No, the author is clueless. Just because he writes that, you automatically believe it? The GOR is pretty solid.
Expansion
- Thread starter ZachRyan22
- Start date
No, the author is clueless. Just because he writes that, you automatically believe it? The GOR is pretty solid.
Re: Good Read
Because the blogger wants to write about something and without actually understanding what GOR is, he just pulls a stupid statement out of his ***. Because without this stupid assumption, the rest of the article is meaningless.
The problem is that some of you actually believe this garbage. The best article about GOR was the one that Frank the Tank wrote and was linked here a few pages back. It is actually well thought out and logical and explains exactly why the GOR is as solid of a deterrent of any team leaving as there is.
This is the argument used in the linked article "The media deal for Conference A remains unchanged despite School X leaving, therefore there would be no damages for breach of grant of rights." Any lawyer will poke holes in this in a second. All you need is an economist that will show that future lifetime expected earnings for the remaining 8 schools would be reduced and then you have your damages which would be significant. The damages may actually be more than the actual media rights at this point.
The biggest deterrent is that someone would have to actually leave to test whether GOR will hold up. It is a game of Russian Roulette. And no one is going to leave without a 100% assurance that they will actually succeed. And since there is no assurance, no one is leaving. Therefore, the GOR will keep teams from leaving.
Because the blogger wants to write about something and without actually understanding what GOR is, he just pulls a stupid statement out of his ***. Because without this stupid assumption, the rest of the article is meaningless.
The problem is that some of you actually believe this garbage. The best article about GOR was the one that Frank the Tank wrote and was linked here a few pages back. It is actually well thought out and logical and explains exactly why the GOR is as solid of a deterrent of any team leaving as there is.
This is the argument used in the linked article "The media deal for Conference A remains unchanged despite School X leaving, therefore there would be no damages for breach of grant of rights." Any lawyer will poke holes in this in a second. All you need is an economist that will show that future lifetime expected earnings for the remaining 8 schools would be reduced and then you have your damages which would be significant. The damages may actually be more than the actual media rights at this point.
The biggest deterrent is that someone would have to actually leave to test whether GOR will hold up. It is a game of Russian Roulette. And no one is going to leave without a 100% assurance that they will actually succeed. And since there is no assurance, no one is leaving. Therefore, the GOR will keep teams from leaving.
You do realize that the ACC is stuck in the mud with their proposed network, the PACN payout is less than $1M/yr to each school, and that nearly half of the B12's schools currently make more money with their indy T3 deals than what they would being in the SEC and B10?
The bozos that throw out the "Let's start a B12 conference network!" crap are clueless, including Boren.
Yeah...just like the ACC's GOR kept Maryland in the conference? The ACC finally gave up and Maryland paid around $31 mil to leave for the Big 10. Big whoop.
Apples and oranges. Maryland voted against an increase in the ACC's exit fee, then they announced they were going to the Big Ten. Only after that did the rest of the ACC schools (not Maryland) vote to institute the GOR. Can't compare that situation to any of the Big 12 schools that were fully present in the conference and who voted in favor of the GOR.
ACC did not have a GOR when Maryland left. They added their GOR afterwards. The $31 mil was an exit fee, not a GOR settlement. A GOR has never been tested. (Nice Try, but have your facts straight next time.)
Light-hearted look at if FBS conferences were redrawn into 8-team leagues solely by geography (split line method):
http://www.collegeandmagnolia.com/2...e-football-conferences-without-gerrymandering
16 groups of 8.
ISU with Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Illinois, Northern Illinois, Northwestern and Wisconsin.
Author makes a second map in the comments section, using only the 64 P5 teams (no independents).
8 groups of 8.
ISU with Minnesota, Nebraska, KSU, Colorado, Utah, Arizona and ASU.
Iowa with Wisconsin, Northwestern, Illinois, Kansas, Missouri, Arkansas and Ole Miss.
http://www.collegeandmagnolia.com/2...e-football-conferences-without-gerrymandering
16 groups of 8.
