OK, I'll break down the other aspects that I think will start to unfold. And then we can challenge the Four Horsemen of the NOPE-ocalypse (
@NorthernVirginiaCane ,
@Handsome Squidbum ,
@dycane , and
@camber_2374 ) to articulate what THEY think will happen next, since all they ever do is tell us how nobody is goin' nowhere until the mid-2030s.
First, I'd point out that if/when F$U and another school leave, it takes our "votes to kill the ACC" from 8 to 7, but with two fewer "kill" votes. So we go from needing 5 other votes (besides UM, Clemson, and F$U) to needing 6 other votes (besides UM).
So let's think about next steps.
If "Clemson-F$U" heads to ESPN because of the rights flip, it could open up an interesting argument AGAINST the GOR, which I alluded to earlier. That is, if ESPN treats Clemson-F$U rights like poker chips, instead of "but but but we really need all the ACC teams to make a 20 year commitment so that our contract will hold value", then it strengthens the argument that the PENALTY component of the GOR is just a duplicative "exit penalty", since ESPN could ******* care less who is in the below-market ACC as long as they have more worthless inventory to fill timeslots.
And let's think about WHAT would happen if ESPN facilitates 2 (or more) ACC teams to the SEC...
Then, when the Big 10 invites some ACC teams (and make no mistake, the Big 10 has not abandoned the dream of expanding into the southeast), you begin to get into the fun stuff.
1. Who sues? For what? And on what grounds? People have been overly focused on the GOR terms, in the sense that the ACC does not have to give us our share of the annual rights money. BUT WHAT ANNUAL RIGHTS MONEY? The ACC can't actually enforce anything against us, not at the outset. We are ALLOWED to leave the conference, under the terms of the ACC Constitution and Bylaws. And the ACC does not "own" our rights any longer, having sold them to ESPN. So what is the move?
2. Again, AT THE OUTSET, what is ESPN's move? We are 12 months (at least) from the fateful day when broadcast trucks for BOTH Fox/CBS/NBC and ESPN/ABC show up in Miami Gardens to broadcast a Miami home game. Quite simply, the ACC should be terrified of dipping below 15 teams, lest ESPN be within its contractual rights to reopen the contract and pay the ACC actually LESS THAN $35M per school (which is legit in a non-Clemson-F$U world). And ESPN...what...files for declaratory judgment that it can show up to televise our games, which we know that Fox/CBS/NBC will not agree to without compensation. And, then, you'd think that ESPN might have to "continue to pay" the ACC the "old guarantee" if it wants to have a credible argument that televising Miami and any other exiting ACC schools is sooooooo important to its old contract. Because if ESPN activates its right to pay the ACC actually LESS money in the future, then it undermines the (bogus) argument that ESPN really really REALLLLLY wanted the same 15 teams for all 20 years.
3. It is hard to argue that ESPN owns 15 separate media properties. The GOR bundled all 15, and ESPN bought a CONFERENCE worth of inventory. They did not set a separate price for each school, yet we inherently know that "Stanford-Cal" instead of "Clemson-F$U" is LESS VALUABLE. It just is, even without a la carte pricing. And what gets lost on the Four Horsemen of the NOPEocalypse is WHAT HAPPENS WHEN SOMEONE BREACHES. Nobody has disputed that someone CAN assert that they have the right to broadcast Miami home games. What IS at dispute...is what that looks like...I have never said that schools can't leave...and I have never said that the ACC can't withhold annual revenue shares...BUT WHAT I HAVE SAID IS THAT THE ACC HAS NOTHING TO SHARE IF ESPN DOESN'T GIVE THEM THE MONEY. What is ESPN's enforcement tool? To NOT pay the ACC for Miami while insisting that they can broadcast Miami? That's not gonna fly. It's up to the ACC to NOT pay Miami, but it's also incumbent upon ESPN to ACTUALLY PAY the ACC. Interesting conundrum.
4. Here's another thought. The "we're stuck in the ACC" crowd are soooo fond of telling us how "IRREVOCABLE" and "ironclad" the GOR is. But is it? ESPN signed a contract with the ACC knowing FULL WELL that schools could leave at any time. EVEN WITH the paper tiger of the GOR trying to scare everyone straight, it has ALWAYS been the right of schools to leave the ACC. So why should ESPN "continue" to own the rights of anyone who VALIDLY leaves the ACC? They bought a bundle of inventory from a conference of 15 teams knowing that any of those 15 schools could leave. So ESPN, regardless of its purchase of "these" 15 schools, cannot possibly intervene in conference business to tell schools that they cannot leave the conference. Sure, maybe they can insist "but we are bringing a TV truck to your stadium next year", but that has NOTHING to do with the money, per se, it has to do with performance of services. And if ESPN wants to bluff the world that it will pay a half-billion every year to televise some unwilling old-ACC teams (along with some willing still-ACC teams), I would like to see them write that check. Because it will also be a PR disaster IF IF IF they insisted on broadcasting unwilling schools.
5. Here's the reality. If ESPN willingly flips a few ACC schools' rights to the ESPN side of the ledger, I strongly suspect that they will be willing to negotiate to flip a few ACC schools' rights to the Big 10. For a price. And the price will NOT be "35 million per year times 12 years". It will be something. But it won't be that. And maybe Fox/CBS/NBC will advance that money against the "future earnings" of some ACC schools, and in exchange, we agree to take a "partial share" for a while. But it can certainly happen. Anyone who thinks that Disney and Fox aren't willing to buy/sell some of its properties to the other hasn't been paying attention over the last couple of years.
So here's the conclusion. We need to find "enough things" that will make Disney/ESPN/ABC happy, Fox/CBS/NBC happy, the Big 10 happy, the ACC happy ENOUGH, and the various schools that change conferences happy. When that happens, everything will snap into place. Until that time, I hope we retain ALL of our leverage, including the nuclear option (killing the ACC), the "challenge the GOR and/or extension" option, and the "2026/2027 we out" option. I believe that the Big 10 and SEC want to "manage" expansion, and I highly doubt the SEC takes more than 2 more teams and the Big 10 takes more than 4 more teams. I would also look for a few more players to be involved soon, don't rule out USF and a few others. And the Big 12 is not out of the woods yet.
I still believe the Big 10 really really really wants to expand into the southeast.
I still believe that Fox/CBS/NBC want to snatch as many teams as possible prior to making a bid for the CFP broadcast package.
I still believe that the GOR has been waaaaaay oversold in its power and enforceability.
So the next week will be interesting, the next few months will be interesting.
