Big East pile of exit fee money - UConn Conundrum

[HobokenHusky]

So this apparently large pile of money that UConn is entitled to (20-30 million) puts UConn in a pretty interesting situation. How long will we need to stay in the new conference to be eligible to collect the money? If any conference comes calling before that time not named the B1G, do we jump immediately sight unseen due to the fear of being left out? My initial thought is yes, but considering the fact that the only way we get an ACC invite is if one of their big fish got taken, is that really a smart move? There is no way we get a full pay out immediately, So this would be a short term loss for a potential Lon term gain, a gain of which I am not sure is very big considering what would be left in the ACC. Hopefully it works out where we are in the conference long enough to collect and are able to bolt almost immediately, but it brings up an interesting debate if we are forced to choose between $30 million and the tty version of the ACC.

 

[junglehusky]

You take the *tty version of the ACC, it's essentially the old big east less Rutgers and WVU. More east coast identity, better schools, better long-term stability (even if the ACC's stability / perception is lower than other major conferences)... that's worth giving up a few million for IMHO.

 

[ConnHuskBask]

If UConn could cut a check today to the ACC for membership, the only question UConn would ask is "how much?"

 

[HobokenHusky]

Yea, if it was $5M I would def agree, but the fact that it could be in the upper $20M makes it a more intriguing discussion at least. I don't think anyone would argue that we would switch places with Ville in a heartbeat, but now that we are in this situation and close enough to the money, it makes it much more of a debate. Another thing is that we might be able to use 2 facts as leverage for a better initial ACC payout: 1) we have this pile of money that we would forgo collecting to join 2) Tradition wise, we are the only game in town that is left. If they go past us and take anyone else, it's a huge downgrade. We stick out like a sore thumb based on what is left. I am very curious to hear what the terms of collection are on this payout.

 

[HobokenHusky]

If UConn could cut a check today to the ACC for membership, the only question UConn would ask is "how much?"

Yes, today, but if 2 or possibly 4 of UNC/FSU/GTech/UVA are gone, is that still the case? It almost becomes a Boise and the Big East type of debate at that point.

 

[gioff23]

Like the C7 (who got their credits), UConn better have a frigging lawyer who already made sure contractually or can later prove that we "earned" the fee at the time of the split. The timing of the payment is irrelevant. That's like telling someone to fix your roof, they do the work, and then you put up a for sale sign and say sorry, we're moving, you need to go see the new buyer about the check.

 

[noeynox]

You take the power five conference invite no questions asked.

 

[Exit 4]

If UConn could cut a check today to the ACC for membership, the only question UConn would ask is "how much?"

I agree, we should consider paying our way in if its the ACC or B1G. Both conf might appreciate the buy in given its essentially a partial return of the break up money they paid us.

 

[ConnHuskBask]

Yes, today, but if 2 or possibly 4 of UNC/FSU/GTech/UVA are gone, is that still the case? It almost becomes a Boise and the Big East type of debate at that point.

The ACC is locked in with ESPN for what, the next 10 years at nearly $18 million a year per team?

I would argue UCONN would pay $100 million (financed of course) to get ACC membership. Even a watered down ACC would command something similar to what the Big East turned down a year ago.

 

[businesslawyer]

[quote="HobokenHusky, post: 529567, member: 2340"If any conference comes calling before that time not named the B1G, do we jump immediately sight unseen due to the fear of being left out? My initial thought is yes[/quote]

You could have stopped right there instead of getting all thoughtful on us. Your initial thought should be yes, your intermediate thought should be yes and your long term thought should be yes. Regardless of the one time economic consequences. And regardless of whether the New ACC is a merger of the old Big East and the dregs of the old ACC.

One time money is irrelevant compared to national interest. No one is going to turn on our game against SMU becauses "Oh, I head UConn cashed a big check this week, let's see if they play like they're happy about it." Interest is driven by opponents and conference.

 

[HobokenHusky]

Like the C7 (who got their credits), UConn better have a frigging lawyer who already made sure contractually or can later prove that we "earned" the fee at the time of the split. The timing of the payment is irrelevant. That's like telling someone to fix your roof, they do the work, and then you put up a for sale sign and say sorry, we're moving, you need to go see the new buyer about the check.

You take the power five conference invite no questions asked.

Gioff23 - I agree, but you'd better believe that if we hypothetically went to the ACC the day after the C7 signed that separation agreement, the new conference is coming after us like hawks trying to keep that money in the conference, for Cinci and USF (if they are even still there at that point also)

Noeynox - Is the ACC a "big 5" conference after it's been gutted of the marquee teams? Not sure. There are so many possible moving parts, that is what makes it interesting.

