Current board mood: $EC or B1GLY ?

[E1k]

I cant get down with this E1K. The NCAA does not like us and will always press their foot on our throats a little harder at any opportunity they can get. Thats not delusional. Thats fact. It doesnt matter whether we are champs or chumps either.

What makes u think the ncaa doesn’t like us? Mfs in our own building for the last 15 years haven’t liked us lol thats been the issue. Very delusional to think the ncaa will hinder our success based on what conference we go to

 

[Hold My Beer]

I don't know enough specifics behind the scenes, but I do know the money and contract situation.

It's untenable for ACC members. Someone's hand is gonna get forced.

This x 100

Zero chance the 'Magnificent 7' (UM, Clemson, UNC, NCSU, UVA, VT and fsu) will sit around and accept an annual $30M to $50M shortfall compared to what SEC and B1G schools are collecting from their conference offices.

An escape route will be found — one way or another — long before 2036

 

[RVACane]

Don’t think if we are one of the only big schools in the south it wont hurt? U think we get negative recruited now? I think it would be worse then

Maybe. I think the big will help recruiting in other places.

 

[SayWhat]

Worst take I have read. Not a program in the Big that UM won't be able to compete with after a couple of added high quality recruiting classes. Games of national viewer interest on a large scale ... UM vs ND, Michigan, PSU, OSU. UM would have more exposure than ever. The SEC? They would do all they could to keep UM down in any manner they can.

Worst take is people thinking that we'd get better treatment than in the SEC.

We all know how ND thinks of us. The same is absolutely true of other Midwest folks. The idea that they would be anything different is laughable.

Such silly fear mongering that one is better than the other.

 

[TheOriginalCane]

I’ll ask @TheOriginalCane this as I can’t remember - is there anything in contract law where a contract is so onerous on one side that they can’t do business competitively and it could become illusory or some kind of voidable contract???

I’m thinking that the money is so much less in the ACC compared to the BIG and SEC that we can no longer compete with our competition and therefore will be decimated if forced to remain in that onerous contract

For both you and @JeddTheFisch , I don't think we would win in a pure contract situation (not involving termination of the conference itself) because I do not think that the TV money, non-FMV though it may be, is so low that you could argue an inability to do business (such as, our costs exceed the revenue, no matter what we do).

The problem is that there are two aspects to this. Simply on the issue of what ESPN pays, compared to what we "need" to stay on par with the Big 10 and SEC, the arguments would be that we thought the money was good on Day 1, we have brought nothing "new" to the table in terms of new schools/markets, and that our ratings do not evidence a need to gratuitiously raise the payouts just because someone else is getting paid more.

The second aspect is the Grant of Rights. The GOR is a mechanism that provides stability to not only the conference (it dissuades members from defecting), but also for the TV network (the group of schools/markets that they originally contracted to broadcast remains stable, and you don't "lose" Clemson and then get East Carolina as a "replacement"); it is the GOR which FINALLY induced ESPN to help us launch the ACC Network.

The TV deal, by itself, may not fit the definition of so "onerous" that it allows us to get out early. Unlike the Bally deal, the ESPN checks are coming through on time. The GOR might be able to be attacked based on its length, but what will hurt us here (and in other aspects of the case) are that our GOR isn't even the longest, as the Big 12 has a 99 year deal to stick together. But the notable differences are that that the Big 12 has a "2-year out" from the GOR, where you only forfeit two years worth of revenue, not "twelve more years".

I think the only possible compromise(s) involve killing the ACC, killing the GOR, and figuring out a way to let ESPN get back into the Big 10 broadcasting game. If any of those things don't happen, I can't see a more "polite" approach like attacking the TV contract itself or the GOR itself as having any real chance of succeeding.

 

[E1k]

Maybe. I think the big will help recruiting in other places.

Might be right, i wont be mad at either one tbh i see positives for both. If i were forced to choose id say sec because i think thats where the best football is gonna be

 

[RVACane]

Might be right, i wont be mad at either one tbh i see positives for both. If i were forced to choose id say sec because i think thats where the best football is gonna be

I think the odds are, assuming we’re left alone, that the SEC would be better for straight football recruiting. The school’s looking at a bigger picture though and the research funding and cooperation is significant in the BIG.

 

[Brains]

Don’t think if we are one of the only big schools in the south it wont hurt? U think we get negative recruited now? I think it would be worse then

I agree with this, and I think a lot of this board is underestimating the fact that saying "B1G" carries very little cachet here, whereas the $EC brand carries a lot.

Some will say "we recruit nationally now." That's all fine and good, but look at who we actually sign, and our roster composition.

The bread and butter is Florida, and that's not changing any time soon.

The money is powerful, but don't kid yourself that going to the B1G is ANYTHING but a pure money play.

 

[WaterburyCane]

What makes u think the ncaa doesn’t like us? Mfs in our own building for the last 15 years haven’t liked us lol thats been the issue. Very delusional to think the ncaa will hinder our success based on what conference we go to

You're right. The NCAA has been a pleasure to work with and a terrific partner. We get treated as equally as Alabama and the others.

We arent going to agree on this if you arent willing to admit that the NCAA doesnt like us.

But we can agree that SEC or B1G has to happen and either is better than the **** situation we are in.

There are so many variables we can dissect on the SEC/B1G arguement. We are just nitpicking at one. Im for the B1G for other reasons, but I do think that in terms of treatment, B1G is just getting in bed with the lesser of 2 pricks. I'll still be celebrating though if we move to the SEC.

