As Predicted By Anyone With A Brain, The ACC Is NOT Getting A TV Network

[upstater]

No. The Atlantic 10, the Colonial Athletic Association, the Mountain West, SEC, B1G, and others aren't there either. They are launching this so that it is easy to find all the games during the Conference baskctball tournaments next month. ESPN is planning to stream every ACC men's basketball and women's basketball tournament game. This sorts them for easy streaming access.

Why this particular list of conferences? Who knows? I imagine that the AAC and the others will be added later.

The ones you list are on other networks, ESPN doesn't have them, and/or they have their own networks.

 

[upstater]

This is for NelsonMuntz and all the others still pining for games against Marquette.

The extra $2m gets you next to nothing. NBC did UConn a big favor with that contract that explicitly guaranteed the conference that 90% of th games would be on TV (and by TV, I don't mean WatchESPN or ESPN3). The extra money for taking a conference and then burying it in the lineup (NC State, for instance, has only 4 games on ESPN/ESPN2 and CBS while UConn has 16) would not add any value to UConn.

Exposure is the name of the game for now--until UConn starts bleeding so badly that all hope is lost. And the extra $2m would not keep UConn running for long anyway.

If you flip this, you realize that the ACC schools are trading exposure and extra conference network revenues for $17-20m a year.

Right now, UConn needs exposure, exposure, exposure. As soon as UConn becomes an afterthought, the athletic program is done.

 

[buckaineer]

the AAC is 100% an espn property. The others you mention are not. It's bizarre that they aren't listed at launch but it likely has to do with the new contract that starts in the fall.

I believe CBS is also a media partner with the AAC.

 

[upstater]

I believe CBS is also a media partner with the AAC.

Yes, the CBS games are not subcontracted with ESPN. It's a totally separate contract, one that is ludicrously cheap for CBS. But hey, that's 3 to 6 games a year on network TV.

The games on CBSSN however are subcontracted through ESPN.

 

[itgoeslike]

It might be premature to give Aresco credit, but he may have structured the NBC deal with the assumption that ESPN would indeed exercise their option to meet any offer. If the deal with NBC was worth $5M year but had no guarantees, ESPN could exercise their option and relegate conference content to obscure outlets or resell without any provisions. Aresco may have made the calculation that 6 years of national exposure would do more to help the conference and its members than an extra $3M a year.

 

[UConn Dan]

I believe CBS is also a media partner with the AAC.

yes you are right instead of 100% I should have said 90% espn property.

 

[btstimpy]

Maybe for reruns, but the article states that they will be starting live broadcasts in the fall, which is when the AAC's football deal kicks in. If football resembles the current basketball season, you'll see UConn and other AAC teams nationally televised each week. Consider that every UConn basketball game has been nationally televised this year, at least from where I'm sitting.

Not reruns only. It will be live on ESPN, ESPN2, ESNPU, or ESPN3 and live on this simultaneously. That's what I mean by simulcast.

 

[btstimpy]

It's interesting the ACC office hasn't commented on this new ACC network. Usually they are out ahead of the game spinning every so called development but not a peep on this so far.

There isn't a development here. ESPN is reorganizing how to search for games on Watch ESPN that were already going to be on Watch ESPN. What is the ACC supposed to announce?

 

[btstimpy]

The ones you list are on other networks, ESPN doesn't have them, and/or they have their own networks.

I've seen games from all of them on ESPN I thought. I know that the Big East isn't there, but I know I've seen SEC, Big Ten, and AAC. This is all about the upcoming conference tournaments. Maybe other networks, like CBS, has the SEC. Or maybe the Big Ten Tournament will be on BTN. That would make sense why they aren't listed. But I don't understand the AAC.

 

[upstater]

I've seen games from all of them on ESPN I thought. I know that the Big East isn't there, but I know I've seen SEC, Big Ten, and AAC. This is all about the upcoming conference tournaments. Maybe other networks, like CBS, has the SEC. Or maybe the Big Ten Tournament will be on BTN. That would make sense why they aren't listed. But I don't understand the AAC.

