• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Conference Expansion: Stanford, California and SMU Join the ACC

DownEastDeac said:
North Carolina has been and will probably always be a college basketball state, with NBA fan interest far behind. But if the NBA ping-pong balls had fallen the Hornets way with the firt pick instead of the 2nd last year, I think that dynamic would have been forever altered by having Wemby in Charlotte.
Click to expand...
Very late to this post, but did sell out a 23K+ arena for 10 straight years ???
 
wsc8521s said:
Very late to this post, but did sell out a 23K+ arena for 10 straight years ???
Click to expand...

Yeah seriously. Plus the hornets and bobcats run of draft near misses and/or blown picks that could have changed the franchise goes back waaaay further than being close on getting wemby.
 
Florida judge calls 10-day timeout on FSU's lawsuit...

thecapitolist.com

FSU challenge to ACC hits snag

A Leon County circuit judge paused Florida State University’s lawsuit against the Atlantic Coast Conference, requiring FSU to refine its legal challenge concerning potential exit penalties an…
thecapitolist.com thecapitolist.com

A Leon County circuit judge on Monday put a hold on Florida State University’s lawsuit against the Atlantic Coast Conference, saying the school needed to amend its legal challenge before the high-profile case can move forward.

Legal issues in the battle between the conference and FSU center on media rights and could end with the school leaving the conference. The issues are being closely watched in college athletics, which is undergoing major conference realignments.

FSU filed its lawsuit Dec. 22 in Leon County challenging what it describes as more than $500 million in penalties if it wants to exit the conference. But the day before the Leon County case was filed, the conference filed a lawsuit in North Carolina against FSU about many of the same issues.

Much of Monday’s arguments centered on the issue of “personal jurisdiction,” or whether the lawsuit could be brought against the conference in Florida. The ACC argued that FSU failed to flesh out the issue in its legal complaint.

Judge John Cooper on Monday agreed, but said FSU could have more time to address the issue.

“I’m not ruling against FSU. I’m not ruling they have no case. I’m not ruling against the ACC. I’m not ruling in favor of the ACC. I’m not ruling that its case is better than FSU’s case. What I am ruling is that in a case that’s worth, I’m told, up to half a billion dollars, on personal jurisdiction, we need a more specific and clearly stated statement of personal jurisdiction,” Cooper said.

The judge gave FSU 10 days to file an amended complaint.

Lawyers for the ACC had asked Cooper to dismiss the case, arguing that the lawsuit amounted to a “contract dispute” between the school and the conference.

“Those contracts were a good deal when they signed them, in their minds. They remained a good deal in their minds for many years. It wasn’t until Florida State read that other contracts may be getting more money for media rights agreements, that were negotiated by those conferences after the agreement that the ACC negotiated with ESPN, that they started complaining,” Amber Stoner Nunnally, an attorney who represents the ACC, said.

But Peter Rush, who represents FSU, accused the ACC of breaching its contract with FSU, thereby giving the school an out.

“These material breaches relieve the FSU board from any and all obligations to comply with any part of the withdrawal provision penalty in that contract,” Rush said. “A material breach of a contract relieves the offended party from performing any further duties under that contract.”

In a motion to dismiss the lawsuit filed in February, lawyers for the ACC argued that FSU “fumbled the jurisdictional ball” because it “failed to allege any cognizable basis for personal jurisdiction” against the conference.

Cooper said he needed more information before he could decide whether the lawsuit can proceed.

“I think it’s a close call, but in a case that’s this important to both sides, I don’t believe that we should just proceed on, with our eyes closed, thinking no one’s gonna ever be concerned about this, when in fact FSU can plead this with more specificity and directness,” the judge said.

Cooper emphasized that, while he was granting the ACC’s motion to dismiss, he was also allowing the university to make changes to its lawsuit.

“The case is still going on. It’s not over. A dismissal with leave to amend is a common order in civil litigation. It’s not an unusual order in civil litigation. And once the complaint is amended, we’ll look at that in a separate hearing and we’ll make a decision on what to do and then we’ll go forward depending on the ruling,” he said.

