NCAA reorg imminent

[pcowlax]

I'm no lawyer but I'm not sure I follow your reasoning Doc. FSU and Clemson are indeed missing out on a lot of money (which may or may not benefit students outside of the teams) by staying in the ACC. And....so what? If they and others leave, the teams that are left behind would be losing a tremendous amount of money with the disintegration of the conference. Why should Wake Forest agree to lose money they are contractually set up to get so that FSU can get more money? When you ask why the ACC should stick together..the ACC is not an entity. It is a collection of universities. Some want to leave, some don't. Contracts are signed with the understanding by all parties that it is in their benefit to sign. Once signed however, contracts do NOT exist to ensure the mutual benefit of all parties, they exist to hold members to the terms of the contract. It is non-sensical to ask why keep things together when the contract is no longer benefitting the conference because, again, the conference is not an entity and is not a party to the contract as regards to GOR, the institutions are. The contract is working fine for those members (especially relative to what their alternatives would be on the open market). In what world would they be expected to agree to dissolve the conference because it isn't working to the benefit of other members? In what world would they or should they care a whit about that? I agree the commissioner has handled this very poorly and missed the window to make everyone happy. And....again, so what? Now some are going to be unhappy. You do not get out of a contract by demonstrating you are unhappy. I have no idea what will happen with the GOR (though I agree with wgdsr that preening by trustees says absolutely nothing about the confidence of the school's lawyers) and it may be they can break out of it in court or buy their way out with hundreds of millions of dollars (and as a public school, even FSU is not going to be able to get away with paying $500 million to change conferences). If they are to leave the conference though, it sure seems like that will have to be the way they do it. No way the other schools voluntarily forgo literally hundreds of millions of dollars because, and this seems to be the entire weight of your argument, some others schools feel it isn't fair they aren't getting more money. And absolutely no way another conference takes them in and cuts them in on the TV deals while the GOR is still in place.

[DocBarrister]

Does your read of the room include the “Magnificent Seven” who looked at breaking the GOR to escape not only the ESPN deal but also the ACC?

The PAC-12 is a good example of a conference that was in denial for far
If you don’t care that FSU and UVA and half the conference is unhappy, then you don’t really care about the ACC.

If you think the ACC should stay together with half the conference wanting to quit, well … that’s borderline delusional.

Commissioner Phillips has a narrow window to come up with a radical change that can make all ACC members happy.

Barring some miracle … not going to happen.

DocBarrister

we all get it that your over-the-top conjecture certitude is meant to draw clicks and dislikes, what's weird that you lean into it.

your marriage analogy is missing the pre-nup in this case. which can be negotiated or not. what they're largely not done is discounted 80% if they're "ironclad".

you... don't... know... what's.... going... to... happen... for sure... at all... see your last post about the pac.

this isn't even devil's advocate. if i am a non "magnificent seven" (just another ruse by doc b that the moniker is self-named) member, what incentive do i have to disengage on what may be the most significant windfall of my future? unless i can be assured i'll go along happily at my present standing? i'm listening and i don't accept that there's other schools that want to date someone hotter as a good reason.

i have never said the conference should stay together. i'm saying there's a very high likelihood that the non-hot girls may not be so easy to dump. and the evidence thus far... is that they haven't been.

I have previously posted links to articles indicating that the seven ACC schools are calling themselves the “Magnificent Seven.”

Just one example:

https://saturdayroad.com/acc/acc-confer ... -2023/amp/

You really haven’t been paying attention.

DocBarrister

[wgdsr]

Does your read of the room include the “Magnificent Seven” who looked at breaking the GOR to escape not only the ESPN deal but also the ACC?

The PAC-12 is a good example of a conference that was in denial for far
If you don’t care that FSU and UVA and half the conference is unhappy, then you don’t really care about the ACC.

If you think the ACC should stay together with half the conference wanting to quit, well … that’s borderline delusional.

Commissioner Phillips has a narrow window to come up with a radical change that can make all ACC members happy.

Barring some miracle … not going to happen.

DocBarrister

we all get it that your over-the-top conjecture certitude is meant to draw clicks and dislikes, what's weird that you lean into it.

your marriage analogy is missing the pre-nup in this case. which can be negotiated or not. what they're largely not done is discounted 80% if they're "ironclad".

you... don't... know... what's.... going... to... happen... for sure... at all... see your last post about the pac.

this isn't even devil's advocate. if i am a non "magnificent seven" (just another ruse by doc b that the moniker is self-named) member, what incentive do i have to disengage on what may be the most significant windfall of my future? unless i can be assured i'll go along happily at my present standing? i'm listening and i don't accept that there's other schools that want to date someone hotter as a good reason.

i have never said the conference should stay together. i'm saying there's a very high likelihood that the non-hot girls may not be so easy to dump. and the evidence thus far... is that they haven't been.

I have previously posted links to articles indicating that the seven ACC schools are calling themselves the “Magnificent Seven.”

Just one example:

https://saturdayroad.com/acc/acc-confer ... -2023/amp/

You really haven’t been paying attention.

DocBarrister

lol. so hoo was it? the original news breaker that i saw said it was a "source". so hoo was it? did they put out a press release on it?

[DocBarrister]

Does your read of the room include the “Magnificent Seven” who looked at breaking the GOR to escape not only the ESPN deal but also the ACC?

The PAC-12 is a good example of a conference that was in denial for far
If you don’t care that FSU and UVA and half the conference is unhappy, then you don’t really care about the ACC.

If you think the ACC should stay together with half the conference wanting to quit, well … that’s borderline delusional.

Commissioner Phillips has a narrow window to come up with a radical change that can make all ACC members happy.

Barring some miracle … not going to happen.

DocBarrister

we all get it that your over-the-top conjecture certitude is meant to draw clicks and dislikes, what's weird that you lean into it.

your marriage analogy is missing the pre-nup in this case. which can be negotiated or not. what they're largely not done is discounted 80% if they're "ironclad".

you... don't... know... what's.... going... to... happen... for sure... at all... see your last post about the pac.

this isn't even devil's advocate. if i am a non "magnificent seven" (just another ruse by doc b that the moniker is self-named) member, what incentive do i have to disengage on what may be the most significant windfall of my future? unless i can be assured i'll go along happily at my present standing? i'm listening and i don't accept that there's other schools that want to date someone hotter as a good reason.

i have never said the conference should stay together. i'm saying there's a very high likelihood that the non-hot girls may not be so easy to dump. and the evidence thus far... is that they haven't been.

I have previously posted links to articles indicating that the seven ACC schools are calling themselves the “Magnificent Seven.”

Just one example:

https://saturdayroad.com/acc/acc-confer ... -2023/amp/

You really haven’t been paying attention.

DocBarrister

lol. so hoo was it? the original news breaker that i saw said it was a "source". so hoo was it? did they put out a press release on it?

