Maryland’s $157 million counterclaim: ACC recruited B1G schools

[Fishy]

1) I don't see any reason why ESPN would be nervous. Advising a business partner is hardly the stuff of scandal and it's not like anyone is going to turn down their money because they once advised poaching of their membership. Hell, they actually engineered the destruction of our conference and here we are.

2) My guess is Indiana and Penn State. They had to aim low and those two make the most sense - Purdue and Northwestern are my two darkhorses.

3) I don't see this as evidence of the ACC wanting to go to 16 - it looks more like a reactionary move in the moment. If anything, it's pretty clear that the ACC operates on something other than clear, cold logic.

 

[UConn990411]

Which was always my point on this. There's a difference between consulting on a revenue question and scheming behind the scenes to destroy something while simultaneously offering it a billion dollars.

That goes out the window when ESPN was advising the ACC to add Big East schools...while it still had a contract with the Big East.

Not sure why you continue to overlook this point.

 

[Carl Spackler]

True, but it will be interesting to see what surfaces in discovery.

If it were 1998, I would quip, "I can hear the shredders working overtime in Bristol from here.", but in 2014, I'm not sure what the equivalent is....."I can hear the mainframes buzzing from scanning emails?"

Depending how things shake out with the ESPN ordained Power 5 conferences, and their relationship with the rest of the NCAA - which is happening right now as each day passes in real time - I think that ESPN execs eventually are going to end up having some 'splaining to do in front of federal judge someday.

 

[UConn Dan]

1) I don't see any reason why ESPN would be nervous. Advising a business partner is hardly the stuff of scandal and it's not like anyone is going to turn down their money because they once advised poaching of their membership. Hell, they actually engineered the destruction of our conference and here we are.

2) My guess is Indiana and Penn State. They had to aim low and those two make the most sense - Purdue and Northwestern are my two darkhorses.

3) I don't see this as evidence of the ACC wanting to go to 16 - it looks more like a reactionary move in the moment. If anything, it's pretty clear that the ACC operates on something other than clear, cold logic.

Agree with 1 and 2.
Point 3, I think it was a matter of the ACC being reactionary, yes - also trying to ruffle some of Delany's feathers. But I think the ACC was the first to 14 and wants to be the first to 16 (or 15 w/ the 3 pods in football).

 

[CL82]

I'm no lawyer, but I think the Big East (er American) is safe since this was negotiated as part of the early exit and those schools retaining the rights to the Big East name, etc.

Either way, I would imagine this won't go to trial and there will be a settlement in 20 minutes (er 6 months).

Agree Dan.

 

[Fishy]

The three-pod concept is insane - I have to imagine it was invented here.

The biggest roadblock right now to a 16-team ACC is Notre Dame.

They won't go to 15 and I just don't see them adding two more teams without one of them being Notre Dame.

There's just no one to add outside of UConn. (Does anyone actually think Cincinnati will ever have a chance of going to the ACC?)

 

[CL82]

1) I don't see any reason why ESPN would be nervous. Advising a business partner is hardly the stuff of scandal and it's not like anyone is going to turn down their money because they once advised poaching of their membership. Hell, they actually engineered the destruction of our conference and here we are.

If emails, memos and the like show that they knowingly funded the destruction of the Big East the ramifications would be huge. The narrative would be that of a heartless corporation sticking it's defiling the vestigial virgin that is college sports. Think Congressional hearings, anti trust suits and the like. It would be the perfect narrative for every politico to spout off on. They should be concerned. I suspect that they will 'advise their partners' to make the whole thing go away.

Well played by Maryland.

 

[noeynox]

On Cincinnati to the acc, yes i can see it. You probably thought the same about Louisville. They have Ann aggressive ad, in the mold of jurrich or luck. That seems to matter..

 

[Chuck]

The three-pod concept is insane - I have to imagine it was invented here.

The biggest roadblock right now to a 16-team ACC is Notre Dame.

They won't go to 15 and I just don't see them adding two more teams without one of them being Notre Dame.

There's just no one to add outside of UConn. (Does anyone actually think Cincinnati will ever have a chance of going to the ACC?)

