forums

MEGA Conference Realignment and lawsuits Megathread(Its still personal)

5NC4 said:
Click to expand...

Dellenger got it wrong. Fact is the ESPN media agreement ONLY goest through June 30, 2027 and the option (which is now said to be illegal and void) has to be exercised by 2/2025 in order to extend the media agreement to 2036. Now that it was confirmed that the option to extend that was granted was in fact an AMENDMENT and required 2/3 approval ... ESPN has NO deal past 6/27 and they will need to present a new contract offer for review AND FOR ACC MEMBER APPROVAL. Adios.
 
Advertisement
Handsome Squidbum said:
Who said it was illegal and void? The bird lawyers on the internet?
Click to expand...
Still trolling? When someone like Pate or Dellenger starts saying things are going down then they are.
Rickd said:
Dellenger got it wrong. Fact is the ESPN media agreement ONLY goest through June 30, 2027 and the option (which is now said to be illegal and void) has to be exercised by 2/2025 in order to extend the media agreement to 2036. Now that it was confirmed that the option to extend that was granted was in fact an AMENDMENT and required 2/3 approval ... ESPN has NO deal past 6/27 and they will need to present a new contract offer for review AND FOR ACC MEMBER APPROVAL. Adios.
Click to expand...
Agreed, still worth posting another Pate video confirming things are going down sooner rather than later and that ESPN can horse trade. It is worth it for ESPN to horse trade because of the higher values some ACC teams have in other conferences with many more premier matchups.
 
Advertisement
RoboCane said:
Isn’t this the time for Genetics to come in and repeat all of this with some minor variation?
Click to expand...

He’s so full of ****. Has a little info, then runs into all sorts of speculation presented as fact, turns into a ***** when questioned. If he just said here’s what I’m hearing, now here is pure informed speculation and what if opinion, he wouldn’t be lying that he never said there would be a complete p2 breakaway NOW which he did say, as opposed to what has become (for now) a separation tier within same construct.

Handsome Squidbum said:
Who said it was illegal and void? The bird lawyers on the internet?
Click to expand...
Not a lawyer but lot of contract adjacent experience and I don’t think this is as pure and clean cut as some like @Rickd are saying because there are multiple parties and issues here to determine that so perhaps a real lawyer or two on here can comment:

- ACC member institutions give their media rights to the conference to then negotiate the rights to collectively for a deal- Miami does not directly give ESPN their rights as an example if I’m not mistaken even if practical application we do

- ESPN negotiates with ACC for a media rights deal and has the right to expect that the ACC has the rights (“apparent authority” ) to do so on members behalf and from a day to day perspective until recently would see that to be true by the fact they have exercised those acquired rights for years with no objection

- the acc bylaws in fact required the organization get a 2/3 vote approval for the agreement initially and then for any adjustment to it like extending a deadline to exercise an option to extend rights, in this case to 2036

- the ACC admitted in court filing if being read right that no such vote happened

- it also appears that until recently most if not all members were even aware that the rights from 2027-2036 were not locked in, which brings up transparency issues with their member organizations (let alone unrelated fiduciary responsibility the acc had around raycom issue)

So it’s possible (I think) that the issue is espn has a legal deal in place and reasonable expectations of it being followed, along side fsu in this case having an issue about bylaws- in both cases it’s the ACC (which is its members concurrently) that can be sued. Hence court or settlement. The amendment issue makes fsu case stronger against ACC but doesn’t necessarily make espn contract enforcement weaker.
 
Last edited:
Handsome Squidbum said:
Who said it was illegal and void? The bird lawyers on the internet?
Click to expand...
Screen Shot 2021-09-01 at 10.57.41 AM-1.png
 
Ispyin said:
He’s so full of ****. Has a little info, then runs into all sorts of speculation presented as fact, turns into a ***** when questioned. If he just said here’s what I’m hearing, now here is pure informed speculation and what if opinion, he wouldn’t be lying that he never said there would be a complete p2 breakaway NOW which he did say, as opposed to what has become (for now) a separation tier within same construct.