ISU with Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Illinois, Northern Illinois, Northwestern and Wisconsin.
Author makes a second map in the comments section, using only the 64 P5 teams (no independents).
8 groups of 8.
ISU with Minnesota, Nebraska, KSU, Colorado, Utah, Arizona and ASU.
Iowa with Wisconsin, Northwestern, Illinois, Kansas, Missouri, Arkansas and Ole Miss.
The point is the same - the ACC wanted over $52 mil from Maryland and settled for $31 mil.
How about the Big 12 seeking $90 mil from Nebraska, A&M, and Mizzou for leaving? It was in the "contract." How did that work out. The Big 12 collected less than half that from those three...
Much better solution is for SEC, B10 and Pac10 to revert back to their 10 team roots and realign as follows into 4 more 10-team conferences:
ACC: UVa, UNC, NC State, WF, Duke, GT, FSU, Miami, South Carolina, Clemson
"Big East": BC, UConn, Syracuse, Rutgers, Penn St, Pitt, VT, Maryland, Louisville, WVU
Big 12: ISU, KU, KSU, Mizzou, Nebraska, OU, OK State, Arkansas, Texas, TX A&M
MWC: Utah, BYU, Colorado, TX Tech, Baylor, TCU, Boise St, New Mexico, Nevada, SDSU
Keep the existing CFB calendar as-is by expanding the CFP to 8 teams, with 7 conference champs as auto qualifiers and one at-large (ND or conference runner-up). Conference championship games are replaced with 4 first round playoff games the first weekend in December at the four highest seeded teams. Remaining CFP and bowl schedule remains as-is.
The 7 conferences bond as one negotiating entity for T1/T2 and CFP TV rights similar to the NFL. More money for all schools and regional rivalries are enhanced with annual 9-game round robin scheduling for FB and 18-game round robin scheduling for BB.
This beats the hell out of the existing format.
Another article on the ineffectiveness of the Big 12's GOR. Not to mention it lacks termination or damage clauses.
http://sportspolitico.com/2015/02/16/will-grant-of-rights-protect-big12-from-future-raids/
"It’s an assumption that schools like Iowa State can somehow force Oklahoma to remain in the league. It’s a flat out terrible philosophy because:
1) The best-case scenario is that you force the school to stay in the conference, but in doing so create an unfavorable environment. Relationships have been strained beyond repair. Members are still active but uncommitted to a strong viable agenda. Decisions can’t be made, trust has been destroyed, and the hostility has a reverberating effect causing membership to be even more inclined to cut ties with the conference.
2) If a university has already decided it wants to leave, it will leave regardless of what happens next. The benefits of leaving for a new P5 greatly outweigh the consequences of mounting a massive legal battle against the Big 12. You can’t force a school to stay in a conference it doesn’t want to be a member of. If a University is willing to initiate the process of walking out, it has already decided the path it will take and will act according. The University will follow the philosophy of “a contract is only as strong as my lawyer” fighting tooth and nail until their old conference eventually gives in.
For both of these reasons, sooner or later the Big 12 will realize that they are better served if they simply cut ties rather than trying to retain the school.
The GOR won’t be able to hold the conference together. If the Big 12 stays intact over the coming years it will do so because the other P5 schools were either unwilling to invite a Big 12 member outright, or the P5 conference in question did not offer terms that the prospective Big 12 member found acceptable. This could be for example, Oklahoma refusing to join the SEC without Oklahoma State, or Texas refusing to join the Pac-12 without the Longhorn Network."
http://sportspolitico.com/2015/02/16/will-grant-of-rights-protect-big12-from-future-raids/
"It’s an assumption that schools like Iowa State can somehow force Oklahoma to remain in the league. It’s a flat out terrible philosophy because:
1) The best-case scenario is that you force the school to stay in the conference, but in doing so create an unfavorable environment. Relationships have been strained beyond repair. Members are still active but uncommitted to a strong viable agenda. Decisions can’t be made, trust has been destroyed, and the hostility has a reverberating effect causing membership to be even more inclined to cut ties with the conference.
