Florida State Drama

[John]

Yes...but football measures differently.

UConn is a basketball power...but a checked-out coach who was mailing it in was killing it.

Football is a different matter...

IFYPFY

 

[Vowelguy]

If Stan/Cal don’t get taken now, but are very confident that FSU is gone in a year, then they will go Independent. That will be the true indicator of whether folks think FSU has the juice to pull it off.

 

[billybud]

The fact that reportedly UNC was a NO vote for Stanford is strange and maybe telling...UNC is proud of its non revenue sports...like Stanford reels in.

UNC's 22 straight Women's Soccer NC's ...10 Field Hockey NC's...

I would have thought that the guys in chino's and sweater vests would be huge supporters of a like academic school with so many non revenue sports achievements.

 

[CL82]

So Fox is trying to steal FSU from ESPN and put them into the B1G.

Just like Fox probably also B12 not to take UConn since they already got UConn on the cheap.

UConn needs to find a way to get away from Fox and ESPN.

NBC deal ?

 

[ramses 2.0]

The fact that reportedly UNC was a NO vote for Stanford is strange and maybe telling...UNC is proud of its non revenue sports...like Stanford reels in.

UNC's 22 straight Women's Soccer NC's ...10 Field Hockey NC's...

I would have thought that the guys in chino's and sweater vests would be huge supporters of a like academic school with so many non revenue sports achievements.

What's strange about it? I'm sure in theory UNC would love to have Stanford but maybe UNC wants are stronger commitment from the conference, from ND, from ESPN or maybe they just don't see the benefit of the adds

 

[FfldCntyFan]

I thought a little more about what could be viewed as the equivalency of something like a long term GOR and I’m beginning to think it could be far worse for a school attempting to buy out of it than I initially believed, as from what we understand, there is no language in the agreement to address a school leaving early.

I believe the closest business comparison would be a long term office lease in a commercial building (depending on the quality of space and total square footage being leased, these normally run anywhere from ten to thirty years with built in escalations) where if it were a large enough building, there would be multiple tenants each with long term leases.

If the tenant is sufficiently perceptive, they will have payout terms written into the lease in the case of early termination (a penalty and a discounted lump sum payment for remaining term of the lease, normally a discounted cash flow calculation covering future lease payments). More often than not there is no language in the lease covering this so the tenant breaking the lease is on the hook for the remaining rent payments (unless a bankruptcy is in play, but often there are higher level guarantees to protect the landlord from an LLC filing for bankruptcy as a way out of a lease). This would be the case even if the space was subsequently rented after being abandoned. For the record, I’ve spent the past 23 years in this industry and there have been suits (and countersuits) that have led to the tenant a) being on the hook for the entire remainder of an early departed lease even if the space had been subsequently leased, b) the tenant being responsible to reimburse the landlord for all legal costs to pursue payment of the remaining rent term and c) the tenant being responsible to reimburse the landlord for costs incurred in securing a new (replacement) tenant (this part is almost adding insult to injury).

This is the standard judgement as this is accepted as normal practice in the industry and the punitive nature generally forces the departing tenant into seeking settlement without getting the court system involved.

I’m not claiming that this would apply equally to for example FSU leaving the ACC and saying “Let the courts decide” but, if it would apply similarly, FSU could be facing all of their media rights belonging to the ACC regardless of where FSU plays and, if the ACC were to replace FSU with another school, leading to the media partners reducing the total payment to the conference (for example, by $30 million annually due to the lesser product), FSU could be on the hook to cover that reduction and be required to cut the ACC a check for $30 million each year until the GOR expires.

In what would be purely a case of intellectual curiosity, I would be fascinated by a situation where a school attempted to leave and both sides held firm on refusing to negotiate a settlement.

 

[billybud]

What's strange about it? I'm sure in theory UNC would love to have Stanford but maybe UNC wants are stronger commitment from the conference, from ND, from ESPN or maybe they just don't see the benefit of the adds

ahhh...like FSU then.

 

[businesslawyer]

The SEC now has Texas, TAMU, Bama, LSU, Florida — FSU wouldn’t even be the biggest diva.

