FC/OT: Cost to leave ACC is $572mm…
- Thread starter Midnighter
- Start date
A lot of bluster from the ‘Noles. Not sure how they could justify that cost this year. I assume it will drop as they get closer to the agreement. Sucks for them. I have a difficult time feeling sorry for any fanbase that feels unjustly punished.
They entered into a legally binding agreement. In the meantime, a lot of $h!+ happened. Is the incentive to leave worth that? How liquid is FSU? Maybe their proactive legislature will step in to help. They've sure done a lot of grandstanding so far. If not, if FSU would like to increase their leverage, I'm sure that Sandy is available as a consultant. Ya gotta pay to play!
govrel.fsu.edu
Home | Governmental Relations
Last edited:
For those who haven't followed College Football closely over the years, this meeting provides a good summary:
The genesis of FSU's troubles was in 2011-12-13, with the various agreements entered into by FSU. And a lot of "stuff" over the years that all was built on that foundation.
I won't get into all the details - aside from saying myself and others who closely followed, were saying back then "What the ___ are the folks in the ACC (especially those with significant football programs) thinking?" It was idiotic from Day 1.
The Head Chief of Seminole Nation at that time? None other than Eric Barron.
Surprised?
The genesis of FSU's troubles was in 2011-12-13, with the various agreements entered into by FSU. And a lot of "stuff" over the years that all was built on that foundation.
I won't get into all the details - aside from saying myself and others who closely followed, were saying back then "What the ___ are the folks in the ACC (especially those with significant football programs) thinking?" It was idiotic from Day 1.
The Head Chief of Seminole Nation at that time? None other than Eric Barron.
Surprised?
They entered into a legally binding agreement. In the meantime, a lot of $h!+ happened. Is the incentive to leave worth that? How liquid is FSU? Maybe their proactive legislature will step in to help. They've sure done a lot of grandstanding so far. If not, if FSU would like to increase their leverage, I'm sure that Sandy is available as a consultant. Ya gotta pay to play!
Home | Governmental Relations
How liquid are they? Duh. barren was their president not long ago. They’re good.
Extra Onion Dip does not equate to financial liquidity
Per FSU legal counsel.
To be clear:
No way does/will FSU even begin to consider that type of "buyout"
The gist of the legal argument is that - in layman's terms - the "agreement" is crappola (that is a technical legal term).
Without getting too deep into the legal weeds (of which I am no professional expert), there are several avenues of attack - everything from:
1) the legality of "punishments" that are disproportional to actual damage rendered (ie, you can't charge someone $500 M for taking an action that doesn't harm you - or at least doesn't harm you in anywhere near that amount)
2) breach of contract by the ACC in not reasonably acting as a proper fiduciary to negotiate in the member's (FSU) best interest - vav the media rights negotiations
etc
etc
Where it all ends up? Who knows?
IMO: There is plenty of "blame" to be placed on the leadership of FSU for ever getting them into this spot. A lot of obliviousity was at play, IMO (Some may remember at the time, early 2010s) the bloviating suits of the ACC talked of "stability" being the benefit of those contracts. "Stability" defined by them - apparently - as the stability one gets at the bottom of the ocean, after tieing cinder blocks to your body and jumping overboard.
They (the leaders of the ACC big time football schools) were idiots. period. Even the knuckleheads at Maryland realized enough to get out while the getting was (relatively) good.
At the very LEAST, leadership at FSU (and Clemson and wherever) should have strongly opposed and protested - and voted against - several of the agreements and actions that took them to this point.
Like most Higher Education enterprises, FSU was apparently led by a lot of lazy, disengaged, "When is cocktail hour?" leaders.
(IIRC, FSU and Clemson and a couple others did object to the idiotic move of adding Cal/Stanford/SMU to the ACC .... but all the important cows were already well out of the barn by then)
That said, I expect they will have a strong enough case to negotiate reasonable exit from the ACC.
The bigger issue for FSU will be, I believe, "Where do they go?" (Same for Clemson)
Right now, there will need to be several very impactful changes to the college football landscape, in order to make present those options. Of course, with the rate of change we have seen in recent years, those changes could occur by next Tuesday
Last edited:
Just a thought.....if F$U can scare up $572MM to leave the ACC, I wonder if they scare up the same amount strictly to assist their academic side?
Yeah, I know "college" football.....
Yeah, I know "college" football.....
To be clear:
No way does/will FSU even begin to consider that type of "buyout"
The gist of the legal argument is that - in layman's terms - the "agreement" is crappola (that is a technical legal term).
