nice lets get this thing over with and see what we're dealing with.....I dont want to be at 14 teams......horrible number

The outcome of this case could be stabilizing or incendiary.

So much for a resolution any time soon (unless they settle).

So the terps are suing the league...because it is suing the terps? Can the ACC counter-sue Maryland again for suing the league (because it is suing the terps)? This is so childish. It was obvious when the ACC raised the exit fee that Maryland and FSU didn't want to be in. They should have left then. The ACC by-laws clearly state that an increase in the exit fee can be mandated if enough votes are present. They knew that when they agreed to be in the league. They even voted FOR the old exit fee (which I believe was $20MM) two or three years ago.

I agree with most of the talking heads who are saying that the ACC isn't taking a portion of the exit fee--i.e. there is no point in settling ($30-40MM would be a nice single year take, but let's keep in mind what it would truly mean). The exit fee is either going to hold or it's not and if it isn't the full amount, the league is over anyhow so $40MM or whatever the value may be split 12 ways would be such a small amount in the big picture. The ACC has the Notre Dame/ESPN renegotiation, the possibility of an ACCCN and the theory that the BTN model could fail due to changing times/demographics to pacify its membership, but short of those possibilities, no one is catching the BTN. I hope that is not the goal for the schools who aren't in a bad way (like Maryland was). The ACC schools have operated with lower athletic budges than the B1G for years. I don't know why everyone is so uptight about it. Why Maryland in particular (who legitimately had financial struggles) waited so long to get out when it has had all these kinds of financial issues since Deb was the AD is beyond me. If money is what they needed, they should have done something about it 5-6 years ago.

The exit fee would be split up amongst the 11 remaining current members. If it turned out to be the full $50 million then that isn't a bad day's take.

Terps are suing because the league has already withheld $4-5M in payouts because they are holding it in lieu of the exit fee. As soon as the league officially notified them that they were going to withhold it, then the Terps sued stating that the penalty in punitive in nature and therefore unenforceable.

“Our lawsuit calls the ACC’s ‘exit fee’ what it really is -- an antitrust violation and an illegal activity,” Gansler said in the statement. “Our motion in North Carolina will ensure that a Maryland court will rule on the case.

'Maryland attorney general moves to dismiss ACC lawsuit, says ACC is withholding revenue from U-Md.'
www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/t...ainst-maryland/

This will probably lead to a settlement somewhere around the previous number of 20 million.

Too Broke For The ACC

I thank Debbie Yow

Highly doubtful. It's either ALL or NOTHING.

---------------------------------------------
--- DeadeyeDirk wrote:

This will probably lead to a settlement somewhere around the previous number of 20 million.

---------------------------------------------

The ACC ain't stupid. So far, they've withheld over $3 million in TV revenue from UMD, in addition to barring them from attending meetings about league business (scheduling; competition; etc.).

---------------------------------------------
--- DeadeyeDirk wrote:

This will probably lead to a settlement somewhere around the previous number of 20 million.

---------------------------------------------

If so, the ACC is toast.

You might be on to something. How ironic if the agdog's AD destabilized MD before escaping to Cow College that MD dropped the domino that forced our hand to go to the SEC, relegating iNCeST to the Big 12 or C-USA?

---------------------------------------------
--- carolinarolls wrote:

I thank Debbie Yow

---------------------------------------------

Not necessarily. 20 mil is still a lot of money and I don't think teams want to leave as badly as is being portrayed.


---------------------------------------------
--- MFC Heel wrote:

---------------------------------------------

If so, the ACC is toast.

---------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------
--- laxtonto wrote:


“Our lawsuit calls the ACC’s ‘exit fee’ what it really is -- an antitrust violation and an illegal activity,” Gansler said in the statement. “Our motion in North Carolina will ensure that a Maryland court will rule on the case.

---------------------------------------------

Incredible to me that the BIG is willing to let them go down that, I would think that no conference would want an adverse ruling against the ACC.