You are always so lazy … always asking others to do the research that you obviously fail to do.

I am among the members here who most frequently cite and post links to articles, because I do my research before posting on this forum. I feel that is a courtesy to my fellow forum members.

Why don’t you try doing the same?

DocBarrister

[wgdsr]

I'm no lawyer but I'm not sure I follow your reasoning Doc. FSU and Clemson are indeed missing out on a lot of money (which may or may not benefit students outside of the teams) by staying in the ACC. And....so what? If they and others leave, the teams that are left behind would be losing a tremendous amount of money with the disintegration of the conference. Why should Wake Forest agree to lose money they are contractually set up to get so that FSU can get more money? When you ask why the ACC should stick together..the ACC is not an entity. It is a collection of universities. Some want to leave, some don't. Contracts are signed with the understanding by all parties that it is in their benefit to sign. Once signed however, contracts do NOT exist to ensure the mutual benefit of all parties, they exist to hold members to the terms of the contract. It is non-sensical to ask why keep things together when the contract is no longer benefitting the conference because, again, the conference is not an entity and is not a party to the contract as regards to GOR, the institutions are. The contract is working fine for those members (especially relative to what their alternatives would be on the open market). In what world would they be expected to agree to dissolve the conference because it isn't working to the benefit of other members? In what world would they or should they care a whit about that? I agree the commissioner has handled this very poorly and missed the window to make everyone happy. And....again, so what? Now some are going to be unhappy. You do not get out of a contract by demonstrating you are unhappy. I have no idea what will happen with the GOR (though I agree with wgdsr that preening by trustees says absolutely nothing about the confidence of the school's lawyers) and it may be they can break out of it in court or buy their way out with hundreds of millions of dollars (and as a public school, even FSU is not going to be able to get away with paying $500 million to change conferences). If they are to leave the conference though, it sure seems like that will have to be the way they do it. No way the other schools voluntarily forgo literally hundreds of millions of dollars because, and this seems to be the entire weight of your argument, some others schools feel it isn't fair they aren't getting more money. And absolutely no way another conference takes them in and cuts them in on the TV deals while the GOR is still in place.

thanks for the long form. but he still thinks they'll be litigating this in tallahassee.

[wgdsr]

Does your read of the room include the “Magnificent Seven” who looked at breaking the GOR to escape not only the ESPN deal but also the ACC?

The PAC-12 is a good example of a conference that was in denial for far
If you don’t care that FSU and UVA and half the conference is unhappy, then you don’t really care about the ACC.

If you think the ACC should stay together with half the conference wanting to quit, well … that’s borderline delusional.

Commissioner Phillips has a narrow window to come up with a radical change that can make all ACC members happy.

Barring some miracle … not going to happen.

DocBarrister

we all get it that your over-the-top conjecture certitude is meant to draw clicks and dislikes, what's weird that you lean into it.

your marriage analogy is missing the pre-nup in this case. which can be negotiated or not. what they're largely not done is discounted 80% if they're "ironclad".

you... don't... know... what's.... going... to... happen... for sure... at all... see your last post about the pac.

this isn't even devil's advocate. if i am a non "magnificent seven" (just another ruse by doc b that the moniker is self-named) member, what incentive do i have to disengage on what may be the most significant windfall of my future? unless i can be assured i'll go along happily at my present standing? i'm listening and i don't accept that there's other schools that want to date someone hotter as a good reason.

i have never said the conference should stay together. i'm saying there's a very high likelihood that the non-hot girls may not be so easy to dump. and the evidence thus far... is that they haven't been.

I have previously posted links to articles indicating that the seven ACC schools are calling themselves the “Magnificent Seven.”

Just one example:

https://saturdayroad.com/acc/acc-confer ... -2023/amp/

You really haven’t been paying attention.

DocBarrister

lol. so hoo was it? the original news breaker that i saw said it was a "source". so hoo was it? did they put out a press release on it?

You are always so lazy … always asking others to do the research that you obviously fail to do.

I am among the members here who most frequently cite and post links to articles, because I do my research before posting on this forum. I feel that is a courtesy to my fellow forum members.

Why don’t you try doing the same?

DocBarrister

lmao... i literally just gave you an article that cited the gor's point man of how the gor was constructed, why, that it's been vetted repeatedly, and that it would be a federal case. not in podunk florida, your last strawman.

like any good attorney, don't ask a question unless you know the answer, right? you don't know the answer. no one self-proclaimed them the "magnificent seven" other than anonymous leaking mole of mysterious standing. bold added by me, wgdsr.

did you read the rest of your article, doc? where it says they've been trying for loopholes to the contract for years? how they doing on that? and it's pointless to speculate on how/where teams may land?

but you don't speculate!! because you're sure!!!

[DocBarrister]

I'm no lawyer but I'm not sure I follow your reasoning Doc. FSU and Clemson are indeed missing out on a lot of money (which may or may not benefit students outside of the teams) by staying in the ACC. And....so what? If they and others leave, the teams that are left behind would be losing a tremendous amount of money with the disintegration of the conference. Why should Wake Forest agree to lose money they are contractually set up to get so that FSU can get more money? When you ask why the ACC should stick together..the ACC is not an entity. It is a collection of universities. Some want to leave, some don't. Contracts are signed with the understanding by all parties that it is in their benefit to sign. Once signed however, contracts do NOT exist to ensure the mutual benefit of all parties, they exist to hold members to the terms of the contract. It is non-sensical to ask why keep things together when the contract is no longer benefitting the conference because, again, the conference is not an entity and is not a party to the contract as regards to GOR, the institutions are. The contract is working fine for those members (especially relative to what their alternatives would be on the open market). In what world would they be expected to agree to dissolve the conference because it isn't working to the benefit of other members? In what world would they or should they care a whit about that? I agree the commissioner has handled this very poorly and missed the window to make everyone happy. And....again, so what? Now some are going to be unhappy. You do not get out of a contract by demonstrating you are unhappy. I have no idea what will happen with the GOR (though I agree with wgdsr that preening by trustees says absolutely nothing about the confidence of the school's lawyers) and it may be they can break out of it in court or buy their way out with hundreds of millions of dollars (and as a public school, even FSU is not going to be able to get away with paying $500 million to change conferences). If they are to leave the conference though, it sure seems like that will have to be the way they do it. No way the other schools voluntarily forgo literally hundreds of millions of dollars because, and this seems to be the entire weight of your argument, some others schools feel it isn't fair they aren't getting more money. And absolutely no way another conference takes them in and cuts them in on the TV deals while the GOR is still in place.

Because 1) contracts aren’t worth anything unless they are enforceable; 2) the enforceability of contracts are challenged all the time in litigation; 3) litigation inherently brings risks, costs, and uncertainty; and 4) the vast majority of litigated disputes are resolved through some sort of settlement agreement because the litigants want to avoid those risks, costs, and uncertainty.

