(02-12-2014 12:18 PM)mlb Wrote:  

(02-12-2014 12:02 PM)ohio1317 Wrote:  The thing that makes the grant of rights so powerful is that it reverses things. Right now it's up to the conferences loosing members to try to sue and get what they can. Exit fees penalties or not, the courts are only willing to go so far there.

The grant of rights is the opposite though. A school can still leave as it sees fit, but the old conference retains control of the media rights. That means that if no agreement is reached, the school doesn't get them back till the end of the contract. Suing in this case is a lot less helpful to the school, because it doubtful a court is just going to outright give them back.

Essentially the school is taking away its earning power. Courts have never agreed on that deal. Same with the non-compete clauses that have been thrown out by courts... you can't make it so that an entity cannot earn. At some point you will see a school challenge that and they will win, IMO.

In my opinion, your thesis is basically correct. I believe people in these threads often conflate the exit fees with GORs. In reality, they are completely different and distinct animals. Exit fees carry issues of liquidated damages, etc. that GORs, IMO, by their very nature do not carry.

What is a GOR? As has been widely reported, it is a sale of property where, in these cases, entities voluntarily and unanimously sell their media rights for a specific period of time. As has also been reported, the selling entities have received consideration for this sale in the form of higher TV contracts. Once the sale occurs, it is done. Unless there is provable fraud, I don't think you can go back and reverse this any more than a person selling their home can, after the sale has concluded, go back and say "gosh, I made a mistake, I want my house back"!