(04-27-2024 09:05 AM)quo vadis Wrote: (04-26-2024 10:42 AM)Wahoowa84 Wrote: (04-26-2024 09:31 AM)quo vadis Wrote: (04-26-2024 08:51 AM)dawgitall Wrote: (04-25-2024 04:34 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote: Maybe there are things within the "mysterious" ACC-ESPN agreement that, if revealed, would not be favorable to the cause of the ACC office?
Everyone involved in the case has the contract. The only people that haven't seen it are those not directly involved in the case. So it's not really mysterious. FSU just wants it available because they want to fight in the court of public opinion. They have a weak case so that's their best hope for a favorable settlement.
Seems to me that the only way having the contract available would help FSU in the court of public opinion is if there is something strange about the contract.
You’re overthinking this. Forcing public disclosure of the ACC-ESPN contract hurts the ACC and ESPN because other parties (e.g., SEC, AAC, B12, Fox, CBS, Comcast, DirectTV, etc.) will better understand their competitors tactics via detailed contractual terms. FSU and the FL AG are hoping that the public transparency provides some leverage for a favorable settlement.
Well FWIW, I think it very unlikely that disclosure of the contract would hurt ESPN and the ACC. The odds that anything in the details would help FOX or the B12 or anyone else is IMO very unlikely. Still, "trade secrets" are a thing and parties do have the right to protect them so the courts will figure this out.
Beyond that, I'm not sure what I was overthinking. The issue I was responding to was how disclosing the contract would help FSU in the court of public opinion, and IMO it would only do so if there is something weird about the contract. But maybe FSU has something else in mind.
They aren't afraid of any of that. The SEC's contract, for the SECN is exactly like the ACC's which was built upon it. Other than money for the T1 and T2 rights the rest of the contract is very similar.
What I suspect that ESPN doesn't want discovered, and which FSU and Clemson have some institutional memory about, which is the only reason either of them would have the guts to challenge the GOR, and why I think they will ultimately be freed, though for price, is what happened at that end of the deals being worked for the ACC via ESPN at the end of the 2011-2 realignment cycle. You'll remember the crawler, where FSU and Clemson were announced to the SEC and then 3 days later it was as if it never happened and called a mistake. That incident. That incident which saw a panic within the ACC, ESPN's having to give the SEC full carriage for the opening of the SECN, which wasn't part of the deal originally, which saw N.D. getting a partial membership, and which followed months of Clay Travis and Mr. SEC (Pennington) hawking N.C. State and Virginia Tech to the SEC, and Dodds talking about Texas looking East. It's a failed deal and a cleanup that permitted Maryland to negotiate a way out which is the part of discovery some don't want to revisit.
How does one make that body stay buried? You let those who want to stay together do so. You act as though nothing happened with those who weren't privy to the shenanigans, and you appease the aggrieved. Then you pray like hell that Lake Mead's water levels don't fall so that bodies buried in barrels a decade ago don't resurface. The odd party here is UNC. They wanted things to remain as they were in 2011. Is that what they still want, or from the backside of knowing things in 2011 are they seeking to use that to get out now?
I don't think so. I think they are wrestling with how to hold it together. I think FSU gets out. And I'm not sold on the fact that if Clemson could leave as well that they would. Old habits and relationships die hard, and an ACC without FSU is an easier annual path to the playoffs for Clemson. So, it isn't the current contract that anyone really cares about seeing, but the side negotiations in it which may include some things that both a few schools don't want discovered, and which ESPN might be antsy about. Otherwise, a contract is a contract.
I raised these inconsistencies and abrupt changes in directions as an issue when they happened, and I raise them again. Something hinky happened in 2011 which prevented a larger, and expected move, which impacted the SECN's projected opening value, prevented the planned opening of the ACCN a year after the SECN's opening, and for which ESPN paid the ACC schools 2 million a year not to have a network, and which caused and then permitted Maryland to bolt, and which led to the crawler announcing FSU and Clemson to the SEC only to have it retracted 3 days later.
Clearly the SEC has more than prospered since all of those "alleged" occurrences, but the ACC hasn't so much. SEC priorities today are likely different. That's not to say FSU wouldn't find a willing home in the SEC, but clearly Clemson's impact wouldn't be as significant, though the fit is undeniable. My point is getting into Virginia and North Carolina may be more of an SEC priority now than adding the last two most SEC like brands to the lineup.
I've felt that from the first mention of the possibility of Clemson and FSU wanting out that this whole move had more the feel of reciprocity for 2011 than it had for a bonified SEC priority. If FSU and Clemson want out and want into the SEC and ESPN pays for it will it happen? Very likely.
Will it solve the current dilemma for the ACC and ESPN? Somewhat doubtful. Why? More than just FSU and Clemson knew what happened in 2011. Some Tobacco Road parties knew as well. If those North Carolina schools desire that the ACC stick together then old bodies stay buried. If not? Maybe their University System has another reason to be so interested. Maybe one of those schools wanted out and is being told no. And maybe that's why they were so quick to make venue an issue in 2011 for Maryland and again now.