It's the AAC's contract with ESPN that's different. It's explicitly for TV.

 

[Durks07]

Obviously the ACC doesn't believe in their Grant of Rights or they wouldn't still be suing Maryland which is all about trying to stop other schools from trying to leave the conference.[/B]

It's interesting FSU's president bolted just shortly before the announcement of this ACC network. He supposedly signed FSU up under promises of an ACC network coming into place from news accounts at the time.

Sometimes such things are unrelated, but then again sometimes they are.

Unless I have this wrong, Maryland is not subject to the GOR. They announced they were leaving prior to the GOR going into effect. Either way, if the ACC does not believe in the GOR's enforceability then other schools are not precluded from leaving anyway. The GOR is a contract provision, and without "testing" it in the court system, it is not enforceable. Having the GOR but not holding a school accountable for violating it renders it a nullity, and encourages further defection. Not testing it in court for one school but trying it for another is a bad fact for the ACC. Either way, a court may find that the GOR is unenforceable, but the power of the GOR is the threat that it might hold up.

 

[buckaineer]

There isn't a development here. ESPN is reorganizing how to search for games on Watch ESPN that were already going to be on Watch ESPN. What is the ACC supposed to announce?

Please. Get Real. A two second search on the internet shows these tidbits that the ACC announced

ACC announces 2014 schedule
ACC announces conference championship game will remain in Charlotte through 2019
ACC announces academic team
ACC announces Men’s Basketball Tournament Legends

but were supposed to believe they have no interest in announcing an ACC network that has been
talked about for months?

Obviously the ACC doesn't want anyone talking about this, and they certainly aren't "correcting" it with spin as you are desperately trying to do.

 

[btstimpy]

Obviously the ACC doesn't believe in their Grant of Rights or they wouldn't still be suing Maryland which is all about trying to stop other schools from trying to leave the conference.

It's interesting FSU's president bolted just shortly before the announcement of this ACC network. He supposedly signed FSU up under promises of an ACC network coming into place from news accounts at the time.

Sometimes such things are unrelated, but then again sometimes they are.

Grand of Rights has nothing to do with Maryland. Maryland is being sued for the Exit Fee because Maryland is contractually obligated to pay it, and Maryland has publicly announced that they are not planning to pay it. If they pay it and leave, they would not be sued.

Your conspiracy theories about Eric Barron are something you might need to ask him Perhaps he went to Penn State to help move Penn State into the ACC. It's just as imaginable.

 

[buckaineer]

Unless I have this wrong, Maryland is not subject to the GOR. They announced they were leaving prior to the GOR going into effect. Either way, if the ACC does not believe in the GOR's enforceability then other schools are not precluded from leaving anyway. The GOR is a contract provision, and without "testing" it in the court system, it is not enforceable. Having the GOR but not holding a school accountable for violating it renders it a nullity, and encourages further defection. Not testing it in court for one school but trying it for another is a bad fact for the ACC. Either way, a court may find that the GOR is unenforceable, but the power of the GOR is the threat that it might hold up.

You are correct, UMD is not under any ACC GOR.

There is a lawsuit currently involving an ACC buyout fee however. When the buyout fee was increased and announced, several members were surprised and commented that this would prevent schools from looking elsewhere due to its exorbitant amount.

Maryland is leaving the conference, but the ACC knows a 3 times the operating budget buyout--a number that grows every year ($52 million for Maryland)--is something that can prohibit schools from leaving as some were considering.

The point is--that if they indeed felt confident in their GOR then they wouldn't have considered raising the buyout fee for a second time, and they certainly wouldn't continue to sue Maryland. After all, if no one else can leave due to a GOR then why sue? There's little chance they will ever take away $52 million from UMD which will be gone in a few months, and they put themselves and their membership and partners in legal and financial peril of far more than $52 million by continuing rather than settling.

