He is saying that the schools could possibly negotiate a purchase / buy out of the GOR with ESPN and/or the conference. That it's completely uncertain. That's the point. You can't do anything without a resolution of the GOR issue. The exit fee you know. Not the GOR.
Wrong. Wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong.
That is not what he was saying at all. He said that the MAXIMUM price is "remaining years times revenue share", but we all already knew that.
And as for the points he made about uncertainty, you are seeing what YOU want to see, and then building a narrative around THAT. There is no "ordering". There is no "you need to resolve the GOR issue first" nonsense. If you would have listened carefully, you would have realized that Bubba said EXACTLY what many of us have said before...
That "uncertainty" is being used as a cudgel. Nobody knows whether a GOR generally (or the ACC GOR specifically) is enforceable or not because everyone has been afraid to test one out in court. THAT is the issue, not the "dollar amount" nonsense that you are stuck on.
Here's the reality, Mr. I Do Assignments Every Day....this is NOT a traditional assignment, this is a very specific and very strange agreement that was put in place NOT to negotiate a TV deal, but to scare the loose ***** out of everyone in the ACC if they even THOUGHT about leaving...we already HAVE an agreement to keep the ACC together, it's called the ACC Constitution. You can't just sign 10 different contracts that set up 10 different financial penalties for leaving the conference.
And the REASON it is NOT really an "assignment" and is more about an abusive relationship...is that you DO NOT NEED A GOR to negotiate a TV deal. The SEC did it. The Big 10 did it. For the entire history of college sports TV deals, we SOMEHOW were able to survive without a GOR until someone invented it 20 years ago.
So all of your high-falutin' nonsense about how this is some sacrosanct document that was necessary and perfectly reasonable from a consideration standpoint is just false. It's not true. We didn't NEED a GOR to sign any TV deals (though I freely acknowledge that ESPN recognized a battered spouse when they saw one and took advantage of the ACC's desperation and neediness).
What does it all mean? What it MEANS is that we do not need to "resolve" the "GOR issue" before we do anything. In fact, the "anything" that we need to do is to summon up the will to be the first university (or group of universities) with the cojones to challenge the absolute fraudulence of a GOR contract. Period. All that bull**** that Bubba spouted about "well, here's the maximum, and then let's tell the ACC we can't afford to pay that and figure out a settlement" is just bull****. If the GOR was as "ironclad" as frauds like you want to claim, then there is no reason for the ACC to negotiate for one penny less than the maximum.
The "anything" is "going into court and saying that GORs are a farce", that they are an unnecessary construct to perform a function (entering into a TV deal) that is just a disguise for something completely different, namely, creating an ADDITIONAL financial penalty beyond the constitutional/contractual exit fee of $120M.
See, people like you remind me of my brother's former business partner. Over 20 years ago, my brother asked me to look at the Covenant-Not-To-Compete that his partner was having all the employees sign. And that Non-Compete was a template off of FindLaw.com that was perfectly drafted and completely enforceable...except for the fact that it was a 25 year term and a 25,000 mile radius (a number that is, conveniently, the circumference of the earth). So, setting aside whether a US court has the jurisdiction to enforce a planetary Covenant Not To Compete, I pointed out that a court would simply not enforce those time/distance numbers.
And while the ACC facts are not identical, the point is that a contract which APPEARS to be reasonable and enforceable can be completely invalidated by well-made arguments related to context and public policy and other considerations which do not appear on the massive 4-page "original" GOR or the 1-page "extension" to the GOR.
It's simple. The GOR is garbage. It was not necessary. It is a disguise to make "divorce" such a massively expensive undertaking that the abused parties are forced to remain together "for the kids (revenue)". And the "consideration" for the extension of 9 additional abusive years is non-existent.
Look, you might feel like you are being attacked. But you brought this all on yourself, by linking a BULL**** interview, telling us to listen to one particular portion, and then insisting that Bubba Cunningham said things he didn't say. All while misrepresenting the underlying subject matter.
YOU are the one who continues to act like Miami's only choice is to wait until 2036. You own that position, you have staked it out. And you are full of crap. You are like a psychologist who runs to a TV station to give an on-camera diagnosis of a celebrity based on a 60-second interview segment that you watched five minutes ago.
www.sportskeeda.com
