Non-Key Tweets

[UConn9604]

This is what I've been saying for a while now; a GoR can be (and probably will be) challenged in court. Will likely result in a financial settlement but no loss of rights. In not ONE instance that a school left a conference did the conferences Media deal get negotiated down. Not once.

No, Nelson said that the GOR is ironclad, so it must be so.

 

[SAMCRO]

So now we like and believe in the DudeofWV? He makes sense b/c he apparently invented a 'Wonka-vator' that is pro-UConn re: CR? Got it...It's just hard to keep up is all.

 

[UConnJim]

This is what I've been saying for a while now; a GoR can be (and probably will be) challenged in court. Will likely result in a financial settlement but no loss of rights. In not ONE instance that a school left a conference did the conferences Media deal get negotiated down. Not once.

I think you are partially correct. You are correct that media rights have not been negotiated down after defections (not impositions like the BE), but conference networks have muddied the waters. For example, the B1G gets a much higher rate for the BTN in markets that it has schools than in markets it doesn't. So if a big market B1G school left and was replaced by a small market school, there could be a negative impact on BTN revenues. (Just an example, I'm not saying any B1G school would leave the conference.)

Today, there are 3 conference networks: SEC, PAC12, BTN. I don't think anyone is leaving those three conferences so defections are a very low probability. Big 12 and ACC do not have networks yet, but the ACC is trying to get one off the ground. For the ACC, the loss of big market schools like FSU, UNC, UVA, or VT would have a very negative impact on the value of an ACC Network. In my opinion, the next possible catalyst for conference movement is the possibility of an ACC Network.

 

[Dooley]

So now we like and believe in the DudeofWV? He makes sense b/c he apparently invented a 'Wonka-vator' that is pro-UConn re: CR? Got it...It's just hard to keep up is all.

I keep it simple when I decide who I like and who I dont: does that person like UCONN?

 

[jostar1]

Christopher Lambert @theDudeofWV · 7h 7 hours ago
@Steve__Pryor @mkw_14 Let's be clear. I used 14 metrics to grade expansion candidates - just for fun - UCONN had the best score.

 

[dayooper]

I think you are partially correct. You are correct that media rights have not been negotiated down after defections (not impositions like the BE), but conference networks have muddied the waters. For example, the B1G gets a much higher rate for the BTN in markets that it has schools than in markets it doesn't. So if a big market B1G school left and was replaced by a small market school, there could be a negative impact on BTN revenues. (Just an example, I'm not saying any B1G school would leave the conference.)

Today, there are 3 conference networks: SEC, PAC12, BTN. I don't think anyone is leaving those three conferences so defections are a very low probability. Big 12 and ACC do not have networks yet, but the ACC is trying to get one off the ground. For the ACC, the loss of big market schools like FSU, UNC, UVA, or VT would have a very negative impact on the value of an ACC Network. In my opinion, the next possible catalyst for conference movement is the possibility of an ACC Network.

Would VT (or UVA)leaving really damage The ACCN? They already "own" Virginia with UVA/VT and both are a big draw. Getting coverage in Virginia shouldn't be a problem with UVA. My impression is that the only thing that VT is really good at in football, and the luster is starting to come off of that one. Wouldn't The ACC and ESPN want to cover as much ground as they possibly could? Doubling up on a state costs them money, correct?

 

[UConnJim]

Would VT (or UVA)leaving really damage The ACCN? They already "own" Virginia with UVA/VT and both are a big draw. Getting coverage in Virginia shouldn't be a problem with UVA. My impression is that the only thing that VT is really good at in football, and the luster is starting to come off of that one. Wouldn't The ACC and ESPN want to cover as much ground as they possibly could? Doubling up on a state costs them money, correct?

Depends. Does VT + UVA deliver Washington, DC for the ACCN? Maybe. Individually, probably not. Remember, even Penn St. did not totally deliver Pennsylvania. The ACC schools, with a couple of exceptions, will not deliver their whole states, so losing a major state flagship university is a problem for the ACCN.

 

[pj]

More to the point, Va Tech to the B1G would be a loss for ESPN. If Va Tech were really serious about leaving the ACC, the SEC would probably emerge as a competitor. The ACC wouldn't mind losing a non-UNC school in North Carolina, so NC State and VA Tech to the SEC would greatly strengthen the SECN and would not harm a possible ACCN that much. Losing NC State and Va Tech and adding UConn and Cincy might actually strengthen an ACC Network, though it would probably hurt the ACC's cohesion and overall strength. But I could see ESPN pitching this move, if a Va Tech departure seemed inevitable. Va Tech + UConn to the B1G would harm the ACC's competitive standing more than NC State and Va Tech to the SEC with UConn and Cincy backfilling.

If Va Tech chose to go to the SEC, then the B1G would still not have a partner for UConn, and might let UConn go to the ACC. Which would be disappointing for us.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

No, Nelson said that the GOR is ironclad, so it must be so.

Scoreboard.

 

[CTMike]

Scoreboard.

Does "scoreboard" work for games that haven't been played yet?

