Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)

[2speedy1]

Yea, I looked at the revenue #'s from Navigate closer and they are all-in media rights #'s and appear dated.

However, that makes his strategy easier to pull off. ACC schools that would be Big12 options would have higher Big12 revenue than projected ACC revenue. So ACC schools going to SEC/Big10 would not have to subsidize future Big12 schools. The only subsidy would be ACC schools destined for AAC, etc.

So......as i said before, do you think Louisville would be happy to let Clemson make the SEC money while they only make the B12 money? You dont think they will want to also make the big $$? What about BC, or Wake. You dont think those will have a legal avenue to fight for a large payday from those seeking to leave?

There are so many things against teams trying to leave the ACC that it is extremely difficult for them to leave, not impossible, but extremely difficult.

Just about anything a team like Clemson does could open them up to lawsuits from the other members. And as soon as they express their interest in leaving they would be stripped of their voting rights.

You will hear things like torturous interference, collusion, etc. and this would not only be against the schools leaving but also against the Conferences they are going to, and their media partners.

Look at BC, if they dont have a landing spot. Clemson wants to leave. First thing they would do is strip Clemsons voting rights. Then they will look at how they came to a deal with the new conference. Another conference has several restrictions on them on what they can do when negotiating a new member. They must be approached by the school, the new conference cannot initiate the dealings. Then they would look at the media partner. A media partner, would open themselves up for serious lawsuits as well. ESPN negotiating with Clemson to join the SEC would be a serious breach of contract against someone like BC who is also in a contract with ESPN.

Everyone thinks as long as everyone has a landing spot they will be happy. First, not everyone will have equal landing spots. Next, there will be some schools that are left out and those schools will have serious issues with the others leaving them behind.

Contracts can be negotiated out of, but if one side doesnt want to negotiate there is limited options. And when one or more parties look to be that much behind the others, those schools will do as much as possible to stop the others from breaking their obligation.

 

[Gorm]

Umm the contracts? ESPN owns all of the SEC games, all of them. So what is a new parter going to bid on? The worst game of the week? ESPN owns the rest.

If the SEC says "Hey ESPN, we have more inventory, pay us." and ESPN declines, why would the SEC not contact other interested parties?

 

[FriendlySpartan]

So......as i said before, do you think Louisville would be happy to let Clemson make the SEC money while they only make the B12 money? You dont think they will want to also make the big $$? What about BC, or Wake. You dont think those will have a legal avenue to fight for a large payday from those seeking to leave?

There are so many things against teams trying to leave the ACC that it is extremely difficult for them to leave, not impossible, but extremely difficult.

Just about anything a team like Clemson does could open them up to lawsuits from the other members. And as soon as they express their interest in leaving they would be stripped of their voting rights.

You will hear things like torturous interference, collusion, etc. and this would not only be against the schools leaving but also against the Conferences they are going to, and their media partners.

Look at BC, if they dont have a landing spot. Clemson wants to leave. First thing they would do is strip Clemsons voting rights. Then they will look at how they came to a deal with the new conference. Another conference has several restrictions on them on what they can do when negotiating a new member. They must be approached by the school, the new conference cannot initiate the dealings. Then they would look at the media partner. A media partner, would open themselves up for serious lawsuits as well. ESPN negotiating with Clemson to join the SEC would be a serious breach of contract against someone like BC who is also in a contract with ESPN.

Everyone thinks as long as everyone has a landing spot they will be happy. First, not everyone will have equal landing spots. Next, there will be some schools that are left out and those schools will have serious issues with the others leaving them behind.

Contracts can be negotiated out of, but if one side doesnt want to negotiate there is limited options. And when one or more parties look to be that much behind the others, those schools will do as much as possible to stop the others from breaking their obligation.

Stop making sense. Didn’t you hear WhoISThis say this isn’t a legal issue?

 

[FriendlySpartan]

If the SEC says "Hey ESPN, we have more inventory, pay us." and ESPN declines, why would the SEC not contact other interested parties?

Oh boy.

Ok ESPN owns all the rights. If the SEC adds more inventory ESPN owns those rights. They don’t have to pay anything more unless there is an escalator clause that I’m sure ESPN has to agree to. So again ESPN would be bidding against itself.