 

[btstimpy]

Please. Get Real. A two second search on the internet shows these tidbits that the ACC announced

ACC announces 2014 schedule
ACC announces conference championship game will remain in Charlotte through 2019
ACC announces academic team
ACC announces Men’s Basketball Tournament Legends

but were supposed to believe they have no interest in announcing an ACC network that has been
talked about for months?

Obviously the ACC doesn't want anyone talking about this, and they certainly aren't "correcting" it with spin as you are desperately trying to do.

This is not an ACC network or anything like it. This is ESPN reorganizing how to search for games on Watch ESPN. That is their streaming outlet. It is for ESPN to announce how they structure it, and that is precisely what they did. They are doing it at this time in preparation for all of the conference men's and women's basketball tournaments that they will be broadcasting in the next 3 weeks on all of the ESPN outlets.

 

[Dooley]

Oh good. More channels that will be added to the cost of my cable bill that I will boycott. F ESPiN

 

[buckaineer]

Grand of Rights has nothing to do with Maryland. Maryland is being sued for the Exit Fee because Maryland is contractually obligated to pay it, and Maryland has publicly announced that they are not planning to pay it. If they pay it and leave, they would not be sued.

Your conspiracy theories about Eric Barron are something you might need to ask him Perhaps he went to Penn State to help move Penn State into the ACC. It's just as imaginable.

The courts will decide what UMD is contractually obligated to pay if anything at all. They will also determine if the ACC owes Maryland treble damages for attempting to impede them with an illegally punitive fee --raised for a second time in a year, in which the ACC did not follow its own bylaws on either examining the proposed change, or enacting the change. The court will also decide if the ACC had any right to withhold monies from Maryland in part or whole. Maryland never voted for this buyout and they and other schools felt it was illegal and didn't abide by league rules. It was created and enacted after knowledge of Marylands impending move, it never was some longstanding rule of the conference as you try to suggest. Maryland also never declared they would not pay a buyout to the league. They publicly discussed the illegality of this rapid exorbitant change to the buyout, but never stated they weren't going to pay anything.

As far as Penn State, there is 0 chance PSU is giving up a $20 million per year financial advantage over the ACC to join the lowest paid and weakest league in major college football.

 

[buckaineer]

This is not an ACC network or anything like it. This is ESPN reorganizing how to search for games on Watch ESPN. That is their streaming outlet. It is for ESPN to announce how they structure it, and that is precisely what they did. They are doing it at this time in preparation for all of the conference men's and women's basketball tournaments that they will be broadcasting in the next 3 weeks on all of the ESPN outlets.

Ok sure. Sure it is. You keep waiting on that blockbuster payout network. The rest of us will be back here in reality when you come to your senses.

The ACC announces pretty much everything as I have shown. Its telling they haven't even mentioned this new ACC network.

 

[btstimpy]

Ok sure. Sure it is. You keep waiting on that blockbuster payout network. The rest of us will be back here in reality when you come to your senses.

The ACC announces pretty much everything as I have shown. Its telling they haven't even mentioned this new ACC network.

Are you actually this dense? Maybe I already know the answer. This is not an ACC network. This is Watch ESPN. Every one of those conferences listed are getting ready to hold basketball tournaments that ESPN wants its viewers to have easy access to find them online to watch the games.

 

[Durks07]

You are correct, UMD is not under any ACC GOR.

There is a lawsuit currently involving an ACC buyout fee however. When the buyout fee was increased and announced, several members were surprised and commented that this would prevent schools from looking elsewhere due to its exorbitant amount.

Maryland is leaving the conference, but the ACC knows a 3 times the operating budget buyout--a number that grows every year ($52 million for Maryland)--is something that can prohibit schools from leaving as some were considering.

The point is--that if they indeed felt confident in their GOR then they wouldn't have considered raising the buyout fee for a second time, and they certainly wouldn't continue to sue Maryland. After all, if no one else can leave due to a GOR then why sue? There's little chance they will ever take away $52 million from UMD which will be gone in a few months, and they put themselves and their membership and partners in legal and financial peril of far more than $52 million by continuing rather than settling.

