So Rad said in his interview, getting out of Grant of Rights is impossible road..

I think at minimum they're the domino of all the Carolina schools. If they actually grow a pair then they'd cause a chain reaction that could easily and quickly kill the conference.


And this is why people have to stop including "FSU" in the list of teams that will be the driver of this process.

UNC will likely face political pressure to take NC State along, a linkage that does not exist in Florida bertween public F$U and private UM.

If it's 4 teams that bolt the ACC, I expect it to be UM, Clemson, and either UNC-NC State or UVa-VaTech. Six teams bolting brings the other pair. Eight teams bolting brings F$U.
 
Advertisement
Or, for ESPN wanting teams to get out and go B1G or SEC.
ESPN has two perspectives on ACC GoR. Help keep it together as a shield against B1G expansion, or destroy it to consolidate and improve their SEC property (this means really destroy the ACC and cut the bad properties for cost savings). Option 2 is just a financial analysis because the ACC deal is so good for ESPN, but I'm sure the math is clear on that for them. Option 2 would also help the B1G by freeing some ACC properties for them, but I doubt that would stop ESPN from helping themselves
 
Both the BIG10 and SEC are at 16 teams. The BIG10 is on record as saying they want 20. The SEC will match. That makes 8 potential openings, which is coincidentally the number of ACC schools needed to breakup the conference and render the GORs meaningless.

Only problem with that theory is that the BIG10 is likley to add two teams from the PAC12 (Oregon, Washington and Stanford are the likely candidates) so as not to leave USC/UCLA on an island out west. That will likely secure a dominating market position on late night games too (ESPN will have nothing of value in the late night time slot).

If BIG10 adds two more west coast teams then that leaves just 2 ACC teams making their way to the BIG10 (assuming the BIG10 doesn’t poach what’s left of the BIG12) and more work for the lawyers to try and find a way out of the GORs.
 
ESPN has two perspectives on ACC GoR. Help keep it together as a shield against B1G expansion, or destroy it to consolidate and improve their SEC property (this means really destroy the ACC and cut the bad properties for cost savings). Option 2 is just a financial analysis because the ACC deal is so good for ESPN, but I'm sure the math is clear on that for them. Option 2 would also help the B1G by freeing some ACC properties for them, but I doubt that would stop ESPN from helping themselves
Another facet to the evaluations is the BIG 12 media package that ESPN and FOX are at this moment commencing to restructure. Theoretically ESPN could blow up the ACC, add the cream of the ACC to the SEC (and SECN), take second tier ACC programs and add them to the BIG 12. Eliminate the ACCN and fill programming slots with expanded BIG 12 matchups. Lot of evals going on for sure.
 
Will not get 8 teams to leave imo. Miami/ FSU/ Clemson is all I can see leaving
UNC/Duke basically own the conference with the basketball side of things. I can’t see them giving that up. Nobody else would make the move trapping everyone else.
 
HIS comment was that ... the way he read the agreement it was not IRON CLAD but rather MALLEABLE ... due to having a clause that referenced COMPARABLE REVENUE TO SIMILAR PROGRAMS IN OTHER CONFERENCES. It was his belief in reading that contract that there WAS wiggle room for the top programs in the conference to either dramatically renegotiate the exit and GOR clauses ... or outright declare them VOID. At the end of the day it is a contract with terms and conditions ... and terms and conditions generally have some ability to be restructured when there is a clear cut reason. If we are looking at a $50 million dollar or more revenue differential there is basis for litigation ... especially if that clause is real.
You are the first one who spelled out the (likely) major loophole.

THANK YOU!
 
Dont GIF by Meme World of Max Bear
What guy is that?
You know more than Rad?
HaHa.
 
Advertisement
Can’t wait for this tobacco road minion jim phillps to get greg sankeyed
 
Here’s an idea folks:

Professional ppl usually keep things close to the vest to not show their hand, especially when a contract is involved. Words r very important.