Without getting too deep into the legal weeds (of which I am no professional expert), there are several avenues of attack - everything from:
1) the legality of "punishments" that are disproportional to actual damage rendered (ie, you can't charge someone $500 M for taking an action that doesn't harm you - or at least doesn't harm you in anywhere near that amount)
2) breach of contract by the ACC in not reasonably acting as a proper fiduciary to negotiate in the member's (FSU) best interest - vav the media rights negotiations
etc
etc
Where it all ends up? Who knows?
IMO: There is plenty of "blame" to be placed on the leadership of FSU for ever getting them into this spot. A lot of obliviousity was at play, IMO (Some may remember at the time, early 2010s) the bloviating suits of the ACC talked of "stability" being the benefit of those contracts. "Stability" defined by them - apparently - as the stability one gets at the bottom of the ocean, after tieing cinder blocks to your body and jumping overboard.
They (the leaders of the ACC big time football schools) were idiots. period. Even the knuckleheads at Maryland realized enough to get out while the getting was (relatively) good.
At the very LEAST, leadership at FSU (and Clemson and wherever) should have strongly opposed and protested - and voted against - several of the agreements and actions that took them to this point.
Like most Higher Education enterprises, FSU was apparently led by a lot of lazy, disengaged, "When is cocktail hour?" leaders.
That said, I expect they will have a strong enough case to negotiate reasonable exit from the ACC.
The bigger issue for FSU will be, I believe, "Where do they go?" (Same for Clemson)
Right now, there will need to be several very impactful changes to the college football landscape, in order to make present those options. Of course, with the rate of change we have seen in recent years, those changes could occur by next Tuesday
Think FSU leaving the ACC doesn’t kill that brand for football? Their deal goes through 2037 - don't think the ACC can make the case that their departure doesn't hurt them by about $20mm - $45mm per year for the next 13 years (the punitive amount of their exit fee is around $250mm)? FSU is the most watched football brand in the ACC by a mile and top ten nationally.
FWIW:
Did you watch the briefing?
Would be interested in support/counterpoints to some of the legal assumptions.
As to that specific issue - and I don't have a transcript in front of me - one of the parameters of the ACC/ESPN contract presented by FSU's counsel is that the per team payout remains the same, so long as there are 15 members of the ACC (which there would be, even w FSU leaving).
That said, no one seems to be able to access an actual copy of the actual executed contract (does that sound familiar?
). Anyway - that inability to access is another point in the legal action FSU is taking - but if that assertion regarding the media contract were true, it would be hard to show actual damage for the duration of that contract.... I would, as a layman, think.
FWIW:
Did you watch the briefing?
Would be interested in support/counterpoints to some of the legal assumptions.
As to that specific issue - and I don't have a transcript in front of me - one of the parameters of the ACC/ESPN contract presented by FSU's counsel is that the per team payout remains the same, so long as there are 15 members of the ACC (which there would be, even w FSU leaving).
That said, no one seems to be able to access an actual copy of the actual executed contract (does that sound familiar?
Compare advertising revenue over the course of the contract without FSU vs. with?
I don't know what that would be (but likely rounding error compared to $500 million) - but I would expect any of that would fall on ESPN (which is not a party to the contract (GOR) between the member schools and the ACC).
But that would certainly be part of the untangling as the FSU pleading proceeds. I would think.
Does the B1G have any interest? Could other teams be in play after this? UNC and FSU would be nice gets...
The wisdom of FSU getting into this position in the first place aside, they are now desperately wanting to get out of their situation. It seems to me that being a first mover to leave the ACC is going to be the most expensive role for FSU to take here.
So why not work with other like-minded institutions to leave the ACC together? If you suspect that Clemson, UNC, Miami, and others want to leave the ACC as well, why not orchestrate leaving together and then allow the entire ACC enterprise to collapse like the PAC 12 collapsed?
I expect that I am missing something about this situation, but it seems as though FSU might want to pursue a scorched earth strategy in order to reduce the ACC's leverage over them.
So why not work with other like-minded institutions to leave the ACC together? If you suspect that Clemson, UNC, Miami, and others want to leave the ACC as well, why not orchestrate leaving together and then allow the entire ACC enterprise to collapse like the PAC 12 collapsed?
I expect that I am missing something about this situation, but it seems as though FSU might want to pursue a scorched earth strategy in order to reduce the ACC's leverage over them.
Could we do a trade with a couple of programs? Perhaps for a school to be named later?
If they do, they'd better keep it quiet. Doubt that they'd want to be sued for tampering which is exactly what the ACC would do.
Some on this board would volunteer PSU to be named sooner rather than later. ACC! ACC! ACC!
