• The KillerFrogs

Clemson Files Suit Against the ACC

Limey Frog

Limey Frog

Full Member
Wow. That's big news. ACC is in real trouble.

I had a quick look at a summary of the suit. The most interesting argument is the claim that by naming the ESPN contract in reference the the Grant of Rights, the ACC implicitly identifies the GOR exclusively with a media contract that wouldn't apply any longer to a school that has left the ACC, thus the GOR is non-binding as a penalty post exit. That's a classic lawyerly parsing right there; we'll see if it flies. ACC is done if it does.

[Filing text]

6. Properly understood, "the contractual obligations of the Conference" did not include providing media rights to games played by a school after that school exits the Conference. The media rights to games played while Clemson is a member of the ACC are the only rights necessary for the ACC to perform the Conference's obligations under the ACC's media agreements with ESPN. The media rights to games played at a time when Clemson is not a member of the ACC were never a part of any grant of rights.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Double D

Double D

Tier 1
Had lunch with Attorney today. He says it won't hold up like the FSU case. Something about intellectual property. FROGLAW may know more. I doubt it. LOL!
 
T

tetonfrog

Active Member
Limey Frog said:
UNC for sure.
Click to expand...
These lawsuits help UNC and Virginia more than anyone else in the ACC. As soon as the ACC dies, then they are in the Big 10 the next day. I am not sure why the SEC would want Clemson or FSU because they already have teams in those states, but who knows?
 
Limey Frog

Limey Frog

Full Member
tetonfrog said:
These lawsuits help UNC and Virginia more than anyone else in the ACC. As soon as the ACC dies, then they are in the Big 10 the next day. I am not sure why the SEC would want Clemson or FSU because they already have teams in those states, but who knows?
Click to expand...
To keep the Big Ten from getting them.
 
Horned Frog Country

Horned Frog Country

Full Member
The key to the situation to me is the conference expansion. The members that voted no to Stanford, Cal, and SMU to me have a case to break the GOR and leave. They did not sign up for nor did they agree to add school that they felt hurt the conference as well as their future schedule. I’m sure other members will later say that they would not have signed the GOR had certain members left.
 
F

froginaustin

Active Member
bc puckett said:
Has the Big 10 waived their AAU requirement?
Click to expand...

I understand that AAU membership was more an informal understanding than anything binding. Nebby was on the books as an AAU member when they were invited to the B1G but were headed out the door. Supposedly all the AAU B1G members knew that NU wouldn’t be AAU for long when they invited NU to their fraternity.
 
bc puckett

bc puckett

Active Member
froginaustin said:
I understand that AAU membership was more an informal understanding than anything binding. Nebby was on the books as an AAU member when they were invited to the B1G but were headed out the door. Supposedly all the AAU B1G members knew that NU wouldn’t be AAU for long when they invited NU to their fraternity.
Click to expand...
I remember Nebraska joining the Big 10 and then getting booted out of the AAU so the conference didn't really have to come up with an excuse for adding them which always seemed very well timed. Of course $$$ will always trump everything else. I was just looking forward to the tap dance they would do if the "requirement/understanding" was still in place and they added schools like FSU and Clemson.
 

Latest posts

Top