Not a lawyer but lot of contract adjacent experience and I don’t think this is as pure and clean cut as some like @Rickd are saying because there are multiple parties and issues here to determine that so perhaps a real lawyer or two on here can comment:

- ACC member institutions give their media rights to the conference to then negotiate the rights to collectively for a deal- Miami does not directly give ESPN their rights as an example if I’m not mistaken even if practical application we do

- ESPN negotiates with ACC for a media rights deal and has the right to expect that the ACC has the rights (“apparent authority” ) to do so on members behalf and from a day to day perspective until recently would see that to be true by the fact they have exercised those acquired rights for years with no objection

- the acc bylaws in fact required the organization get a 2/3 vote approval for the agreement initially and then for any adjustment to it like extending a deadline to exercise an option to extend rights, in this case to 2036

- the ACC admitted in court filing if being read right that no such vote happened

- it also appears that until recently most if not all members were even aware that the rights from 2027-2036 were not locked in, which brings up transparency issues with their member organizations (let alone unrelated fiduciary responsibility the acc had around raycom issue)

So it’s possible (I think) that the issue is espn has a legal deal in place and reasonable expectations of it being followed, along side fsu in this case having an issue about bylaws- in both cases it’s the ACC (which is its members concurrently) that can be sued. Hence court or settlement. The amendment issue makes fsu case stronger against ACC but doesn’t necessarily make espn contract enforcement weaker.
Click to expand...
There are several attorneys who are FSU alums and are dissecting every filing in minute detail. Several are very optimistic regarding every aspect, however one in particular is much more cautious and grounded in his assessments of every facet of FSU's filings and grounds for success ... with the exception of the MEDIA RIGHTS EXTENSION OPTION that was unilaterally granted to ESPN by Phillips. The original option expired in 2021, ESPN was NOT extending and Phillips granted an extension until February 2025. The wording on the document HE SIGNED with ESPN stated in multiple instances that "this represents an AMENDMENT to the agreement of 2016". He had no authority to agree to an amendment without 2/3 member approval. THAT is the issue every attorney who is reviewing this case on Warchant is in 100% agreement with. The current ESPN media commitment has a term that expires on June 30, 2027 and the extension option SHOULD be found invalid / void by a judge. That is the summary of the attorneys (not those handling the case), but attorneys reviewing and dissecting each filing.

It is also highly likely that ESPN has no intention of extending even if the option were viable due to the fact that the ACC media contract will not be worth anything even approaching the current $40M+ per school, after FSU and Clemson depart, most likely along with at least UNC. There has been smoke once again that the "nuclear option" is now making more sense due to a). The confirmed fact that the P2 will be earning a much larger % of CFP money in addition to the regular season media revenue gap b). IF the media deal is actually only for 3 more seasons (24, 25, 26) schools can leave effective 2027 with full media rights and just pay the $120M exit ... so why not save that and just dissolve.

The CFP contract even has a clause in it ... a look in clause that enables them to CHANGE THE MEDIA PAYOUT to conferences in the event of further realignment. So ... FSU, Clemson, UNC leave the ACC and then the payout is reduced to G5 levels. Another reason to blow up the ACC.
As Josh Pate mentioned ... "it is all being discussed ... it is all on the table". Rip the band aid off in one move. Big 10 takes 4 schools, SEC takes 4 schools, and Big 12 takes at least 2, and maybe 4. Adios ACC ... most likely agreed to effective for the 2026 season along with the new CFP format which looks like it will be 14 games.

The ACC is a poorly constructed group of programs. A few power programs (ND, FSU, Clemson, Miami, UNC), some good regional programs like Va Tech, NC State, Pitt, Louisville, a couple of good BB programs like Duke and Syracuse. Then BC and Wake that just belong in conferences playing with Holy Cross or schools of that nature. The top 4-5 programs can no longer subsidize the programs that have no national interest, hence the P2 actually forming.
 
