Clemson Joins FSU in Suing the ACC To Get Out of Media Rights

[WhosYourDawggy]

I don’t think it will be bad teams that get left out but the least valuable brands. Vandy being one and probably one or both of the Mississippi schools in the SEC replaced by a FSU, Clemson the Rutgers, IU ect. from the BIG replaced by Notre Dame, North Carolina ect.
As far as bad records, yes it will be tougher but, it’s already going to be tougher with less and less undefeated and 1 or even 2 loss teams Imo these schedules are gonna be pretty brutal compared to the past.
It’s not the NFL but it is trending towards that model though many of us don’t like it, myself included. No draft but it WOULD have its version of a developmental league In the “leftover”conferences, G5 ect. Similar to how the NFL has used CFB for decades with its best players being taken by the highest bidding “have” programs that need the help similar to what we are seeing already. The NFL has a draft but that’s not necessarily the key to getting your program/franchise better. The NFL never has undefeated teams anymore and even with a draft certain franchises can’t seem to get their acts together and get to an elite level but the sport makes money hand over fist.
I feel certain that the same would happen in CFB, well ran/managed programs would thrive, even if only for a year or two with others even with all the parts in place somehow (happens already) can’t get out of their own way.

The idea that Ole Miss and Vandy, founding members of the SEC would be kicked out of the SEC is absurd. There is no one saying this right now. No one is even thinking about it. I'll concede that if they ever just go to new leagues - Nike and Amazon - that teams like Vandy would be left out. But that scenario is even more absurd. It's like you aren't even thinking about what makes CFB special and valuable. Sure, we know it's about money, but your scenario and those who keep bringing this up aren't even giving a single thought that no one would like what you suggest. Sure, there is a ton of change, but none of it has changed to the foundation of what CFB is - student athletes - yes, a huge percentage of the players are still student-athletes and want to go to the school of their choice, fans that are fans because they attended the school, tradition (yes, it still exists, even with teams moving), bands, cheerleaders, etc. If that goes away, so do most of the fans, including me.

No, the mid schools will not want to become the bottom schools. That's obvious. So they won't vote for the mess you are laying out. It's why the SEC won't add FSU and Clemson ... more schools don't want to make it harder to get into the CFP, go to a bowl game, or possibly win the league. Hell, why would UTjr want to bring in FSU and Clemson, two losses for you? You haven't sniffed a NC or an SEC championship in almost 30 years (not being an asshole, just pointing out that while you are talking about Vandy and the Mississippi schools, the top teams think the same thing about your team these days). Why would you want to bring in two schools better than yours making that harder? You wouldn't and your school won't vote for that. We saw this first hand last year when the mid and lower schools in the SEC said hell no to going to a 9th SEC game.

You are totally wrong about the NFL. It's designed to drive parity. The draft, scheduling, salary cap, revenue sharing, are all designed to drive parity so that the worst teams can have a chance to get decent and maybe win. Sure, the better teams will win more, but look at New England these days, Dallas, etc. That level of parity doesn't and can't exist in CFB. You can't force players to go to a school they don't want to go to, the scheduling is all over the place and with 134 teams v. 32 you can't schedule parity, and certain teams will always have geographical, financial, and other advantages that can't be smoothed out. So, no, IMO CFB isn't ever going to be like the NFL due to built-in inherent aspects of it that can't or won't be changed.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

I agree with you mostly, but FSU is leaving one way or the other. Given that, ESPN would be stupid to opt in on the next eight years, especially with it looking like the BiG and SEC may break away from the NCAA. When that happens, both conferences will expand again and ESPN will be driving the money conservation, along with Fox.

There are two ways that FSU leaves early - they break the GOR which is highly unlikely, or they try to buy their way out. If they buy their way out, ESPN gets all the money anyway. Please don't get wrapped up in listening to FSU Twitter and similar sources. 99% of the nonsense they spew has no bearing on the case. The ACC is way ahead on this and is very likely to win, with no reason to settle.

I don't know what ESPN will do, but they have a sweetheart deal with the ACC, they have to fill all their slots, and the P2 aren't breaking away from the NCAA before they have to make their decision.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

Ok, so I've missed something evidently.

You guys are saying that if FSU and Clemson leave the ACC that ESPN is still on the hook for all the ACC money?

