If true this would certainly expedite the process of dismantling the current ACC.
Can you imagine being Cal/Stan/SMU ... with the ACC having known there was no media agreement in place past the 2026 season, and taking them as conference members beginning July 1, 2024. Ouch.
I guess it's the lesser of two evils. It's still better than being in the mountain west.
Wait until you see what sort of media deal is offered to the ACC after FSU/ Clemson / UNC bail. Currently deal will be revised down for the balance of the term which ends 6/30/27. Then ... the ACC goes looking for a new media contract ... from ?? Apple / Amazon streaming only? Based on actual viewers? Miami better get out to the P2 now if there is a landing spot ... even paying the $120M exit fee will be a bargain ... even at half share for 4-5 years.
SMU has the money to pivot ... .while we shake the trees to sell coconuts on the corner...
But it seems like there isn’t a P2 spot for us at this moment. We get out and where do we go until we get the invite?
It’s not a spot for us (publicly) because we’re in a contract. I’m sure FOX/BIG not going to openly invite a school that’s currently in a contract.
He means that it "seems" like at the moment UM has no back channeled confirmation of a spot if they DO leave the ACC. Nobody is leaving without a guaranteed spot ... confirmed via back channel conversations. Formal invites come AFTER a school leaves, with media rights.
That’s how I understood it. My question is how much back channeling can actually get done without the risk of lawsuits coming into place?Because everything leaks now days (anonymous source).
Anything short of a contract offer I would imagine. A key thing to remember is that every ACC member has THE RIGHT as per the ACC bylaws, of leaving the conference. They just need to advise and currently at least, pay the $120M exit fee. It would be totally expected that someone who wanted to leave would make some inquiries regarding a new home.
Haha WTF
You always have a right to breach a contract — economical breach is oft times a real option. I understand, technically, exercising a right in a contract is not a breach. But my point is, in regards to (backchannel) dialogue, the third party needs to be careful about tortious interference. I would think that is the only real legal impediment to any such dialogue. Inquiry is not tantamount to anticipatory breach, so I’m not aware of any legal risk UM has in direct inquiry — in other words, don’t know why, from UM’s perspective, using a backchannel would be necessary.
This info is what I have been waiting for to come out. ESPN has to have known all along that some of these ACC teams are worth much more viewership #'s and therefore more $ by playing more quality opponents in better conferences. ESPN not extending the GOR from 2027 to 2036 before the original deadline expired was a clear indicator ESPN wanted to spend their $ more wisely.
The Big and/or SEC has to avoid being sued for tampering by the ACC and teams in the ACC have to avoid being sued as well. Miami was sued by UCONN when they left the Big Least!