Ispyin said:
He’s so full of ****. Has a little info, then runs into all sorts of speculation presented as fact, turns into a ***** when questioned. If he just said here’s what I’m hearing, now here is pure informed speculation and what if opinion, he wouldn’t be lying that he never said there would be a complete p2 breakaway NOW which he did say, as opposed to what has become (for now) a separation tier within same construct.


Not a lawyer but lot of contract adjacent experience and I don’t think this is as pure and clean cut as some like @Rickd are saying because there are multiple parties and issues here to determine that so perhaps a real lawyer or two on here can comment:

- ACC member institutions give their media rights to the conference to then negotiate the rights to collectively for a deal- Miami does not directly give ESPN their rights as an example if I’m not mistaken even if practical application we do

- ESPN negotiates with ACC for a media rights deal and has the right to expect that the ACC has the rights (“apparent authority” ) to do so on members behalf and from a day to day perspective until recently would see that to be true by the fact they have exercised those acquired rights for years with no objection

- the acc bylaws in fact required the organization get a 2/3 vote approval for the agreement initially and then for any adjustment to it like extending a deadline to exercise an option to extend rights, in this case to 2036

- the ACC admitted in court filing if being read right that no such vote happened

- it also appears that until recently most if not all members were even aware that the rights from 2027-2036 were not locked in, which brings up transparency issues with their member organizations (let alone unrelated fiduciary responsibility the acc had around raycom issue)

So it’s possible (I think) that the issue is espn has a legal deal in place and reasonable expectations of it being followed, along side fsu in this case having an issue about bylaws- in both cases it’s the ACC (which is its members concurrently) that can be sued. Hence court or settlement. The amendment issue makes fsu case stronger against ACC but doesn’t necessarily make espn contract enforcement weaker.
Click to expand...

Rickd is well meaning but he is inadvertently becoming Dan Sileo Jr, Esquire. I love his optimism but virtually everything he saying is what FSU fans are telling themselves on their fan sites. I'm sure FSU bird lawyers have dissected everything and found the magic bullet that gets FSU out of the ACC plus a billion dollars of damages for pain and suffering. If only it were so easy. The courts may eventually decide the amendment didn't follow proper procedure so it is illegal and void , but that is not a guarantee and is certainly not true at this moment.

ESPN / Disney lawyers are not as dumb as many want to believe. They didn't fork over hundreds of millions to the ACC and then get bamboozled because they didn't properly execute the contract amendment.

From the beginning, both bird lawyers and real lawyers (I am the rare combo of being an expert in Bird Law and also a real lawyer) have said the same thing about FSUs lawsuit - its goal all along has been to air enough dirty laundry to get the acc to settle. Who knows, FSU may even have a signed deposition from Santa Claus claiming that the ACC is on his naughty list. They haven't even determined the venue yet. That alone has had the lawyers on both sides charging lots of hours. The ACC could drag it on for years. And that's without involving Disney, and Disney could make life difficult for everyone.

But for the sake of argument, lets say there is eventually a settlement between the acc and FSU. That does not end the GOR. The settlement is between the acc and FSU only, not the acc and every team. The precedent it will set is that each team that wants out will need to separately negotiate the cost of its media rights, because each team has a different value to the conference. They will also HAVE to sue individually because the acc knows that if all the top teams leave, it ends the conference. The ACC will dig in harder to keep everyone else.

The more top teams that leave, the higher the chances that espn will sue the conference. Remember that even if all the internal shenanigans (e.g. allegedly bypassing the proper voting procedures etc) are true, that's the ACCs problem, not espns. As far as espn is concerned (and almost certainly the perspective of most courts in contract law), a deal is a deal. It's not espns job to make sure the acc is following its bylaws to the letter. It legitimately thought the acc commissioner had the authority to sign the deal (called "apparent authority" in contract law) and the acc is going to be on the hook for breach of contract, especially if the top teams leave for the B1G / Fox Sports.