Assessing the enforceability of a contract depends on fully evaluating the facts and circumstances at the time of contract formation, the facts and circumstances that have developed since the time of contract implementation, the facts and circumstances at the time the enforceability of the contract is being challenged, and future considerations that would impact the parties to the contract. Also key is the applicable law at the time of contract formation and the current state of that law.

I can’t make that assessment because I don’t have access to all the necessary information and certainly have not researched all the applicable law.

However, it is safe to assume that FSU and its lawyers have made a thorough assessment, and they reportedly think they can get around the GOR.

Finally, you are incorrect about the ACC not being an entity or a party to contracts. The ACC is a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization. It has a legal existence separate and apart from its member schools.

https://projects.propublica.org/nonprof ... /560599082

DocBarrister

[wgdsr]

I'm no lawyer but I'm not sure I follow your reasoning Doc. FSU and Clemson are indeed missing out on a lot of money (which may or may not benefit students outside of the teams) by staying in the ACC. And....so what? If they and others leave, the teams that are left behind would be losing a tremendous amount of money with the disintegration of the conference. Why should Wake Forest agree to lose money they are contractually set up to get so that FSU can get more money? When you ask why the ACC should stick together..the ACC is not an entity. It is a collection of universities. Some want to leave, some don't. Contracts are signed with the understanding by all parties that it is in their benefit to sign. Once signed however, contracts do NOT exist to ensure the mutual benefit of all parties, they exist to hold members to the terms of the contract. It is non-sensical to ask why keep things together when the contract is no longer benefitting the conference because, again, the conference is not an entity and is not a party to the contract as regards to GOR, the institutions are. The contract is working fine for those members (especially relative to what their alternatives would be on the open market). In what world would they be expected to agree to dissolve the conference because it isn't working to the benefit of other members? In what world would they or should they care a whit about that? I agree the commissioner has handled this very poorly and missed the window to make everyone happy. And....again, so what? Now some are going to be unhappy. You do not get out of a contract by demonstrating you are unhappy. I have no idea what will happen with the GOR (though I agree with wgdsr that preening by trustees says absolutely nothing about the confidence of the school's lawyers) and it may be they can break out of it in court or buy their way out with hundreds of millions of dollars (and as a public school, even FSU is not going to be able to get away with paying $500 million to change conferences). If they are to leave the conference though, it sure seems like that will have to be the way they do it. No way the other schools voluntarily forgo literally hundreds of millions of dollars because, and this seems to be the entire weight of your argument, some others schools feel it isn't fair they aren't getting more money. And absolutely no way another conference takes them in and cuts them in on the TV deals while the GOR is still in place.

Because 1) contracts aren’t worth anything unless they are enforceable; 2) the enforceability of contracts are challenged all the time in litigation; 3) litigation inherently brings risks, costs, and uncertainty; and 4) the vast majority of litigated disputes are resolved through some sort of settlement agreement because the litigants want to avoid those risks, costs, and uncertainty.

Assessing the enforceability of a contract depends on fully evaluating the facts and circumstances at the time of contract formation, the facts and circumstances that have developed since the time of contract implementation, the facts and circumstances at the time the enforceability of the contract is being challenged, and future considerations that would impact the parties to the contract. Also key is the applicable law at the time of contract formation and the current state of that law.

I can’t make that assessment because I don’t have access to all the necessary information and certainly have not researched all the applicable law.

However, it is safe to assume that FSU and its lawyers have made a thorough assessment, and they reportedly think they can get around the GOR.

Finally, you are incorrect about the ACC not being an entity or a party to contracts. The ACC is a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization. It has a legal existence separate and apart from its member schools.

https://projects.propublica.org/nonprof ... /560599082

DocBarrister

yeah, we don't know that fsu thinks they can get around the gor. actually up until now, it seems like they think they can't. we'll find out when and if they do more than trash the acc and try to (legally?) blackmail them publicly.

[DocBarrister]

Does your read of the room include the “Magnificent Seven” who looked at breaking the GOR to escape not only the ESPN deal but also the ACC?

The PAC-12 is a good example of a conference that was in denial for far
If you don’t care that FSU and UVA and half the conference is unhappy, then you don’t really care about the ACC.

If you think the ACC should stay together with half the conference wanting to quit, well … that’s borderline delusional.

Commissioner Phillips has a narrow window to come up with a radical change that can make all ACC members happy.

Barring some miracle … not going to happen.

DocBarrister

we all get it that your over-the-top conjecture certitude is meant to draw clicks and dislikes, what's weird that you lean into it.

your marriage analogy is missing the pre-nup in this case. which can be negotiated or not. what they're largely not done is discounted 80% if they're "ironclad".

you... don't... know... what's.... going... to... happen... for sure... at all... see your last post about the pac.

this isn't even devil's advocate. if i am a non "magnificent seven" (just another ruse by doc b that the moniker is self-named) member, what incentive do i have to disengage on what may be the most significant windfall of my future? unless i can be assured i'll go along happily at my present standing? i'm listening and i don't accept that there's other schools that want to date someone hotter as a good reason.

i have never said the conference should stay together. i'm saying there's a very high likelihood that the non-hot girls may not be so easy to dump. and the evidence thus far... is that they haven't been.

I have previously posted links to articles indicating that the seven ACC schools are calling themselves the “Magnificent Seven.”

Just one example:

https://saturdayroad.com/acc/acc-confer ... -2023/amp/

You really haven’t been paying attention.

DocBarrister

lol. so hoo was it? the original news breaker that i saw said it was a "source". so hoo was it? did they put out a press release on it?

You are always so lazy … always asking others to do the research that you obviously fail to do.

I am among the members here who most frequently cite and post links to articles, because I do my research before posting on this forum. I feel that is a courtesy to my fellow forum members.

Why don’t you try doing the same?

DocBarrister

lmao... i literally just gave you an article that cited the gor's point man of how the gor was constructed, why, that it's been vetted repeatedly, and that it would be a federal case. not in podunk florida, your last strawman.

like any good attorney, don't ask a question unless you know the answer, right? you don't know the answer. no one self-proclaimed them the "magnificent seven" other than anonymous leaking mole of mysterious standing. bold added by me, wgdsr.

did you read the rest of your article, doc? where it says they've been trying for loopholes to the contract for years? how they doing on that? and it's pointless to speculate on how/where teams may land?

but you don't speculate!! because you're sure!!!

You really don’t know what you’re talking about. I have successfully filed and argued motions regarding venue and jurisdiction (personal and subject matter) in state and federal courts.

It’s a basic part of being a litigator. I’m sure the FSU lawyers have thoroughly researched where they would file suit if they wanted to litigate the GOR. I don’t know their thinking, but trying to litigate in Florida state court in Tallahassee would be an option that I would at least strongly consider and evaluate. Who knows, maybe they file elsewhere if the contract law in that jurisdiction is more favorable.