 

[2speedy1]

Oh boy.

Ok ESPN owns all the rights. If the SEC adds more inventory ESPN owns those rights. They don’t have to pay anything more unless there is an escalator clause that I’m sure ESPN has to agree to. So again ESPN would be bidding against itself.

It really appears some people on here have no idea how a contract works.

 

[Gorm]

Oh boy.

Ok ESPN owns all the rights. If the SEC adds more inventory ESPN owns those rights. They don’t have to pay anything more unless there is an escalator clause that I’m sure ESPN has to agree to. So again ESPN would be bidding against itself.

ESPN owns the rights to the 16 schools currently under contract. Without knowing the contract specifics the SEC has regarding expansion, if the SEC adds additional schools and thus additional content, if ESPN declines to carry the inventory, in theory the SEC could approach other media partners for that additional inventory.

Bottom line, if the SEC expands and ESPN doesn't want the additional inventory, there is probably nothing stopping the SEC from approaching another media partner for the inventory.

 

[Gorm]

It really appears some people on here have no idea how a contract works.

Ok...sure. Happen to have a link to the SEC / ESPN contract? - Its currently being housed at Vanderbilt so it can't be exposed by FOIA.

 

[FriendlySpartan]

ESPN owns the rights to the 16 schools currently under contract. Without knowing the contract specifics the SEC has regarding expansion, if the SEC adds additional schools and thus additional content, if ESPN declines to carry the inventory, in theory the SEC could approach other media partners for that additional inventory.

As speedy just said you don’t understand how this works. ESPN owns ALL sec content. If they add someone ESPN owns it. They don’t decline to carry the inventory because they own it. It’s why the conference has to confirm with espn what they would pay to add those teams.

 

[WhoISthis]

The ACC bylaws almost certainly bar schools with a conflict of interest from voting on a matter. If a school has negotiated a landing spot or a payoff from someone to vote a certain way, that's likely a conflict of interest.

Option 1 would be to find 8 schools willing to blindly leap without a guaranteed spot. Sure, FSU, Clemson, UNC, Miami would likely find a P2 home as long as the networks are willing to put up the cash for it. Are they? We don't know for certain. The B12 would take on ~4 schools if the networks oblige, but which ones? NC State, Louisville, Pitt, Va Tech, GA Tech, Syracuse, Duke? Somebody's getting left out.

Option 2 would be to get everyone on board with dissolving. If everyone agrees to a deal, there's no one to object. Downside is 1 school could stop it cold, and I'm thinking 3-4 might be on the outside of the power conference structure forever with the move. Yes, those same schools would likely end up there in 2036, but that's a ways down a road they're in no hurry to rush down.

Still, why is everyone bending over backwards to accommodate FSU, UNC, etc? They're the only ones that really come out ahead. Everyone else will get there eventually, and for a lot less money in over the next 13 years.

The Big 12 would take as many as 8 in order to remove the ACC and get to a 3 conference setup. 6 ACC to P2 and 8 to Big 12 is possible.Schools like Cuse are right in line with Yormark working to build up basketball and separate deals

Fox wants more basketball too and would get it basically for Big East rate, with ESPN on the hook for initially $20 million. ACC network converted to Big 12 Network would also factor in, plus exit fees. They also want ND sooner than later. Helping ESPN liquidate ACC goes a long ways towards that

All the ACC base CFP base pay would be redistributed too. The Big 24 would stand a better chance to get a bigger percentage of base in a 3 conference setup than a 4 or 5 conference plus ND setup in which ACC has Clemson, FSU

Considering the reduction of risk for ACC deadweights and ESPN, everyone comes out ahead.

 

[Gorm]

As speedy just said you don’t understand how this works. ESPN owns ALL sec content. If they add someone ESPN owns it. They don’t decline to carry the inventory because they own it. It’s why the conference has to confirm with espn what they would pay to add those teams.

Cool story bro.

Got a link to the SEC / ESPN contract? Without knowing what that entails regarding expansion, we are all just guessing on this. I really, REALLY doubt the SEC willingly put themselves into a spot where they expand and ESPN can just "decline" the additional inventory and just have to "sit" with nobody broadcasting the additional inventory.