So that brings me to the likely end game. The acc does not want to get sued by espn. Top teams want out. The small market acc teams don't want to let the top schools go because it ends the conference. There is one path of least resistance that makes almost every party feel better. The one aspect of the tv deal that somewhat ties espns hands and helps the acc is that the deal says that espn can't renegotiate the tv deal unless the number of acc teams drops below 15. Doesn't say which teams have to be part of that 15. Acc took care of losing a couple teams and still staying above 15 by recently adding 3 teams. It is entirely conceivable that espn tells the acc:

"We are fine with letting Clemson and FSU go the SEC because we still make money off them. They are obviously more valuable to the ACC than the SEC. But to sweeten the pot for everyone else, when we extend the tv deal in 2025 we will kick in extra 100 million per year into your new performance based distribution model so that the top 4 acc teams can get as much money as the SEC and B1G counterparts." Pate even mentions the possibility tiered distribution in the clip above.

Overall it still remains a terrific deal for espn even without FSU and Clemson. All the lower tier acc teams need only look at Oregon State and Washington State to realize that getting 20 million a year is a lot better than getting 500k per year if they are homeless. The top 4 teams in the acc could see huge payouts and still have a couple guaranteed playoff spots.

Does it make the acc a 2nd tier conference? Yes, but getting 2 guaranteed playoff spots for a weak conference isn't too shabby. Does it suck for us to be stuck in the acc? A little bit, but at the end of the day if we are making as much as Alabama per year with a schedule that's far less difficult and have playoff spot guarantees, it's not the end of the world. The Big East generally sucked, but that didn't hurt us much. Are there other options for how this ends? Of course, but pretty much every other option has everyone suing everyone (small market acc teams will sue big market acc teams and the ACC itself, espn suing everyone, big schools suing small schools and espn and the ACC) and the cases will probably last until the end of the GOR.
 
Advertisement
Handsome Squidbum said:
Rickd is well meaning but he is inadvertently becoming Dan Sileo Jr, Esquire. I love his optimism but virtually everything he saying is what FSU fans are telling themselves on their fan sites. I'm sure FSU bird lawyers have dissected everything and found the magic bullet that gets FSU out of the ACC plus a billion dollars of damages for pain and suffering. If only it were so easy. The courts may eventually decide the amendment didn't follow proper procedure so it is illegal and void , but that is not a guarantee and is certainly not true at this moment.

ESPN / Disney lawyers are not as dumb as many want to believe. They didn't fork over hundreds of millions to the ACC and then get bamboozled because they didn't properly execute the contract amendment.

From the beginning, both bird lawyers and real lawyers (I am the rare combo of being an expert in Bird Law and also a real lawyer) have said the same thing about FSUs lawsuit - its goal all along has been to air enough dirty laundry to get the acc to settle. Who knows, FSU may even have a signed deposition from Santa Claus claiming that the ACC is on his naughty list. They haven't even determined the venue yet. That alone has had the lawyers on both sides charging lots of hours. The ACC could drag it on for years. And that's without involving Disney, and Disney could make life difficult for everyone.

But for the sake of argument, lets say there is eventually a settlement between the acc and FSU. That does not end the GOR. The settlement is between the acc and FSU only, not the acc and every team. The precedent it will set is that each team that wants out will need to separately negotiate the cost of its media rights, because each team has a different value to the conference. They will also HAVE to sue individually because the acc knows that if all the top teams leave, it ends the conference. The ACC will dig in harder to keep everyone else.

The more top teams that leave, the higher the chances that espn will sue the conference. Remember that even if all the internal shenanigans (e.g. allegedly bypassing the proper voting procedures etc) are true, that's the ACCs problem, not espns. As far as espn is concerned (and almost certainly the perspective of most courts in contract law), a deal is a deal. It's not espns job to make sure the acc is following its bylaws to the letter. It legitimately thought the acc commissioner had the authority to sign the deal (called "apparent authority" in contract law) and the acc is going to be on the hook for breach of contract, especially if the top teams leave for the B1G / Fox Sports.

