OT: Florida State to sue ACC over GOR

[CTFAN4LIFE]

The devil is in the deals. The GOR could be a grant conditioned upon a contract being in place with a specific media partner or it could be a general grant to the conference. Since the conference prepared it, I'd guess it is the latter.

That could be but based on what people closer to the situation are saying, it seems as though the ACC's GOR is over if/when ESPN doesn't exercise its upcoming option (because the wording within the GOR specifically names ESPN, which some people said was surprising when that information was discovered). Might be wrong on that but that's what it seems to be.

 

[billybud]

The ACC GOR is very specific...it states that the Members assign their rights to the conference only as necessary to meet the obligations of the ESPN Media Agreement.

....so..a specific contract is tied to the grant of rights. If the agreement ceases to be in force, the GOR is gone.

No one had seen the ACC-ESPN Agreement...now Judge Cooper and FSU's and Clemson's lawyers have an unredacted copy (under court ordered confidentiality)...and, in the court filings we see that Clemson and FSU are saying that the ESPN Agreement was only through 2027. With a right forr ESPN to extend to 2036, if they exercised that option by February, 2021.

ESPN did not exercise that option and the deadline passed...Commissioner Phillips extended a letter offering ESPN until Feb. 2025 to make that extension decision. FSU/Clemson are maintaining that the option in the contract had expired...therefore any new deal would take a Member vote and a new GOR to be signed.

 

[CL82]

That could be but based on what people closer to the situation are saying, it seems as though the ACC's GOR is over if/when ESPN doesn't exercise its upcoming option (because the wording within the GOR specifically names ESPN, which some people said was surprising when that information was discovered). Might be wrong on that but that's what it seems to be.

I think those "people" are FSU and Clemson. I take their interpretation with a grain of salt.

 

[CTFAN4LIFE]

I think those "people" are FSU and Clemson. I take their interpretation with a grain of salt.

Not so sure about that - these people include national media members as well. I guess we'll see how it plays out in court; if they don't settle out of court first.

 

[Patman]

That could be but based on what people closer to the situation are saying, it seems as though the ACC's GOR is over if/when ESPN doesn't exercise its upcoming option (because the wording within the GOR specifically names ESPN, which some people said was surprising when that information was discovered). Might be wrong on that but that's what it seems to be.

I'm a little shocked the acc would tie themselves to espn like that. This gives espn all the leverage

 

[dayooper]

I'm a little shocked the acc would tie themselves to espn like that. This gives espn all the leverage

The ACC has not been smart in any of this. I guess when the commish puts stipulations to help Raycom/his son, this is what you get.

 

[CTFAN4LIFE]

I'm a little shocked the acc would tie themselves to espn like that. This gives espn all the leverage

That's what the situation appears to be.

 

[CL82]

Not so sure about that - these people include national media members as well. I guess we'll see how it plays out in court; if they don't settle out of court first.

Just curious, how exactly do these "national media members" have access to the confidential contracts between the ACC and ESPN.

 

[CTFAN4LIFE]

Just curious, how exactly do these "national media members" have access to the confidential contracts between the ACC and ESPN.

Hasn't some of this info been part of the court documents (albeit somewhat redacted) that have been reported on by media members?

 

[CL82]

Hasn't some of this info been part of the court documents (albeit somewhat redacted) that have been reported on by media members?

Pull the refracted contract and take a look at it. I think you will find that the material terms are not available.

 

[CTFAN4LIFE]

Pull the refracted contract and take a look at it. I think you will find that the material terms are not available.

A lot has been redacted, but seems like the Feb 2025 deadline of ESPN's unilateral extension option was learned about, so there's been some terms brought to light.

 

[CL82]

A lot has been redacted, but seems like the Feb 2025 deadline of ESPN's unilateral extension option was learned about, so there's been some terms brought to light.

Correct but do you see any language the the GOR is conditioned upon that exercise?

 

[Waquoit]

I'm a little shocked the acc would tie themselves to espn like that. This gives espn all the leverage

You have to assume ESPN paid for the privilege.

 

[KryHavok]

Correct but do you see any language the the GOR is conditioned upon that exercise?

I'm not paying close attention to this soap opera saga, but considering that of this information is coming to light presumably from redacted documents, does that somehow violate confidentiality (or whatever gag order might in place)? Not that I mind as these secrets should be outed, I just wonder if the Clemson or FSU folks are leaking this and giving a silent middle finger to the ACC while doing so.

 

[CTFAN4LIFE]

I'm not paying close attention to this soap opera saga, but considering that of this information is coming to light presumably from redacted documents, does that somehow violate confidentiality (or whatever gag order might in place)? Not that I mind as these secrets should be outed, I just wonder if the Clemson or FSU folks are leaking this and giving a silent middle finger to the ACC while doing so.

I think both sides are leaking things to influence the public and non-public narratives in hopes of denting the other side's armor.

 

[CL82]

I'm not paying close attention to this soap opera saga, but considering that of this information is coming to light presumably from redacted documents, does that somehow violate confidentiality (or whatever gag order might in place)? Not that I mind as these secrets should be outed, I just wonder if the Clemson or FSU folks are leaking this and giving a silent middle finger to the ACC while doing so.

I suspect it's mere speculation being taken as fact. Keep in mind that the plaintiff's complaints aren't the final word in this matter.

