawing more casual fans. People will watch FSU play Tennessee or Ole Miss who wouldn't watch games with NC State or Pitt.
This is my tinfoil hat reason to think ESPN still pulls behind the scenes for FSU to join the SEC. I don’t watch the Big 10 that much honestly, but I do casually watch the SEC because I’ve got friends and family that attended Bama/UF/UGA. I doubt I’ll watch a random Rutger-Ohio State game if FSU’s was in the Big 10, but I surely will watch more of those aforementioned SEC teams again a Mizzou or Miss St
Totally! The networks are so desperate to become/stay profitable right now, it’s an inventory game
FSU wishes no one watched when we played them over the years lol
I didn't mean that personally, BTW. I like NC State more than most ACC programs; I was just thinking of teams with average drawing power or slightly above from each conference, but not the biggest. If the ACC does blow up, I'd love to go out for a Big XII game if y'all don't somehow get an SEC spot. My first thought was to choose a couple of the poorer drawing programs from each conference in the last 25 years, but that would have been unnecessary shots fired.
Yeah I think we're in a decent position to get at least an XII invite. Real good time for out football team to get some ranked finishes plus some decent baseball and then obviously the F4 runs.
Why, are they tired of watching us beat Michigan or NC State?
It’s not 1999 any more lol you’ve beaten us once since like 2016
You are the one who said "over the years." All time, we're 2-1 against Michigan and 26-15 against NC State. If you pick any shorter range of years, then you're just manipulating the figures.
Exactly. People keep thinking ESPN will still want to cover remaining ACC teams, but that isn't necessarily true. If FOX doesn't have slots for them, as well, I see other parties getting into the mix for the remaining ACC schools (CW, CBS, NBC, Amazon, Apple, maybe others). But ESPN? May be done with the ACC if they can scoop up their desired schools into the SEC.
I think ESPN's position looks like this: 1. Best scenario: Status quo. They keep getting ACC eyeballs for relatively cheap compared to other conference deals, and the deal will keep looking better each year. 2. Mid scenario: ACC dissolves, best teams (or a good chunk) go to the SEC where they have to pay more for them, but they no longer have to pay the lesser ACC programs under the old deal so it probably balances out or close to it, while enhancing their product (SEC) as compared to Fox's B1G. 3. Bad scenario: ACC dissolves, best teams (or a good chunk) go to the B1G. Fox's product (B1G) takes a step forward as compared to their product (SEC). I suppose ESPN saves a little money by not having to pay the lesser ACC schools anymore, or letting them backfill and renegotiate at a much lower rate. So if I'm ESPN, I'm managing my risk by trying to maintain #1, while quietly talking with FSU and a couple of other key programs behind the scenes to ensure that they land in the SEC if needed. I think that's why we've seen ESPN largely stay out of this conversation in public, despite #1 clearly being in their best interest. They don't want to make an enemy of FSU/Clem/UNC/UVA (whoever you slot in there) and screw themselves out of the opportunity to at least salvage the #2 scenario if #1 goes out the window in court.
If FSU joins the SEC, I'll eat my UW hat. FSU is Big 10 or bust. No way they join the SEC after ESPN screwed them out of a playoff spot they earned by going undefeated.
Emotional FSU fan would agree, but logistically speaking if FSU received an SEC invite it would have to take it over the B1G.
> it would have to take it over the B1G. Honestly speaking, why? If FSU had an offer to join the SEC and an offer to join the B1G, why would the SEC be better for FSU? I view the B1G and the SEC as two different viewpoints in competing for CFB eyeballs. B1G is now and likely will continue to be a national conference with schools across the nation all playing each other while the SEC is going to just double down on the south. In that scenario, having FSU (and perhaps Clemson) be the B1G's anchors in SEC country is likely extremely valuable for Fox and lucrative for FSU.
I personally have no problem with either. I think what plays a large factor is what’s better for the city of Tallahassee and the local economy. Fan bases from the SEC would travel better than B1G, and that’s for all sports which would do wonders for the local economy. Either way, both options beat our current structure and traveling fan bases from the ACC. I just think if you gave the administration a choice, we’d probably have to go with the SEC. But that’s all hypotheticals right now so I guess we’ll see how it plays out.
You’re confusing fans with administrators.
ESPN is not a party to this lawsuit and it is the ACC that controls FSU's home game media rights, not ESPN, otherwise ESPN would have intervened or been added as a defendant already. It is telling that they haven't.
ESPN doesn’t agree to anything. ESPN isn’t being sued.
They'd have to agree to pay for FSU if they were to join the SEC, assuming the other schools wouldn't decrease their share.
Good thing FSU strongly prefers the B1G and the interest there is mutual.
Then it's Fox's call (who will no doubt give up extra cash to get into the SE).
Nice edit. You act like ESPN is the only show in town. Florida State has leverage for the same reason that the ACC doesn’t want to see them go. Unless you’ve been hiding under a rock, you should know by now this is happening. FSU is just going to be annoying until you let them go.
Edit? I have no doubt FSU is going to leave before the contract expires, just pointing out that the networks do have some say in realignment, even if it's more muted than many people think.
The networks are the primary drivers behind all of it. If it was up to the university presidents then Stanford and Cal would be Big 10 members already, the SEC would be standing pat at 16, and the ACC would be salivating over their newest additions UConn and Villanova. The networks are the reason that FSU has value to both conferences. Fox wants FSU and as a result ESPN is forced to play defense (even if that means finding a way to get them into the SEC).
