|
Replies: 29
| visibility 1
|
Commissioner [963]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 377
Joined: 12/3/17
|
I am not an attorney but I deal with
4
Aug 23, 2023, 7:55 PM
|
|
contracts daily. Anytime a part of the contract is changed it opens the door for unilateral termination of said contract. If these asinine rumors of west coast expansion are true and we vote against (but someone gives in and it passes) I have to believe that there is a lawyer SOMEWHERE that can find a way out of the conference and GOR because the original contract would have changed. At that point they are forcing CU to travel across the country to play freakin volleyball- not cheap. This logically creates a hardship and effectively changes the original agreement to the point that it is not what was originally agreed upon.
|
|
|
|
 |
All-TigerNet [13568]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8953
Joined: 8/30/18
|
Re: I am not an attorney but I deal with
1
Aug 23, 2023, 8:01 PM
|
|
In theory, I get your point. However, the GOR is simply a transfer of media rights to the ACC to negotiate TV contracts on behalf of the schools. I don't think conference realignment is really going to change any of that since there are provisions for exits in the event schools do have issues and want to move on.
From what I've heard, the contracts were written about as iron-clad as it gets. That is why you have not seen any movement at this point. No one seems to be arguing their validity; they are just trying to figure out how to finance their exit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [25834]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 15048
Joined: 10/12/08
|
Re: I am not an attorney but I deal with
Aug 23, 2023, 8:12 PM
|
|
This is the first time that a change has been made in which schools object. The GOR us a part of this deal since the new additions are agreeing to forgo part of the TV revenue generated by the GOR. It cannot be isolated and is a big part of the deal. And it does change the contract since all teams were to get an equal share. And now, all teams will not get an equal share. If there is not a attorney out there that can't now void this, then we have some other issues with our law schools.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Athletic Dir [871]
TigerPulse: 88%
Posts: 1826
Joined: 9/24/01
|
Well, it’s still to be determined if Clemson or others
Aug 23, 2023, 8:16 PM
|
|
actually vote against inviting those schools, if indeed it happens.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1654]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 3509
Joined: 11/18/01
|
If we also agreed to the part and which we did, that it
Aug 24, 2023, 11:37 AM
[ in reply to Re: I am not an attorney but I deal with ] |
|
Only takes a set number of schools to change anything then it doesn’t matter you have to go along with whatever changes happen and the deal doesn’t end.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [25834]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 15048
Joined: 10/12/08
|
Re: I am not an attorney but I deal with
Aug 23, 2023, 8:04 PM
|
|
Like you I dealt with contracts and agree. Any change to a contract that you do not agree to but are forced to accept, nullifies the original contract. If Clemson and FSU vote no, they have in effect stated that they do not agree with the change.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13568]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8953
Joined: 8/30/18
|
Re: I am not an attorney but I deal with
Aug 23, 2023, 8:08 PM
|
|
In legal terms, that would only work if they had no remedy available to them in the event of changes they disagreed with. Since there are clauses/terms for exit that they also agreed to, I'm afraid that will take precedent.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [14002]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7880
Joined: 11/30/98
|
but the baseline changed from the original agreement
Aug 23, 2023, 8:15 PM
|
|
If more teams are added it now opens up the 'agreement' from the original intent. Again, if the addition is approved, it should release the teams from the GOR 'term' as it is no longer the 'acc' in the original agreement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13568]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8953
Joined: 8/30/18
|
Re: but the baseline changed from the original agreement
2
Aug 23, 2023, 8:18 PM
|
|
If that really worked then FSU and Clemson would both be at the front of the line voting to expand the ACC...
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6474]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 10128
Joined: 11/2/03
|
Re: but the baseline changed from the original agreement
Aug 23, 2023, 9:07 PM
|
|
No they would not. Voting to bring about the condition that causes what you deem to Breech the contract ends your claim of nullification.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13568]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8953
Joined: 8/30/18
|
Re: I am not an attorney but I deal with
1
Aug 23, 2023, 8:15 PM
[ in reply to Re: I am not an attorney but I deal with ] |
|
Maybe the more salient point in all of this would be that don't you think FSU, Clemson and others have already hired the best contract attorneys money can buy to comb through these documents to find a way out? Since they have had several months to do this work, I would say if they have not found anything by now, they probably aren't going to find anything at all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Starter [368]
TigerPulse: 71%
Posts: 569
Joined: 8/25/05
|
Re: I am not an attorney but I deal with
Aug 23, 2023, 8:22 PM
|
|
they have had several years to do this work
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [25834]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 15048
Joined: 10/12/08
|
Re: I am not an attorney but I deal with
Aug 23, 2023, 8:22 PM
[ in reply to Re: I am not an attorney but I deal with ] |
|
While those attorneys were working on this months ago, this scenario had not presented itself.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13568]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8953
Joined: 8/30/18
|
Re: I am not an attorney but I deal with
Aug 23, 2023, 8:24 PM
|
|
If they thought approving an expansion would open that door when they first started discussing adding schools, then both Clemson and FSU would have voted YES and this thing would already be in motion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [25834]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 15048
Joined: 10/12/08
|
Re: I am not an attorney but I deal with
Aug 23, 2023, 8:29 PM
|
|
Clemson and FSU voting for expansion would nullify any argument they would have that they did not agree with and accept the changes to the original contract.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13568]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8953
Joined: 8/30/18
|
Re: I am not an attorney but I deal with
Aug 23, 2023, 8:34 PM
|
|
Well, if no teams are added then you have no change in the agreement, if I try and follow your logic, so you have no basis to say the terms have changed to void the extended agreement that was ratified in 2016.