I agree that the ACC is staying put, but I disagree that UConn is the only choice out there. I think Cincy would get in to the ACC at this point. You can't put the "academic" toothpaste back in the tube with the ACC's Louisville addition. They squirted that stuff all over the mirror, the toilet seat and put some on Duke's toilet paper just to be a [fill in word that would be filtered]. Add in the fact that we are just loathed and I think USF/UCF, Memphis, Appalachian State, UNH, William and Mary and a few others have a better chance of getting in to the ACC than us (only a slight exaggeration). I think we'd have to see a mass exodus from the ACC to get a call. I truly feel that if ND agrees to become a football member, Cincinnati gets the call over us.

 

[Husky92]

I agree that the ACC is staying put, but I disagree that UConn is the only choice out there. I think Cincy would get in to the ACC at this point. You can't put the "academic" toothpaste back in the tube with the ACC's Louisville addition. They squirted that stuff all over the mirror, the toilet seat and put some on Duke's toilet paper just because to be a [fill in word that would be filtered]. Add in the fact that we are just loathed and I think USF/UCF, Memphis, Appalachian State, UNH, William and Mary and a few others have a better chance of getting in to the ACC than us (only a slight exaggeration). I think we'd have to see a mass exodus from the ACC to get a call. I truly feel that if ND agrees to become a football member, Cincinnati gets the call over us.

Ugh. That is sad. I think I'll go to bed now.

 

[UConn Dan]

The three-pod concept is insane - I have to imagine it was invented here. The biggest roadblock right now to a 16-team ACC is Notre Dame. They won't go to 15 and I just don't see them adding two more teams without one of them being Notre Dame. There's just no one to add outside of UConn. (Does anyone actually think Cincinnati will ever have a chance of going to the ACC?)

Insane or not is immaterial. I'm for anything that will get UConn out of this sh!thole.
I agree Cinci has no shot but I do think we are desirable and the Swoff knows this and wants to snag us for 15 so when ND iOS ready we aren't already in the B1G. Maybe I'm crazy. I just don't see any other way out

 

[zls44]

That goes out the window when ESPN was advising the ACC to add Big East schools...while it still had a contract with the Big East.

Not sure why you continue to overlook this point.

If the ACC goes to ESPN "we are considering adding schools X and Y, what are their valuations in your opinion", and ESPN responds with the dollar figure...that isn't saying "ADD THESE TEAMS AND SCREW UP OUR OTHER CONTRACT!"

It's answering the question that's asked. Maybe the Big East should have asked if the ACC was mentioning any of their teams to ESPN.

 

[NEforceUConn]

So Pitt has essentially had its hands inside three conferences in the past couple years. What s

That's why they are called Pitt.

 

[UConn990411]

If the ACC goes to ESPN "we are considering adding schools X and Y, what are their valuations in your opinion", and ESPN responds with the dollar figure...that isn't saying "ADD THESE TEAMS AND SCREW UP OUR OTHER CONTRACT!"

It's answering the question that's asked. Maybe the Big East should have asked if the ACC was mentioning any of their teams to ESPN.

I didn't realize the ACC contracted ESPN to be its consultant on conference realignment.

 

[noeynox]

If the ACC goes to ESPN "we are considering adding schools X and Y, what are their valuations in your opinion", and ESPN responds with the dollar figure...that isn't saying "ADD THESE TEAMS AND SCREW UP OUR OTHER CONTRACT!"

It's answering the question that's asked. Maybe the Big East should have asked if the ACC was mentioning any of their teams to ESPN.

And you know they didn't, and weren't lied to? Just saying.

 

[WestHartHusk]

The irony of ironies is that the B1G has a Grant or Rights, but apparently Swofford thinks they can be broken.

 

[UConn9604]

View attachment 4756

As the saying goes, good lawyers generally don't ask a question to which they don't already know the answer.

Maryland's President is a lawyer, and was probably aware of what was going on when the ACC discussed adding Syracuse and Pitt. These paragraphs are included in the complaint for a reason.

 

[SAMCRO]

If the ACC goes to ESPN "we are considering adding schools X and Y, what are their valuations in your opinion", and ESPN responds with the dollar figure...that isn't saying "ADD THESE TEAMS AND SCREW UP OUR OTHER CONTRACT!"

