forums

MEGA Conference Realignment and lawsuits Megathread: Stories, Tales, Lies, and Exaggerations

here’s a link to the live stream

www.wctv.tv

WCTV | Livestream | Tallahassee, FL

WCTV | Livestream | Tallahassee, FL
www.wctv.tv www.wctv.tv

FSU counsel arguing that sovereign immunity was never waived, and therefore it could have never committed to many of the provisions with the ESPN-ACC grant of rights
 
Advertisement
For the record, I’m not an attorney by trade, but I’ve worked for banks that have bought failed banks, and overseen over 100 foreclosures and been involved in negotiating over 60 new development and loan docs sets

So I’ve got a pretty solid understanding of contract law and the components of how they are resolved
 
USNAVYCANE said:
I don’t think that’s a good defense but I’m not a lawyer
Click to expand...

You are on the right track in that this argument isn’t the golden ticket to the resolution

However, when acc and espn argue that fsu, as a public institution has to pay a $700mm exit fee, and the impacts to public finances of Florida, it is meaningful from a political standpoint
 
Advertisement
The way ACC and ESPN put into place the GOR is going to become a major issue.

Applying it to my world, if proper documentation of procedure and approval of each institution isn’t met, it blows up the Security Interest

It’s like allowing your 18 year old kid to take out a loan on the house that his dad owns…. The kid can say that the house is his residence, but he doesn’t have the authority or capacity to pledge the house (security) as collateral for the loan

And this becomes extra arduous for non-profits and governmental entities
 
Cane6 said:
The way ACC and ESPN put into place the GOR is going to become a major issue.

Applying it to my world, if proper documentation of procedure and approval of each institution isn’t met, it blows up the Security Interest

It’s like allowing your 18 year old kid to take out a loan on the house that his dad owns…. The kid can say that the house is his residence, but he doesn’t have the authority or capacity to pledge the house (security) as collateral for the loan

And this becomes extra arduous for non-profits and governmental entities
Click to expand...

I’ll bet you all a beer that FSU wins the priorities argument when the judge returns in about 20min

ACC was shoddy in how they rushed to file, and the fsu attorney roasted them in how they didn’t follow ACC requirements to sue or counter sue one of its member schools
 
Advertisement
Hoyacane1620 said:
Click to expand...



I have no idea what that means.

First, why should the ACC be able to "sell them" and "split the revenue"? This is just bizarre. The GOR was supposed to be a conduit, to pass along the broadcast rights to the broadcast partner. It was not supposed to create an ownership interest on the part of the ACC that they could then "sell" to another broacast partner, while they "split" the revenue with whoever's rights they just sold.

Second, WHAT "under the terms of the normal agreement"? Where does the GOR say that the ACC can buy and sell our various TV rights on their own initiative?

This makes no sense at all.
 
So ACC says they own the media rights after a school leaves conference, not ESPN. But that is entirely reliant on Grant of Rights, as nothing in ACC constitution or whatever gives media rights to the conference once they leave

But the Grant of Right itself was literally a condition of the ESPN agreement and for the purpose of allowing the conference to perform the obligation to the media agreement for the entire term, even if the left the conference before the term ended.

Wouldn’t that mean since the media agreement explicitly says ESPN doesn’t own any future media rights once the school leaves the conference, that the school is still meeting its obligation to the media agreement without the conference retaining control of their rights? Like the purpose of the GoR is literally for conference to meet the ESPn media agreement. But as soon as the school leaves their future “works” are no longer subject to the media agreement…

Probably too simple way to look at it, but seems to me that the GOR entire purpose is just to ensure the conference and school is specifically meeting its ESPN media deal. So if in the media deal they don’t get rights to games for team out of conference, why does the conference? The school met its obligation to the media deal. The deal is when the leave the conference ESPN losing the future media rights… the GOR did its job. Why does the conference get to keep the rights?
 
Advertisement
TheOriginalCane said:
I have no idea what that means.

First, why should the ACC be able to "sell them" and "split the revenue"? This is just bizarre. The GOR was supposed to be a conduit, to pass along the broadcast rights to the broadcast partner. It was not supposed to create an ownership interest on the part of the ACC that they could then "sell" to another broacast partner, while they "split" the revenue with whoever's rights they just sold.