Seriously, do you really think a bunch of non-lawyers on TNet have figured out something that the highest priced lawyers representing these universities haven't figured out?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [25834]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 15048
Joined: 10/12/08
|
Re: I am not an attorney but I deal with
1
Aug 23, 2023, 8:18 PM
[ in reply to Re: I am not an attorney but I deal with ] |
|
The remedy is a costly remedy that was put in place to keep a member from leaving. That remedy did not say anything about changing the contract and allowing for a remedy due to a contract change by the ACC OR ESPN.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13568]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8953
Joined: 8/30/18
|
Re: I am not an attorney but I deal with
Aug 23, 2023, 8:20 PM
|
|
See my point above. If it was really that easy, we would already be out...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commissioner [909]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 1547
Joined: 4/4/02
|
Re: I am not an attorney but I deal with
Aug 23, 2023, 8:32 PM
|
|
I am not an attorney either but I watch Perry Mason almost every day. I think you are right that bringing in new schools changes the dynamic and the expectations under which the GOR was set up. I think there would be a case. Hopefully Hamilton Burger on the other side but most of the lawyers in the ACC area are Duke or UNC who would be put on the other side of their beloved alma mammies so ACC would have to look outside to get lawyers to litigate which would be very expensive. How much can the conference afford to litigate this? I am saying there's a chance!
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13568]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8953
Joined: 8/30/18
|
Re: I am not an attorney but I deal with
Aug 23, 2023, 8:36 PM
|
|
Listen, I stayed at a Holiday Inn last night. Did anyone else?
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1268]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 281
Joined: 7/15/23
|
Re: I am not an attorney but I deal with
1
Aug 23, 2023, 8:43 PM
|
|
I was getting ready to say that I slept in an extended stay Holiday inn last night and you beat me to it. You take the case since they will only need one genius to figure this out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13568]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8953
Joined: 8/30/18
|
Re: I am not an attorney but I deal with
Aug 23, 2023, 8:49 PM
|
|
You can be 2nd chair... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1150]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 1166
Joined: 9/21/00
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4572]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3142
Joined: 9/4/03
|
The GOR contract versus the bylaws of the ACC
6
6
Aug 23, 2023, 8:47 PM
|
|
I think you (and others) are confusing the issue. What you're trying to claim is that if the ACC votes to allow new members to join, THEN "the contract" changes and that change opens a door for a Clemson exit.
In the GOR, there is a provision for conference expansion. It reads: "Additional Members. The Conference shall not admit a new member to the Conference unless and until (a) such new member agrees to become bound by this Agreement with respect to all sports in which it participates as a member of the Conference by executing a signature page or joinder agreement hereto as a condition to such admission and (b) grants to the Conference pursuant to this Agreement all Rights of such Member Institution with respect to such sports."
As is appropriate, the GOR only address what happens if the ACC adds new members. It doesn't mention how the ACC might add new members. That's covered by the ACC's bylaws. If you dig into the ACC's Constitution and Bylaws, it's fairly simple: "A favorable vote of three-fourths of the Directors is required to extend an invitation for membership to the Conference."
So, 3/4 of the members could vote to accept a new school. That new school would have to agree to the GOR. That's it. That's the whole thing. The GOR doesn't change if the ACC adds schools other than to have those new schools sign onto the existing GOR. It's my opinion that the only escape options are 1) pay the fee, 2) renegotiate with ESPN (or some other media corp with super deep pockets) or 3) dissolution of the conference. None of those are likely to happen anytime soon.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13568]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8953
Joined: 8/30/18
|
Re: The GOR contract versus the bylaws of the ACC
1
Aug 23, 2023, 8:51 PM
|
|
You win, the defense rests...
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1150]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 1166
Joined: 9/21/00
|
Re: The GOR contract versus the bylaws of the ACC
1
Aug 23, 2023, 8:59 PM
|
|
Someone call Mickey Haller?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trainer [40]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 45
Joined: 11/3/08
|
Re: The GOR contract versus the bylaws of the ACC
Aug 23, 2023, 9:49 PM
|
|
So would it be possible if the four holdouts could renegotiate their exit fee in return for their vote. Just a thought.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1858]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 1555
Joined: 10/3/19
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13568]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8953
Joined: 8/30/18
|
Re: The GOR contract versus the bylaws of the ACC
Aug 23, 2023, 9:47 PM
|
|
Can I just take your word for it and save myself some time?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4572]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3142
Joined: 9/4/03
|
Re: The GOR contract versus the bylaws of the ACC
Aug 23, 2023, 10:47 PM
[ in reply to Re: The GOR contract versus the bylaws of the ACC ] |
|
I think my $222 would be better spent on funding the Clemson ACC Exit Fund.
There was a time earlier this year when it seemed possible that we could get 3/4 of the teams to jump at the same time, causing the dissolution of the conference. But it won't happen. Schools like BC, GT and SYR are getting the best deal they can from the ACC. There's only downside for them. So while we and a few others can stop expansion, those bottom 4 can also hold us hostage.
Maybe if Disney sells ESPN to Apple, Apple will go bold and create a new college football mega conference with the top 50 schools, buying out all existing contracts. Not gonna happen, but it's fun to speculate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 29
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