Ok, that's where I misunderstood what you were getting at. They probably do not feel "confident" in the GOR. A strong argument exists that GORs are unenforceable. This is the best explanation that I have found thus far arguing this point: http://msn.foxsports.com/college-fo...erage/myth-of-the-big-12s-grant-of-rights.php (however, it automatically assumes that GORs are liquidated damage clauses). To this point, the legality of the GORs is grounded in conferences that have GORs declining to poach schools from other conferences with GORs. God forbid the Big 12 try and poach FSU, win, and then the PAC-12 take Texas, Oklahoma, Texas Tech, Ok. State, and the B1G takes Kansas. That is the irony in winning against the GOR.

 

[buckaineer]

Are you actually this dense? Maybe I already know the answer. This is not an ACC network. This is Watch ESPN. Every one of those conferences listed are getting ready to hold basketball tournaments that ESPN wants its viewers to have easy access to find them online to watch the games.

Keep deluding yourself.

 

[buckaineer]

Ok, that's where I misunderstood what you were getting at. They probably do not feel "confident" in the GOR. A strong argument exists that GORs are unenforceable. This is the best explanation that I have found thus far arguing this point: http://msn.foxsports.com/college-fo...erage/myth-of-the-big-12s-grant-of-rights.php (however, it automatically assumes that GORs are liquidated damage clauses). To this point, the legality of the GORs is grounded in conferences that have GORs declining to poach schools from other conferences with GORs. God forbid the Big 12 try and poach FSU, win, and then the PAC-12 take Texas, Oklahoma, Texas Tech, Ok. State, and the B1G takes Kansas. That is the irony in winning against the GOR.

Not only do they apparently not feel confident, perhaps its not as it seems. For example, the BIG 12 and its lawyers, and the tv network partners crafted their GOR over months and months and it was well documented in the media--and heavily questioned until it was announced everyone had signed on. The ACC's GOR however, came up virtually overnight. At the time neither Pittsburgh nor Syracuse were going to be in the league for months. Notre Dame wouldn't become a partial member for months. Louisville isn't going to be a member until this summer.

Yet they announced it was all done and immediately effective for everyone which is basically impossible since ND obviously didn't sign the same agreement as everyone else and Pitt, SU and UL all had media rights agreements with another league as well as ND, and weren't even members of the ACC. News reports also spoke of i.e. FSU being enticed with an ACC network guarantee, which certainly isn't any closer to being a reality in the manner in which they sold it. The ACC has made many false claims about many things such as their revenues being better than the top four leagues, that an ACC network was guaranteed, etc. etc. so there is at least a possibility that this GOR is also not exactly written in stone at this point. That they continue to sue UMD could well be an indication that if the lawsuit falls through then there isn't anything else besides the threat of an enormous buyout to hold anyone in. Continuing to sue Maryland at this late stage doesn't make much sense unless you are very concerned about what happens if you don't get the outcome you seek.

 

[buckaineer]

Ok, that's where I misunderstood what you were getting at. They probably do not feel "confident" in the GOR. A strong argument exists that GORs are unenforceable. This is the best explanation that I have found thus far arguing this point: http://msn.foxsports.com/college-fo...erage/myth-of-the-big-12s-grant-of-rights.php (however, it automatically assumes that GORs are liquidated damage clauses). To this point, the legality of the GORs is grounded in conferences that have GORs declining to poach schools from other conferences with GORs. God forbid the Big 12 try and poach FSU, win, and then the PAC-12 take Texas, Oklahoma, Texas Tech, Ok. State, and the B1G takes Kansas. That is the irony in winning against the GOR.

The Pac 12 is generating less revenues for its schools than the BIG 12 does. There is no chance the Pac 12 or anyone else for that matter is going to "take" Big 12 schools. It's possible some Pac 12 schools might one day join the BIG 12, or some of those western Big Ten schools would become tired of being stuck in a western upper midwest conference while OSU, PSU, MSU and Michigan all play one another each year and get yearly exposure in the new east coast markets.