If ESPN declines, the SEC can approach other media partners to pay for that additional inventory. Which would likely result in lower payments to the new SEC members.

 

[FerShizzle]

So......as i said before, do you think Louisville would be happy to let Clemson make the SEC money while they only make the B12 money? You dont think they will want to also make the big $$? What about BC, or Wake. You dont think those will have a legal avenue to fight for a large payday from those seeking to leave?

There are so many things against teams trying to leave the ACC that it is extremely difficult for them to leave, not impossible, but extremely difficult.

Just about anything a team like Clemson does could open them up to lawsuits from the other members. And as soon as they express their interest in leaving they would be stripped of their voting rights.

You will hear things like torturous interference, collusion, etc. and this would not only be against the schools leaving but also against the Conferences they are going to, and their media partners.

Look at BC, if they dont have a landing spot. Clemson wants to leave. First thing they would do is strip Clemsons voting rights. Then they will look at how they came to a deal with the new conference. Another conference has several restrictions on them on what they can do when negotiating a new member. They must be approached by the school, the new conference cannot initiate the dealings. Then they would look at the media partner. A media partner, would open themselves up for serious lawsuits as well. ESPN negotiating with Clemson to join the SEC would be a serious breach of contract against someone like BC who is also in a contract with ESPN.

Everyone thinks as long as everyone has a landing spot they will be happy. First, not everyone will have equal landing spots. Next, there will be some schools that are left out and those schools will have serious issues with the others leaving them behind.

Contracts can be negotiated out of, but if one side doesnt want to negotiate there is limited options. And when one or more parties look to be that much behind the others, those schools will do as much as possible to stop the others from breaking their obligation.

Why don’t they just strip them of their voting rights now then? That way the bottom of the league could at least ride out the current contract or negotiate a buyout.

 

[FriendlySpartan]

Cool story bro.

Got a link to the SEC / ESPN contract? Without knowing what that entails regarding expansion, we are all just guessing on this. I really, REALLY doubt the SEC willingly put themselves into a spot where they expand and ESPN can just "decline" the additional inventory and just have to "sit" with nobody broadcasting the additional inventory.

Because that’s the way it does work bro. Find where I’m wrong. I’ll wait.

 

[Gorm]

Because that’s the way it does work bro. Find where I’m wrong. I’ll wait.

Claiming you know how it works, yet have nothing to back that up. Neato. I see that Lansing Community College education is really paying off.

Link? If not, your guess is as good as mine.

 

[FriendlySpartan]

Claiming you know how it works, yet have nothing to back that up. Neato. I see that Lansing Community College education is really paying off.

Link? If not, your guess is as good as mine.

Hahaha enjoy your night man

 

[2speedy1]

ESPN owns the rights to the 16 schools currently under contract. Without knowing the contract specifics the SEC has regarding expansion, if the SEC adds additional schools and thus additional content, if ESPN declines to carry the inventory, in theory the SEC could approach other media partners for that additional inventory.

Bottom line, if the SEC expands and ESPN doesn't want the additional inventory, there is probably nothing stopping the SEC from approaching another media partner for the inventory.

ESPN owns the rights to ALL SEC content. Period, it is not on a per team basis. These are negotiated as the SEC as a whole gets $XXX for the year, then that is divided by the number of teams. They dont negotiate on a per team basis. I think this is misunderstood because so many only see how much made per team, and that is what is reported.

The only thing would be that if the SEC adds more schools if that triggers a escalator to increase the total pay, by $X etc. They still own the media rights to the conference content regardless. Unless there is a clause to allow for a new member if they expand.

The reason the Big 12 has that option is because Fox did not agree to the pro rata, rate up front, they get the option to negotiate or pass, and allows for a new media partner. But that is written in the contract and is mostly because there are multiple partners already. ESPN owns ALL of the SEC rights, and it is very unlikely they did not build in the pro rata for any adds, allowing for other media partners to take part of the content.

Some of you really must think these media and conferences have 1st graders writing their contracts. These people have teams of lawyers writing these to cover them in every scenario. And they make them very rock solid.