Lawyers for the ACC also argued that the lawsuit should be rejected because it was premature. Nunnally noted Monday that FSU has “not made a decision about whether or not they’re withdrawing from the ACC.”

“That alone, full stop, shows that their claims are not ripe,” she added.

But Rush said the ACC violated parts of its agreement with the school.

“We seek a declaratory judgment today that these material breaches relieve the FSU board of any and all obligations to comply with any part of the withdrawal penalty in that contract. That’s ripe. That’s today. The breaches are historical,” Rush said.

Cooper rejected the request for dismissal on the ripeness issue.

Rush on Monday also suggested that FSU and the conference could negotiate a settlement on the exit-penalty fees.

Florida State essentially contends the ACC has shortchanged its members through television contracts, with FSU widely viewed as wanting to move to a more-lucrative conference such as the Big Ten or the Southeastern Conference.

If Florida State leaves the ACC, it would have to pay a $130 million to $140 million withdrawal fee, Jim Cooney, an attorney for the conference, said during a hearing earlier this month.

Meanwhile, Louis Bledsoe, chief business court judge in Mecklenburg County, denied Florida State’s motion to stay the lawsuit filed by the ACC.

Bledsoe on April 4 ruled earlier that the “ACC did not engage in improper conduct or ‘procedural fencing’ in filing this action in North Carolina. Accordingly, considering all of the facts and circumstances surrounding the filing of this action and the Florida action, the court concludes, in the exercise of its discretion, that the ACC’s choice of forum is entitled to deference on this record.”

Florida State on April 9 filed a notice of appealing Bledsoe’s decision.
Click to expand...
 
While ACC schools besides the "Magnificent 7" fret over the future of the conference, a much bigger threat looms over the horizon:

sports.yahoo.com

Meet the man responsible for bringing disorder to college athletics ... and who could shape its future

Jeffrey Kessler is the lead attorney in what is shaping up to be the most revolutionary case in NCAA history.
sports.yahoo.com sports.yahoo.com

...Kessler spoke deeply about athletic department finances, outlined the four most likely possibilities of a new college model and repeatedly declined to discuss any potential settlement.

However, for months now, the NCAA and power conferences have been engrossed in settlement discussions among themselves — not a well kept secret in the sports world. A settlement is a two-fold issue: Schools are responsible for likely more than $1 billion in back pay, plus must agree to a future compensation model for athletes.

Settlement discussions have ranged widely, and the details of such have mostly been kept private. But several athletic administrators, briefed on the matter, say they are preparing to share revenue with athletes as part of a potential settlement — an outcome much preferred over the lingering possibility of athlete employment.

Figures are murky and are steadily evolving, but many administrators believe that any settlement agreement comes with an annual per-school revenue-sharing figure of $15-20 million.

Defendants in the case include the five power leagues and the NCAA as a whole. What about the little guys? Most Group of 5 and FCS football programs do not generate a profit and their athletic departments are often subsidized by university and student fees.

Kessler’s focus is on the top 70 or so programs, many of which generate upward of $100 million in ticket sales, television contracts and donations — a majority of it related to football.

“You really have to think about [Power 4] as different,” Kessler said. “The reason we get tied in knots is because we conflate those schools who have developed these gigantic independent commercial businesses with the schools who are still just educational institutions with extracurricular activities. When you try to come up with one rule for all, you go crazy. You have to look at the schools differently. For the ones with the money, there is plenty of money to compensate the athletes and share it with the women’s sports.

...Most athletic departments use profit from their one true revenue-generating sport (football) to subsidize the rest of the athletic department. That means funding money-losing Olympic sports and paying for football expenses, such as travel, game-day operations and athlete support in the way of dining, healthcare and scholarships.