2) If a university has already decided it wants to leave, it will leave regardless of what happens next. The benefits of leaving for a new P5 greatly outweigh the consequences of mounting a massive legal battle against the Big 12. You can’t force a school to stay in a conference it doesn’t want to be a member of. If a University is willing to initiate the process of walking out, it has already decided the path it will take and will act according. The University will follow the philosophy of “a contract is only as strong as my lawyer” fighting tooth and nail until their old conference eventually gives in.
For both of these reasons, sooner or later the Big 12 will realize that they are better served if they simply cut ties rather than trying to retain the school.
The GOR won’t be able to hold the conference together. If the Big 12 stays intact over the coming years it will do so because the other P5 schools were either unwilling to invite a Big 12 member outright, or the P5 conference in question did not offer terms that the prospective Big 12 member found acceptable. This could be for example, Oklahoma refusing to join the SEC without Oklahoma State, or Texas refusing to join the Pac-12 without the Longhorn Network."
Last edited:
Re: Good Read
As a fan, this just seems incredibly boring to me. It'd be basically the same schedule every year with 10 conference games, two creampuffs or rivalry games. Determining at large bids would be more impossible than it already is. I'd love to see 16 team conferences, division champs determined in an 8 team round robin, 1 cross division game, 1 required game against another power conference team, 1 rivalry game, and 2 more games to schedule as desired. It's sad to me that as it currently stands, ISU will never play a power 5 team from a neighboring state ever again.
As a fan, this just seems incredibly boring to me. It'd be basically the same schedule every year with 10 conference games, two creampuffs or rivalry games. Determining at large bids would be more impossible than it already is. I'd love to see 16 team conferences, division champs determined in an 8 team round robin, 1 cross division game, 1 required game against another power conference team, 1 rivalry game, and 2 more games to schedule as desired. It's sad to me that as it currently stands, ISU will never play a power 5 team from a neighboring state ever again.
Independent would be the way to go. We wouldn't have any home games, and thus we would not have all the expenses associated with maintaining a football stadium. It would help recruiting because most kids don't really want to play here anyway, so playing away games all of the time would fix that problem. Nearly every team in the country would be chomping at the bit to schedule us for homecoming. We could play all of the power schools, like Alabama, Florida State, Oregon, Ohio State, N. Dakota State, and the rest. We could even play Hawaii now and then and get in some relaxation time on the beach. Who needs the Big 12 when we could have all of that.
The point is you don't understand how a GOR works. Every team in the conference signed away their 1st and 2nd tier media rights - which means any T1 and T2 dollars Team X would make goes to the Big 12 - not the school. And it's such that good luck trying to break it. Which means, yeah. Texas and Oklahoma can try and go to another conference - but they will be making virtually zero media dollars for the next decade. That's why neither Texas nor OU are going anywhere for the next decade - that kind of financial hit would even destroy those behemoths.
The ACC's GOR is much less stable than the Big 12's - because supposedly there's a provision that if an ACC Network isn't in place by a certain date (I think it's next year), the ACC's GOR becomes null and void. There are no provisions in the Big 12's GOR that make it go null and void outside of dissolution of the conference, in which 8 of 10 teams would have to find a home elsewhere at the same time. That in itself makes the Big 12 GOR nearly iron clad.
Last edited:
You are really missing the point. The ACC wanted to enforce an exit fee against Maryland. Maryland argued that it was punitive. Punitive damages are not allowed in contracts. Regardless of whether or not the fee was enforceable, the Big Ten still could make as much money off of Maryland as it wanted after they left.
If Texas (or any other school) wanted to leave the Big 12, they'd have to argue against the enforceability of the GOR. Assigning rights, like the GOR did, is perfectly allowable in contracts. Texas would likely lose that fight. If they did, the Pac-12 or whatever conference took them could not make ANY money off of them in media rights, which is the bread and butter of college athletics as you know.
