This isn’t to say those three won’t try to poach the ACC down the line given the opportunity, but they’re all on the same page regarding the precedent this would set.
B1G, Big 12, SEC joins ACC in opposing ESPN contract disclosure
- Thread starter HailToPitt725
- Start date
Got to love America. Sign a long-term business deal that becomes bad for your side 10 years later, sue to get out and find a judge on your team.
In the end ESPN and the ACC can’t contract their way out of Florida’s Sunshine Laws.
The law is pretty extreme in the transparency it requires for documents involving government institutions.
The law is pretty extreme in the transparency it requires for documents involving government institutions.
I dont know much about the Sunshine laws but they seem so extreme that FSU's BOT aren't even allowed to have private meetings. Everything is public so you can hear those whiny bitches all over YouTube.
But from their perspective if their agent, the conference, entered into a contract with ESPN that was self-serving and not in the best interest of the school then they should absolutely be able to challenge that the conference didn't live up to its obligations. No matter how you look at it, Swofford's son being involved with Raycom (Now VP of Sports Media) during the negotiations and being promoted shortly after the contracts were signed is not a good look.
A contract signed by 2 parties isnt self-serving. No one forced FSU to sign. They could have said they didn't like it and left the conference back then. The landscape has changed during this long-term contract period so its not as favorable to them so they want out. They arent sugarcoating anything. The market value of ACC sports and FSU sports has gone up considerably and they are stuck in an old contract and want out. That's the gist of this.
This is no different than any other business deal. You sign a contract for a company to build your house. 6 months later, the cost of labor and materials skyrocket so they sue to get out of a contract which is unfavorable to them. As long as they find the right judge, they will win and FSU will win. We are a nation of judges
Yep.
The above legal action isn’t even being taken by FSU.
It’s the AG for the state of FL. Because what ESPN and the conferences want is illegal in FL.
There’s no getting around that. You can’t contract your way out of that.
This is not completely true because the ACC had a fiduciary duty to FSU.
A fiduciary can’t have a contract where the fiduciary gains at the principal’s expense. That’s illegal.
Whether that happened here I don’t know. But that is FSU’s claim. And “hey, that’s contract law” isn’t really a response to that. Because that’s not contract law.
FSU is going to win because they got a good judge but if it was an impartial judge, they'd have no case. Proving the ACC did not act as a fiduciary by suggesting that all its member schools sign a long-term TR contract, which at the time, was viewed very favorably, is impossible. Any impartial judge rules in the ACC's favor in about 15 minutes. But FSU got a hometown judge.
Inflation happened, TV costs skyrocketed. The ACC got stuck in a bad deal. That's the gist of this. You can say the ACC should have foreseen this and made a bad deal but making a bad business deal isnt a breach of fiduciary duties.
Thanks for my biannual reminder not to engage with your posts. So I asked for some help.
Me:
Explain the ACC's fiduciary duty to represent FSU in contract negotiations in a way that SMF would understand.
Chat GPT:
Alright, picture this: FSU has these juicy, delicious apples, right? And ESPN is eyeing them, thinking, "Man, those apples look tasty!" Now, the ACC steps in and says, "Hey, FSU, these apples are top-notch, and I promise to take care of them for you." It's like they're selling not just apples but a whole apple care package.
So, what's this apple care package all about? Well, it's like a guarantee that those apples will be treated like royalty. The ACC vows to protect FSU's interests and make sure they get the best deals and opportunities. It's like they're saying, "Trust us with your apples, and we'll make sure they shine brighter than any other apple out there!" It's all about selling not just the apples but the peace of mind that comes with knowing someone's got your interests first.
But uh-oh, imagine if the ACC, who promised to take care of FSU's apples, decides to sell them to their own son at a super low price. That's like saying, "Hey, FSU, we'll look after your apples, but then we're gonna give them away for cheap to our own family."
Now, why's that a problem? Well, it's not fair to FSU! The ACC made a promise to put FSU's interests first, but by giving away the apples for less than they're worth, they're not keeping that promise. Plus, it's like they're not giving FSU the chance to get the best deal for their apples. It's kind of like breaking a promise and not being fair, and that's not cool.
FSU's claim that Swofford made a bad deal only to take care of his son, who was a lower level Raycom employee at the time, is completely unprovable....partly because at the time of signing, it was a historically good deal. And this is FSU's problem. The deal was very good at the time. Their issue is that the ACC wasnt smart enough to enter into a shorter term contract thinking TV contracts would go up. You cant sue the ACC for being bad at business under the auspices of Swofford just trying to help his son. They sound like a message board.
pittdan77
Athletic Director
What exactly is that?
