I have been clear about this for months, in the face of all the gullible/misguided porsters who tried to tell us how "ironclad" and "irrevocable" the Grant of Rights was.
1. The ORIGINAL 4-page Grant of Rights might have had some valid aspects to it, AND some invalid aspects to it, but at least it matched up to our ORIGINAL TV deal with ESPN, in terms of length and scope.
2. The 1-page EXTENSION to the Grant of Rights did not offer any NEW consideration and was MISMATCHED to the ESPN deal, in terms of length and scope.
3. The ACC Commissioner exceeded his mandate and confused the situation further by granting ESPN an extension of time to guarantee its broadcast partnership until 2036 without a vote of the ACC membership.
4. ESPN can't buy media rights for a period that is 9 years longer than what they have promised to pay under the TV contract. It's just that simple. If ESPN wanted a 2027 option, then the GOR extension should have been through 2027. If ESPN then wanted to pay us through 2036, we could have signed a second extension through 2036.
5. US caselaw on contracts does not allow for separate contracts to impose additional and multiple forms of exit penalties beyond the exit fee already imposed by a document such as the ACC Constitution. The "damages" for a team exiting the ACC are in the ACC Constitution, and the "damages" for exiting the ESPN contract are in the TV contract. You can't impose a double-whammy penalty, particulary one as vague and difficult to measure as the GOR, that serves as a double-secret conference exit penalty, and NOT a...you know..."actual damages to ESPN" clause. ESPN has already protected itself IN THE TV CONTRACT for any teams leaving the ACC, or any "new" teams coming into the ACC who are not as valuable as existing ACC teams.
In conclusion, Blue Blood Bias continues to make factual mistakes (F$U cannot leave for free, they would still have to pay the Constitution-mandated exit fee) while otherwise making some decent points. The actions of the ACC Commissioner were in violation of the ACC Constitution and may very well damage the ACC's argument that the GOR has validly been extended to 2036.
**** the ACC and **** the ACC Commissioner. I have argued all along that the GOR extension isn't worth the one piece of paper it's written on. No new consideration, invalid length, improper reliance on an already-flawed original GOR. Fatal.
