OT: Florida State to sue ACC over GOR

[Ldandy]

Cartel bores me. Like watching Apple earnings or Meta

It's still a free country, watch what you like.

 

[Ha Who]

It's still a free country, watch what you like.

You’re darn right. Rather go to the gym

 

[ScottVib]

I think if they (the Big Ten) had the choice of picking 2 of FSU/Miami/UNC/UVA it would be Florida State and UNC.

 

[dayooper]

I think if they (the Big Ten) had the choice of picking 2 of FSU/Miami/UNC/UVA it would be Florida State and UNC.

I don’t think that’s even a question. Of course it’s FSU/UNC.

 

[History Geek]

Adding the combo of FSU & Miami could make sense to The B1G in terms of negotiating their next medial deal. The old paradigm was all about adding cable markets, but the current discussion is far more centered around brands. Down or not, Miami is still a name that can be sold with The B1G Marketing Machine behind it. Due to their proximity to talent, it is also a program that can be turned around relatively quickly under the right leadership. FSU has already made that difficult climb back to prominence.

Adding 2 teams in Florida allows the conference to stake a strong claim there for traditional cable carriage, obtain regular access to its fertile recruiting grounds, and provide two opportunities for relocated alums and fans to see their schools compete in person. It also adds another large population state to the mix which will eventually feed out of state students to the rest of the conference.

For years the belief was that the B1G desperately wanted UNC & UVA as a part of their future expansion plans. It could still be true, but it feels far less likely than in the Delany Era. While the conference would certainly love adding the crown jewel of The ACC Tarheels, UVA on the other had feels iffy to me now. If we're to believe that sports media is barreling full speed towards a streaming model that focuses on teams and matchups, what would you rather sell?

UM, OSU, PSU, UO, and USC vs FSU and Miami or vs UNC and UVA?

I have always thought that Miami was not a strong candidate because they are essentially a smallish private which only relatively recently was relevant in the highest echelons of college football, and hasn’t been that great for about a generation now. But this is a good point. Those 40+ still think Miami is a strong brand. That could get them a seat in the P2.

 

[Rockford]

I have always thought that Miami was not a strong candidate because they are essentially a smallish private which only relatively recently was relevant in the highest echelons of college football, and hasn’t been that great for about a generation now. But this is a good point. Those 40+ still think Miami is a strong brand. That could get them a seat in the P2.

I kind of view Miami as Boston College with palm trees. Think their P2 value is over stated.

 

[History Geek]

I kind of view Miami as Boston College with palm trees. Think their P2 value is over stated.

Institutionally overall I agree. And both are essentially Wake without the magnolias. However, overall having that strong football brand built from circa 1980 to about 2000 may get them a seat at the table.

 

[dayooper]

Institutionally overall I agree. And both are essentially Wake without the magnolias. However, overall having that strong football brand built from circa 1980 to about 2000 may get them a seat at the table.

I’m still skeptical they will have a seat. It’s possible, but I just don’t see how they would be additive to the Big10 and SEC. Unless it’s about planting a flag in Miami and the Big10 wants to recruit athletes and general population students there.

 

[hank970]

I’m still skeptical they will have a seat. It’s possible, but I just don’t see how they would be additive to the Big10 and SEC. Unless it’s about planting a flag in Miami and the Big10 wants to recruit athletes and general population students there.

If population (eyeballs) and access to superb athletes aren't of importance to a conference, then what is?

 

[UConnJim]

I kind of view Miami as Boston College with palm trees. Think their P2 value is over stated.

There has only been 1 private university invited to the P2, USC, and they are a very large school in a large market with tons of football history. The only other private school that I think is seriously under consideration for the P2 is Notre Dame. Miami is a long shot, but more likely than Syracuse, Wake Forest, Boston College,...

 

[dayooper]

If population (eyeballs) and access to superb athletes aren't of importance to a conference, then what is?

If you have FSU, you have the eyeballs and access to superb athletes. I guess you can double down in Florida, but FSU is already a huge name. If Miami were to be admitted to the Big10, they would have by far the smallest population, by several thousand students. Could it happen? Yeah, especially over those you listed above.

I’m basing my opinion on the fact that they are just going to 20. If they go higher, all bets are off. Here is what I believe the Big10 ACC wishlist would be;

1. Notre Dame - Not happening, but would take them in any condition. So would the SEC.

2. FSU - Huge school in an extremely populous state. Very high viewership. Would really increase the eyeballs on each member university.

3. UNC - Huge basketball school in a growing state. Not a football draw at all, but one of the few basketball schools (UConn included) that can increase viewership in the winter months.

If any of the schools above aren’t included, the Big10 isn’t expanding.

4. UVA - only if paired with UNC. Lower if they aren’t included.

5. Miami - Only if paired with ND, FSU or UNC.

6. VT - Dark horse. Has a Big10 like atmosphere, but just not enough of a draw by themselves.

7. GT - All about the Atlanta eyeballs, but is it enough?

No one else in the ACC has a chance.

 

[Rdkid]

I wouldn’t compare Miami to the other ACC privates in that they have national championship history and sit in fertile recruiting territory. They have a problem in that Miami is a pro sports town and they have stadium/attendance issues. They are having difficulty getting back to national relevance and aren’t looking like P2 material at all. Now if they make the playoff in the next few years, maybe. Not close based on this past year.

 

[Rdkid]

If you have FSU, you have the eyeballs and access to superb athletes. I guess you can double down in Florida, but FSU is already a huge name. If Miami were to be admitted to the Big10, they would have by far the smallest population, by several thousand students. Could it happen? Yeah, especially over those you listed above.