 

[businesslawyer]

Gioff23 - I agree, but you'd better believe that if we hypothetically went to the ACC the day after the C7 signed that separation agreement, the new conference is coming after us like hawks trying to keep that money in the conference, for Cinci and USF (if they are even still there at that point also)

Noeynox - Is the ACC a "big 5" conference after it's been gutted of the marquee teams? Not sure. There are so many possible moving parts, that is what makes it interesting.

It's not interesting and there is no conundrum. We want out on any terms that, after a transition period, let us compete in even a watered down ACC.

 

[HobokenHusky]

The ACC is locked in with ESPN for what, the next 10 years at nearly $18 million a year per team?

I would argue UCONN would pay $100 million (financed of course) to get ACC membership. Even a watered down ACC would command something similar to what the Big East turned down a year ago.

I think ESPN has the right to renegotiate if a significant amount of teams change and/or they get below 14 teams, could be wrong though.

BusinessLawyer - I guess I agree, but Devils advocate, has BC generated national interest in the ACC? What is different about UConn SMU and UConn Wake Forest or UConn Duke in Football? I mean I don't think it's much. I get the immediate cash vs long term stability, but I don't think at the point of invitation the ACC would represent long term stability.

 

[tzznandrew]

Yes, today, but if 2 or possibly 4 of UNC/FSU/GTech/UVA are gone, is that still the case? It almost becomes a Boise and the Big East type of debate at that point.

It is still the case. Who is worth spending time with in our current conference? Basketball-wise, Cincy, Temple, Memphis. Football-wise, Cincy, maybe Temple.

Cincy's already sending the ACC Christmas cards--if two leave, Cincy's almost certainly gone with us or without us. So what you're then asking is: do we stay in a league without the only really good football team, and minus one or two of the better basketball schools? The answer is no.

 

[Marty Jackson]

So this apparently large pile of money that UConn is entitled to (20-30 million) puts UConn in a pretty interesting situation. How long will we need to stay in the new conference to be eligible to collect the money? If any conference comes calling before that time not named the B1G, do we jump immediately sight unseen due to the fear of being left out? My initial thought is yes, but considering the fact that the only way we get an ACC invite is if one of their big fish got taken, is that really a smart move? There is no way we get a full pay out immediately, So this would be a short term loss for a potential Lon term gain, a gain of which I am not sure is very big considering what would be left in the ACC. Hopefully it works out where we are in the conference long enough to collect and are able to bolt almost immediately, but it brings up an interesting debate if we are forced to choose between $30 million and the tty version of the ACC.

it was mentioned that this would be paid over several years... Even if we received an invite today, I believe we're still bound by the 27months. I think the bigger question is do we have claim to that money if we decide to leave the conference. If the money is specifically earmarked for Uconn, USF, and Cincy, are there certain performance guarantees on either side that need to be met for Uconn to get the payout? specifically, what happens to that money if Uconn departs?

 

[HobokenHusky]

It's not interesting and there is no conundrum. We want out on any terms that, after a transition period, let us compete in even a watered down ACC.

Being that you are apparently a business lawyer, I was actually hoping you would be able to provide some insight to the legal terms of collection on these exits fees based on what we know now as Marty mentioned above, but you instead chose to pick apart my opinion of the future ACC having a good deal of long term risk. Sounds about right.

 

[businesslawyer]

I think ESPN has the right to renegotiate if a significant amount of teams change and/or they get below 14 teams, could be wrong though.

BusinessLawyer - I guess I agree, but Devils advocate, has BC generated national interest in the ACC? What is different about UConn SMU and UConn Wake Forest or UConn Duke in Football? I mean I don't think it's much. I get the immediate cash vs long term stability, but I don't think at the point of invitation the ACC would represent long term stability.

If you don't think the difference between Wake -- BCU and SMU -- Southern Miss is much, ask yourself why the payments each conference receives for those respective games is so different.

Being in a bigger conference is not a guaranty that you will thrive. No one said it is. But it vastly increases the odds that you won't fade into oblivion.

 

[noeynox]

Do I think the ACC would be a power conference after it was gutted? Doesn't matter what I think. The rules of three new BCS agreement have been put into place for the next dozen years or so. The ACC is part of the cool crowd. Some conference will always be perceived as undeserving. For years it was the Big East, it may now be the ACC's turn but that doesn't really matter.

 

[businesslawyer]

Being that you are apparently a business lawyer, I was actually hoping you would be able to provide some insight to the legal terms of collection on these exits fees based on what we know now as Marty mentioned above, but you instead chose to pick apart my opinion of the future ACC having a good deal of long term risk. Sounds about right.

Can't do the former without having the governing documents in front of me. There is so much speculation and hypothesizing on how the money will flow that, frankly, it's not worth talking about until we see something definitive. Which we will eventually.