It’s a complicated issue, but at least I have some actual professional experience and knowledge on the subject.

You? Not so much.

DocBarrister

[wgdsr]

Does your read of the room include the “Magnificent Seven” who looked at breaking the GOR to escape not only the ESPN deal but also the ACC?

The PAC-12 is a good example of a conference that was in denial for far
If you don’t care that FSU and UVA and half the conference is unhappy, then you don’t really care about the ACC.

If you think the ACC should stay together with half the conference wanting to quit, well … that’s borderline delusional.

Commissioner Phillips has a narrow window to come up with a radical change that can make all ACC members happy.

Barring some miracle … not going to happen.

DocBarrister

we all get it that your over-the-top conjecture certitude is meant to draw clicks and dislikes, what's weird that you lean into it.

your marriage analogy is missing the pre-nup in this case. which can be negotiated or not. what they're largely not done is discounted 80% if they're "ironclad".

you... don't... know... what's.... going... to... happen... for sure... at all... see your last post about the pac.

this isn't even devil's advocate. if i am a non "magnificent seven" (just another ruse by doc b that the moniker is self-named) member, what incentive do i have to disengage on what may be the most significant windfall of my future? unless i can be assured i'll go along happily at my present standing? i'm listening and i don't accept that there's other schools that want to date someone hotter as a good reason.

i have never said the conference should stay together. i'm saying there's a very high likelihood that the non-hot girls may not be so easy to dump. and the evidence thus far... is that they haven't been.

I have previously posted links to articles indicating that the seven ACC schools are calling themselves the “Magnificent Seven.”

Just one example:

https://saturdayroad.com/acc/acc-confer ... -2023/amp/

You really haven’t been paying attention.

DocBarrister

lol. so hoo was it? the original news breaker that i saw said it was a "source". so hoo was it? did they put out a press release on it?

You are always so lazy … always asking others to do the research that you obviously fail to do.

I am among the members here who most frequently cite and post links to articles, because I do my research before posting on this forum. I feel that is a courtesy to my fellow forum members.

Why don’t you try doing the same?

DocBarrister

lmao... i literally just gave you an article that cited the gor's point man of how the gor was constructed, why, that it's been vetted repeatedly, and that it would be a federal case. not in podunk florida, your last strawman.

like any good attorney, don't ask a question unless you know the answer, right? you don't know the answer. no one self-proclaimed them the "magnificent seven" other than anonymous leaking mole of mysterious standing. bold added by me, wgdsr.

did you read the rest of your article, doc? where it says they've been trying for loopholes to the contract for years? how they doing on that? and it's pointless to speculate on how/where teams may land?

but you don't speculate!! because you're sure!!!

You really don’t know what you’re talking about. I have successfully filed and argued motions regarding venue and jurisdiction (personal and subject matter) in state and federal courts.

It’s a basic part of being a litigator. I’m sure the FSU lawyers have thoroughly researched where they would file suit if they wanted to litigate the GOR. I don’t know their thinking, but trying to litigate in Florida state court in Tallahassee would be an option that I would at least strongly consider and evaluate. Who knows, maybe they file elsewhere if the contract law in that jurisdiction is more favorable.

It’s a complicated issue, but at least I have some actual professional experience and knowledge on the subject.

You? Not so much.

DocBarrister

ok, the big 12 commish and his (and the acc's) attorneys are wrong, and you're right because you've moved some court cases. sweet. $400-500 mill minimum. u think they have the stones? i'm skeptical, but i'll have the popcorn out if they do.

[DocBarrister]

I'm no lawyer but I'm not sure I follow your reasoning Doc. FSU and Clemson are indeed missing out on a lot of money (which may or may not benefit students outside of the teams) by staying in the ACC. And....so what? If they and others leave, the teams that are left behind would be losing a tremendous amount of money with the disintegration of the conference. Why should Wake Forest agree to lose money they are contractually set up to get so that FSU can get more money? When you ask why the ACC should stick together..the ACC is not an entity. It is a collection of universities. Some want to leave, some don't. Contracts are signed with the understanding by all parties that it is in their benefit to sign. Once signed however, contracts do NOT exist to ensure the mutual benefit of all parties, they exist to hold members to the terms of the contract. It is non-sensical to ask why keep things together when the contract is no longer benefitting the conference because, again, the conference is not an entity and is not a party to the contract as regards to GOR, the institutions are. The contract is working fine for those members (especially relative to what their alternatives would be on the open market). In what world would they be expected to agree to dissolve the conference because it isn't working to the benefit of other members? In what world would they or should they care a whit about that? I agree the commissioner has handled this very poorly and missed the window to make everyone happy. And....again, so what? Now some are going to be unhappy. You do not get out of a contract by demonstrating you are unhappy. I have no idea what will happen with the GOR (though I agree with wgdsr that preening by trustees says absolutely nothing about the confidence of the school's lawyers) and it may be they can break out of it in court or buy their way out with hundreds of millions of dollars (and as a public school, even FSU is not going to be able to get away with paying $500 million to change conferences). If they are to leave the conference though, it sure seems like that will have to be the way they do it. No way the other schools voluntarily forgo literally hundreds of millions of dollars because, and this seems to be the entire weight of your argument, some others schools feel it isn't fair they aren't getting more money. And absolutely no way another conference takes them in and cuts them in on the TV deals while the GOR is still in place.

Because 1) contracts aren’t worth anything unless they are enforceable; 2) the enforceability of contracts are challenged all the time in litigation; 3) litigation inherently brings risks, costs, and uncertainty; and 4) the vast majority of litigated disputes are resolved through some sort of settlement agreement because the litigants want to avoid those risks, costs, and uncertainty.

Assessing the enforceability of a contract depends on fully evaluating the facts and circumstances at the time of contract formation, the facts and circumstances that have developed since the time of contract implementation, the facts and circumstances at the time the enforceability of the contract is being challenged, and future considerations that would impact the parties to the contract. Also key is the applicable law at the time of contract formation and the current state of that law.

I can’t make that assessment because I don’t have access to all the necessary information and certainly have not researched all the applicable law.

However, it is safe to assume that FSU and its lawyers have made a thorough assessment, and they reportedly think they can get around the GOR.

Finally, you are incorrect about the ACC not being an entity or a party to contracts. The ACC is a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization. It has a legal existence separate and apart from its member schools.

https://projects.propublica.org/nonprof ... /560599082

DocBarrister

yeah, we don't know that fsu thinks they can get around the gor. actually up until now, it seems like they think they can't. we'll find out when and if they do more than trash the acc and try to (legally?) blackmail them publicly.

FSU and Clemson, and at least five other ACC schools, have been evaluating this issue for quite some time. I’m sure they recognize the risks and challenges of trying to get around the GOR. Yet, FSU seems ready to try. I doubt they are alone.