But over the years, fueled by multi-million dollar television contracts, athletic departments at the highest level became flush with cash. Unable to directly compensate athletes and situated in a competitive environment, departments pumped the excess cash into gaudy facility projects and million-dollar coaching and administrative salaries in an effort to compete with their rivals on the recruiting trail.

This resulted in schools reporting a loss or break-even figure in their annual financial documents. Their argument against an employment or revenue sharing model is simple: If profits are shared with athletes — women athletes, too, as required by Title IX — how then are the other sports funded?

“If you are paying your athletic director $3.5 million because you have the money and you [report] that you have a $100,000 loss, you’re making money!” Kessler bellowed.

He cited the salary of Alabama’s strength coach, David Ballou, who earns $950,000.

“If [he] only made $500,000 and those athletes, largely Black athletes on the football team, got some of that money, no one is going to think that is a bad thing — except the people who are trying to hold up and profit from the system,” he said.

Kessler also questions why football players should miss out on compensation because they hold the responsibility of funding the department with the revenue in which they generate.

“They should not receive anything so that the money can go to the golf and tennis team?” Kessler asked. “Think of the composition of those teams and think of the composition of the teams that are giving up the money. What is that about? Why is it their responsibility to do that?”

From his pulpit Thursday, Kessler encouraged college leaders to lift the NCAA’s remaining amateurism policies prohibiting schools from directly compensating athletes. And yet, as their bedrock of amateurism crumbles, industry executives have not yet pursued the first phase of Baker’s proposal, which permits schools to pay NIL directly to athletes.

So many pressures are pushing high-level college sports from amateurism to a more professionalized outfit. The long-standing amateurism facade is cracking and crumbling, bludgeoned by the courts, state lawmakers and employment entities.

For instance, just in the past five months, court rulings have permitted athletes to transfer an unlimited amount without penalty and OK'd booster-led NIL collectives to induce high school prospects and those from other universities. The NCAA has paused all NIL investigations.

There are four ongoing cases seeking to deem athletes as employees. In addition to the House case, Kessler is leading two more costly antitrust suits, including Hubbard vs. the NCAA with a December trial date.

And various state laws are prohibiting NCAA enforcement and permitting schools to have more of a role in compensating athletes, none more than Virginia, whose law takes effect July 1 — the latest trigger, like California and Florida before it, to potentially exact change.

“Right now, President Baker agrees that schools should pay directly NIL. Our lawsuit says these schools should pay NIL directly and the state of Virginia now agrees. What are we waiting for?” Kessler said. “There wouldn’t be [NIL] collectives if the rules didn’t prohibit the institutions from being involved in providing the NIL payments. Only reason collectives were formed is to try to comply with the ban on that. Everybody’s thought about it and said, ‘Maybe that’s not a good thing,’ and it would be better to have the schools directly do this instead of this bizarre system.”

So how does this end? What’s the new model look like?

Kessler detailed four possibilities:

1. Conferences: NCAA economic regulations around compensation are eliminated and the individual conferences compete with each other by setting their own regulations and rules, creating “one marketplace standard” for athlete compensation.

2. Employment: Athletes are made employees or, at the very least, they unionize in an effort to collectively bargain with their school or conference.

3. Revenue sharing: A settlement from the House case produces a revenue-sharing model for athletes.

4. Congress: The federal government takes action with legislation that grants legal protection to the NCAA and potentially creates a carve-out for college athletes to earn compensation in a more regulated way.

“I think that is the least likely way,” Kessler said. “Until Congress can agree on anything else, I’m not sure they’re going to agree on anything that would be good for college sports.”

There is, of course, another option: The NCAA and college conferences do nothing, continue to get litigated in court and eventually find themselves bankrupt. That choice, though, is well past its expiration date.

“Change is here. It is not going to stay the same. It’s already different,” Kessler said. “The best thing that everybody should think about is, ‘OK, how can we make this change the most positive change for everyone involved?’

“Stop living a vision that doesn’t exist. Face the realities here, because it’s going to happen. The question is, are you going to be part of that change or not be part of that change?”