Let me give u a personal example; so while working for a former employer, there were rumblings that structural changes were coming to our compensation, b/c some of us (cough, cough, cough) were making more than the execs, due to a grandfather clause. Well, wouldn’t U know a town hall meeting was called to squash the rumblings. The verbiage used was “at this time, we don’t see anything changing…our focus, at this time…”

Well ppl were so excited, thanking & kissing the execs ***, except for ya boy. Why? B/c they were right, at THAT time, no change was happening, & there focus was on us, as in not forming a union b/c we were non unionized. They couldn’t make a change until the end of the yr, and boom, a change came as they had to “pivot.”

Don’t get so caught up on what Rad says publicly about anything, b/c when contracts r involved, u have to play coy.
lol the times have caught up now and all that **** is made public thanks to team blind and fishbowl.

also, I get your point that hes gonna give the corporate statement but it is valid argument that the GoR is something someone is gonna have take to court to get out of. I dont see 8 schools bouncing to abolish the conf. im sure UM legal is working on a loophole argument to survive the likely dispositive motion in court. its what makes a lot of the ACC sort of untouchable
 
It’s also pretty likely non-disclosure agreements were signed across the board.
they released the GoR online w all the AD sigs I believe. its out there word for word for what it says. I dont think anyone is hiding the ball. I mean you can convince yourself that everything is done or there is some magic argument but w the amount of attorneys n here, we all can look at the GoR and theorize arguments that can get UM out of it early
 
they released the GoR online w all the AD sigs I believe. its out there word for word for what it says. I dont think anyone is hiding the ball. I mean you can convince yourself that everything is done or there is some magic argument but w the amount of attorneys n here, we all can look at the GoR and theorize arguments that can get UM out of it early
All I am saying is whoever is part of the conversations with the SEC or Big 10 has more likely than not signed NDAs and there are very limited people party to those conversations at this phase, whether you are talking about Miami, Clemson, or whoever. But the NDA goes for when Oklahoma and Texas jumped, A&M jumped, UCLA and USC jumped. Pretty much - these are being treated like high level M&A deals.
 
All I am saying is whoever is part of the conversations with the SEC or Big 10 has more likely than not signed NDAs and there are very limited people party to those conversations at this phase, whether you are talking about Miami, Clemson, or whoever. But the NDA goes for when Oklahoma and Texas jumped, A&M jumped, UCLA and USC jumped. Pretty much - these are being treated like high level M&A deals.
that part I get and assume such. I was just referring to the GoR part. all the talks dont matter until we can get out of the GoR. once one school gets into agreement with the ACC or a conference puts up the buyout fee, its open season. since I dont see a conf funding the buyout for a school, its gonna be up to their legal team
 
Advertisement
that part I get and assume such. I was just referring to the GoR part. all the talks dont matter until we can get out of the GoR. once one school gets into agreement with the ACC or a conference puts up the buyout fee, its open season. since I dont see a conf funding the buyout for a school, its gonna be up to their legal team
Sure. I will say this though. No one wants litigation, no one is going to want the limbo of how long that will take, and no one is going to want 1/4 or so of the conference to be there essentially against their will. If Miami, Clemson, FSU, UNC, or whoever are going to leave, those remaining teams and the conference will need to figure out their next steps and renegotiate their TV deal asap, not putz around until 2036. They cannot do that through a drawn out lawsuit. More likely this is all posturing and the various sides will negotiate a buyout.
 
Sure. I will say this though. No one wants litigation, no one is going to want the limbo of how long that will take, and no one is going to want 1/4 or so of the conference to be there essentially against their will. If Miami, Clemson, FSU, UNC, or whoever are going to leave, those remaining teams and the conference will need to figure out their next steps and renegotiate their TV deal asap, not putz around until 2036. They cannot do that through a drawn out lawsuit. More likely this is all posturing and the various sides will negotiate a buyout.
litigation is 90 percent of the reason why so many lawyers hate their jobs and lives and leave lol
 
litigation is 90 percent of the reason why so many lawyers hate their jobs and lives and leave lol
As an attorney, I have made a very deliberate effort to keep my lane on the transactional side. But seriously, this will not get to that point. It would be madness for everybody. There is a reason so many of these moves get accelerated from what is first proposed.
 
Five years from now, we'll still be in the ACC,
FSU, Clemson gone.
Silver lining, we will be a yearly contender for the Coastal Title..
Tell me you don’t have a ******* clue about how this works without telling me you don’t have a ******* clue about how this works
 
Back
Top