 

[2speedy1]

Cool story bro.

Got a link to the SEC / ESPN contract? Without knowing what that entails regarding expansion, we are all just guessing on this. I really, REALLY doubt the SEC willingly put themselves into a spot where they expand and ESPN can just "decline" the additional inventory and just have to "sit" with nobody broadcasting the additional inventory.

If ESPN declines, the SEC can approach other media partners to pay for that additional inventory. Which would likely result in lower payments to the new SEC members.

Why don’t they just strip them of their voting rights now then? That way the bottom of the league could at least ride out the current contract or negotiate a buyout.

 

[Gorm]

ESPN owns the rights to ALL SEC content. Period, it is not on a per team basis. These are negotiated as the SEC as a whole gets $XXX for the year, then that is divided by the number of teams. They dont negotiate on a per team basis. I think this is misunderstood because so many only see how much made per team, and that is what is reported.

The only thing would be that if the SEC adds more schools if that triggers a escalator to increase the total pay, by $X etc. They still own the media rights to the conference content regardless. Unless there is a clause to allow for a new member if they expand.

The reason the Big 12 has that option is because Fox did not agree to the pro rata, rate up front, they get the option to negotiate or pass, and allows for a new media partner. But that is written in the contract and is mostly because there are multiple partners already. ESPN owns ALL of the SEC rights, and it is very unlikely they did not build in the pro rata for any adds, allowing for other media partners to take part of the content.

Some of you really must think these media and conferences have 1st graders writing their contracts. These people have teams of lawyers writing these to cover them in every scenario. And they make them very rock solid.

Cool. Lets see your receipts on this info.

ESPN has a contract with the SEC currently. The new inventory would be IN ADDITION to the content already contracted. ESPN likely has first shot at that content by contract. If they decline, its open.

 

[WhoISthis]

Stop making sense. Didn’t you hear WhoISThis say this isn’t a legal issue?

You’re going to wrong on this one too?
All signs point to major ACC shakeup way before 2030.

Either ESPN will subsidize to delay movement, like they did via LHN. Long term little benefit to espn

Or they’ll utilize the GOR to get favorable consolidation and stratification, at little-to-no incremental decrease in profits by sharing unwanted leftovers with Fox via Big 12. Some would say they reverse flow could happen with big 12 schools going east, but that’s a much more difficult transaction

Or they wait and do nothing, which risks losing a lot of valuable market share in 10 years or less, while also having two middle class conferences on their books, and passing on conference network tax expansion

 

[Gunnerclone]

ESPN owns the rights to the 16 schools currently under contract. Without knowing the contract specifics the SEC has regarding expansion, if the SEC adds additional schools and thus additional content, if ESPN declines to carry the inventory, in theory the SEC could approach other media partners for that additional inventory.

Bottom line, if the SEC expands and ESPN doesn't want the additional inventory, there is probably nothing stopping the SEC from approaching another media partner for the inventory.

Which is a moot point because ESPN would love to suck 4 more SEC cocks.

 

[2speedy1]

Cool. Lets see your receipts on this info.

ESPN has a contract with the SEC currently. The new inventory would be IN ADDITION to the content already contracted. ESPN likely has first shot at that content by contract. If they decline, its open.

Seriously, where are your receipts? Because you are the one saying all these things can happen.

Maybe go do some reading on how contracts work.

No one said that ESPN would refuse to broadcast the new content. They would absolutely broadcast it. They just may not pay more for it. It depends on if they have a pro rata clause for additions. Most likely they do. otherwise it would be just like our current deal, where the money for new members comes out of the total pot, and reduces everyone elses share.

It is the same reason our shares were reduced until the new contract starts for the new members to come to the B12. ESPN and Fox are still going to show that content, they own it. They just are not going to pay more for it, because they dont have to contractually. So the R8 shares are going to be reduced to pay for the adds until the new contract. But we are getting the exit fees from OuT to offset the reductions.

ESPN would still own the content unless their is an escalator for another media partner. No one has ever said there was such an escalator for the SEC. It is very unlikely that ESPN would agree to such an escalator that would allow for other media members to gain access to their exclusive rights. At most they would have agreed to a pro rata increase.