I get it … you want the ACC to stay intact. There’s probably an emotional component to that since you are an ACC fan.

This is a business dispute involving hundreds of millions of dollars. It’s going to be resolved like a business dispute.

You may not like that, but that’s how it is.

Stop being so emotional about it.

DocBarrister

[pcowlax]

I'm no lawyer but I'm not sure I follow your reasoning Doc. FSU and Clemson are indeed missing out on a lot of money (which may or may not benefit students outside of the teams) by staying in the ACC. And....so what? If they and others leave, the teams that are left behind would be losing a tremendous amount of money with the disintegration of the conference. Why should Wake Forest agree to lose money they are contractually set up to get so that FSU can get more money? When you ask why the ACC should stick together..the ACC is not an entity. It is a collection of universities. Some want to leave, some don't. Contracts are signed with the understanding by all parties that it is in their benefit to sign. Once signed however, contracts do NOT exist to ensure the mutual benefit of all parties, they exist to hold members to the terms of the contract. It is non-sensical to ask why keep things together when the contract is no longer benefitting the conference because, again, the conference is not an entity and is not a party to the contract as regards to GOR, the institutions are. The contract is working fine for those members (especially relative to what their alternatives would be on the open market). In what world would they be expected to agree to dissolve the conference because it isn't working to the benefit of other members? In what world would they or should they care a whit about that? I agree the commissioner has handled this very poorly and missed the window to make everyone happy. And....again, so what? Now some are going to be unhappy. You do not get out of a contract by demonstrating you are unhappy. I have no idea what will happen with the GOR (though I agree with wgdsr that preening by trustees says absolutely nothing about the confidence of the school's lawyers) and it may be they can break out of it in court or buy their way out with hundreds of millions of dollars (and as a public school, even FSU is not going to be able to get away with paying $500 million to change conferences). If they are to leave the conference though, it sure seems like that will have to be the way they do it. No way the other schools voluntarily forgo literally hundreds of millions of dollars because, and this seems to be the entire weight of your argument, some others schools feel it isn't fair they aren't getting more money. And absolutely no way another conference takes them in and cuts them in on the TV deals while the GOR is still in place.

Because 1) contracts aren’t worth anything unless they are enforceable; 2) the enforceability of contracts are challenged all the time in litigation; 3) litigation inherently brings risks, costs, and uncertainty; and 4) the vast majority of litigated disputes are resolved through some sort of settlement agreement because the litigants want to avoid those risks, costs, and uncertainty.

Assessing the enforceability of a contract depends on fully evaluating the facts and circumstances at the time of contract formation, the facts and circumstances that have developed since the time of contract implementation, the facts and circumstances at the time the enforceability of the contract is being challenged, and future considerations that would impact the parties to the contract. Also key is the applicable law at the time of contract formation and the current state of that law.

I can’t make that assessment because I don’t have access to all the necessary information and certainly have not researched all the applicable law.

However, it is safe to assume that FSU and its lawyers have made a thorough assessment, and they reportedly think they can get around the GOR.

Finally, you are incorrect about the ACC not being an entity or a party to contracts. The ACC is a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization. It has a legal existence separate and apart from its member schools.

https://projects.propublica.org/nonprof ... /560599082

DocBarrister

By entity I meant not legally but in reality. It is not a "thing". It does not have an opinion. There is no what is good for the ACC (outside of the conference administrative staff), there is what is good for the ACC members. And, most importantly, it plays no games that GOR are based on, the schools do. It is not a part of the contract, the schools are. As for 1-4, those are pretty much all true but not relevant to the argument you are making. Obviously FSU (or whoever) has the right to challenge the contract in court. And any time anything goes to a trial only a fool would claim to be completely sure of the outcome. But if they were so confident they could get around the GOR they would have tried already. And wgdsr is completely right that the fact that they are making noises they are confident they will win means absolutely nothing. All lawyers do that publicly before every case (I sure hope you do). Because trials are fraught with risk, they are posturing to try to get the other schools to cave. That however gets to the real issue. No one is saying FSU does not have the right to challenge the contract in court or buy their way out with massive concessions. That however is not what you have made seemingly 20 posts claiming. You have been claiming, in essence, that since they are so unhappy and missing out on so much money, the other schools should recognize this as "unfair", realize that if the ACC stays together it will be against the will of some schools, and that those schools will be unhappy, and therefore magnanimously propose a path forward that will result in the dissolving of the conference and the landing of themselves in a worse situation. This is insane. Of course FSU could offer $1 billion in concessions and Wake, GT, Duke and the rest would say thank you very much. Of course, they do not actually have that money to offer. As for enforceability, that fact that it is in fact being enforced, when FSU would desperately like to get out of it, pretty conclusory shows its enforceability. Why stay together when its a bad deal for half the schools? Because it isn't for the other half and they get just as much of a say, embarrassing, self-bestowed nicknames or not.

[DocBarrister]

Does your read of the room include the “Magnificent Seven” who looked at breaking the GOR to escape not only the ESPN deal but also the ACC?

The PAC-12 is a good example of a conference that was in denial for far
If you don’t care that FSU and UVA and half the conference is unhappy, then you don’t really care about the ACC.

If you think the ACC should stay together with half the conference wanting to quit, well … that’s borderline delusional.

Commissioner Phillips has a narrow window to come up with a radical change that can make all ACC members happy.

Barring some miracle … not going to happen.

DocBarrister

we all get it that your over-the-top conjecture certitude is meant to draw clicks and dislikes, what's weird that you lean into it.

your marriage analogy is missing the pre-nup in this case. which can be negotiated or not. what they're largely not done is discounted 80% if they're "ironclad".

you... don't... know... what's.... going... to... happen... for sure... at all... see your last post about the pac.

this isn't even devil's advocate. if i am a non "magnificent seven" (just another ruse by doc b that the moniker is self-named) member, what incentive do i have to disengage on what may be the most significant windfall of my future? unless i can be assured i'll go along happily at my present standing? i'm listening and i don't accept that there's other schools that want to date someone hotter as a good reason.

i have never said the conference should stay together. i'm saying there's a very high likelihood that the non-hot girls may not be so easy to dump. and the evidence thus far... is that they haven't been.

I have previously posted links to articles indicating that the seven ACC schools are calling themselves the “Magnificent Seven.”

Just one example:

https://saturdayroad.com/acc/acc-confer ... -2023/amp/

You really haven’t been paying attention.

DocBarrister

lol. so hoo was it? the original news breaker that i saw said it was a "source". so hoo was it? did they put out a press release on it?

You are always so lazy … always asking others to do the research that you obviously fail to do.

I am among the members here who most frequently cite and post links to articles, because I do my research before posting on this forum. I feel that is a courtesy to my fellow forum members.

Why don’t you try doing the same?

