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

[Point6]

Man, the relevant market as being only the P5 is not fun to read. Para. 90 to 100.

If the exit fee is ruled illegal that might get some things going. I'm not an antitrust lawyer but the counterclaim seems persuasive to me.

I imagine similar antitrust arguments could be made against the P5 as it relates to Div. 4 proposals, especially to the extent conference affiliation (vs. objective criteria) becomes the basis for Div 4 eligibility.

 

[SAMCRO]

Wow, that escalated quickly. Bric, you killed a guy with a trident. You might want to lay low for a while.

This is a move to settle, and it will settle without revealing too much IMO. UMd will not pay the $52M and they won't receive the $157M. They will pay something though, just not the full amount.

NW and Penn St are my guess for the 2 B1G targets. We had heard about PSU in the past. NW from a smaill private school pov that fits with other ACC schools and gets them a local team for ND to play in all other sports (no way they're getting OSU, UM, MSU to come, and no way would their targets be IU, PU, UI or anyother B1G schools this side of the Mississippi.

 

[btstimpy]

Maryland didn't say anything that BC's GDF hasn't said already, really. They basically just referred to his quote in the lawsuit.

In regards to the ACC approaching Big 10 schools, Maryland is merely trying to show that this is a competitive business and that while the ACC was trying to acquire new membership, they were limiting their current memberships opportunities - making an anti-trust claim.

I'm curious who Wake and Pitt might have talked to. The only Big Ten school I'd be interested in for the ACC is Penn State. The rest are all midwestern schools and belong in the Big Ten as it is the Midwestern Conference.

 

[The Viking]

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

 

[UConn Dan]

I'm curious who Wake and Pitt might have talked to. The only Big Ten school I'd be interested in for the ACC is Penn State. The rest are all midwestern schools and belong in the Big Ten as it is the Midwestern Conference.

I think we can all agree on Penn State.

If current B1G, then that eliminates Rutgers, and I would say the ACC would only have a shot at Northwestern - but that seems so disjointed.

 

[btstimpy]

Maryland didn't say anything that BC's GDF hasn't said already, really. They basically just referred to his quote in the lawsuit.

In regards to the ACC approaching Big 10 schools, Maryland is merely trying to show that this is a competitive business and that while the ACC was trying to acquire new membership, they were limiting their current memberships opportunities - making an anti-trust claim.

In no way is the ACC limiting Maryland's membership opportunities. Maryland could pay the $53 million and leave any time it likes just like any other ACC school could. Now the rest have signed the Grant of Television Rights. They can pay $53 million and leave too, just not be on television until 2027.

The ACC working on new membership doesn't interfere with what Maryland is doing in any way.

 

[btstimpy]

I think we can all agree on Penn State.

If current B1G, then that eliminates Rutgers, and I would say the ACC would only have a shot at Northwestern - but that seems so disjointed.

Northwestern doesn't do anything for the ACC IMO. I would hope not. I would imagine it to be someone that Notre Dame likes. The President of Wake Forest is former Notre Dame. But I don't know who Notre Dame likes in the Big Ten. Purdue maybe? Who knows. And who knows if it is even accurate.

 

[jrazz12]

We Take The Stairs @NoEscalators
Follow
30 years from now when the unfiltered realignment history is written the twist ending will be that Pitt was Keyser Soze all along.

 

[UConn Dan]

In no way is the ACC limiting Maryland's membership opportunities. Maryland could pay the $53 million and leave any time it likes just like any other ACC school could. Now the rest have signed the Grant of Television Rights. They can pay $53 million and leave too, just not be on television until 2027.

The ACC working on new membership doesn't interfere with what Maryland is doing in any way.

Yes, but Maryland is arguing 1) that other conferences don't have exit fees (and doesn't even mention grant of rights whatsoever) or have minimal exit fees (old Big East) and that the ACC's are punitive/damaging, and 2) that the new exit fee was not properly implemented according to the ACC Constitution (read the lawsuit for detail).

Maryland is trying to settle and they make valid points. Ultimately this will settle. Not sure what it means for the ACC exit fee or the grant of rights.

The major thing I am taking away from this whole thing is that the ACC is still looking to add. More movement/chaos will eventually be good for UConn because nothing has been good for UConn to-date.

 

[zls44]

If their entire basis of collusion claim is Mean gene's quote...that's not gonna do it.

 

[gioff23]

Why Pitt and Wake? One might ask if you wanted PSU, might you enlist their neighbor to pose the question? And if you wanted NW, might you look at what Wake's AD did prior to his current gig?