Big 10 is trying to reduce the amount they have to pay up from for Maryland. It was part of the deal.

Second, if the ACC is withholding money, Md can't pay ANY of their bills.

---------------------------------------------
--- ProfessorSmith wrote:



---------------------------------------------
--- laxtonto wrote:


“Our lawsuit calls the ACC’s ‘exit fee’ what it really is -- an antitrust violation and an illegal activity,” Gansler said in the statement. “Our motion in North Carolina will ensure that a Maryland court will rule on the case.

---------------------------------------------

Incredible to me that the BIG is willing to let them go down that, I would think that no conference would want an adverse ruling against the ACC.

---------------------------------------------

Fear the Turtle.....

The money fromt the media contract is only a portion of each school's operating budget for the athletic department. UNC's operating budget is ~$70 MM and ~$14 MM of that is from ESPN for this year. Maryland's operating budget is probably a bit less but it's probably still in the $50MM range. I know the $14MM is more significant (especially when you have less money than your peer schools in the same conference), but Maryland can still pay some of its bills with what it gets from other sources (and it could borrow from the university's funds if it had to). At a minimum, the ACC will be able to withhold moneys from the BCS payout and the media deal and get over half of that exit fee. The trial will be about who owes whom the other half.

---------------------------------------------
--- yallreadyforthis wrote:

Big 10 is trying to reduce the amount they have to pay up from for Maryland. It was part of the deal.

Second, if the ACC is withholding money, Md can't pay ANY of their bills.

---------------------------------------------
--- ProfessorSmith wrote:



---------------------------------------------
--- laxtonto wrote:


“Our lawsuit calls the ACC’s ‘exit fee’ what it really is -- an antitrust violation and an illegal activity,” Gansler said in the statement. “Our motion in North Carolina will ensure that a Maryland court will rule on the case.

---------------------------------------------

Incredible to me that the BIG is willing to let them go down that, I would think that no conference would want an adverse ruling against the ACC.

---------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------

True. I was being a little sarcastic when I said ANY. They are having problems paying their bills now and that's with all of the revenue streams. I can only imagine taking away anywhere between 14-18 mil would be extremely painful.

---------------------------------------------
--- CornbreadandCollards wrote:

The money fromt the media contract is only a portion of each school's operating budget for the athletic department. UNC's operating budget is ~$70 MM and ~$14 MM of that is from ESPN for this year. Maryland's operating budget is probably a bit less but it's probably still in the $50MM range. I know the $14MM is more significant (especially when you have less money than your peer schools in the same conference), but Maryland can still pay some of its bills with what it gets from other sources (and it could borrow from the university's funds if it had to). At a minimum, the ACC will be able to withhold moneys from the BCS payout and the media deal and get over half of that exit fee. The trial will be about who owes whom the other half.

---------------------------------------------
--- yallreadyforthis wrote:

Big 10 is trying to reduce the amount they have to pay up from for Maryland. It was part of the deal.

Second, if the ACC is withholding money, Md can't pay ANY of their bills.

---------------------------------------------
--- ProfessorSmith wrote:



---------------------------------------------
--- laxtonto wrote:


“Our lawsuit calls the ACC’s ‘exit fee’ what it really is -- an antitrust violation and an illegal activity,” Gansler said in the statement. “Our motion in North Carolina will ensure that a Maryland court will rule on the case.

---------------------------------------------

Incredible to me that the BIG is willing to let them go down that, I would think that no conference would want an adverse ruling against the ACC.

---------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------

I find it painfully ironic that this is the 2nd time in 150 years that Maryland has broken its covenant with the South.

---------------------------------------------
--- tarheelphil89 wrote:

The outcome of this case could be stabilizing or incendiary.

---------------------------------------------

Meh. Schools will either want to stay or bolt elsewhere, and the exit fee won't stop anybody if they feel like they have a better situation in another conference. About the only school I could see MAYBE considering another offer would be UVA to the Big 10 and even if that happens it wouldn't sink the ACC (it would just add Cincy and actually add 10 million more eyeballs than it had before).