A deadline looms. The House case goes to trial in January.

After his presentation, Kessler hurried through the auditorium, his luggage in tow, shuffled down the stairs and, before exiting the doors, shared one more comment.

“If we get to December and nothing else has happened,” he said smiling, “we are going to win before a jury in December and we are going to win before a jury in January.”
Click to expand...
 
CaptRenault said:
While ACC schools besides the "Magnificent 7" fret over the future of the conference, a much bigger threat looms over the horizon:

sports.yahoo.com

Meet the man responsible for bringing disorder to college athletics ... and who could shape its future

Jeffrey Kessler is the lead attorney in what is shaping up to be the most revolutionary case in NCAA history.
sports.yahoo.com sports.yahoo.com
Click to expand...
I actually think that is a great article and shows there is someone thinking about all the ramifications of all this. He also makes some great points re demographics of football and basketball funding the demographics of Olympic sports.

He also posits the outcome that I also think is most likely - conferences organizing themselves and setting their own rules and compensations levels.
 
MichDeac25 said:
I actually think that is a great article and shows there is someone thinking about all the ramifications of all this. He also makes some great points re demographics of football and basketball funding the demographics of Olympic sports.

He also posits the outcome that I also think is most likely - conferences organizing themselves and setting their own rules and compensations levels.
Click to expand...
Kessler (the attorney managing the big lawsuits) is indeed "thinking about all the ramifications of all this." The biggest ramification for him is that he will get millions of dollars in attorney fees when he either wins a huge settlement or wins at trial.

The only important "ramification" for WF is that it, if it wants to continue to play with the big boys, it would need to come up with $15-20M* per year in revenue sharing for its athletes. That's alotta moolah for LOWF.

But don't worry, John Carrie has promised that "...we remain proudly focused on enhancing Wake Forest's position amongst the highest level of intercollegiate athletics competition in the country." That's great but where does the extra $15-20M per year come from?

From the Yahoo article:

*Figures are murky and are steadily evolving, but many administrators believe that any settlement agreement comes with an annual per-school revenue-sharing figure of $15-20 million.
 
CaptRenault said:
But don't worry, John Carrie has promised that "...we remain proudly focused on enhancing Wake Forest's position amongst the highest level of intercollegiate athletics competition in the country." That's great but where does the extra $15-20M per year come from?
Click to expand...

Multiple sources. Some from the media rights payments. With revenue sharing between schools and players, NIL will be less important. Those funds can once again go (tax deductible) to the school. Perhaps some ancillary athletics staff positions may have to go (e.g. third assistant offensive line analyst.)
 
MichDeac25 said:
I actually think that is a great article and shows there is someone thinking about all the ramifications of all this. He also makes some great points re demographics of football and basketball funding the demographics of Olympic sports.

He also posits the outcome that I also think is most likely - conferences organizing themselves and setting their own rules and compensations levels.
Click to expand...
I think it is really cheap and dirty to try and make this a racial issue...
 
PhDeac said:
Why? It's clearly a racial issue based on simple numbers.
Click to expand...
So you believe that money from football goes to support the non-revenue sports at universities BECAUSE the football players are largely POC and many of the athletes in the non-revenue sports are not? Because I do not believe that and think it is literally dumb to make race part of the conversation.
 
I presume he thinks it very unlikely they would take money from predominantly white revenue sports to subsidize losing money with minority sports.
That racial dynamic has allowed the system to exist in a pretty unfair fashion. Unfair, in that one group is clearly generating revenue to pay for others who do not.
I don’t think that is a crazy realization. I don’t think administrators are consciously thinking, “we should steal from poor black people and give it to rich white people”. But, they are willing to passively let it happen because it is comfortable for their world view and the values of our country.
 
scooter84 said:
So you believe that money from football goes to support the non-revenue sports at universities BECAUSE the football players are largely POC and many of the athletes in the non-revenue sports are not? Because I do not believe that and think it is literally dumb to make race part of the conversation.
Click to expand...