So that brings me to the likely end game. The acc does not want to get sued by espn. Top teams want out. The small market acc teams don't want to let the top schools go because it ends the conference. There is one path of least resistance that makes almost every party feel better. The one aspect of the tv deal that somewhat ties espns hands and helps the acc is that the deal says that espn can't renegotiate the tv deal unless the number of acc teams drops below 15. Doesn't say which teams have to be part of that 15. Acc took care of losing a couple teams and still staying above 15 by recently adding 3 teams. It is entirely conceivable that espn tells the acc:

"We are fine with letting Clemson and FSU go the SEC because we still make money off them. They are obviously more valuable to the ACC than the SEC. But to sweeten the pot for everyone else, when we extend the tv deal in 2025 we will kick in extra 100 million per year into your new performance based distribution model so that the top 4 acc teams can get as much money as the SEC and B1G counterparts." Pate even mentions the possibility tiered distribution in the clip above.

Overall it still remains a terrific deal for espn even without FSU and Clemson. All the lower tier acc teams need only look at Oregon State and Washington State to realize that getting 20 million a year is a lot better than getting 500k per year if they are homeless. The top 4 teams in the acc could see huge payouts and still have a couple guaranteed playoff spots.

Does it make the acc a 2nd tier conference? Yes, but getting 2 guaranteed playoff spots for a weak conference isn't too shabby. Does it suck for us to be stuck in the acc? A little bit, but at the end of the day if we are making as much as Alabama per year with a schedule that's far less difficult and have playoff spot guarantees, it's not the end of the world. The Big East generally sucked, but that didn't hurt us much. Are there other options for how this ends? Of course, but pretty much every other option has everyone suing everyone (small market acc teams will sue big market acc teams and the ACC itself, espn suing everyone, big schools suing small schools and espn and the ACC) and the cases will probably last until the end of the GOR.
Click to expand...
You keep ignoring that the deficit in cash is not just the playoff guarantees per team it’s the tv payout deal and the possible opt out. Miami, stuck in the acc with your ongoing half troll half serious hill you want to die on view, would potentially be at a deficit yearly by 2030 north of $75 m yearly and that’s if espn doesn’t gut the tv deal. No matter how good your NIL and even performance bonuses if you make the playoffs and win, that is hard to keep up with.

I’m pretty **** positive you’re wrong in where Miami lands and would engage with you in a serious conversation about it but you usually just decide to go full Monty troll instead about a team you claim to be a fan of when the ground changes a bit expectedly or unexpectedly even if the destination on waze is very likely to remain in place. And I’m not a slurper before you try to go down that path in your response. I’m **** positive you’re wrong about the future where this ultimately lands but don’t care enough to fight with you back and forth on it or give more on my background and degree of contacts to defend my reasons because despite this logical response you gave this time, I know you’ll revert back the next post.
 
Handsome Squidbum said:
Rickd is well meaning but he is inadvertently becoming Dan Sileo Jr, Esquire. I love his optimism but virtually everything he saying is what FSU fans are telling themselves on their fan sites. I'm sure FSU bird lawyers have dissected everything and found the magic bullet that gets FSU out of the ACC plus a billion dollars of damages for pain and suffering. If only it were so easy. The courts may eventually decide the amendment didn't follow proper procedure so it is illegal and void , but that is not a guarantee and is certainly not true at this moment.

ESPN / Disney lawyers are not as dumb as many want to believe. They didn't fork over hundreds of millions to the ACC and then get bamboozled because they didn't properly execute the contract amendment.