 

[Hold My Beer]

I' wonder if the Magnificent 7's lawyers might do a deep dive into the back-room dealings between John Swofford and ESPN in 2016 that allowed Raycom Sports to retain a significant share of the ACC's broadcast inventory (and at a favorable price?).

Swofford's son, Chad, has been a VP at Raycom since 2007.

 

[No_Fly_Zone]

The reality is nobody on this board so far has been able to provide a copy of the NEW GOR which is reportedly a 36-40 page document as compared to the 2013 original that was 4 pages. I did read comments that were posted on another forum by a media "journalist" who said that he HAD read the entire document and in HIS OPINION it was not IRON CLAD but rather MALLEABLE due to actually containing some wording referencing monies received by programs "needed to be of a level similar to other programs of like stature in other conferences". There might be some wording in the agreement that creates a degree of "exit ability" and you combine that with 8-10 programs voting to dissolve the ACC Conference and then ESPN is in a very tough place as far as trying to "hold onto" media rights for a non existent conference.

Yes. Which is a lot of words to essentially say what I wrote: "ACC schools looking to exit are likely stuck searching within the contract itself for their out." And trust me, those schools have very qualified and expensive attorneys doing precisely that.

 

[E1k]

You're right. The NCAA has been a pleasure to work with and a terrific partner. We get treated as equally as Alabama and the others.

We arent going to agree on this if you arent willing to admit that the NCAA doesnt like us.

But we can agree that SEC or B1G has to happen and either is better than the **** situation we are in.

There are so many variables we can dissect on the SEC/B1G arguement. We are just nitpicking at one. Im for the B1G for other reasons, but I do think that in terms of treatment, B1G is just getting in bed with the lesser of 2 pricks. I'll still be celebrating though if we move to the SEC.

Lol i love when people argue made up ****t and say i said it

 

[CaneThang2020]

I can read and comprehend just fine. You were trying to inject some bs political talking point into something it didn't need to be. In addition, further make yourself look foolish implying how non diverse "The South" is and their fans. You've done the same **** in other threads. Give it a rest.

We can agree to disagree. No need to argue friend. Go Canes.

 

[WaterburyCane]

Lol i love when people argue made up ****t and say i said it

Cmon E1K. Dont make me do this. What makes u think the ncaa doesn’t like us?

That was your response to me. So can I not infer from that that you think the NCAA likes us?

 

[SpikeUM]

 

[RVACane]

I' wonder if the Magnificent 7's lawyers might do a deep dive into the back-room dealings between John Swofford and ESPN in 2016 that allowed Raycom Sports to retain a significant share of the ACC's broadcast inventory (and at a favorable price?).

Swofford's son, Chad, has been a VP at Raycom since 2007.

The schools still signed off on it though. I don’t think that would yield fruit. It seems we need to dissolve the ACC.

 

[SpikeUM]

Selfishly, I would prefer the SEC, but if given the choice, the B1G would be a bigger financial windfall, so logic says thats where we go.

 

[Brains]

For both you and @JeddTheFisch , I don't think we would win in a pure contract situation (not involving termination of the conference itself) because I do not think that the TV money, non-FMV though it may be, is so low that you could argue an inability to do business (such as, our costs exceed the revenue, no matter what we do).

The problem is that there are two aspects to this. Simply on the issue of what ESPN pays, compared to what we "need" to stay on par with the Big 10 and SEC, the arguments would be that we thought the money was good on Day 1, we have brought nothing "new" to the table in terms of new schools/markets, and that our ratings do not evidence a need to gratuitiously raise the payouts just because someone else is getting paid more.

The second aspect is the Grant of Rights. The GOR is a mechanism that provides stability to not only the conference (it dissuades members from defecting), but also for the TV network (the group of schools/markets that they originally contracted to broadcast remains stable, and you don't "lose" Clemson and then get East Carolina as a "replacement"); it is the GOR which FINALLY induced ESPN to help us launch the ACC Network.

The TV deal, by itself, may not fit the definition of so "onerous" that it allows us to get out early. Unlike the Bally deal, the ESPN checks are coming through on time. The GOR might be able to be attacked based on its length, but what will hurt us here (and in other aspects of the case) are that our GOR isn't even the longest, as the Big 12 has a 99 year deal to stick together. But the notable differences are that that the Big 12 has a "2-year out" from the GOR, where you only forfeit two years worth of revenue, not "twelve more years".

I think the only possible compromise(s) involve killing the ACC, killing the GOR, and figuring out a way to let ESPN get back into the Big 10 broadcasting game. If any of those things don't happen, I can't see a more "polite" approach like attacking the TV contract itself or the GOR itself as having any real chance of succeeding.

I'm gonna have to research this stuff, because it's just so far from what I practice in moron law.

 

[RVACane]

Cmon E1K. Dont make me do this. What makes u think the ncaa doesn’t like us?

That was your response to me. So can I not infer from that that you think the NCAA likes us?

@E1k ‘s cool man but once he’s on a mission he simply…

 

[Hold My Beer]

The schools still signed off on it though. I don’t think that would yield fruit. It seems we need to dissolve the ACC.

What if it revealed some problematic dealings by Swofford and ESPN of which the presidents were not made aware?

Just throwing **** up against the wall, but that seems like something ESPN wouldn't want out in the open because it could get messy