The ACC remains vulnerable because its schools make so much less than the other leagues. $100 million less than Maryland by just 2020 and the ACC still has another 7 years on their all in contract.

 

[upstater]

The Pac 12 is generating less revenues for its schools than the BIG 12 does. There is no chance the Pac 12 or anyone else for that matter is going to "take" Big 12 schools. It's possible some Pac 12 schools might one day join the BIG 12, or some of those western Big Ten schools would become tired of being stuck in a western upper midwest conference while OSU, PSU, MSU and Michigan all play one another each year and get yearly exposure in the new east coast markets.

The ACC remains vulnerable because its schools make so much less than the other leagues. $100 million less than Maryland by just 2020 and the ACC still has another 7 years on their all in contract.

The B12's revs are only as good as Texas's word that it's going nowhere. Whereas the Pac12 is here to stay. $20m in perpetuity or until college sports cease. If you're Kansas you're not taking a chance.

 

[Durks07]

The Pac 12 is generating less revenues for its schools than the BIG 12 does. There is no chance the Pac 12 or anyone else for that matter is going to "take" Big 12 schools. It's possible some Pac 12 schools might one day join the BIG 12, or some of those western Big Ten schools would become tired of being stuck in a western upper midwest conference while OSU, PSU, MSU and Michigan all play one another each year and get yearly exposure in the new east coast markets.

The ACC remains vulnerable because its schools make so much less than the other leagues. $100 million less than Maryland by just 2020 and the ACC still has another 7 years on their all in contract.

No chance is probably too strong an assessment. While the Big 12 rakes in roughly $20m per school (http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/8346345/big-12-announces-media-deal-abc-espn-fox), the Pac-12 rakes in just about the same amount (http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/05/04/pac-12-officially-announces-landmark-media-deal/). The difference is not dramatic, and the numbers suggest that the Pac-12 gets almost $1m more per school (insignificant a difference in it of itself for sure). However, the media rights deal the Pac-12 could get with Texas alone in its footprint is massive. Adding Oklahoma brings that market into the equation and gives the Pac-12 control of one of the biggest rivalries in college sports. The raid of these four Big 12 schools came perilously close to happening in 2010 (http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/6998751/pac-12-conference-decides-expand-further).

Kansas, if the opportunity presented itself would jump at the chance to go to the B1G. The B1G pays out $5m more per school (http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id/76205/big-tens-tv-revenue-keeps-climbing), and projects a higher payout when its rights come up in 2016. The Big 12 has only 5 states in its footprint, and with three of those states have multiple members, the opportunities to grow that pot are limited. Especially if the Pac-12 came calling again, there is no benefit to sticking around with 6 schools when stability is so quick to attain.

The ACC has reason to remain concerned because two powerful conferences flank them. The SEC would love to get into NC and VA. The B1G would love to reach into those markets as well. However, the UNC and UVA talk to the B1G seems to have died down for now. Both see themselves as "Southern" universities and don't want (at the moment) to go to the B1G. However. if the SEC came calling and ripped two teams, the B1G would respond, and the Big 12 lives to fight another day with new members.

I'm not saying that it is going to happen that way, but the conference does have reason to sweat.

 

[buckaineer]

No chance is probably too strong an assessment. While the Big 12 rakes in roughly $20m per school (http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/8346345/big-12-announces-media-deal-abc-espn-fox), the Pac-12 rakes in just about the same amount (http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/05/04/pac-12-officially-announces-landmark-media-deal/). The difference is not dramatic, and the numbers suggest that the Pac-12 gets almost $1m more per school (insignificant a difference in it of itself for sure). However, the media rights deal the Pac-12 could get with Texas alone in its footprint is massive. Adding Oklahoma brings that market into the equation and gives the Pac-12 control of one of the biggest rivalries in college sports. The raid of these four Big 12 schools came perilously close to happening in 2010 (http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/6998751/pac-12-conference-decides-expand-further).