I just can't believe they don't have an out if teams leave.

They have outs. But if FSU and Clemson leave, their money stays. That what the GOR is about. The get all the media money that FSU and Clemson generate no matter what league they are in. They would use that money to keep paying the ACC. If the GOR is broken, then I am sure they can get out of the deal.

 

[batchaps4me]

There are two ways that FSU leaves early - they break the GOR which is highly unlikely, or they try to buy their way out. If they buy their way out, ESPN gets all the money anyway. Please don't get wrapped up in listening to FSU Twitter and similar sources. 99% of the nonsense they spew has no bearing on the case. The ACC is way ahead on this and is very likely to win, with no reason to settle.

I don't know what ESPN will do, but they have a sweetheart deal with the ACC, they have to fill all their slots, and the P2 aren't breaking away from the NCAA before they have to make their decision.

Three ways, you left out that if ESPN exercises their option to end the contract, the GOR goes away and is therefore not an issue for leaving. I don't do twitter and stated already that most of what I am saying is from Pate at 24/7.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

Three ways, you left out that if ESPN exercises their option to end the contract, the GOR goes away and is therefore not an issue for leaving. I don't do twitter and stated already that most of what I am saying is from Pate at 24/7.

That's not true. The GOR is from the schools to the ACC, not the schools to ESPN. The ACC "owns" the GOR, not ESPN. ESPN would require a GOR to make sure what is happening doesn't happen. But, if ESPN terminates their agreement, the ACC still owns the media rights of Clemson and FSU. They would negotiate with CBS, Fox, Apple, or other media partners still owning Clemson and FSU rights. That would be true even if FSU and Clemson were in the B1G or SEC. Any media money those schools got from their new conference would be paid to the ACC per the GOR. But, the SEC and B1G wouldn't take either team until they are clear of the GOR.

 

[Wild Turkey]

Three ways, you left out that if ESPN exercises their option to end the contract, the GOR goes away and is therefore not an issue for leaving. I don't do twitter and stated already that most of what I am saying is from Pate at 24/7.

I just don’t think it’s logical for ESPN to exit the ACC deal as long as it is intact. If they have an out of teams leave then there is no reason not to ride it out.

There is no win for ESPN in killing off the ACC and losing bargain broadcast rights to Clemson, FSU, Miami and ND away games. They kill off the ACC and they end up paying more for the teams that leave than they do for the whole entire conference. I see no upside to not take the option as long as there is an out if things change.

You stated you can think of a million reasons why ESPN would opt out but honestly I can only think of reasons why riding it out makes the most sense and protects them from a liability standpoint. The Big 12 has already threatened to sue at one point and that had to be handled behind closed doors and the state of Florida is investigating EVERYONE (or threatening to) in regards to FSU being left out of the playoff. There is just a lot of risk terminating early and very little not.

 

[batchaps4me]

That's not true. The GOR is from the schools to the ACC, not the schools to ESPN. The ACC "owns" the GOR, not ESPN. ESPN would require a GOR to make sure what is happening doesn't happen. But, if ESPN terminates their agreement, the ACC still owns the media rights of Clemson and FSU. They would negotiate with CBS, Fox, Apple, or other media partners still owning Clemson and FSU rights. That would be true even if FSU and Clemson were in the B1G or SEC. Any media money those schools got from their new conference would be paid to the ACC per the GOR. But, the SEC and B1G wouldn't take either team until they are clear of the GOR.

I think you are wrong. The ACC GOR that was approved ends in 2027 unless ESPN extends its contract option to 2036. Here is the CBS Sports reporting from 2022:
CBSSports.com reported earlier Monday the ACC presidents were in the process of clearing the Grant of Rights with their departments. The agreement goes to 2026-27, the duration of the league's contract with ESPN.
EDIT: Yes they are separate contracts, but the ACC GOR and buyout are dependent on ESPN extending the contract. When the ESPN deal ends, so does the ACC GOR deal in place.

 

[batchaps4me]

I just don’t think it’s logical for ESPN to exit the ACC deal as long as it is intact. If they have an out of teams leave then there is no reason not to ride it out.

Again ACC without Clemson and FSU the ACC is worthless to ESPN. They would be a losing money on the ACC.