DocBarrister

lmao... i literally just gave you an article that cited the gor's point man of how the gor was constructed, why, that it's been vetted repeatedly, and that it would be a federal case. not in podunk florida, your last strawman.

like any good attorney, don't ask a question unless you know the answer, right? you don't know the answer. no one self-proclaimed them the "magnificent seven" other than anonymous leaking mole of mysterious standing. bold added by me, wgdsr.

did you read the rest of your article, doc? where it says they've been trying for loopholes to the contract for years? how they doing on that? and it's pointless to speculate on how/where teams may land?

but you don't speculate!! because you're sure!!!

You really don’t know what you’re talking about. I have successfully filed and argued motions regarding venue and jurisdiction (personal and subject matter) in state and federal courts.

It’s a basic part of being a litigator. I’m sure the FSU lawyers have thoroughly researched where they would file suit if they wanted to litigate the GOR. I don’t know their thinking, but trying to litigate in Florida state court in Tallahassee would be an option that I would at least strongly consider and evaluate. Who knows, maybe they file elsewhere if the contract law in that jurisdiction is more favorable.

It’s a complicated issue, but at least I have some actual professional experience and knowledge on the subject.

You? Not so much.

DocBarrister

ok, the big 12 commish and his (and the acc's) attorneys are wrong, and you're right because you've moved some court cases. sweet. $400-500 mill minimum. u think they have the stones? i'm skeptical, but i'll have the popcorn out if they do.

What are you ranting about?

This is not about having the “stones.” It’s about making reasonable business and legal choices after thorough consideration, consultation, and research.

When this much money is at stake, you don’t make decisions based on whether you “have the stones.”

DocBarrister

[DocBarrister]

I'm no lawyer but I'm not sure I follow your reasoning Doc. FSU and Clemson are indeed missing out on a lot of money (which may or may not benefit students outside of the teams) by staying in the ACC. And....so what? If they and others leave, the teams that are left behind would be losing a tremendous amount of money with the disintegration of the conference. Why should Wake Forest agree to lose money they are contractually set up to get so that FSU can get more money? When you ask why the ACC should stick together..the ACC is not an entity. It is a collection of universities. Some want to leave, some don't. Contracts are signed with the understanding by all parties that it is in their benefit to sign. Once signed however, contracts do NOT exist to ensure the mutual benefit of all parties, they exist to hold members to the terms of the contract. It is non-sensical to ask why keep things together when the contract is no longer benefitting the conference because, again, the conference is not an entity and is not a party to the contract as regards to GOR, the institutions are. The contract is working fine for those members (especially relative to what their alternatives would be on the open market). In what world would they be expected to agree to dissolve the conference because it isn't working to the benefit of other members? In what world would they or should they care a whit about that? I agree the commissioner has handled this very poorly and missed the window to make everyone happy. And....again, so what? Now some are going to be unhappy. You do not get out of a contract by demonstrating you are unhappy. I have no idea what will happen with the GOR (though I agree with wgdsr that preening by trustees says absolutely nothing about the confidence of the school's lawyers) and it may be they can break out of it in court or buy their way out with hundreds of millions of dollars (and as a public school, even FSU is not going to be able to get away with paying $500 million to change conferences). If they are to leave the conference though, it sure seems like that will have to be the way they do it. No way the other schools voluntarily forgo literally hundreds of millions of dollars because, and this seems to be the entire weight of your argument, some others schools feel it isn't fair they aren't getting more money. And absolutely no way another conference takes them in and cuts them in on the TV deals while the GOR is still in place.

Because 1) contracts aren’t worth anything unless they are enforceable; 2) the enforceability of contracts are challenged all the time in litigation; 3) litigation inherently brings risks, costs, and uncertainty; and 4) the vast majority of litigated disputes are resolved through some sort of settlement agreement because the litigants want to avoid those risks, costs, and uncertainty.

Assessing the enforceability of a contract depends on fully evaluating the facts and circumstances at the time of contract formation, the facts and circumstances that have developed since the time of contract implementation, the facts and circumstances at the time the enforceability of the contract is being challenged, and future considerations that would impact the parties to the contract. Also key is the applicable law at the time of contract formation and the current state of that law.

I can’t make that assessment because I don’t have access to all the necessary information and certainly have not researched all the applicable law.

However, it is safe to assume that FSU and its lawyers have made a thorough assessment, and they reportedly think they can get around the GOR.

Finally, you are incorrect about the ACC not being an entity or a party to contracts. The ACC is a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization. It has a legal existence separate and apart from its member schools.

https://projects.propublica.org/nonprof ... /560599082

DocBarrister

By entity I meant not legally but in reality. It is not a "thing". It does not have an opinion. There is no what is good for the ACC (outside of the conference administrative staff), there is what is good for the ACC members. And, most importantly, it plays no games that GOR are based on, the schools do. It is not a part of the contract, the schools are. As for 1-4, those are pretty much all true but not relevant to the argument you are making. Obviously FSU (or whoever) has the right to challenge the contract in court. And any time anything goes to a trial only a fool would claim to be completely sure of the outcome. But if they were so confident they could get around the GOR they would have tried already. And wgdsr is completely right that the fact that they are making noises they are confident they will win means absolutely nothing. All lawyers do that publicly before every case (I sure hope you do). Because trials are fraught with risk, they are posturing to try to get the other schools to cave. That however gets to the real issue. No one is saying FSU does not have the right to challenge the contract in court or buy their way out with massive concessions. That however is not what you have made seemingly 20 posts claiming. You have been claiming, in essence, that since they are so unhappy and missing out on so much money, the other schools should recognize this as "unfair", realize that if the ACC stays together it will be against the will of some schools, and that those schools will be unhappy, and therefore magnanimously propose a path forward that will result in the dissolving of the conference and the landing of themselves in a worse situation. This is insane. Of course FSU could offer $1 billion in concessions and Wake, GT, Duke and the rest would say thank you very much. Of course, they do not actually have that money to offer. As for enforceability, that fact that it is in fact being enforced, when FSU would desperately like to get out of it, pretty conclusory shows its enforceability. Why stay together when its a bad deal for half the schools? Because it isn't for the other half and they get just as much of a say, embarrassing, self-bestowed nicknames or not.

Heh. Of course the ACC has “opinions.”

Anyone who has been subject to an HOA knows that HOAs frequently place their interests above those of their contractual members (homeowners). That’s why there is so much litigation involving HOAs.

I’m sure Commissioner Phillips wants to preserve the ACC and his $2 million+ salary. The ACC, as a legal entity and its collection of employees, has its own legal and business interests separate and apart from its member schools.

The best indication of that? If litigation does break out, you can wager everything that the ACC will retain its own counsel.