As long as FSU, CL, and UNC want to stay put I ain't losing any sleep over the fate of the ACC.

You could not be more wrong. I wonder if you really believe that. If so that is sad

---------------------------------------------
--- DeadeyeDirk wrote:

This will probably lead to a settlement somewhere around the previous number of 20 million.

---------------------------------------------

Ok, so tell us what will happen with Maryland and the ACC.

---------------------------------------------
--- jrobe wrote:

You could not be more wrong. I wonder if you really believe that. If so that is sad

---------------------------------------------
--- DeadeyeDirk wrote:

This will probably lead to a settlement somewhere around the previous number of 20 million.

---------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------

Good post by ALincoln on the Hive.

" The lawsuit by the ACC against Maryland was well thought out.

The ACC is chartered under the laws of the State of North Carolina (that was surprising to me, I thought it would have been Delaware). The laws of the State of North Carolina govern the management of the conference. The exit fee is a corporate by-law of the conference.

The first count in the complaint filed by the ACC is a request for Declaratory Judgement on the issue of the validity and legality of the corporate by law providing for the exit fee under North Carolina law.

There is only one court in the land that has the power to determineifa corporateby law adopted by a North Carolina corporation is binding under North Carolina law. That court is the SupremeCourt ofNorth Carolina. TheU.S. Supreme Court can act to supercede the decision of the North Carolina SupremeCourt only ifitfinds theNorth Carolina statutes govening corporations and corporate by-laws violate the U.S. Constitution (in this case the Interstate Commerce Clause). Not likely to happen.

The ACC didn't sue Maryland for $50M, it sued to get a North Carolina Court to declare that the corporate by laws of the ACC relating to the exist fee were valid and binding on the members. The ACC lawyers anticipated that Maryland would argue that you have to sue the University of Maryland in Maryland, which is possibly true. Maryland would have had a lot easier time of it if they were on their home turf. So the ACC took this step. They'llhavea judgment from a North Carolina Court declaring the exit fees binding under North Carolina law, (which will be a disincentive to UVA and GT and UNC and VT and Clemson and FSU to look anywhere else even if that thought cameto them in a dream) then they'llsueMaryland in Maryland for the money, and they'll have to prove that Maryland was a member of the ACC and it joined the BIG, and under North Carlolina law (ACC will attach the certified copy of the declaratory judgment of the North Carolina Court) that behavior by a member of a North Carolina organization entitles the other shareholders of the corporation to $50M, and that they owe the conference $50M. Maryland writes a check because there's not a lot of wiggle room in that set of facts.

That's why Maryland couldn't remove the case to FederalCourt, the FederalCourt would just have to submit the declaratory judgment queston of the corporate by law to the North Carolina SupremeCourt.

So you have a North Carolina judge making a decision on whether the ACC exit fee is legal and binding under North Carolina law. I'm pretty sure I know how that's going to come out. If s/he rules in favor of North Carolina it benefits the State of North Carolina, if he rules in favor of Maryland, s/he gets to explain that ruling in the next general election and nobody who benefits from the case benefitting Maryland gets to vote in said North Carolina election. The North Carolina Court is going to say corporations are free to run their business anywaytheywant unless they're outkilling people,and maybe the standard will be its o.k. unless they're out killing people that didn't need killing.

I think Maryland had to leave the conference before the vote on the bylaw became final if it wanted to pursue this anti-trust claim. Otherwise, they were members of the ACC for 5 months while the ACC was engaged in all this illegal activity they're complaining about, so in other words, they were part of the illegalconspiracy that is the subject matter of the law suit they brought. I don't think a court is going to allow a lawsuit by the getaway driver in a bank robbery to recoverfrom his fellow bank robbers, his share of the loot. Bank robbers usually have to use guns to settle disputes.

