Their BOT was "informed" a couple of hours ago.
| NEWS The ACC, Clemson, and FSU news (FSU and the ACC in court today.)
- Thread starter TerryP
- Start date
TerryP
Staff
I've skimmed the 28 pages ... looks like they are looking for clarification of the GOR, not to be removed from that agreement.
The suit says Clemson is seeking a "declaration of its rights" from the court regarding the "unenforceability" of the ACC's "exorbitant" and "unconscionable" withdrawal penalty, as well as the "nonexistence of fiduciary duties" the ACC might claim a member institution owes the conference when filing suit.
TerryP
Staff
CW Lambert, a Big12 guy.
I have some legit insider information from a source in the sports broadcasting industry that I was going to write up and disseminate, but I don't have the time. So, I'm just going to spill the beans here and now and see who takes notice.
But first, do me a favor, remember who, what and when. Keep track of how many of the details I'm sharing tonight come to fruition.
ESPN has approached FSU, Clemson and the ACC about a potential settlement allowing the Seminoles & Tigers to leave the ACC whenever they want. But an ESPN brokered deal is only possible if FSU and Clemson leave for the SEC. Why? I'm glad you asked.
ESPN is the exclusive rights holder for both the ACC & SEC. Moreover, ESPN is a partner in both the ACCN and SECN. ESPN would not lose money if FSU & Clemson are in the SEC as opposed to the ACC.
The basics of the potential settlement are: 1. FSU & Clemson would pay an exit fee equal to what Texas & Oklahoma paid to exit the Big 12 + a %. 2. The ACC would retain the rights to FSU & Clemson home games BUT license those rights to the ESPN for SEC broadcasts.
3. The ACC receives 50% of the fair market (SEC) value of FSU & Clemson home games in both football & basketball. The % the ACC receives would decrease each year of the agreement.
4. ESPN would pick up the option on the ACC's contract until 2036, but would renegotiate terms to reflect the loss of value from losing FSU & Clemson. 5. The SEC - namely FSU & Clemson - would be contractually obligated to play a top tier ACC program each year.
My source tells me the details above are the initial - opening proposition and they will change slightly as negotiations change the details, but the basics will remain the same. Why? I'm glad you asked.
The proposed settlement mitigates the damages to everyone. The ACC survives because ESPN picks up the option to 2036. But their losses will be offset by the % of the FSU & Clemson rights they retain.
FSU & Clemson win by leaving the ACC. 50% of SEC is more than 100% of ACC money and each year they claw back a % of their home media rights.
Everyone saves legal fees and public embarrassment. Expect the % the ACC receives of FSU & Clemson's TV rights to be negotiated down from the starting point of 50%. 35% is more likely the starting point. Expect that to drop by 3-5% each year until its 0.
But you can expect the ACC will retain some % of FSU & Clemson's rights until 2036.
My source pointed out it's critical that the ACC negotiate in good faith and accept the survival of the conference depends on the acceptance of this offer at the best terms they can negotiate... but the ACC doesn't have much leverage.
If the ACC doesn't settle with FSU & Clemson, then ESPN will not pick up the option on its TV contract. They will have no TV revenue beginning in 2027 and the conference will breach the terms of the GoR thus voiding it.
Expect a settlement in time to allow FSU and Clemson to begin SEC play in 2025/2026.
And yes, ESPN will pressure the SEC to take them both. Why? ESPN has accepted the inevitable departure of FSU & Clemson from the ACC. ESPN losses considerable money if FSU and Clemson end up in the Big Ten. ESPN will do everything it can to avoid that scenario.
But, here's a warning to the ACC and its fans. The ACC can't play hardball. If it becomes clear the ACC and FSU/Clemson can't reach an agreement, then ESPN will promptly decline the 2027 ACC option and engineer the move of the ACC's top football properties to the SEC & Big 12.
The Big 12 would benefit the most from the ACC's refusal to use common sense and avoid disaster. But it would necessarily be an economic boon the Big 12. Think pro rata additions... plus a contract extension that gives the Big 12 security until 2036.
The takeaway is this... The ACC can save itself by being pragmatic. But an agreement of this nature requires that all parties involved use common sense and see the writing on the wall clearly.
Unfortunately, it's not an automatic that the ACC realizes its predicament and accepts it has no choice but listen to ESPN. There's a fault line running through the ACC that divides its membership in half.
Some, like UNC, are going to be unhappy. The question is will the ACC's new contract - resulting from a settlement - pay schools like Louisville, Miami, NCST, and VT enough? Will the renegotiated contract pay enough to win a supermajority of votes needed to approve a settlement?
Here's my advice to the ACC... remember what happened to the Pac 12.
I have some legit insider information from a source in the sports broadcasting industry that I was going to write up and disseminate, but I don't have the time. So, I'm just going to spill the beans here and now and see who takes notice.
But first, do me a favor, remember who, what and when. Keep track of how many of the details I'm sharing tonight come to fruition.
ESPN has approached FSU, Clemson and the ACC about a potential settlement allowing the Seminoles & Tigers to leave the ACC whenever they want. But an ESPN brokered deal is only possible if FSU and Clemson leave for the SEC. Why? I'm glad you asked.
ESPN is the exclusive rights holder for both the ACC & SEC. Moreover, ESPN is a partner in both the ACCN and SECN. ESPN would not lose money if FSU & Clemson are in the SEC as opposed to the ACC.
The basics of the potential settlement are: 1. FSU & Clemson would pay an exit fee equal to what Texas & Oklahoma paid to exit the Big 12 + a %. 2. The ACC would retain the rights to FSU & Clemson home games BUT license those rights to the ESPN for SEC broadcasts.
3. The ACC receives 50% of the fair market (SEC) value of FSU & Clemson home games in both football & basketball. The % the ACC receives would decrease each year of the agreement.