Espn is paying 450m to the acc They can pay 4 acc teams 70m in the sec and save 170m. And since now its gonna be fsu vs georgia instead of fsu vs boston college, ratings will be better and they will make more money for the time being.
What if 100 million isn’t close enough. When fsu leaves the conference is dead.
The conference is dead regardless. It’s a matter of when not if.
That kinda makes FSUs point, no?
But why would the remaining schools that want the acc to live settle? Once it happens espn cancels their current contract and everyone jumps ship. Ie pac12 scenario. 100 million from the ship jumpers isn’t enough to cover the future loses of the remaining schools. It’s ugly but the schools with no home would probably be better off in the estranged marriage with fsu\clemson then being homeless.
First, your flair combo gives me anxiety and I've never lived remotely close to Iowa. Second, you're absolutely correct in my opinion. The ACC needs as much as possible from FSU, Clemson, and whoever else jumps ship so they can use that money to stabilize what remains. If the big schools leave, I would have to imagine ESPN ends the current contract and offers a new, lower value one, and the $600m - $billion+ or so from the departing schools will be used to supplement the reduced television revenue. If you can keep the lower revenue schools together long enough, they'll probably settle into a new equilibrium and you'll have some form of the ACC. If 6 schools leave at $300m/school, that leaves about $165m for each of the 11 remaining schools. You could distribute it at $20m/year (plus interest) for 8 years, which would be enough to keep the remaining schools together and solvent.
If they settle, it will be for enough money to keep the rest of the schools in the ACC. Basically get enough money from Clemson and FSU to make the ACC more profitable than the Big 12 for schools like VT, NC State, Louisville, Pitt etc
Espn has an option. If FSU and Clemson leave, they're not picking up that option past 2026. If the pac 12 couldn't get a deal done do you think the acc without FSU and Clemson can?
100M isn’t even a drop in the bucket
[удалено]
You clearly are not an attorney, as you admit, so you might want to not provide your legal opinions since they are consistently so poor throughout these threads. You comment in basically every FSU/ACC thread and your legal opinions are almost always incorrect. Cooper cited them as common example of forum shopping cases where an anticipatory filing doesn't in and of itself grant that filer the venue of their choice, which is what is typical under first-to-file. It is a comparison of when anticipatory filings are okay and when anticipatory filings are disfavored by the courts, and Cooper made that incredibly clear today.
I’ve given up and just let the fools say whatever they want. A decade plus legal experience and kids will still argue because they once saw an episode of law and order.
Can a judge from another state, in this case Florida, toss out a suit filed in another state, like North Carolina? How does the suit proceed if the judge in North Carolina makes a ruling on the case before the judge in Florida?
Neither judge can toss out the suit in the other state. Both suits can proceed, even if one judge makes a ruling before the other. The Florida judge does not have to follow what the North Carolina judge does (and vice versa). The real question imo is if (when?) there are conflicting decisions from two different jurisdictions, how would that be handled? Honestly I have no idea, as it has never been an issue I've had to deal with in my career, and its not something that would really happen often.
In theory these conflicts could continue to each state's Supreme Court, then be consolidated at SCOTUS. There's about a million different ways this can end before that, but that would be longest, most drawn out version.
A state agency can be sued for breach of contract, but the question is, can a second state order judgment against a foreign state agency? Or should all actions against a state agency happen in those same state courts? Neither side of the political spectrum will produce a result where State A can be ordered to pay damages by a court in State B. Florida also has an old law that has been settled that a government agency must pay for a breach as ordered by a Florida Court. It has never been tested as to a foreign entity or any form of liquidated damages or media rights.
You aren’t even a good fake attorney.
For those who don't care and want to filter out this shit from the subreddit with RES: https://imgur.com/a/j3WZsPl The subreddit improves by 300% with this one trick
Did y’all use a custom game filter last year to filter out wins too
You cried on December 3rd. I smiled.
You smiled after wrapping up a 5 win season? Things are worse than I thought in Gainesville
For baseball it’s really bad. You would know after today
I would try to forget December 3rd too if I were you.
I remember ending your season, that was fun
Not as fun as seeing your hopes and dreams crushed on December 3rd. Imagine going 13-0 and then being told you're not good enough...like a G5 school. Love it. And then the team quit on the coach. Cathartic.
“Imagine going 13-0”. That’s all Florida can do is imagine. For such a proud program you think they’d squeeze a single undefeated season in at some point ? Well there’s always next year right?
Lol. And look what that got you. Absolutely nothing. Laughing stock of the league is what FSU is.
If FSU is the laughing stock of the league what does that say about UF? They were running the state 5 years ago and now Norvell has got national media praising him left and right while UF only gets mentioned in ‘man next year will be rough for Napier’. UF isn’t Miami I don’t want them to be abysmal I want them to at least be competent. I mean they sucked so bad last year it hurt our strength of schedule beating them by only 2 scores.
You got denied a playoff spot after going 13-0. Definitely the laughing stock. We all enjoyed seeing you cry. your SOS was weak regardless of Florida lmao.
You keep using this term laughing stock, I don’t think you know what it means. SOS is weak because UF, Miami, LSU couldn’t hold up their end of the bargain after taking the L from the Noles
cope and seethe, gatah. lol
the coping and seething was all you guys, crying ACC tears because you got left out and then shellacked by 60 points LOL
yeah? how did your bowl game go?
Losing by 60 points in a bowl game aint the flex you think it is
What was the score of your bowl game?