From the beginning, both bird lawyers and real lawyers (I am the rare combo of being an expert in Bird Law and also a real lawyer) have said the same thing about FSUs lawsuit - its goal all along has been to air enough dirty laundry to get the acc to settle. Who knows, FSU may even have a signed deposition from Santa Claus claiming that the ACC is on his naughty list. They haven't even determined the venue yet. That alone has had the lawyers on both sides charging lots of hours. The ACC could drag it on for years. And that's without involving Disney, and Disney could make life difficult for everyone.

But for the sake of argument, lets say there is eventually a settlement between the acc and FSU. That does not end the GOR. The settlement is between the acc and FSU only, not the acc and every team. The precedent it will set is that each team that wants out will need to separately negotiate the cost of its media rights, because each team has a different value to the conference. They will also HAVE to sue individually because the acc knows that if all the top teams leave, it ends the conference. The ACC will dig in harder to keep everyone else.

The more top teams that leave, the higher the chances that espn will sue the conference. Remember that even if all the internal shenanigans (e.g. allegedly bypassing the proper voting procedures etc) are true, that's the ACCs problem, not espns. As far as espn is concerned (and almost certainly the perspective of most courts in contract law), a deal is a deal. It's not espns job to make sure the acc is following its bylaws to the letter. It legitimately thought the acc commissioner had the authority to sign the deal (called "apparent authority" in contract law) and the acc is going to be on the hook for breach of contract, especially if the top teams leave for the B1G / Fox Sports.

So that brings me to the likely end game. The acc does not want to get sued by espn. Top teams want out. The small market acc teams don't want to let the top schools go because it ends the conference. There is one path of least resistance that makes almost every party feel better. The one aspect of the tv deal that somewhat ties espns hands and helps the acc is that the deal says that espn can't renegotiate the tv deal unless the number of acc teams drops below 15. Doesn't say which teams have to be part of that 15. Acc took care of losing a couple teams and still staying above 15 by recently adding 3 teams. It is entirely conceivable that espn tells the acc:

"We are fine with letting Clemson and FSU go the SEC because we still make money off them. They are obviously more valuable to the ACC than the SEC. But to sweeten the pot for everyone else, when we extend the tv deal in 2025 we will kick in extra 100 million per year into your new performance based distribution model so that the top 4 acc teams can get as much money as the SEC and B1G counterparts." Pate even mentions the possibility tiered distribution in the clip above.

Overall it still remains a terrific deal for espn even without FSU and Clemson. All the lower tier acc teams need only look at Oregon State and Washington State to realize that getting 20 million a year is a lot better than getting 500k per year if they are homeless. The top 4 teams in the acc could see huge payouts and still have a couple guaranteed playoff spots.

Does it make the acc a 2nd tier conference? Yes, but getting 2 guaranteed playoff spots for a weak conference isn't too shabby. Does it suck for us to be stuck in the acc? A little bit, but at the end of the day if we are making as much as Alabama per year with a schedule that's far less difficult and have playoff spot guarantees, it's not the end of the world. The Big East generally sucked, but that didn't hurt us much. Are there other options for how this ends? Of course, but pretty much every other option has everyone suing everyone (small market acc teams will sue big market acc teams and the ACC itself, espn suing everyone, big schools suing small schools and espn and the ACC) and the cases will probably last until the end of the GOR.
Click to expand...
Long post to say it is your opinion ... period ... that the "GOR is rock solid". My opinion is that you're wrong and this will be over sooner than later and Miami won't be in the ACC until, as you stated, 2036.
 
Advertisement
Rickd said:
Long post to say it is your opinion ... period ... that the "GOR is rock solid". My opinion is that you're wrong and this will be over sooner than later and Miami won't be in the ACC until, as you stated, 2036.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately for Jim Phillips, John Swofford's backroom dealings are gonna make battling FSU (and each subsequent ACC school) in court not worth the fallout of the conference's business maneuvers getting dissected in public
 
Last edited:
Ispyin said:
He’s so full of ****. Has a little info, then runs into all sorts of speculation presented as fact, turns into a ***** when questioned. If he just said here’s what I’m hearing, now here is pure informed speculation and what if opinion, he wouldn’t be lying that he never said there would be a complete p2 breakaway NOW which he did say, as opposed to what has become (for now) a separation tier within same construct.