Maryland couldn't pull out of the conference before the by-law becamea by-law becausetheycouldn'textort theBIGbribe they received to join the conference if they were a free agent, they would have to have begged the BIG to let them join and would have needed to take partial payouts for the first 5 years to join the club. But that's what happens when you hire a bunch of incompetents to run your athletic program, you get yourself in a bad situation.

This lawsuit by Maryland is a plea to the ACC to come talk to them about settling for something less than $50M. The ACC probably needs to do that because they really need Maryland out of the conference sooner rather than later, everytime Maryland's name comes up in connection with the ACC there is negative press for the conference. We need Maryland to get about its regular business of getting it's athletics teams beat by Illinois and Minnesota on a regular basis."

---------------------------------------------
--- msjaskon wrote:

I find it painfully ironic that this is the 2nd time in 150 years that Maryland has broken its covenant with the South.

---------------------------------------------

Good poast. Carpetbaggers and scalawags will arrive on this thread in 3.......2.........1.............


;-)

BTW, is Maryland Sue any kin to Vippie Sue up in Blacksburg?

The Terps need to sue whiny Debbie. She's the primary reason they have to sue us since we sued them. We're withholding their revenue share which hurts because Yow left them holding such an untenable bag to begin with.

Also, anyone else hearing "Days of our Lives" quality rumors flowing out of that shining star of academic integrity in RawLee. I'm not talking about the Gott stuff. If he's that stupid and she's that hard up they deserve each other. I'm talking about other tidbits.

Anyone?

---------------------------------------------
--- Bost52 wrote:

The Terps need to sue whiny Debbie. She's the primary reason they have to sue us since we sued them. We're withholding their revenue share which hurts because Yow left them holding such an untenable bag to begin with.



---------------------------------------------

You mean Debbie Yow isn't perfect?

According to NC state fans Yow is an angel being villified by mean old evil Maryland.

The gap between the image that whiny Debbie tries to project and the person she really is, couldn't be wider. She's burning the candle at both ends however. She can't keep kissing ass on one side, then stabbing those same people in the back on the other. It will catch up to her. I've heard there's at least 4 ADs in this league that would like to see her boiled in oil right now. Fowler lasted as long as he did, while performing poorly, because the other ADs trusted him and at times, went to bat for him. Whiny Debbie doesn't have that luxury.

She has her own "internal" issues to deal with right now anyway. I can't wait for her next "setting a good example" speech. That will present great comedic value.

ACC needs to stick to their guns, wherever that may lead. Maryland made this bed, now they have to lie in it.

Gary Wiliams laughs whenever he sees the words Yow and lie used in a thread.

As fir the muttpackers thye love to worship the dirtiest leaders they can find. I predict a statue. possibly plastic and possibly red mud, at the entrance to the fake cave.

---------------------------------------------
--- GOHEELS86 wrote:

ACC needs to stick to their guns, wherever that may lead. Maryland made this bed, now they have to lie in it.

---------------------------------------------

Gladly! First thing is IF the ACC goes to court and is awarded anything under 35-40 million the league can and will be in real trouble. The word settle will NEVER come up for a figure in the $20 million range and we all know why. Here's the other thing that legally is key. Maryland voted against the latest fee to leave the league for one reason and one reason only. They already had discussions with the Big Ten. So the prior votes they had for the league fees to leave become huge plus the fact they have been a league member since day one. That means a pattern of league approvals and also league understanding of the voting and league bylaws in regard to that. In simple terms it becomes very hard to suddenly raise a red flag against a bylaw when you have voted for it since day one. Also of note when giving a civil deposition all things go on the table. Maryland will have to answer two key questions. Both already covered. Have you ever voted against the league in terms of raising the buyout for league membership. No they have not. 2 prior to the last league meeting did you have discussions with the B10 about membership and did it affect your decision on the buyout amount in this league meeting? Anti trust laws are the only course they have to fight this and it is really interesting that the State of Maryland and the b10 choose that course of action. Winning that will open a "can of worms that is not what college athletics wants or needs."