Kansas, if the opportunity presented itself would jump at the chance to go to the B1G. The B1G pays out $5m more per school (http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id/76205/big-tens-tv-revenue-keeps-climbing), and projects a higher payout when its rights come up in 2016. The Big 12 has only 5 states in its footprint, and with three of those states have multiple members, the opportunities to grow that pot are limited. Especially if the Pac-12 came calling again, there is no benefit to sticking around with 6 schools when stability is so quick to attain.

The ACC has reason to remain concerned because two powerful conferences flank them. The SEC would love to get into NC and VA. The B1G would love to reach into those markets as well. However, the UNC and UVA talk to the B1G seems to have died down for now. Both see themselves as "Southern" universities and don't want (at the moment) to go to the B1G. However. if the SEC came calling and ripped two teams, the B1G would respond, and the Big 12 lives to fight another day with new members.

I'm not saying that it is going to happen that way, but the conference does have reason to sweat.

I know you want to give the impression that somehow the BIG 12 is unstable or that schools are looking to move elsewhere to deflect from the instability of the ACC, buts it is simply misguided.

The numbers you see for the BIG 12 only include tiers 1 and 2 media rights for the league along with other things. They don't include tier 3, and all BIG 12 schools are making money from tier 3 tv deals despite what ACC fans and others will tell you.

Last year Texas and other members of the BIG 12 were paid out $22 million by the league. On top of that, Texas pulled in over $10 million for their tier 3 deal for television for the Longhorn Network. This year, UT will make more than $22 million in payouts from the BIG 12 conference as will other members and the number will increase throughout the tv deals. BIG 12 payouts for all media rights will remain on par with the top conferences.

Pac 12 payouts on the other hand --here is exactly what Oregon, the highest revenue earner for the 2012 year for the Pac 12 made:

• UO projects to receive $18.43 Million from the Pac-12 and the NCAA in Fiscal Year 2013. This distribution includes television revenue (projected and budgeted as $14.74 M), bowl revenue, NCAA basketball or other event revenue the conference distributes.
• We received $14.69 Million last fiscal year from the Pac-12 and the NCAA.
• The net gain is $3.74 Million from the Pac-12 and the NCAA, which includes the television revenue increase.

http://www.goducks.com/ViewArticle.dbml?ATCLID=205705405

You referenced a potential move of several years ago, prior to the BIG 12 signing new tv deals, GORs, Sugar bowl deal including ownership, Alamo bowl deal including ownership, and other revenues which on a per school basis are higher for the BIG 12 than any other league-coming online. You are talking about the past and inferring since teams were leaving the Big 12 years ago -and so some others explored options-that the same situation exists years later. It does not.

There isn't more stability in the Pac 12 and no BIG 12 schools are going to consider moving west--that is done.

Kansas would not jump at a chance to move to the Big Ten. Disregarding the GORs there is absolutely nothing to support that at all. Conference payouts for everything from the Big Ten were just over $25 million for full share members last year. Conference payouts for full share BIG 12 members were $22 million. But schools like Kansas also had tier 3 deals that boosted revenues for media rights above every Big Ten school.

For some reason you and others are under the mistaken belief that BIG 12 revenues remain static through 2025 but it isn't the case. By 2015 the conference payouts will be at $30 million per school and over $40 million by the end of the contracts. When you add in tier 3 media rights, BIG 12 schools will be just fine thank you. By 2025 the conference will have new tv deals that--if they are doing so for everyone else, will also be increasing for the BIG 12. Financially the BIG 12 is strong and will remain so, and also competitively.

ACC members are not going to keep pace financially and they know this and have expressed concern about it. No one in the BIG 12 is expressing any concern about stability of the league or a need to look around--and they aren't going to.

 

[buckaineer]

The B12's revs are only as good as Texas's word that it's going nowhere. Whereas the Pac12 is here to stay. $20m in perpetuity or until college sports cease. If you're Kansas you're not taking a chance.