UM's lawsuit is a good one - you can't recruit other schools to join your conference while preventing your own schools to do the same, in reverse. But it is smart for any conference to go after BIG schools as the exit fee is ZERO.

Stimpy, you are on the wrong board appealing to folks sensibilities about the good faith of the ACC, its members, commish, Pitt AD, etc. You spent a decade raiding the BE and now are crying foul when ONE school decides they want to leave and do so on reasonable terms.

 

[UConn Dan]

If their entire basis of collusion claim is Mean gene's quote...that's not gonna do it.

I agree - that's the meatiest thing in there, there were some non-specific mentions of ESPN providing counsel on what additions would benefit the ACC, but I think that's typical. If I were looking to add schools to my conference, I would discuss with my TV partner on what schools would raise the payout too.

 

[gioff23]

BTW, Mr. Delany,

What better way to respond to your colleague's Mr. Swofford's plans than to add UConn and drive a line right thru the ACC footprint, walling off Pitt, SU, and BC on an island and locking down NYC? Please feel free to add another (to retain balance) - we could offer Ga Tech, Kansas, or UVa (in case you want to lock down all meaningful northeastern metro areas).

Sincerely,

ESPN

 

[zls44]

I agree - that's the meatiest thing in there, there were some non-specific mentions of ESPN providing counsel on what additions would benefit the ACC, but I think that's typical. If I were looking to add schools to my conference, I would discuss with my TV partner on what schools would raise the payout too.

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.

 

[The Viking]

It's amazing that a conference can force an exorbitant exit fee on a member who doesn't vote for it but I guess I'm just a nice guy

 

[AZHuskiePop]

"Any school should be allowed to participate unrestricted with the peer institutions of their choice"
That was Swafford from 2003 responding to the Big East law suit.
Let's see since then the ACC has imposed a ridicules high exit fee and a GOR
Restricting that right that he claims every institution has.
The moral compass of the ACC is a bit off course. I sincerely want UConn to be sucessful ,but not at any cost.
Cuse and Pitt sold their souls I hope we don' t follow.

 

[btstimpy]

Why Pitt and Wake? One might ask if you wanted PSU, might you enlist their neighbor to pose the question? And if you wanted NW, might you look at what Wake's AD did prior to his current gig?

UM's lawsuit is a good one - you can't recruit other schools to join your conference while preventing your own schools to do the same, in reverse. But it is smart for any conference to go after BIG schools as the exit fee is ZERO.

Stimpy, you are on the wrong board appealing to folks sensibilities about the good faith of the ACC, its members, commish, Pitt AD, etc. You spent a decade raiding the BE and now are crying foul when ONE school decides they want to leave and do so on reasonable terms.

Nobody is crying foul about anything. The ACC has bylaws for exiting that any member can follow. Maryland has chosen to leave. It has every right to do so as long as it follows the bylaws for exit. Those bylaws include a $52 million exit fee that Maryland had full disclosure of before making its decision to leave. There is nothing hidden here.

 

[The Viking]

Nobody is crying foul about anything. The ACC has bylaws for exiting that any member can follow. Maryland has chosen to leave. It has every right to do so as long as it follows the bylaws for exit. Those bylaws include a $52 million exit fee that Maryland had full disclosure of before making its decision to leave. There is nothing hidden here.

How many schools were required to impose that comical exit fee on schools that wants no part of it?

 

[Husky92]

Nobody is crying foul about anything. The ACC has bylaws for exiting that any member can follow. Maryland has chosen to leave. It has every right to do so as long as it follows the bylaws for exit. Those bylaws include a $52 million exit fee that Maryland had full disclosure of before making its decision to leave. There is nothing hidden here.

And WVU, Pitt and Syracuse all had 27 month waiting periods before they could leave. It was clearly written in a contract they voted for and without debate... oh... wait....rats.... I guess contracts aren't always ironclad.

 

[btstimpy]

I agree - that's the meatiest thing in there, there were some non-specific mentions of ESPN providing counsel on what additions would benefit the ACC, but I think that's typical. If I were looking to add schools to my conference, I would discuss with my TV partner on what schools would raise the payout too.

There basically is nothing to it, and it would be interesting to know how that amount of money was determined. The Attorney General of Maryland is running for Governor of Maryland. Maybe that has something to do with it. Most Maryland fans I know think the whole idea of going to the Big Ten wasn't properly vetted to begin with. They're all trying to rationalize it in their minds at this point because they don't have much choice. I don't know how much appeal attacking the ACC will have in Maryland, but maybe Doug Gansler thinks it might help his campaign.

