SMU2006

It doesn't invalidate the legal argument or filing but it speaks more to the total jackassery and general ineptitude of the counsel. This thing was flung together by a team of monkeys banging a cymbal. Its arguments are laugh out loud hysterical.

When that bridge is ready to cross in 2036 we'll worry about it then but not anytime soon. And if so call up Tulane and USF. Call it a day.

That discovery road goes both ways. FSU doesn't want to get into that. There are already dozens of publicly available statements from the FSU brass praising the agreement in 2016 as being a "historic milestone" and "great for the long-term stability of the league".

They actually kind of are poor (by ACC standards). Endowment is the smallest in the league except for Louisville.

The P5 is history yes. Its really a P2 with the Big 12 and ACC a step below. Ultimately there will be a separation by the members of these conferences from the G5. It is inevitable. Rest of the conferences (including the AAC) will be siphoned off and will comprise the new Division 2.

The ACC suit in NC was filed first. In almost every instance suit filed first takes precedent. The FL case will die on the vine. ACC has four member institutions in NC and is based in Charlotte. FL case will be an afterthought.

LOL. A super majority of members voted CAL/Stanford/SMU into the league. Expansion also provides significantly more money for the legacy members in addition to the creation of a performance pool. Have fun making that legal argument that the membership actively acted against its own interests.

There is also no equivalent to the ACC grant of rights among the Power 5. It was lauded at the time as being a historic achievement in conference stability. No other conference has anything even close to the ACC's deal through 2036 with as many financially punitive ramifications for breaking it. There is no comparison that even comes close.

So many logical errors here but I'll start with an easy one. SMU (as well as CAL and Stanford) are already assured that if the league loses any current member institutions (even one) they become full members receiving a full revenue share. Second, why do you think we haven't heard a peep from Clemson or UNC? They know the game here too. This is, in all likelihood, a multi-billion dollar decision. It isn't just an exit fee as you incorrectly categorize it. It is giving up the rights to your home games and conference TV revenue for 12 years. That money automatically kicks back to the ACC. The ACC holds all the leverage in this situation. FSU willingly signed the agreement (alongside very other ACC member) to grant their rights to the conference through 2036. The document was written in such a way that it would be financially disastrous to try to break it. It is what it is Noles. See ya in Ford Stadium next fall!

Texas and OU paid to leave to go to the SEC for a grand total of ONE YEAR prior to the existing Big 12 GoR in 2025. One year. Those programs are also much more well-heeled than FSU. So if it was a huge financial decision for Texas and OU to leave one year early what do you think the dollar figure will look like for FSU to leave 12 years early?

Yes I'm sure ESPN wants to have the ACC destroyed so that it can lose valuable properties to FOX as well as lose thousands of hours worth of live programming..... Easiest decision ESPN will ever make is to exercise the extension (especially at the current deal which is highly favorable to the network).

Nope. All of this is pure saber rattling by FSU. They know the financial implications of breaking the grant of rights and they're stuck for the next decade. If I had to put odds on it they probably will be in the ACC through 2035. FSU endowment is less than a billion (current market value around $710m, second lowest in the ACC). They are not going to create financial sepukku just so they can sign away their TV rights and home games to the ACC for the next 13 years. Just isn't going to happen.

Good kid but he's made of glass.

B/c if they could get out they already would've done it. There's a reason why they had an army of attorneys pour over the grant of rights last year and ultimately walked away and did absolutely nothing. The deal is clear. The financial implications for trying to break the grant of rights is likely a $2 billion dollar decision. The league would own the rights to all of FSU's home games for the next 13 years in addition to the entirety of their TV revenue for the same time period. It is financially catastrophic. They know this. The league knows this. Every member institution knows this as well. Its important to view the FSU lawsuit when contrasted with the ACC suit that was filed the day prior in North Carolina. You can tell this is something the ACC was anticipating with very clear language from the FSU administration when the grant of rights was extended to 2036 about how great it was for the league and that now quote from FSU university president "this agreement provides long-term stability and ensures that no one can leave." Good luck arguing in a court of law that you agree to a deal and then decide you want out b/c the deal didn't work out in your favor. Precedent is very clear how that works out and it won't work for FSU either. Barring the Saudis trying to buy their way into college football by bank rolling FSU to the SEC/Big 10 you will see the Seminoles with an ACC patch on their uniforms for the next decade.

This might be dumbest post I've ever read. Regardless of the public whining by FSU, they are going to be in the ACC for a very, very, very long time. The legal argument is laughable with the actual filing having multiple spelling and grammatical errors. it is a total clown show and being done exclusively for the purpose of throwing red meat to the butt hurt FSU fans over being shut out of the playoff. And as far as SMU not bringing competitive value to the league we're the defending AAC champions and several 2024 preseason polls have SMU ranked between 21-25 positioning us as the 4th or 5th best football program in the ACC in year one. So yeah. Not really a great argument. The ACC has a grant of rights that runs through 2036 as well as Notre Dame as a full voting member who needs the ACC to park all of the non-football sports. Notre Dame was one of the strongest advocates for adding SMU/CAL/Stanford to the league. The PAC 12 had no such long term stability and lacked a viable TV partner. The two situations couldn't be more different. Could FSU/Clemson/UNC eventually get out? Yeah that is possible. But we're talking 2033 or 2034 at the earliest. That is a lifetime in the realignment timeline. Who knows what the landscape will be by then. But one thing is for sure. Being in a conference with FAU, UAB, Rice, Tulsa, Charlotte, Temple, etc. was a slow walk to a certain death. SMU grabbed the last G5 to P5 lifeboat before the inevitable breakaway (which is absolutely going to happen).

He's made of glass.

Makes galaxy brain comment about daddy's money....

Both parents were public school teachers. Pretty sure my weekly allowance was a reminder to graduate early 🙂

He did.

Pro tip: Area around the Liberty Bowl is about as close to a demilitarized zone as there is in the United States. Do not go anywhere alone. Highly recommend going with a group and taking LYFT/Uber.

SMU's academic profile is right smack in the middle of the ACC. No one that plays D1A football has academics on par with Stanford. They are an outlier. Syracuse, Wake, Miami, FSU, NC State, VA Tech, and Clemson are all absolutely academic peer institutions to SMU.

The ACC is an academic-minded conference. They are not going to associate themselves with the likes of Houston, Texas Tech, K-State, West Virginia, UCF, et al.