I’m basing my opinion on the fact that they are just going to 20. If they go higher, all bets are off. Here is what I believe the Big10 ACC wishlist would be;

1. Notre Dame - Not happening, but would take them in any condition. So would the SEC.

2. FSU - Huge school in an extremely populous state. Very high viewership. Would really increase the eyeballs on each member university.

3. UNC - Huge basketball school in a growing state. Not a football draw at all, but one of the few basketball schools (UConn included) that can increase viewership in the winter months.

If any of the schools above aren’t included, the Big10 isn’t expanding.

4. UVA - only if paired with UNC. Lower if they aren’t included.

5. Miami - Only if paired with ND, FSU or UNC.

6. VT - Dark horse. Has a Big10 like atmosphere, but just not enough of a draw by themselves.

7. GT - All about the Atlanta eyeballs, but is it enough?

No one else in the ACC has a chance.

I think Clemson needs a mention.

 

[Ldandy]

I’m still skeptical they will have a seat. It’s possible, but I just don’t see how they would be additive to the Big10 and SEC. Unless it’s about planting a flag in Miami and the Big10 wants to recruit athletes and general population students there.

You just answered your own question for the most part. I’d add that if brands/matchups are a bigger selling point in the future than under the previous model, then they become a much more attractive option. Mediocrity or not, they remain a brand that TV can sell with the right matchups.

 

[dayooper]

I think Clemson needs a mention.

Yes, they do. I knew I was forgetting some one.

I personally would put them as #4, but I don’t think the Big10 sees it that way. I think they have them tied with or slightly below Miami.

 

[Hoophound]

Miami is nothing. Whatever conference falls for Miami is foolish. FSU and Florida are all that really matter in the Sunshine State.

 

[huskymedic]

 

[billybud]

s someone commented...makes to much sense to happen...

 

[Rufus]

s someone commented...makes to much sense to happen...

Will never happen. Stanford and Cal don't fit in academically with the Big 12, and the Big 12 already passed on SMU.

While the ACC additions would make sense, I don't think UC, UCF, or WVU will want to join what the ACC is about to become.

 

[UConnJim]

While the ACC additions would make sense, I don't think UC, UCF, or WVU will want to join what the ACC is about to become.

Exactly. The ACC has colleges that the P2 may want and the Big 12 does not. Thus, the Big 12 is more stable at this time than the ACC.

 

[jostar1]

Florida State wants dismissal of ACC lawsuit in North Carolina

FSU argues, in part, that its trustees never signed the grant of rights document at the center of this dispute.

By
Matt Baker Times staff

Florida State has asked a North Carolina court to dismiss the ACC’s lawsuit against the university — the latest legal step as the Seminoles explore a potential exit from their conference.

Florida State called the ACC’s preemptive suit “an admitted ‘race to the courthouse’ to secure what it hoped would prove to be a more favorable forum.” FSU contends that legal race came at a cost: the ACC’s members never took the required vote to approve the suit against the ’Noles. In the motion and corresponding brief, FSU also said the ACC sued Florida State “before an actual or justiciable controversy arose” — it was all theoretical until FSU’s trustees approved and filed their suit in Leon County Circuit Court.

Florida State’s most interesting argument focuses on the ACC’s grant of rights — the document at the center of this potential half-a-billion-dollar dispute. The ACC contends that Florida State (and every other member) “knowingly and voluntarily” granted the “irrevocable” TV rights to their home games to the conference. The conference then sold them to ESPN and passed the funds back to FSU and its peers.

FSU’s latest filing argues that the school’s trustees never signed or approved the grant of rights; it was only signed by the university president. That’s important because, according to FSU, its board is the only entity with the legal authority to “contract and be contracted with.”

Florida State wants dismissal of ACC lawsuit in North Carolina

FSU argues, in part, that its trustees never signed the grant of rights document at the center of this dispute.

www.tampabay.com

 

[Rufus]

The more we learn, the better the case for Florida State.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

FSU’s latest filing argues that the school’s trustees never signed or approved the grant of rights; it was only signed by the university president. That’s important because, according to FSU, its board is the only entity with the legal authority to “contract and be contracted with.”

Florida State wants dismissal of ACC lawsuit in North Carolina

FSU argues, in part, that its trustees never signed the grant of rights document at the center of this dispute.

www.tampabay.com

It may be true that the trustees needed to approve the GOR before the president could sign but that appears to be more of an issue between the school and the then president.

Also, if the school believed the agreement was signed by someone without the authority to do so (this does happen on occasion), why didn't FSU bring this up shortly after the GOR was signed?

 

[CL82]

The more we learn, the better the case for Florida State.

When did the board become existence of the GOR? When were they aware that the president signed it on their behalf? Did the president take any other actions which were arguably the boards exclusive domain? Did the board ever indicate that it was aware of the GOR? What actions, if any, did the board take to repudiate the GOR?

 

[billybud]

It may be true that the trustees needed to approve the GOR before the president could sign but that appears to be more of an issue between the school and the then president.

Also, if the school believed the agreement was signed by someone without the authority to do so (this does happen on occasion), why didn't FSU bring this up shortly after the GOR was signed?

Well...there is the matter of Florida law...which states that it is the BOT that must sign as the only legal authority to contract and be contracted with..."a. Each board of trustees constitutes the contracting agent of the university".

and thus...if a state institution did not follow the legal requirement to bind the university, in the eyes of Florida, it may not be valid. And which GOR ? The question has been that the 2016 extension was not brought to the BOT as required. A search of BOT minutes and agendas has shown no trace of the mention of the 2016 extension.

The venue infighting is important...if this goes where FSU filed their suit (2nd district in Florida), more items will play in re Florida law.