By the way, I've found it to be pretty easy to shield information under this law when it comes to trade secrets or PII. Seems unlikely the whole document gets released.
I’m not sure the AG is arguing that. Maybe she is.
I recall at oral argument the ACC argued none of it should be part of the public record.
A more nuanced position probably would have helped the ACC.
I don’t think that’s fully the argument. At least as it relates to Raycom and some of the other allegations.
I'm going to go out on a limb and guess you haven't read any of the complaints that FSU has filed.
I have. A lot of was message board-type complaints. It so ridiculous. They would lose easily in an impartial court but there are no such things as those in this country.
Just opinions but interesting McMurphy quotes. Says ACC will fight until the bitter end until a judge tells them to settle. A judge cant MAKE them settle though, right? Just encourage it. Obviously a settlement is a loss for the ACC.
pittdan77
Athletic Director
There isn't anything that hurts you to hold back and take that position in this instance. Worst that can happen is that there is a deeper investigation into why and that's what's going on. Intellectual property and trade secrets are usually a big deal and are easy to shield. ESPN shouldn't have a hard time with that argument. I'm not even sure what they hope to gain by making this information public.
Wouldn't it be that FSU did something illegal by signing that contract?
I don’t think the AG is arguing the contract is illegal. It’s maybe void or against public policy or contract law, but not necessarily illegal in the normal use of the word.
The ACC argued at oral argument that none of the contract can be made public.
That’s what the AG is arguing is in violation of FL’s statutory sunshine law.
What I’m saying is ESPN should have argued subject to redactions.
FSU’s argument is compelling enough. “This is a contract made to the benefit of the state of FL. FL law requires such things to be disclosed when requested. And ESPN’s argument that nothing can be made public is silly in light of the ACC including parts of the contract in its Motion. How can none of it be allowed to be made public, when the ACC is making some of it public?”
I would say I think the ACC’s argument that “this is a contract between ACC and ESPN so FL’s sunshine laws are inapplicable because FL is not a party to it” has some merit.
pittdan77
Athletic Director
Okay. That makes some more sense. Again, I don't blame them for saying it shouldn't be public. There isn't any reason to disclose something freely. Doesn't carry a penalty and to be honest, if it were really subject to Sunshine laws, a redacted copy should have been requested when it was executed.
Great dialogue. I can see both arguments pretty clearly. Prior to reading this entire thread I had no idea that the Florida AG actually sued for disclosure of the contracts. What is shocking to me is the show of unity of the conferences to back the confidentiality of the contracts! It is obvious that the conferences fear the fallout of major networks backing away from big payouts for future contracts. Highly suspicious for collusion IMO. How secret can the network trade secrets be? We have commissioners who have worked for other conferences. People leave ESPN and go to Fox or CBS. Swofford’s son worked for Raycom. The idea that these secrets are protected is about as true as Trump being the second coming of the messiah. Beyond that, the best way to keep a secret is tell nobody. Why would ESPN even disclose their trade secrets in a contract with a conference? More ridiculous is FSU and every ACC school agree to the contract without seeing what the contract looked like? I hope the Florida AG wins the suit, everything gets disclosed and the whole system gets blown up. Maybe then ADs will be more sensible with scheduling games fans would actually be more interested in seeing.
pittdan77
Athletic Director
Be careful what you wish for. If the model that is profitable for them falls flat, the broadcasts of most every game stop and you end up with something much, much worse.
I doubt it. I would be fine with kdka broadcasting the game or any other local media outlet. They’d be happy to air it and at lower cost. Put it back in the hands of the schools or the conference and then you will have conferences that make sense geographically. Stop paying 18 year olds millions of dollars and restore sanity to the system.
It's as if you don't understand that what got the whole ball rolling on the current system is when the conferences took over television rights for their members.
Things are the way they are pretty much BECAUSE television rights are in the hands of the conferences.
pittdan77
Athletic Director
Most of those horses are so far from the barn, they're never coming back.
As a Pitt alum who lives in Texas, I'm extremely happy with the ACC network. I never have to miss a Pitt game anymore.
Having the ACC network is nice but I still think Comcast needs to make a change. When I had Comcast, the ACC network was in the 1400’s (or something like that), not in the 800’s with all of the other sports networks (espn’s, Big Ten, SEC, the RSNs, etc). I’m in the Harrisburg area, so maybe it’s different elsewhere. With it not near the other channels, I never started watching while browsing for something interesting. I only watched when I already knew something was on that interested me. Now I have Hulu TV, which is alphabetical, so I watch the channel a lot more often because it’s always at the top of the list.
YTTV lets you customize so for me, ACCN is essentially "Channel 1," ESPN is 2, ESPN2 is 3, etc
Similar threads