It's answering the question that's asked. Maybe the Big East should have asked if the ACC was mentioning any of their teams to ESPN.

If schools X and Y are currently in a contract with ESPN, the answer should be "we are currently in contract with the schools you're inquiring about, so to provide an answer would be a conflict of interest and inappropriate and unethical for us to provide you such valuation. Just as we would not provide similar information on schools in your conference to other leagues Mr. Swofford."

 

[Jarhead_1775]

If schools X and Y are currently in a contract with ESPN, the answer should be "we are currently in contract with the schools you're inquiring about, so to provide an answer would be a conflict of interest and inappropriate and unethical for us to provide you such valuation. Just as we would not provide similar information on schools in your conference to other leagues Mr. Swofford."

When did ethics and business ever go together?

 

[CL82]

If the ACC goes to ESPN "we are considering adding schools X and Y, what are their valuations in your opinion", and ESPN responds with the dollar figure...that isn't saying "ADD THESE TEAMS AND SCREW UP OUR OTHER CONTRACT!"

It's answering the question that's asked. Maybe the Big East should have asked if the ACC was mentioning any of their teams to ESPN.

BIG EAST: Television partner. Oh television partner..... are you planning on paying another conference a premium if they raid us?

ESPN: Why no that would be despicable, if not an outright breach of our fiduciary duty to you Big East. We would never do that...wait I gotta go Swofford's on the other line.

BIG EAST: Hello? Hello?

 

[Fishy]

If the ACC goes to ESPN "we are considering adding schools X and Y, what are their valuations in your opinion", and ESPN responds with the dollar figure...that isn't saying "ADD THESE TEAMS AND SCREW UP OUR OTHER CONTRACT!"

It's answering the question that's asked. Maybe the Big East should have asked if the ACC was mentioning any of their teams to ESPN.

You're being willfully naive. Either that or you're just simple.

The ACC is ESPN's house brand.

They're not in a sit-quietly-and-consult mode with their house brand and they certainly didn't shed a tear when the Big East was destroyed. Their money underwrote the massacre - if you don't want your checkbook being used as a machete, you don't let your checkbook be used as a machete.

Now, is that wrong? It certainly wasn't nice, but wrong?

No, it's business.

I'm not sure what kind of smoking gun the rest of the board thinks we're going to find or if a smoking gun can even exist when you're talking about a network favoring one conference over another.

The Big East overplayed whatever hand it thought it had and it got leveled by the ACC and ESPN.

Indisputable.

 

[CL82]

You're being willfully naive. Either that or you're just simple.

...or deliberately disingenuous.

 

[Fishy]

I don't think ESPN cares.

Say that it comes out tomorrow that ESPN willfully engineered the destruction of the Big East....

Who's left to be outraged?

Us?

The national media and the world that is served by the ACC, SEC, Pac 12, Big 12 and Big Ten would probably applaud. They certainly welcomed the Big East's demise when it happened.

 

[Chin Diesel]

You're being willfully naive. Either that or you're just simple.

The ACC is ESPN's house brand.

They're not in a sit-quietly-and-consult mode with their house brand and they certainly didn't shed a tear when the Big East was destroyed. Their money underwrote the massacre - if you don't want your checkbook being used as a machete, you don't let your checkbook be used as a machete.

Now, is that wrong? It certainly wasn't nice, but wrong?

No, it's business.

I'm not sure what kind of smoking gun the rest of the board thinks we're going to find or if a smoking gun can even exist when you're talking about a network favoring one conference over another.

The Big East overplayed whatever hand it thought it had and it got leveled by the ACC and ESPN.

Indisputable.

A pretty good analogy. For whatever reason ESPN made the ACC it's Market Place or Great Value product.

Sure they buy, sell, promote other brands that are more valuable and higher quality but at the end of the day the ACC is what ESPN figured was the highest quality brand that they could control.

 

[Adios]

This pales what Blumenthal did with the ACC. I can see the ACC or B1G welcoming us with open arm now. Who's left to take? UCF? Gotta love the drama of college sports...

If ND is forced to join the ACC as a full member for D4, we're probably in for #16.