As much as everyone talks about the BiG bring top dog, it has a long term demographics problem. It needs access to growing areas, with big pipelines of HS athletes.

To be clear, it’s not just that it has a long term demographics problem. It has a problem that its publicity and monetization far, far, far exceeds its performance on the field. If we end up with just a Big 2, and I’d ever bother watching it after they killed college sports, why would I pick a Big Ten game over a SEC game.

 

[businesslawyer]

I thought a little more about what could be viewed as the equivalency of something like a long term GOR and I’m beginning to think it could be far worse for a school attempting to buy out of it than I initially believed, as from what we understand, there is no language in the agreement to address a school leaving early.

I believe the closest business comparison would be a long term office lease in a commercial building (depending on the quality of space and total square footage being leased, these normally run anywhere from ten to thirty years with built in escalations) where if it were a large enough building, there would be multiple tenants each with long term leases.

If the tenant is sufficiently perceptive, they will have payout terms written into the lease in the case of early termination (a penalty and a discounted lump sum payment for remaining term of the lease, normally a discounted cash flow calculation covering future lease payments). More often than not there is no language in the lease covering this so the tenant breaking the lease is on the hook for the remaining rent payments (unless a bankruptcy is in play, but often there are higher level guarantees to protect the landlord from an LLC filing for bankruptcy as a way out of a lease). This would be the case even if the space was subsequently rented after being abandoned. For the record, I’ve spent the past 23 years in this industry and there have been suits (and countersuits) that have led to the tenant a) being on the hook for the entire remainder of an early departed lease even if the space had been subsequently leased, b) the tenant being responsible to reimburse the landlord for all legal costs to pursue payment of the remaining rent term and c) the tenant being responsible to reimburse the landlord for costs incurred in securing a new (replacement) tenant (this part is almost adding insult to injury).

This is the standard judgement as this is accepted as normal practice in the industry and the punitive nature generally forces the departing tenant into seeking settlement without getting the court system involved.

I’m not claiming that this would apply equally to for example FSU leaving the ACC and saying “Let the courts decide” but, if it would apply similarly, FSU could be facing all of their media rights belonging to the ACC regardless of where FSU plays and, if the ACC were to replace FSU with another school, leading to the media partners reducing the total payment to the conference (for example, by $30 million annually due to the lesser product), FSU could be on the hook to cover that reduction and be required to cut the ACC a check for $30 million each year until the GOR expires.

In what would be purely a case of intellectual curiosity, I would be fascinated by a situation where a school attempted to leave and both sides held firm on refusing to negotiate a settlement.

So this is to me, not being expert in this, believes a court could go one of two ways on this, and which way a court rules on this has huge consequences. Can FSU lock out ESPN, to which the ACC assigned the GOR, and prevent it from teleconferencing FSU’s home games in, say the Big Ten, and let Fox’s crew in to show them? Yes, that would be a clear breach of contract, but generally parties to a contract are allowed to breach it and just pay damages. If that is allowed, the ACC and/or ESPN in this instance could sue for damages, but that would be actual damages, after the ACC in good faith tries to cover them by bringing in a less powerful replacement. On the other hand, if a court says FSU can’t lock out ESPN and has to let ESPN and only ESPN broadcast the game, then neither the Big nor FSU is getting any money from FSU home games so why would the Big pay FSU anything? (That is rhetorical — they wouldn’t.). I have from the beginning not been sure how a court would rule (and, to be clear, it’s not like I’ve spent free time researching this), and thus whether FSU can get out by writing a huge check, but based on the precedent in the music industry I can’t see another conference writing FSU a check and taking this risk unless and until FSU can resolve it in court.

 

[UCFBfan]

I still agree with Zoo when asking where is FSU going? If FSU can get out of the GOR, then other ACC teams can too. At that point, I don't see the B1G having any interest in them and instead heading to UNC and UVA. The SEC has UF and likely has little desire to add FSU. The same can be said about Clemson and if they need a second South Carolina school. However, the Big 12 just showed with both Utah schools that if you can corner a state you gotta do it!

I just don't see a spot for FSU. They're doing the dirty work and I feel like if they successfully break out of the GOR, they allow other ACC schools to do the same and the B1G gets who they really want and the SEC likely takes a pass.