These really aren't the same thing at all.
Sorry, but it is not the same. With an exit fee, you can leave knowing an exact number that can be a starting point for negotiations. The exit fee was a part of the contract that said what happened if the team left. There is no such provision with GOR. With GOR, you are giving up your media rights for the incoming conference (i.e. lost value), let alone giving up money. It is complete apples and oranges. GOR and Exit Fees are so completely different that they shouldn't even be brought up in the same sentence.
Last edited:
It will hold it together through the length of the contract. I agree with these points, but all this means is that if there are issues, then at the end (or close to the end) of the GOR, teams will move. But they aren't going to risk it with 10 years left.
The fact that it lacks a termination clause makes it much more risky for any team to test it. A team would have to leave a conference to actually know whether they can fight it or not. That is damn risky. Would you risk $300 million if there was a good chance you may lose that money?
Last edited:
You are completely correct. A GOR is far more ironclad than an exit fee...whole different thing altogether.
With an exit fee, a team still takes in revenues in its new conference and has to determine how much it must payout to its old league...and a negotiation ensues. With a GOR, there is no negotiation. ALL of the rights are held by the old conference, and all TV money goes to the conference directly...the team HAS no revenue, and no leverage to negotiate. The league simply holds the revenue and ignores the team till the end of the duration of the GOR...meaning the team gets ZERO money.
On TOP of that, there is still an exit fee involved...I think its around 50 million right now. That can certainly be lawyered/negotiated down...maybe cut in half...but the GOR isn't negotiable, nor is it escapable. If a team leaves OR stays, all its TV revenue is funneled directly to the conference...who then pays out from there. A team that has left, gets no payout...and the conference has no reason to negotiate or mitigate that situation.
So a team leaving a GOR conference gets no revenue for the next decade whatsoever...AND...owes an exit fee of 50 million. Basically a loss of 300 million or so at this point for any B12 team, and 250 million of that is entirely non-negotiable. No team can afford that, and none will attempt to do so. Whatever happens to the Big 12, it won't happen until the GOR is in the last couple of years...say 2023 or so.
When you think of Grant of Rights, think of property rights. Can someone come and take your property rights (non-government) without your consent? The answer is no. This works the same way. When you think Exit Fee, think of an employment contract. Every employment contract has a provision for both parties to terminate that contract. But there is no provision for anyone to come in and terminate my rights to my house. I can only give those up willingly.
It works the same way with the Grant of Rights. Big 12 owns all media rights to conference games. The only way that they can lose them is if they willingly give them up. And the remaining teams will not do that. The only other way is for it to be dissolved. And that would take 8 teams leaving. That is also very unlikely to happen. So teams are not leaving any time soon. Don't let bloggers that past crap saying otherwise fool you. They don't know what they are talking about.
It works the same way with the Grant of Rights. Big 12 owns all media rights to conference games. The only way that they can lose them is if they willingly give them up. And the remaining teams will not do that. The only other way is for it to be dissolved. And that would take 8 teams leaving. That is also very unlikely to happen. So teams are not leaving any time soon. Don't let bloggers that past crap saying otherwise fool you. They don't know what they are talking about.
Last edited:
Also, for anyone wondering why it would take 8 teams to leave to dissolve the conference, see 1.5.2 (b) (2) of the following bylaws:
http://www.big12sports.com/fls/10410/pdfs/handbook/Bylaws.pdf
I think there are a lot of misconceptions here about what might happen because bloggers and media members write a bunch of stuff and then people believe it. But the fact is that GOR will keep this conference together for at least the next 7-8 years. After that, it is up in the air.
http://www.big12sports.com/fls/10410/pdfs/handbook/Bylaws.pdf
I think there are a lot of misconceptions here about what might happen because bloggers and media members write a bunch of stuff and then people believe it. But the fact is that GOR will keep this conference together for at least the next 7-8 years. After that, it is up in the air.