Not a lawyer but lot of contract adjacent experience and I don’t think this is as pure and clean cut as some like @Rickd are saying because there are multiple parties and issues here to determine that so perhaps a real lawyer or two on here can comment:

- ACC member institutions give their media rights to the conference to then negotiate the rights to collectively for a deal- Miami does not directly give ESPN their rights as an example if I’m not mistaken even if practical application we do

- ESPN negotiates with ACC for a media rights deal and has the right to expect that the ACC has the rights (“apparent authority” ) to do so on members behalf and from a day to day perspective until recently would see that to be true by the fact they have exercised those acquired rights for years with no objection

- the acc bylaws in fact required the organization get a 2/3 vote approval for the agreement initially and then for any adjustment to it like extending a deadline to exercise an option to extend rights, in this case to 2036

- the ACC admitted in court filing if being read right that no such vote happened

- it also appears that until recently most if not all members were even aware that the rights from 2027-2036 were not locked in, which brings up transparency issues with their member organizations (let alone unrelated fiduciary responsibility the acc had around raycom issue)

So it’s possible (I think) that the issue is espn has a legal deal in place and reasonable expectations of it being followed, along side fsu in this case having an issue about bylaws- in both cases it’s the ACC (which is its members concurrently) that can be sued. Hence court or settlement. The amendment issue makes fsu case stronger against ACC but doesn’t necessarily make espn contract enforcement weaker.
Click to expand...
Has anyone seen the document (usually called a grant of authority), wherein the schools signed on to give the ACC commissioner the right to negotiate with ESPN on the schools' behalf. Is that available anywhere online? That document would likely be extremely pertinent. I am not disregarding the fact that the bylaws require a supermajority for amendment.
 
Peachycarnahan said:
Has anyone seen the document (usually called a grant of authority), wherein the schools signed on to give the ACC commissioner the right to negotiate with ESPN on the schools' behalf. Is that available anywhere online? That document would likely be extremely pertinent. I am not disregarding the fact that the bylaws require a supermajority for amendment.
Click to expand...
Personally I’ve seen and read through the overall ACC bylaws but have not seen another document on that front but @TheOriginalCane and others may have. You should search him too in this thread because a while ago he went through a lot of this
 
Advertisement
Ispyin said:
He’s so full of ****. Has a little info, then runs into all sorts of speculation presented as fact, turns into a ***** when questioned. If he just said here’s what I’m hearing, now here is pure informed speculation and what if opinion, he wouldn’t be lying that he never said there would be a complete p2 breakaway NOW which he did say, as opposed to what has become (for now) a separation tier within same construct.
Click to expand...
He would ace CIS Insider 101....
 
I'm an attorney and FSU's lawsuit is really a single issue case. All of the antitrust stuff isn't going anywhere. I doubt all the arguments about the ACC's ineptitude will either (even though it's extremely true that the ACC is corrupt and incompetent and was largely a vehicle to enrich the swofford crime family).

The entire issue boils down to that extension that phillips unilaterally gave for ESPN to renew the deal. If the court rules that he wasn't allowed to that, FSU is going to immediately break the contract and sign up with the B1G and tell the ACC to go **** themselves and sue for damages. When the ACC does, FSU will argue that their future media rights were 0 because the ACC has no contract in place. The ACC will try to negotiate a new deal but nobody is going to make an offer anywhere close to the current ESPN deal knowing full well that FSU/Clemson and *hopefully* us are about to bolt.

if the court rules that phillips is allowed to just unliterally extend the deadline, i suspect ESPN will renew the contract and then the price to leave jumps up into the hundreds of millions and everyone stuck in the ACC slowly gets bled to death by the wake and BC parasites until 2030 at the earliest.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top