 

[Doggie Style]

Does "scoreboard" work for games that haven't been played yet?

C'mon Mike..... It always works!

 

[CL82]

C'mon Mike..... It always works!

True enough but [drops mic] trumps "scoreboard."

[drops mic]

 

[gioff23]

Some intertesting comments

PSU did not deliver entire state of PA - what did they not deliver?
ACC wouldn't mind losing a NC school to SEC - what?

Everyone assumes if BIG moves south to VA, then ACC will move to get UConn, if available (or Cincy - highly unlikely). I disagree. I think they look west and reach out to Texas (and OU) or to the entire B12 about a mega conference.

 

[CL82]

Some intertesting comments

PSU did not deliver entire state of PA - what did they not deliver?
ACC wouldn't mind losing a NC school to SEC - what?

Everyone assumes if BIG moves south to VA, then ACC will move to get UConn, if available (or Cincy - highly unlikely). I disagree. I think they look west and reach out to Texas (and OU) or to the entire B12 about a mega conference.

In your scenario, who are you pairing with VA?

 

[UConnJim]

Some intertesting comments

PSU did not deliver entire state of PA - what did they not deliver?

PSU did not deliver the whole state of Pennsylvania at the BTN in-market rate on basic cable.

 

[kyleslamb]

No, Nelson said that the GOR is ironclad, so it must be so.

What I continue to find funny about that whole stance is that it's not actually the GoR that another league would challenge. Technically speaking, if the GoR were working correctly, a school would leave and continue to be paid for the rights to certain home games that the old league retains through its media partners. What will have to be challenged is the forfeiture clause, because it would likely be in direct violation of the Grant of Rights itself if the old league stopped paying for the rights it retains.

It's not the Grant of Rights that is a real obstacle, but rather it's the intent to follow through on the forfeiture clause in the bylaws.

 

[specialisthusky]

What I continue to find funny about that whole stance is that it's not actually the GoR that another league would challenge. Technically speaking, if the GoR were working correctly, a school would leave and continue to be paid for the rights to certain home games that the old league retains through its media partners. What will have to be challenged is the forfeiture clause, because it would likely be in direct violation of the Grant of Rights itself if the old league stopped paying for the rights it retains.

It's not the Grant of Rights that is a real obstacle, but rather it's the intent to follow through on the forfeiture clause in the bylaws.

Hey kyle have you gotten your hands on an actual GOR contract? I'm curious if any have been leaked online. I remember you did a FOI request on something a year or so ago....was that a GOR?

 

[CL82]

You wonder why a league like the B1G couldn't make this work as follows:

1) Your payout will eventually be X
2) For years 1-10 this will be reduced by your buy-in to the BTN of Y
3) For years 1-7 (or however many years are left in the GOR) this will be reduced by Z due to the fact that we don't broadcast your games
4) So the net number is for years 1-7 is X-Y-Z, for years 8-10 X-Y, and year 11 going forward is X, oh and by the way all even for years 1-7 you will earn more than your current league share.

 

[kyleslamb]

Hey kyle have you gotten your hands on an actual GOR contract? I'm curious if any have been leaked online. I remember you did a FOI request on something a year or so ago....was that a GOR?

Yeah it was about 2 years ago, I think. I did get the Big 12 Grant of Rights and posted it online. Here was that link if you wanted to see it:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-251R2bYBxMc1lQNk1qd1pxZGM/view?usp=sharing

 

[Seaa Blue]

I believe the bylaws generally say "you have to field a team, but we don't have to pay you a dime of revenue previously entrusted to the league".

 

[pj]

I believe the bylaws generally say "you have to field a team, but we don't have to pay you a dime of revenue previously entrusted to the league".

Then the question is, if the league doesn't have to make good on its quo, why should the school be obliged to provide the quid, i.e. the media rights? And why be prevented from selling them elsewhere?

 

[Seaa Blue]

Then the question is, if the league doesn't have to make good on its quo, why should the school be obliged to provide the quid, i.e. the media rights? And why be prevented from selling them elsewhere?

I believe the idea is that you not only gave rights to the league, but also (more importantly) to the TV partner. The TV partner then compensates the league, but the league is no longer bound to a payout.

The challenge in court would be, from what I understand, that you are entitled to compensation one way or another if indeed you have to field a team and someone is making money off it.

 

[kyleslamb]

Then the question is, if the league doesn't have to make good on its quo, why should the school be obliged to provide the quid, i.e. the media rights? And why be prevented from selling them elsewhere?

That's exactly why common sense will prevail, as it usually does in all other Grant of Rights disputes legally. You don't get to keep rights that you're not paying for, generally speaking. The forfeiture bylaw, not the Grant of Rights, is the only thing that might make a school balk. Even so, most people I've heard from in athletics circles believe that bylaw will be beaten in court if anyone decides to challenge it.

 

[Seaa Blue]

And that is why the ACC also has a ridiculous exit fee. They hope one of the penalties will stick.

 

[Kevin Caliendo]

http://www.bigeastcoastbias.com/2015/2/5/7974553/why-uconn-should-rejoin-the-big-east