The Big Ten's revs are only as good as Ohio State's word its not going anywhere. The SEC's revs are only as good as Alabama's and LSU's word they aren't going anywhere. The ACC's revs are only as good as FSUs word they aren't going anywhere. The Pac 12's revs are only as good as Oregon's and USC's word they aren't going anywhere.

Where do you people come up with this nonsense? I know some of you HOPE for the BIG 12 to go away, but it isn't a remote possibility. You are basing these silly thoughts on nothing real.

 

[upstater]

The Big Ten's revs are only as good as Ohio State's word its not going anywhere. The SEC's revs are only as good as Alabama's and LSU's word they aren't going anywhere. The ACC's revs are only as good as FSUs word they aren't going anywhere. The Pac 12's revs are only as good as Oregon's and USC's word they aren't going anywhere.

Where do you people come up with this nonsense? I know some of you HOPE for the BIG 12 to go away, but it isn't a remote possibility. You are basing these silly thoughts on nothing real.

I don't know why I bother. In over a century, Ohio State has sat on its eggs and hasn't spoken to a single anyone about leaving the B1G. Alabama and LSU have spoken to no one about leaving the SEC. Oregon and USC are on the Left Coast. Enough said. Only one of the schools mentioned here has had discussions with various conferences (Pac12, B1G, SEC, ACC), and that school is Texas.

Stop being an idiot.

 

[Pat125]

Buckaineer, the ACC's current exit fee and GOR has been done, at least significantly in part, to dissuade other universities from leaving the conference. It may have ended what I believe was mutual distrust that some of the members have on each other. But I don't think the purpose of the lawsuit is to make other members think twice of leaving. I think Mr. Swofford somehow actually believes the ACC is legally entitled to extort $52 million from Maryland, or thinks he can convince a possibly biased North Carolina court of that. If his purpose is to try to keep all of the current membership in line, he is playing a dangerous game with the lawsuit. Maryland, of course, would have a better chance of prevailing than other members, because they voted against the grossly, excessive fee, and announced soon after they were leaving the conference. That would not be the case for the others, who (except for Florida State) voted for the fee, and enough time has passed. Whereas Maryland has a good argument to say that the ACC's bylaw procedures weren't followed, the others, even Florida State, can no longer make that claim (they could only try to convince a court that the exit fee is punitive, and they had temporary asininity when they voted for it). Sure, if the ACC prevails, then the other members will see that the current fee would most likely be enforceable for them. A big gamble in my opinion.

As for the ACC Network, I doubt it will happen any time soon, but it appears to me this ESPN announcement has nothing to do with whether the ACC Network is happening or not. That ACC hasn't made any announcement about the ACC Network is more indicative they have no news to report at this time.

 

[buckaineer]

I don't know why I bother. In over a century, Ohio State has sat on its eggs and hasn't spoken to a single anyone about leaving the B1G. Alabama and LSU have spoken to no one about leaving the SEC. Oregon and USC are on the Left Coast. Enough said. Only one of the schools mentioned here has had discussions with various conferences (Pac12, B1G, SEC, ACC), and that school is Texas.

Stop being an idiot.

I've noticed when posters like you have no legitimate rebuttal you resort to personal attack or childish staements. That is uncalled for.

Things change. Once upon a time Big 12 payouts weren't so good compared to some of the other leagues. That has all changed now. Once upon a time the BIG 12 didnt have ownership of the Sugar bowl, a deal to play their best against the best of the SEC in the Sugar bowl - or to receive the same money and exposure as the Rose bowl. Its all changed. You rest your hopes on things that transpired years ago, but none of the circumstances of that time exist in the BIG 12 now. No one is considering moving from the BIG 12. Some did years ago, but it has absolutely no bearing on today or going forward.

Teams left the SEC, and big ten in the past as well as the ACC--different times, different circumstances.

No need to be angry, you need to move into the present and quit hanging your hopes on four years ago.