Second, WHAT "under the terms of the normal agreement"? Where does the GOR say that the ACC can buy and sell our various TV rights on their own initiative?

This makes no sense at all.
Click to expand...
They are "making **** up" as they go along ... out of panic of pending collapse. The GOR documents we have all read clearly tie the initiation of the GOR TO the ESPN media agreement ... period. Now they are saying it basically has nothing to even do with ESPN ... all conference members simply .... FOR NO CONSIDERATION OF ANY KIND ..... agreed to give the ACC their media rights until 2036. Not going to hold up ... in court.
 
Advertisement
In case anyone wants a reminder of GOR:
IMG_1468.jpeg


IMG_1469.jpeg
 
Rickd said:
They are "making **** up" as they go along ... out of panic of pending collapse. The GOR documents we have all read clearly tie the initiation of the GOR TO the ESPN media agreement ... period. Now they are saying it basically has nothing to even do with ESPN ... all conference members simply .... FOR NO CONSIDERATION OF ANY KIND ..... agreed to give the ACC theire media rights until 2036. Not going to hold up ... in court.
Click to expand...
Seems pretty clear GOR is all about ensuring schools meet their end of ESPN media deal specifically.
 
TheOriginalCane said:
I have no idea what that means.

First, why should the ACC be able to "sell them" and "split the revenue"? This is just bizarre. The GOR was supposed to be a conduit, to pass along the broadcast rights to the broadcast partner. It was not supposed to create an ownership interest on the part of the ACC that they could then "sell" to another broacast partner, while they "split" the revenue with whoever's rights they just sold.

Second, WHAT "under the terms of the normal agreement"? Where does the GOR say that the ACC can buy and sell our various TV rights on their own initiative?

This makes no sense at all.
Click to expand...

I’ve waited for this day for a looooooooonnnnggggg time, to watch and listen to the ACC try to argue the GOR and ACC bylaws combo

There is more fun to be had, but today was just the beginning of exposing the ACC and their North Carolina plantation mentality

At some point ESPN is gonna wise up, and offer a settlement before going down with the sinking ship that is the ACC
 
TL;DR for everyone. Well shorter lol.

- lot of fun listening to ACC get owned (as much fun a court session is without a murder trial to shock)
- FSU lawyer did a good job.
- that all said- there was almost no chance this case was getting dismissed in Florida like ACC wanted before the day started, and that's where we ended the day.

To me the interesting part is not around any of that per se- it was a peak into the judge's initial take on a lot of things that would make the ACC (and ESPN) realize they have an uphill battle in the state because of Florida state being a state entity and sunshine laws and could make them and ESPN more interested in the negotiated settlement we all would expect- but much faster perhaps. He also mentioned mediation a dozen times.

In terms of the weird comment the ACC lawyer said around GOR- one of two things happened there IMO @TheOriginalCane
- he made an outright mistake in the interpretation of the GOR and conference bylaws
- OR - the language in the ACC contract with ESPN that no one has seen but could be a smoking gun in fact says that ESPN doesn't get the media rights for a member institution if they withdraw from the league via exit fee or settlement, that FSU and Clemson statement that their as necessary rights to the ACC to negotiate a deal end if they leave the league.

IF the latter, and we don't know, then **** they did find an exit path most likely. Still have work to do in new hearing on 4/22 on discovery (like seeing the ESPN contract as an example) and others.

Few last notes- judge leaned to strongly leaned into the fact that the FSU BOT did not vote to accept the GOR or extension as might be required in Florida law in contrast to the NC court ruling, it came up that the ACC commish flew down at some meeting in the past and said it wouldn't be shown in state, and leaned into the original vote to sue fsu not being handled right- again in contrast to NC court.

There was also a mention that when FSU originally voted on things in 1991, a key NC law the ACC and judge cited (can't recall the name but it's around organizations in the state) didn't even come into existence until 2006 in NC and they are trying to take away the rights of a sovereign without their approval by using this "law".
 
Advertisement
Back
Top