Good Article on ACC's Grant of Rights

[Dawgg]

Gives a good breakdown on what grant of rights are, how they started, and some of the loopholes FSU and Clemson are trying to use to get out of theirs. Clemson's arguments are certainly creative.

'Like smoke coming from the Vatican': The history -- and future -- of the grant of rights

In the ACC, a grant-of-rights agreement appears to hold the key to future realignment. It has been highly secretive and much argued over. What exactly is it, and where did it start?

www.espn.com

 

[DesotoCountyDawg]

Whoever crafted their Grant of Rights did a good job of making that thing lock tight.

 

[patdog]

How hilarious would it be if the ACC adding Cal, Stanford & SMU what gives Clemson, FSU & UNC the out they need. Highly unlikely though. All their arguments basically boil down to: we signed a legally binding contract & now don’t like it so please let us get out without compensating the other parties to the contract.

 

[Perd Hapley]

How hilarious would it be if the ACC adding Cal, Stanford & SMU what gives Clemson, FSU & UNC the out they need. Highly unlikely though. All their arguments basically boil down to: we signed a legally binding contract & now don’t like it so please let us get out without compensating the other parties to the contract.

Ultimately, it’s not the GOR itself that is the issue. It was the 20-year extension they signed back in 2016 that essentially put the whole league over a barrel with ESPN.

The ultimate irony to all of it - this document (and term extension) which was designed to keep the conference whole is going to ultimately be the thing that 100% assures its violent destruction. 100% guaranteed…..its just a dead league walking. Only question is when. Had they taken a little less money from ESPN in exchange for, say, a 10-year extension instead of a 20-year extension….they wouldn’t be in this mess. Pigs and hogs and what not.

 

[OG Goat Holder]

Ultimately, it’s not the GOR itself that is the issue. It was the 20-year extension they signed back in 2016 that essentially put the whole league over a barrel with ESPN.

The ultimate irony to all of it - this document (and term extension) which was designed to keep the conference whole is going to ultimately be the thing that 100% assures its violent destruction. 100% guaranteed…..its just a dead league walking. Only question is when. Had they taken a little less money from ESPN in exchange for, say, a 10-year extension instead of a 20-year extension….they wouldn’t be in this mess. Pigs and hogs and what not.

Funny how everyone thought it was the Big 12 that would fold about 7-8 years ago. And I don't think anybody foresaw the Pac-12 crumbling. Heck at one time Texas/Oklahoma were allegedly headed out there.

What this does to me, is shows you what this is all about.....not winning and losing......but about the right brand winning and losing.

 

[Howiefeltersnstch]

It's all about money is what it's all about. Adding Stanford and SMU and Cal may have helped the ACC bosses but it did not help FSU, UNC or Clemson in any way. Weaker teams ?? One could argue it was actually hurtful to their programs.

 

[Dawgg]

Ultimately, it’s not the GOR itself that is the issue. It was the 20-year extension they signed back in 2016 that essentially put the whole league over a barrel with ESPN.

The ultimate irony to all of it - this document (and term extension) which was designed to keep the conference whole is going to ultimately be the thing that 100% assures its violent destruction. 100% guaranteed…..its just a dead league walking. Only question is when. Had they taken a little less money from ESPN in exchange for, say, a 10-year extension instead of a 20-year extension….they wouldn’t be in this mess. Pigs and hogs and what not.

The 20 year extension is the reason I think the Big 12 has an outside chance of getting one or both of FSU and Clemson for at least a 5-7 year period. I don't think the Big Ten or SEC would touch either of them right now, but going to the Big 12 until their current media rights ends in 2031 gives them the equivalent of a Nick Saban rehab 'quality analyst' position and makes them available to better suitors when that run ends.

Another irony is that they signed that 20 year extension so that ESPN would create the ACC Network with the thought that this would get them to compete with the SEC... now they're going to be lucky to compete with the Big 12 in 10 years.

 

[Dawgg]

It's all about money is what it's all about. Adding Stanford and SMU and Cal may have helped the ACC bosses but it did not help FSU, UNC or Clemson in any way. Weaker teams ?? One could argue it was actually hurtful to their programs.

The biggest thing it did was basically give FSU and Clemson a bigger slice of pie temporarily.

Their ESPN deal has a pro-rata as new (qualified) teams are added, so every new team nets the conference another $20 Million or so. Stanford and Cal are only taking about $6-$7 million per year from the ESPN media deal for the next 7 years, then stair stepping to 100% in 10 years (right before the grant of rights expires). SMU is taking $0 for I think the next 9 years. That other $50-$60 million is going to be split among the other members.

Their brand was already hurting, so I'm not sure Cal and Stanford made it worse (SMU maybe), but now they have conference games on the other coast which is going to be a headache logistically. I'm not sure they had another real option to add anything significant money-wise without selling naming rights, etc. If they did, they likely would have exercised it.