DocBarrister

[wgdsr]

I'm no lawyer but I'm not sure I follow your reasoning Doc. FSU and Clemson are indeed missing out on a lot of money (which may or may not benefit students outside of the teams) by staying in the ACC. And....so what? If they and others leave, the teams that are left behind would be losing a tremendous amount of money with the disintegration of the conference. Why should Wake Forest agree to lose money they are contractually set up to get so that FSU can get more money? When you ask why the ACC should stick together..the ACC is not an entity. It is a collection of universities. Some want to leave, some don't. Contracts are signed with the understanding by all parties that it is in their benefit to sign. Once signed however, contracts do NOT exist to ensure the mutual benefit of all parties, they exist to hold members to the terms of the contract. It is non-sensical to ask why keep things together when the contract is no longer benefitting the conference because, again, the conference is not an entity and is not a party to the contract as regards to GOR, the institutions are. The contract is working fine for those members (especially relative to what their alternatives would be on the open market). In what world would they be expected to agree to dissolve the conference because it isn't working to the benefit of other members? In what world would they or should they care a whit about that? I agree the commissioner has handled this very poorly and missed the window to make everyone happy. And....again, so what? Now some are going to be unhappy. You do not get out of a contract by demonstrating you are unhappy. I have no idea what will happen with the GOR (though I agree with wgdsr that preening by trustees says absolutely nothing about the confidence of the school's lawyers) and it may be they can break out of it in court or buy their way out with hundreds of millions of dollars (and as a public school, even FSU is not going to be able to get away with paying $500 million to change conferences). If they are to leave the conference though, it sure seems like that will have to be the way they do it. No way the other schools voluntarily forgo literally hundreds of millions of dollars because, and this seems to be the entire weight of your argument, some others schools feel it isn't fair they aren't getting more money. And absolutely no way another conference takes them in and cuts them in on the TV deals while the GOR is still in place.

Because 1) contracts aren’t worth anything unless they are enforceable; 2) the enforceability of contracts are challenged all the time in litigation; 3) litigation inherently brings risks, costs, and uncertainty; and 4) the vast majority of litigated disputes are resolved through some sort of settlement agreement because the litigants want to avoid those risks, costs, and uncertainty.

Assessing the enforceability of a contract depends on fully evaluating the facts and circumstances at the time of contract formation, the facts and circumstances that have developed since the time of contract implementation, the facts and circumstances at the time the enforceability of the contract is being challenged, and future considerations that would impact the parties to the contract. Also key is the applicable law at the time of contract formation and the current state of that law.

I can’t make that assessment because I don’t have access to all the necessary information and certainly have not researched all the applicable law.

However, it is safe to assume that FSU and its lawyers have made a thorough assessment, and they reportedly think they can get around the GOR.

Finally, you are incorrect about the ACC not being an entity or a party to contracts. The ACC is a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization. It has a legal existence separate and apart from its member schools.

https://projects.propublica.org/nonprof ... /560599082

DocBarrister

yeah, we don't know that fsu thinks they can get around the gor. actually up until now, it seems like they think they can't. we'll find out when and if they do more than trash the acc and try to (legally?) blackmail them publicly.

FSU and Clemson, and at least five other ACC schools, have been evaluating this issue for quite some time. I’m sure they recognize the risks and challenges of trying to get around the GOR. Yet, FSU seems ready to try. I doubt they are alone.

I get it … you want the ACC to stay intact. There’s probably an emotional component to that since you are an ACC fan.

This is a business dispute involving hundreds of millions of dollars. It’s going to be resolved like a business dispute.

You may not like that, but that’s how it is.

Stop being so emotional about it.

DocBarrister

sigh... ok, you are welcome to your opinion. mine is -- we will know if fsu is willing to try when and only when.... they try. as of now, they aren't trying. they're trying to get more dough now without trying, or muddy the waters enough (i.e. a pac/acc deal) to get an escape hatch.

if the acc stays in tact, great!!! do i care if uva gets another 30-40 million per year? no, no i do not. what i and many people have been pointing out to you is that no outcome is certain nor "should it be" because some parties want a better deal. and that includes my alma mater.

at every turn, i have been in agreement that it is a business deal. i am now laughing at fsu because they sound like a bunch of crybabies in a business deal that they entered into. ultimately, they (or someone else) may challenge that contract. given their posture, i would like them to do it tomorrow. i doubt they will. i don't think they have the stones. and yes, that matters. and when they do if it's in a day or a year or 4, i want wake to take them to the mat and see what happens. i would say the same for wake about uva . but i'd at least hope they'd be smart enough to let someone else be the guinea pig instead. because while i don't care about fsu having high risk of getting burned, i would in the 'hoos case.

then again, if uva wants to join in with the rubes from tallahassee, nothing i can do about it!!!

[Farfromgeneva]

Does your read of the room include the “Magnificent Seven” who looked at breaking the GOR to escape not only the ESPN deal but also the ACC?

The PAC-12 is a good example of a conference that was in denial for far
If you don’t care that FSU and UVA and half the conference is unhappy, then you don’t really care about the ACC.

If you think the ACC should stay together with half the conference wanting to quit, well … that’s borderline delusional.

Commissioner Phillips has a narrow window to come up with a radical change that can make all ACC members happy.

Barring some miracle … not going to happen.

DocBarrister

we all get it that your over-the-top conjecture certitude is meant to draw clicks and dislikes, what's weird that you lean into it.

your marriage analogy is missing the pre-nup in this case. which can be negotiated or not. what they're largely not done is discounted 80% if they're "ironclad".

you... don't... know... what's.... going... to... happen... for sure... at all... see your last post about the pac.

this isn't even devil's advocate. if i am a non "magnificent seven" (just another ruse by doc b that the moniker is self-named) member, what incentive do i have to disengage on what may be the most significant windfall of my future? unless i can be assured i'll go along happily at my present standing? i'm listening and i don't accept that there's other schools that want to date someone hotter as a good reason.

i have never said the conference should stay together. i'm saying there's a very high likelihood that the non-hot girls may not be so easy to dump. and the evidence thus far... is that they haven't been.

It’s more like a corporate takeover poison pill than a prenup.

[ggait]

Now there you go again Doc. [Based on his posts, I have a really really hard time believing that Doc is actually also a barrister. But whatev.]

Totally possible that the B10 will poach UW and Oregon. Makes total business, geographic, academic and culture sense. UW and UO are both AAU schools, which the B10 always likes. And, as we just saw from from CU, USC, UCLA, P12 teams currently are free to walk. Since the P12 media rights deal has expired (so no GOR issues). Would not be surprised to see other P12s follow go to the B12 (AZ, ASU) or B10 (Stanford, Cal). FYI, new schools joining the B10 are extremely unlikely to get full rev shares. USC and UCLA did, but that's the exception not the rule.