 

[btstimpy]

How many schools were required to impose that comical exit fee on schools that wants no part of it?

If you're talking about Maryland, the fee is in place by motion of Dr. Wallace Loh of Maryland in 2010. He made the motion personally to set the Exit Fee at $20 million. He then voted against raising it in 2011 because he was probably already talking to the Big Ten. Maryland originally very much wanted part of it, and they voted when becoming members of the conference to abide by the bylaws of the conference which determines how many votes are required by the Council of Presidents to pass bylaws, change bylaws, and conduct business.

I don't want any part of Obamacare. Why is this comical thing imposed on me? But I understand how legislation is passed. Same difference.

 

[kingdobbs]

I just remembered that Pitt was public... I always forget that since everything with them screams small time.

Pitt is semi-public.

It receives public funding as part of the state's Commonwealth System, but is managed by is board of trustees without operational oversight from the state government.

They are still definitively exempt from PA's open records laws, though.

 

[btstimpy]

And WVU, Pitt and Syracuse all had 27 month waiting periods before they could leave. It was clearly written in a contract they voted for and without debate... oh... wait....rats.... I guess contracts aren't always ironclad.

All three negotiated with the Big East to pay more money to the Big East to shorten the 27 months. The ACC isn't actually asking Maryland to pay more than the bylaws state. Maryland didn't try to leave early.

Now I think Rutgers is suing the AAC to pay less than is specified in the AAC bylaws. Louisville has already negotiated their exit, but I think Rutgers is trying to get out of their obligations to the AAC. I haven't looked at that lawsuit in a while.

 

[The Viking]

If you're talking about Maryland, the fee is in place by motion of Dr. Wallace Loh of Maryland in 2010. He made the motion personally to set the Exit Fee at $20 million. He then voted against raising it in 2011 because he was probably already talking to the Big Ten. Maryland originally very much wanted part of it, and they voted when becoming members of the conference to abide by the bylaws of the conference which determines how many votes are required by the Council of Presidents to pass bylaws, change bylaws, and conduct business.

I don't want any part of Obamacare. Why is this comical thing imposed on me? But I understand how legislation is passed. Same difference.

Why are you talking about 20 million when I'm talking 52 million?
I'm just curious how many schools it take to impose a incredibly hefty exit fee on those who disagree.

 

[btstimpy]

Yes, but Maryland is arguing 1) that other conferences don't have exit fees (and doesn't even mention grant of rights whatsoever) or have minimal exit fees (old Big East) and that the ACC's are punitive/damaging, and 2) that the new exit fee was not properly implemented according to the ACC Constitution (read the lawsuit for detail).

Maryland is trying to settle and they make valid points. Ultimately this will settle. Not sure what it means for the ACC exit fee or the grant of rights.

The major thing I am taking away from this whole thing is that the ACC is still looking to add. More movement/chaos will eventually be good for UConn because nothing has been good for UConn to-date.

What motivation is there for this to settle? The ACC's lawsuit in North Carolina is about having the North Carolina Judiciary uphold the bylaws of the ACC under North Carolina law as binding. Collecting any money is beside the point. The ACC may choose not to try to collect any money past the $30+ million offset that the ACC will have collected from Maryland's share by July, 2014. That may be determined later. But the ACC still wants the Supreme Court of North Carolina to declare the ACC bylaws binding. I don't see a motivation to settle.

This new Maryland lawsuit is a side show.

 

[huskymedic]

I'm just curious how many schools it take to impose a incredibly hefty exit fee on those who disagree.

It was a 10-2 vote by the ACC Council of Presidents to raise the exit fee. FSU was the other dissenter.

 

[CL82]

If their entire basis of collusion claim is Mean gene's quote...that's not gonna do it.

Maybe not, but it opens the door to some interesting discovery.

 

[SubbaBub]

I agree - that's the meatiest thing in there, there were some non-specific mentions of ESPN providing counsel on what additions would benefit the ACC, but I think that's typical. If I were looking to add schools to my conference, I would discuss with my TV partner on what schools would raise the payout too.

No, but if you had access to Flippy's email, I am sure there'd be more than enough info.

 

[CL82]

Rut Roh ACC.

 

[The Viking]

It was a 10-2 vote by the ACC Council of Presidents to raise the exit fee. FSU was the other dissenter.

What is required, 2/3? 3/4?
Is part of Maryland's suit that the exit fee has to be reasonable in nature