There's a reason the SEC isn't expanding. They are the premier football conference and just added OU and UT. They rekindled the UT - A&M game and have zero need to add anyone. They can up their deal with their current makeup just because people want to watch their teams. I don't know if they have any desire to divy up the pot anymore than they need to.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

Agree fully @businesslawyer and this is why I believe that until we are within shouting distance of the end of the GOR no school will attempt to break it. I'm sure a handful of schools would be very happy watching someone else do it as and then, having a clearer view of the cost, would immediately work on calculating what they should offer to buy themselves out of it and then determine if it makes sense to do so.

Kind of like my storming the castle analogy, the handful of schools would be standing around together, each one saying "OK. You go first".

 

[billybud]

So this is to me, not being expert in this, believes a court could go one of two ways on this, and which way a court rules on this has huge consequences. Can FSU lock out ESPN, to which the ACC assigned the GOR, and prevent it from teleconferencing FSU’s home games in, say the Big Ten, and let Fox’s crew in to show them? Yes, that would be a clear breach of contract, but generally parties to a contract are allowed to breach it and just pay damages. If that is allowed, the ACC and/or ESPN in this instance could sue for damages, but that would be actual damages, after the ACC in good faith tries to cover them by bringing in a less powerful replacement. On the other hand, if a court says FSU can’t lock out ESPN and has to let ESPN and only ESPN broadcast the game, then neither the Big nor FSU is getting any money from FSU home games so why would the Big pay FSU anything? (That is rhetorical — they wouldn’t.). I have from the beginning not been sure how a court would rule (and, to be clear, it’s not like I’ve spent free time researching this), and thus whether FSU can get out by writing a huge check, but based on the precedent in the music industry I can’t see another conference writing FSU a check and taking this risk unless and until FSU can resolve it in court.

A lot of highly paid lawyers have been dancing on the head of this pin for a year...

The GOR is not signed by ESPN nor a document between ESPN and the schools. The GOR is between the schools and the conference and the schools assign their media rights for a time certain. And the ACC, in turn, leases those rights to ESPN via a contract.

The clause in the GOR states that the schools assign their media rights to the conference only so far as to meet the conference's obligation under the ESPN contract. If the ESPN contract with the ACC gets amended to not require a certain school(s) rights as part of the ACC package, that school would have no GOR obligation.

Why would ESPN do that? Make the ACC whole and not have a schools rights? Only if ESPN figured it could make more money in match ups in another of its properties. Enough more to pay the ACC $30 million per year without that school. Or if another school is added...and the ACC, like with Hutton, will listen.

Ultimately, there will be only so many prime TV slots available and the SEC and Big Ten will go head to head for viewership...matches with Wake, BC, Duke, GT, Vandy, Ole Miss, Northwestern, Indiana, etc., will go to the ACCN, BETN.

 

[billybud]

Each of the Member Institutions hereby exclusively grants to the Conference during the Term all rights necessary for the conference to perform the contractual obligations set forth in the ESPN Agreement....

 

[UConnJim]

I still agree with Zoo when asking where is FSU going? If FSU can get out of the GOR, then other ACC teams can too. At that point, I don't see the B1G having any interest in them and instead heading to UNC and UVA. The SEC has UF and likely has little desire to add FSU. The same can be said about Clemson and if they need a second South Carolina school. However, the Big 12 just showed with both Utah schools that if you can corner a state you gotta do it!

I just don't see a spot for FSU. They're doing the dirty work and I feel like if they successfully break out of the GOR, they allow other ACC schools to do the same and the B1G gets who they really want and the SEC likely takes a pass.

There's a reason the SEC isn't expanding. They are the premier football conference and just added OU and UT. They rekindled the UT - A&M game and have zero need to add anyone. They can up their deal with their current makeup just because people want to watch their teams. I don't know if they have any desire to divy up the pot anymore than they need to.

Florida State would be a great add for the SEC. When FSU plays SEC schools, people watch. And, as sports moves to steaming, games and schools that people want to watch will become more important. Finally, if the SEC has FSU and Florida, they will basically own Florida.