4. ESPN would pick up the option on the ACC's contract until 2036, but would renegotiate terms to reflect the loss of value from losing FSU & Clemson. 5. The SEC - namely FSU & Clemson - would be contractually obligated to play a top tier ACC program each year.
My source tells me the details above are the initial - opening proposition and they will change slightly as negotiations change the details, but the basics will remain the same. Why? I'm glad you asked.
The proposed settlement mitigates the damages to everyone. The ACC survives because ESPN picks up the option to 2036. But their losses will be offset by the % of the FSU & Clemson rights they retain.
FSU & Clemson win by leaving the ACC. 50% of SEC is more than 100% of ACC money and each year they claw back a % of their home media rights.
Everyone saves legal fees and public embarrassment. Expect the % the ACC receives of FSU & Clemson's TV rights to be negotiated down from the starting point of 50%. 35% is more likely the starting point. Expect that to drop by 3-5% each year until its 0.
But you can expect the ACC will retain some % of FSU & Clemson's rights until 2036.
My source pointed out it's critical that the ACC negotiate in good faith and accept the survival of the conference depends on the acceptance of this offer at the best terms they can negotiate... but the ACC doesn't have much leverage.
If the ACC doesn't settle with FSU & Clemson, then ESPN will not pick up the option on its TV contract. They will have no TV revenue beginning in 2027 and the conference will breach the terms of the GoR thus voiding it.
Expect a settlement in time to allow FSU and Clemson to begin SEC play in 2025/2026.
And yes, ESPN will pressure the SEC to take them both. Why? ESPN has accepted the inevitable departure of FSU & Clemson from the ACC. ESPN losses considerable money if FSU and Clemson end up in the Big Ten. ESPN will do everything it can to avoid that scenario.
But, here's a warning to the ACC and its fans. The ACC can't play hardball. If it becomes clear the ACC and FSU/Clemson can't reach an agreement, then ESPN will promptly decline the 2027 ACC option and engineer the move of the ACC's top football properties to the SEC & Big 12.
The Big 12 would benefit the most from the ACC's refusal to use common sense and avoid disaster. But it would necessarily be an economic boon the Big 12. Think pro rata additions... plus a contract extension that gives the Big 12 security until 2036.
The takeaway is this... The ACC can save itself by being pragmatic. But an agreement of this nature requires that all parties involved use common sense and see the writing on the wall clearly.
Unfortunately, it's not an automatic that the ACC realizes its predicament and accepts it has no choice but listen to ESPN. There's a fault line running through the ACC that divides its membership in half.
Some, like UNC, are going to be unhappy. The question is will the ACC's new contract - resulting from a settlement - pay schools like Louisville, Miami, NCST, and VT enough? Will the renegotiated contract pay enough to win a supermajority of votes needed to approve a settlement?
Here's my advice to the ACC... remember what happened to the Pac 12.
Justneedme81
Member
Hmmm.
TerryP
Staff
They gave Bama a honeymoon in Hawaii.
50+yeartidefan
Member
Espn taking over state universities.....wierd
TerryP
Staff
Didn't you say you and the Ms went to Hawaii under Shula? A game that ESPN arranged?
50+yeartidefan
Member
We did. May have arranged but still have to get consent.
O. And what a Thanksgiving. No kids. No cooking. No cleaning. Invited n had free thanksgiving dinner.
But this stuff about fsu n Clemson is kinda wierd. Even u have to think so!!!
TerryP
Staff
Consent, from whom? The Hawaii exemption was "officially" put in the rule books seven or eight years ago but it's been in practice for awhile.
The first game Alabama played Hawaii was considered a regular season game, as I recall. The second game was contingent on how the NCAA ruled, but still a regular season game.
Not at all. Read over the playoff thread posted and see the disparity in payouts ... then tell me it's weird for FSU and Clemson to want out; as quickly as possible.
A 20+ million dollar difference in revenue is HUGE! We're looking at a situation where a school like Ole Miss will be as financially solvent as Clemson. Literally. There was roughly a 25 million dollar difference in revenue in the 2024 report (covering '23) between Clemson and Ole Miss: next year they'd be dead even. (FSU only reported three million more than Clemson.)
The playoff format is relegating teams to lower levels of play.
50+yeartidefan
Member
The game at Hawaii was available for bama because they were on probation and had a bowl ban and ncaa allowed the game as a regular season game.
Bama agreed to play at Hawaii
Wasn't espn. They just televised
TerryP
Staff
The game they played when they were under the bowl ban was arranged before the NCAA passed down their ruling. Washington State was scheduled to play Hawaii and backed out of that game in 2002. Alabama was the team chosen as the replacement.
At that time the 'Advertiser' in Hawaii was already publishing details of the 2003 game that was contingent on the NCAA's ruling. The reports were published in the spring of '02.
There wasn't any word coming from the Alabama camp at the time. Coach Moore was questioned about it during spring meetings but declined to say one way or another. Hawaii's AD (I think it was him, may have been their President) said he was leaving the official announcement up to Bama.
Coach Moore was ahead of the game that spring. Talking about this reminds me of 2005.
LSU should have been in the Cotton Bowl that season but Moore approached their committee weeks before the season ended and started negotiating for an Alabama invitation. When the season ended LSU officials "went hard" after the bowl committee trying to get them to change their minds and invite LSU instead. The deal was already made.
RTB X Bot
Member
“The ACC is asking a state entity—Florida State University—to potentially pay and lose more than a half a billion dollars but is refusing to produce the documents related to that outrageous price tag,” Moody said in a statement. “We sent a public records request to the ACC in January, but they failed to fully comply. We are taking legal action against the ACC for wrongfully withholding these important public records.”
Similar threads
- SEC Sports
- Our Fansights