Based on their legal counsel's presentation today (one version of the scenario, of course), I would gather they would conclude they are better off to go it alone - and to be the first one in line.
F$U - no thanks. Their idiotic tomahawk chop is enough reason to keep them out. Their corrupt history is another. We already have enough of those in the Big 10. There is also a chance they may lose their accreditation because of state mandated curricula regulations.
fsu can’t contemplate spending $100 MM on mere academics. The priority is $572 MM for football.
“College”
Last edited:
That's what is called "alignment."fsu can’t contemplate spending $100
MM on mere academics. The priority is $572 MM for football.
“College”
Reminds me of the Berlin Wall. The communists had to put up a wall to keep their citizens from fleeing to better countries. The ACC had to put up a money wall to keep their teams from fleeing to better conferences.
Dadgummit, Cigarette money . Have to fund the football team .fsu can’t contemplate spending $100
MM on mere academics. The priority is $572 MM for football.
“College”
many individuals and organizations would like to terminate a contract (which is what the "Grant of Rights" is) for convenience, which they signed. voiding a contract is a common effort, and rarely works as the hurdles are significant especially for a large professionally run organization (i.e. FSU). there is a lot of case law here, and a state legislature is going to be able to do squat, as this is a federal matter. Think what would happen if a state legislature tried to write law that would allow any person or organization to terminate any contract for convenience. You would have legal chaos.To be clear:
No way does/will FSU even begin to consider that type of "buyout"
The gist of the legal argument is that - in layman's terms - the "agreement" is crappola (that is a technical legal term).
Without getting too deep into the legal weeds (of which I am no professional expert), there are several avenues of attack - everything from:
1) the legality of "punishments" that are disproportional to actual damage rendered (ie, you can't charge someone $500 M for taking an action that doesn't harm you - or at least doesn't harm you in anywhere near that amount)
2) breach of contract by the ACC in not reasonably acting as a proper fiduciary to negotiate in the member's (FSU) best interest - vav the media rights negotiations
etc
etc
Where it all ends up? Who knows?
IMO: There is plenty of "blame" to be placed on the leadership of FSU for ever getting them into this spot. A lot of obliviousity was at play, IMO (Some may remember at the time, early 2010s) the bloviating suits of the ACC talked of "stability" being the benefit of those contracts. "Stability" defined by them - apparently - as the stability one gets at the bottom of the ocean, after tieing cinder blocks to your body and jumping overboard.
They (the leaders of the ACC big time football schools) were idiots. period. Even the knuckleheads at Maryland realized enough to get out while the getting was (relatively) good.
At the very LEAST, leadership at FSU (and Clemson and wherever) should have strongly opposed and protested - and voted against - several of the agreements and actions that took them to this point.
Like most Higher Education enterprises, FSU was apparently led by a lot of lazy, disengaged, "When is cocktail hour?" leaders.
(IIRC, FSU and Clemson and a couple others did object to the idiotic move of adding Cal/Stanford/SMU to the ACC .... but all the important cows were already well out of the barn by then)
That said, I expect they will have a strong enough case to negotiate reasonable exit from the ACC.
The bigger issue for FSU will be, I believe, "Where do they go?" (Same for Clemson)
Right now, there will need to be several very impactful changes to the college football landscape, in order to make present those options. Of course, with the rate of change we have seen in recent years, those changes could occur by next Tuesday
a few years back my organization encountered a contract where the other party intentionally breached because they wanted out. There was no termination for convenience, and the deal never met any hurdle for voiding. We wound up in court and they lost, and appealed. the appeal was even worse for them than the lower court. We won all direct costs plus indirect/consequential damages and because of their public behavior (lots of evidence) we won treble damages. The total cost to the party was over $50M on a contract value of $10M. We did not seek performance on the contract, but the cost was far beyond what they expected. They wanted to be able to walk away and their arguments were all circus and no legal substance. What came out is they wanted a better deal somewhere else - the evidence was everywhere.
in the case of FSU they are stuck in a contract that goes for 13 more years so the cost will cover a long period, and their motivation for leaving is what??? they want a better deal somewhere else. About the only way I can see them get out of this is to try and prove there was not contract to start with. That seems shaky as how long has this been running? How many years? They have been performing in the contract for years, and now decide that there was never a contract? FSU has probably already a bunch of evidence they believed there was a contract and that they want to get out for some non-legal reason.
So would you gather FSU intends to do more than kick the tires ? Why have a big hissy fit today if you’re not going to do more ? They had to already know the $500 mill penalty.
We Are!…Fortunate to have the much
Get unlimited access today.