There is no win for ESPN in killing off the ACC and losing bargain broadcast rights to Clemson, FSU, Miami and ND away games. They kill off the ACC and they end up paying more for the teams that leave than they do for the whole entire conference. I see no upside to not take the option as long as there is an out if things change.

Think about this: ESPN could pay four teams SEC money and it still would be cheaper that the ACC deal per year. Now which do you think is more profitable from a TV revenue standpoint, Clemson/FSU/NC/Miami playing the remaining ACC team or a SEC slate?

You stated you can think of a million reasons why ESPN would opt out but honestly I can only think of reasons why riding it out makes the most sense and protects them from a liability standpoint. The Big 12 has already threatened to sue at one point and that had to be handled behind closed doors and the state of Florida is investigating EVERYONE (or threatening to) in regards to FSU being left out of the playoff. There is just a lot of risk terminating early and very little not.

Which will be more profitable, maintaining the ACC when the SEC/BiG leave the ACC or getting the value out of four teams now and having leverage as those two conferences bail on the NCAA? Look at it as a whole instead of isolated occurrences. Short or long term, ESPN makes more money dumping the ACC and helping the few ACC schools that are profitable for ESPN get into a super conference?

 

[CorpRebel]

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

I think you are wrong. The ACC GOR that was approved ends in 2027 unless ESPN extends its contract option to 2036. Here is the CBS Sports reporting from 2022:
CBSSports.com reported earlier Monday the ACC presidents were in the process of clearing the Grant of Rights with their departments. The agreement goes to 2026-27, the duration of the league's contract with ESPN.
EDIT: Yes they are separate contracts, but the ACC GOR and buyout are dependent on ESPN extending the contract. When the ESPN deal ends, so does the ACC GOR deal in place.

I don't think you are correct, but I don't have a copy of the agreement so I can't say that with certainty. The GOR is definitely between the ACC schools, and not ESPN. There could be language in the agreement tying it to the ESPN deal, but that really wouldn't make sense. If ESPN didn't exercise its option, the ACC would still want to negotiate with other media partners as a conference.

The article you cited doesn't support what either of us are arguing. I read it. That's a 2013 article ... the GOR was amended in 2016 to go to 2036. So, again, it doesn't support what you are saying. But, I can't give you any language proving mine. I'll keep looking.

 

[batchaps4me]

I don't think you are correct, but I don't have a copy of the agreement so I can't say that with certainty. The GOR is definitely between the ACC schools, and not ESPN. There could be language in the agreement tying it to the ESPN deal, but that really wouldn't make sense. If ESPN didn't exercise its option, the ACC would still want to negotiate with other media partners as a conference.

The article you cited doesn't support what either of us are arguing. I read it. That's a 2013 article ... the GOR was amended in 2016 to go to 2036. So, again, it doesn't support what you are saying. But, I can't give you any language proving mine. I'll keep looking.

Like I said, most of what I am saying was from Josh Pate podcasts. I am trusting him because he is connected well enough to accurately "predict" timelines and near-term actions within weeks of it happening. The ACC contract is locked down and not public from all I can see or tell. IF I am recalling incorrectly, that is on me but I don't think I am. He is convinced that ESPN is the driver of the realignment and CFP expansion and is wielding their financial might to get their version of what NCAAF should be.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

Like I said, most of what I am saying was from Josh Pate podcasts. I am trusting him because he is connected well enough to accurately "predict" timelines and near-term actions within weeks of it happening. The ACC contract is locked down and not public from all I can see or tell. IF I am recalling incorrectly, that is on me but I don't think I am. He is convinced that ESPN is the driver of the realignment and CFP expansion and is wielding their financial might to get their version of what NCAAF should be.

I like Josh Pate, but I don't think he is as smart as you think he is, especially with the legal wrangling that is going on. No one other than FSU is talking, and most of what they are saying is wishful thinking. They have been talking out of their ass for years.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

Here is the 2013 contract. There is nothing that ties it to the ESPN contract for the purpose of the termination of the agreement.

Loading…

www.wralsportsfan.com

 

[batchaps4me]

I like Josh Pate, but I don't think he is as smart as you think he is, especially with the legal wrangling that is going on. No one other than FSU is talking, and most of what they are saying is wishful thinking. They have been talking out of their ass for years.