So you think it’s dumb to for other people to talk about race because you don’t believe it matters.

I think it’s dumb to think race is only a factor if it’s overt purposeful racism. You’ve been taught that because when the consequences disproportionately impact “others” people like you can just claim it was unintentional.

Maybe you can just learn something instead of dismissing new knowledge outright because your ideas are “superior.”
 
PhDeac said:
So you think it’s dumb to for other people to talk about race because you don’t believe it matters.

I think it’s dumb to think race is only a factor if it’s overt purposeful racism. You’ve been taught that because when the consequences disproportionately impact “others” people like you can just claim it was unintentional.

Maybe you can just learn something instead of dismissing new knowledge outright because your ideas are “superior.”
Click to expand...
No - I think it is dumb because it is total bullshit. There are plenty of instances in society where the concepts you are talking about apply - but I really believe that race plays zero role in this one.
Are you saying that if a sport made up of primarily white athletes was generating all the excess revenue that schools would not use that revenue to support non-revenue sports that are made up of athletes that are primarily POC? I'm just not buying that.
Many of the non-revenue sports are also largely POC athletes - do they get less financial support? I am not aware of that assertion?
A lot of the excess revenue generated by football has in turn been used on football - primarily on the facilities arms race.
I just think people are looking for a race-based angle to the story when there is not one.
 
scooter84 said:
Are you saying that if a sport made up of primarily white athletes was generating all the excess revenue that schools would not use that revenue to support non-revenue sports that are made up of athletes that are primarily POC? I'm just not buying that.
Click to expand...
no I actually think that would exactly be the case
 
I would hope that for many schools, part of the $15-20M would come from a suppression of the highest salaries at the school, most of whom got those salaries because the media money was available. Coaches and top level administrators could take a 20% cut and make up a large portion of that shortfall.
 
If you actually read the article, the lawyer isn't suggesting there is any intentional racism going on with respect to bball and football funding Olympic sports. He is really just raising an issue of fairness re sports comprised predominantly of black athletes funding sports comprised predominantly of white athletes. Of course, there are exceptions to the rule - decent number of women's vball and soccer players are not white. But it is probably true on the averages.

The lawyer's bigger issue was with administrators and coaches making enormous salaries.
 
scooter84 said:
No - I think it is dumb because it is total bullshit. There are plenty of instances in society where the concepts you are talking about apply - but I really believe that race plays zero role in this one.
Are you saying that if a sport made up of primarily white athletes was generating all the excess revenue that schools would not use that revenue to support non-revenue sports that are made up of athletes that are primarily POC? I'm just not buying that.
Many of the non-revenue sports are also largely POC athletes - do they get less financial support? I am not aware of that assertion?
A lot of the excess revenue generated by football has in turn been used on football - primarily on the facilities arms race.
I just think people are looking for a race-based angle to the story when there is not one.
Click to expand...
There's a lot to unpack here.

First, there are plenty of examples of spending less on students as the students become more diverse. College education was free or heavily subsidized until colleges and universities became heavily integrated. Then the cost of education skyrocketed because all of a sudden white people were against "handouts." College education is incredibly expensive now that white students only about half of college undergradates in the US.

Second, student-athletes as a whole are disproportionately white compared to the larger population of college students. When you take out football and men's and women's basketball, student-athletes in the remaining non-revenue sports are overwhelmingly white. People tend not to understand that because our reference point for student-athletes is Division 1 football and basketball. But even those sports at lower divisions are overwhelmingly white. I think the only non-revenue women's sport that is mostly non-white is track (not even field).

Third, even you admit that the excess revenue generated by football has been given to construction companies that are 99% owned by white men.

Fourth, this is the United States of America. You don't have to "look" for a "race-based angle." The country was built and founded through racial genocide and a uniquely race based form of chattle slavery. This conversation is about a higher education system that only became integrated in earnest about 50 years ago.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top