 

[billybud]

Actually… it has been Big Ten Information on X that has been leaking info. He puts up the court documents and has attempted to use software to look through the redactions. But the unredacted FSU and Clemson filings can be readily downloaded from court sites.

The filings do not reproduce the ESPN document but they reference some of the provisions.

 

[CTFAN4LIFE]

I suspect it's mere speculation being taken as fact. Keep in mind that the plaintiff's complaints aren't the final word in this matter.

Here's a pretty darn comprehensive and clear way of looking at the FSU/ACC situation. Yes, the attorney is an FSU guy, but he's very level headed and balanced in everything he's commented on the legal situation over the past 6 or so months...

 

[FfldCntyFan]

Correct but do you see any language the the GOR is conditioned upon that exercise?

The only assertions on the GOR being tied specifically to the ESPN contract that I know of were statements on this board by billybud more than once that it was only for that contract.

Not knowing what the actual case is, logically there are only three possibilities on the GOR (which we do know runs through 2036):

1 - it is only tied to the specific ESPN deal and any extensions of that deal through the GOR expiration, with the GOR ending early if that deal ends prior to the GOR end date.

2 - the GOR is for any contract with similar principles/partners of the initial deal until the GOR expiration date.

3 - the GOR is for any and all media deals until its expiration date.

I'm thinking that it is most likely somewhere between possibities one and two and that the language may be vague enough where it would take a court to determine it if it comes to that (ESPN not exercising the option but negotiating a new agreement with the ACC). If it gets to that, all hell may break loose as a number of schools will make very significant decisions on basically faith that the courts will lean in their direction.

 

[Chin Diesel]

Here's a pretty darn comprehensive and clear way of looking at the FSU/ACC situation. Yes, the attorney is an FSU guy, but he's very level headed and balanced in everything he's commented on the legal situation over the past 6 or so months...

I have almost no skin in the game other than several good friends with kids at FSU.

But there's no one from Florida, South Carolina or North Carolina putting out balanced unbiased social media on this topic. You don't even need AI to know what perspective they'll find most intriguing. Even if they make their case in front of shelves full of leather bound books.

 

[Chin Diesel]

I'm thinking that it is most likely somewhere between possibities one and two and that the language may be vague enough where it would take a court to determine it if it comes to that (ESPN not exercising the option but negotiating a new agreement with the ACC). If it gets to that, all hell may break loose as a number of schools will make very significant decisions on basically faith that the courts will lean in their direction.

If it does come down to a court deciding, the ACC schools outside of FSU and Clemson have a serious prisoner dilemma type scenario to contemplate. They'll have to weigh the consequences and probability of a court ruling in favor of the Darling Duo against the probability court rules in favor of ACC. And then figure out how their school fits in to either situation.

F 'em. You sleep in the bed you make.

 

[CTFAN4LIFE]

I have almost no skin in the game other than several good friends with kids at FSU.

But there's no one from Florida, South Carolina or North Carolina putting out balanced unbiased social media on this topic. You don't even need AI to know what perspective they'll find most intriguing. Even if they make their case in front of shelves full of leather bound books.

Seems like you're being very biased.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

If it does come down to a court deciding, the ACC schools outside of FSU and Clemson have a serious prisoner dilemma type scenario to contemplate. They'll have to weigh the consequences and probability of a court ruling in favor of the Darling Duo against the probability court rules in favor of ACC. And then figure out how their school fits in to either situation.

F 'em. You sleep in the bed you make.

I'm not sure it would be much if a dilemma nor would their concerns play much of a role.

The scenario I spelled out would only happen if a) ESPN does not extend the option and b) ESPN signs the ACC to a new contract with both ESPN and the ACC believing the initial GOR will remain in force.

If they were to do that, it would be far easier to just extend the current deal by exercising the option.

 

[CTFAN4LIFE]

The only assertions on the GOR being tied specifically to the ESPN contract that I know of were statements on this board by billybud more than once that it was only for that contract.

Not knowing what the actual case is, logically there are only three possibilities on the GOR (which we do know runs through 2036):

1 - it is only tied to the specific ESPN deal and any extensions of that deal through the GOR expiration, with the GOR ending early if that deal ends prior to the GOR end date.

2 - the GOR is for any contract with similar principles/partners of the initial deal until the GOR expiration date.

3 - the GOR is for any and all media deals until its expiration date.

I'm thinking that it is most likely somewhere between possibities one and two and that the language may be vague enough where it would take a court to determine it if it comes to that (ESPN not exercising the option but negotiating a new agreement with the ACC). If it gets to that, all hell may break loose as a number of schools will make very significant decisions on basically faith that the courts will lean in their direction.

If I understand it correctly, Clemson's lawsuit argues that they can exit the ACC (i.e. pay an exit fee) and because the way the agreement is worded that they immediately take their media rights with them and don't have to pay GOR penalties. If Clemson's case goes to trial and they win, then the other most valuable ACC schools (i.e. the top 6-8) would then have to consider exiting as well.

 

[CL82]

Here's a pretty darn comprehensive and clear way of looking at the FSU/ACC situation. Yes, the attorney is an FSU guy, but he's very level headed and balanced in everything he's commented on the legal situation over the past 6 or so months...

Oh well if he's level headed...