 

[Sea Goat]

If you count the women's team, UConn basketball won 4 national championships in 7 years of AAC membership. We weren't in the conference long enough for it to kill us. That's just a piss poor excuse for bad coaching hires.

You're right that we are paying a terrible price for the ineptitude of Hathaway, Pasqualoni, Manuel, Diaco, Edsall 2.0.

You can only put a string like that together if you have been safely ensconced in a P-5 conference.
It is a drag if you are trying to get there...

 

[ramses 2.0]

ahhh...like FSU then.

FWIW I believe UNC & FSU are in agreement with the need for unequal revenue distribution but might not agree on the amount. UNC is just not going to publicly express it's position.

 

[Rufus]

You have to wonder what the ACC lower tier schools are thinking. Even if the GOR holds until the bitter end, the outcome is inevitable. What happened to the football Big East…..what happened to the PAC-12…..it’s going to happen to the ACC. The only question is when?

 

[FfldCntyFan]

You have to wonder what the ACC lower tier schools are thinking. Even if the GOR holds until the bitter end, the outcome is inevitable. What happened to the football Big East…..what happened to the PAC-12…..it’s going to happen to the ACC. The only question is when?

They are thinking basically (to use your words) "we have to hold out until the bitter end as the outcome is inevitable. We will be compensated at a second tier level until then and at that point we will need to take a step down in the financial hierarchy of college sports".

They know exactly what their fate is. Their goal is to keep it as far in the future as possible.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

Each of the Member Institutions hereby exclusively grants to the Conference during the Term all rights necessary for the conference to perform the contractual obligations set forth in the ESPN Agreement....

Yes, but as ESPN was only willing to offer what they had with the GOR signed by all member schools, I would be very surprised if there isn't some language in the contract about the makeup of the conference (member schools that the ACC is providing to ESPN), defining for ESPN to some course of action if the makeup of the ACC changes. If this doesn't exist, the top third of the ACC can split off whenever they want (if the ACC would bless this move), start a new conference and bring a product to market for more money, while the ACC replaced those schools with an equal number of current G-5 schools and tell ESPN "you have to keep paying us, we have a contract".

 

[Kolumbo]

I am stubborn. I think FSU will end up in the SEC because it makes sense (I know...). It's a fairly short drive to Florida, Auburn, Alabama, Georgia, USC. Imagine a CR move which actually reduces travel. If you have two schools in Alabama, Miss, Tenn, you have to have 2 in FLA. Having FSU and Florida in the same conference would put those programs so far ahead of all other schools in FLA. And have you seen Doak Campbell lately? Impressive building!

I think the ACC, or at least FSU, is selling the conference short. If a few programs would get their acts together it is actually a very football conference. You don't need every team to be ranked every year to be a beast of a conference. If only the ACC had locked down the east coast before the B1G acted because there are very few options westward. The ACC needs to focus on competing, bringing in additional revenue streams which shouldn't be difficult given it dominates the east coast, and adding valuable properties like UConn.

 

[Waquoit]

FWIW I believe UNC & FSU are in agreement with the need for unequal revenue distribution but might not agree on the amount. UNC is just not going to publicly express it's position.

What is the need for FSU and UNC? I understand the desire for more money. Why do these two need more money than any other program?

 

[hoopsfan22]

What is the need for FSU and UNC? I understand the desire for more money. Why do these two need more money than any other program?

They are big mad that they will make half a billion dollars less than Northwestern and Rutgers.

 

[Vowelguy]

They are big mad that they will make half a billion dollars less than Northwestern and Rutgers.

And that with that $1/2B extra , Rutgers will steal away their coaches, their players ….

 

[billybud]

Nobody but the ACC and a few lawyers that flew to North Carolina to review it seem to know what is in the ESPN agreement with the ACC...but you can bet that agreement will always say whtever ESPN wants it to say....ESPN wants to do something ? Shazam ! As long as the ACC is made whole re current $$.

 

[ramses 2.0]

What is the need for FSU and UNC? I understand the desire for more money. Why do these two need more money than any other program?

From a UNC point of view we have 26 non revenue sports that the FB/BB have to support. FB is the largest untapped generator on campus. Now FB doesn't have to necessarily compete for championships year in/out but it has to be good enough to keep people invested &that takes money