He is well connected with a good track record and has predicted the FSU lawsuit, the Clemson lawsuit and said yesterday that others are coming. Smart or stupid doesn't matter, until he becomes inaccurate, I will trust him.

 

[batchaps4me]

Here is the 2013 contract. There is nothing that ties it to the ESPN contract for the purpose of the termination of the agreement.

Loading…

www.wralsportsfan.com

Legal questions for you, if you don't mind:
As I read it, and I use the word read loosely, the GOR expires in 2027. Should this GOR become null and void if ESPN exercises their right to terminate the contract in 2027? This GOR appears to me to be exclusively in place for the ESPN contract. The date listed as the end of term is the exact date the ESPN's contract originally expired. I would expect that the ACC GOR expires when and if the ESPN contract is over. Do you see it as being different than that? I know without the amended GOR we are speculating.

 

[Thiefery]

He is well connected with a good track record and has predicted the FSU lawsuit, the Clemson lawsuit and said yesterday that others are coming. Smart or stupid doesn't matter, until he becomes inaccurate, I will trust him.

Pate is more wrong than right

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

He is well connected with a good track record and has predicted the FSU lawsuit, the Clemson lawsuit and said yesterday that others are coming. Smart or stupid doesn't matter, until he becomes inaccurate, I will trust him.

I mean there is no one who didn't think that FSU and Clemson were going to file lawsuits and challenge the GOR. I can't think of a more obvious thing than that.

The point you are missing is that people don't talk in these types of lawsuits. So he isn't connected to the type of people who can give him the information you think he is being given. They could be disbarred for doing so.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

Legal questions for you, if you don't mind:
As I read it, and I use the word read loosely, the GOR expires in 2027. Should this GOR become null and void if ESPN exercises their right to terminate the contract in 2027? This GOR appears to me to be exclusively in place for the ESPN contract. The date listed as the end of term is the exact date the ESPN's contract originally expired. I would expect that the ACC GOR expires when and if the ESPN contract is over. Do you see it as being different than that? I know without the amended GOR we are speculating.

Can't tell ... that's not the current GOR, and this one doesn't have option language. While the GOR and ESPN contract are obviously connected - ESPN isn't about to sign a long term contract without assurances that all the teams will be there for the entire term. So, the ACC-ESPN agreement requires a GOR. I would assume it means if the GOR is no longer in place, ESPN can get out of the agreement. Whether ESPN ending their agreement means the GOR is ended is a different thing. If the ESPN contract ends, the ACC will still want to be able to negotiate with other media partners. They will need a GOR to do so.

The PAC's GOR ended when their media deal did, and that was one of the problems getting a new deal - Oregon and UW weren't going to sign a GOR so long as they held out hope that they could get to the B1G. And the media companies wouldn't sign binding deal without the GOR. That would lead one to believe the GOR might end with the ESPN contract, but no one knows without seeing it.

I haven't read anything that says ESPN won't exercise their option. It's a great deal for them.

 

[batchaps4me]

Pate is more wrong than right

What has he missed on this? Don't get me wrong, I disagree with a lot of his opinions but he has been Johnny on the spot on this.

I mean there is no one who didn't think that FSU and Clemson were going to file lawsuits and challenge the GOR. I can't think of a more obvious thing than that.

The point you are missing is that people don't talk in these types of lawsuits. So he isn't connected to the type of people who can give him the information you think he is being given. They could be disbarred for doing so.

Not many ADs and coaches are bar members.

If the ESPN contract ends, the ACC will still want to be able to negotiate with other media partners. They will need a GOR to do so.

A brand new one, correct? This one does mention ESPN specifically.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

What has he missed on this? Don't get me wrong, I disagree with a lot of his opinions but he has been Johnny on the spot on this.

Not many ADs and coaches are bar members.

A brand new one, correct? This one does mention ESPN specifically.

We don't know. If the GOR is tied to the ESPN deal, then a new one. But that will give the out to FSU and others. If the GOR is not dependent on the ESPN contract, then no, they won't need a new one.

Think through what you are saying ... do you really think ADs sit down and tell inside information to Pate? Why? The only thing they would tell him is exactly what they want to get out and most of the time that won't be the truth.