We all know that FSU wants to get divorced from its current dowdy boring poor wife (ACC) and hook up with a new hot, rich, wife. Sure they can make that happen:

1. So long as they are willing to pay the price of the divorce (nine figures).
2. So long as the proposed new hot rich wife is willing to take on an unattractive new spouse -- dumb (no AAU membership), far away, serious legal issues/baggage/uncertainty, and no mullah (having to pay 9 figures to the ex-wife; no media rights to sell for years).

I'm really having a hard time seeing the B10 be OK with #2. Hard to see the SEC being OK with #2 either.

So, I'll wish good luck to FSU in landing its new hot wife. Morgan Fairchild -- yeah, that's the ticket!! Newsflash to FSU -- you are just not that hot.

[Farfromgeneva]

I'm no lawyer but I'm not sure I follow your reasoning Doc. FSU and Clemson are indeed missing out on a lot of money (which may or may not benefit students outside of the teams) by staying in the ACC. And....so what? If they and others leave, the teams that are left behind would be losing a tremendous amount of money with the disintegration of the conference. Why should Wake Forest agree to lose money they are contractually set up to get so that FSU can get more money? When you ask why the ACC should stick together..the ACC is not an entity. It is a collection of universities. Some want to leave, some don't. Contracts are signed with the understanding by all parties that it is in their benefit to sign. Once signed however, contracts do NOT exist to ensure the mutual benefit of all parties, they exist to hold members to the terms of the contract. It is non-sensical to ask why keep things together when the contract is no longer benefitting the conference because, again, the conference is not an entity and is not a party to the contract as regards to GOR, the institutions are. The contract is working fine for those members (especially relative to what their alternatives would be on the open market). In what world would they be expected to agree to dissolve the conference because it isn't working to the benefit of other members? In what world would they or should they care a whit about that? I agree the commissioner has handled this very poorly and missed the window to make everyone happy. And....again, so what? Now some are going to be unhappy. You do not get out of a contract by demonstrating you are unhappy. I have no idea what will happen with the GOR (though I agree with wgdsr that preening by trustees says absolutely nothing about the confidence of the school's lawyers) and it may be they can break out of it in court or buy their way out with hundreds of millions of dollars (and as a public school, even FSU is not going to be able to get away with paying $500 million to change conferences). If they are to leave the conference though, it sure seems like that will have to be the way they do it. No way the other schools voluntarily forgo literally hundreds of millions of dollars because, and this seems to be the entire weight of your argument, some others schools feel it isn't fair they aren't getting more money. And absolutely no way another conference takes them in and cuts them in on the TV deals while the GOR is still in place.

Because 1) contracts aren’t worth anything unless they are enforceable; 2) the enforceability of contracts are challenged all the time in litigation; 3) litigation inherently brings risks, costs, and uncertainty; and 4) the vast majority of litigated disputes are resolved through some sort of settlement agreement because the litigants want to avoid those risks, costs, and uncertainty.

Assessing the enforceability of a contract depends on fully evaluating the facts and circumstances at the time of contract formation, the facts and circumstances that have developed since the time of contract implementation, the facts and circumstances at the time the enforceability of the contract is being challenged, and future considerations that would impact the parties to the contract. Also key is the applicable law at the time of contract formation and the current state of that law.

I can’t make that assessment because I don’t have access to all the necessary information and certainly have not researched all the applicable law.

However, it is safe to assume that FSU and its lawyers have made a thorough assessment, and they reportedly think they can get around the GOR.

Finally, you are incorrect about the ACC not being an entity or a party to contracts. The ACC is a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization. It has a legal existence separate and apart from its member schools.

https://projects.propublica.org/nonprof ... /560599082

DocBarrister

By entity I meant not legally but in reality. It is not a "thing". It does not have an opinion. There is no what is good for the ACC (outside of the conference administrative staff), there is what is good for the ACC members. And, most importantly, it plays no games that GOR are based on, the schools do. It is not a part of the contract, the schools are. As for 1-4, those are pretty much all true but not relevant to the argument you are making. Obviously FSU (or whoever) has the right to challenge the contract in court. And any time anything goes to a trial only a fool would claim to be completely sure of the outcome. But if they were so confident they could get around the GOR they would have tried already. And wgdsr is completely right that the fact that they are making noises they are confident they will win means absolutely nothing. All lawyers do that publicly before every case (I sure hope you do). Because trials are fraught with risk, they are posturing to try to get the other schools to cave. That however gets to the real issue. No one is saying FSU does not have the right to challenge the contract in court or buy their way out with massive concessions. That however is not what you have made seemingly 20 posts claiming. You have been claiming, in essence, that since they are so unhappy and missing out on so much money, the other schools should recognize this as "unfair", realize that if the ACC stays together it will be against the will of some schools, and that those schools will be unhappy, and therefore magnanimously propose a path forward that will result in the dissolving of the conference and the landing of themselves in a worse situation. This is insane. Of course FSU could offer $1 billion in concessions and Wake, GT, Duke and the rest would say thank you very much. Of course, they do not actually have that money to offer. As for enforceability, that fact that it is in fact being enforced, when FSU would desperately like to get out of it, pretty conclusory shows its enforceability. Why stay together when its a bad deal for half the schools? Because it isn't for the other half and they get just as much of a say, embarrassing, self-bestowed nicknames or not.

Yes ignoring the economic damage and cost to the others is absurd on every level. Ultimately there’s a resolution before the contract is up. Time decay lowers the cost so a few more years and it gets cheaper.

Question is what’s the number that FSU and Clemson have to come up with that works. Can they get out for, and find a way to fund, $350mm? It would be a present value, no one here ever discounts, but those 7-13yr out contract dollars are worth a lot less today.

[ggait]

Quote from FSU's president: "I believe that FSU at some point will have to very seriously consider leaving the ACC unless there is a radical change to the ACC's revenue distribution."

Scary. Very very scary. I bet the FSU Prez is gonna follow that up with a sternly worded letter!

If FSU had an exit of the GOR, they'd take it. So a fair translation of the statement is "FSU is stuck for years and everyone knows it. But maybe we can complain and bluff enough about that as a way to squeeze our partners into paying us some more dough over the many years we are still going to be stuck in the ACC."

B10 response: Don't call us until after you get your issues settled. And after you get into the AAU. Buh-bye. Then blocks the FSU number.

[ggait]

Latest from ESPN's Pete Thamel (who is pretty reliable on this stuff):

Sources: The Big Ten’s presidents met early Thursday morning and authorized Commissioner Tony Petitti to explore expansion and bring them back more information on Oregon and Washington as potential Big Ten members.

Hmm.

No mention of FSU. Or Clemson. Or any other ACC school. What????

Didn't Doc assure us that lawyers for the Mag 7 could shred the ACC GOR? Why would the Magnificents just stand by while other freely hop on the gravy train. I mean, why stay when you are (according to Doc) free to leave?

Like the broken clock, Doc will eventually be right about this. That day is still years away.