....that the ACC has put them at a competitive disadvantage for the CFP Post-Season Championship by mismanaging the Conference's status relative to competing FBS Conferences. Some have argued that this claim is relevant for this year, but is moot on arrival in the lawsuit as the CFP is expanding to 12 teams next year. Not sure I agree with this take as the ACC absolutely did hurt FSU this year and if this is deemed relevant, it absolutely doesn't disappear next year "on the margin" just because the CFP Post-Season Championship goes to 12 teams next year. If there are multiple 2-loss teams competing for the last position in next year's CFP Post-Season Championship, FSU in the ACC will be at a huge disadvantage to SEC and B1G teams with the same number of losses (i.e., they will still be at a competitive disadvantage "on the margin" just as much as they are this year). If it is a legitimate legal argument in FSU's favor this year, it still is a legitimate argument for next year imho.
Apparently one of the arguments FSU has made against ACC is....
- Thread starter CJFisJoePaII
- Start date
Yup. Outside of the competition for the last chair this scenario playing out next year costs them a bye which theoretically puts them at a competitive disadvantage although the 5 seed is almost always going to get the top g5 which is essentially a bye.
Maybe have the G5 teams do a mini "play in" bracket as they do in Basketball.... or use the highest ranked G5 in CFP Rankings....
I’d say drop the reserved spot for the G5. Let them earn it on the field and in the rankings. No more putting #22 into the NY6 jumping over lots of teams ranked above them that are more deserving.
I definitely don't have the answers, but based on who the G5 plays (comparatively), it baffles my mind why they would get in these playoffs. Tulane would play Oregon and I believe that Oklahoma would give them a much tougher game. Maybe not win, but the chances are better imo...
I think the ACC clearly put FSU at a competitive disadvantage this year. When your championship game is against Louisville you aren’t going to get credit, (especially if you win by 10 or so), when teams like Alabama are beating Georgia in their championship game.
Thinking about the FSU lawsuit, I’m not a lawyer and I know FSU signed the deal 7 or 8 years ago but the college football world has drastically changed since then. The ACC hasn’t kept up. No one can really argue that.
From what I hear, the ACC contract says that all teams get paid the same from ESPN as long as there are 15 teams in the conference. After the addition of Stanford, Cal, and SMU there will still be more than 15 teams if FSU leaves.
I get FSU having to pay the exit fee (around $120 million IIRC) but as for the rest- the remaining ACC teams don’t lose money if FSU leaves during this contract. Does that give FSU lawyers an opening to wiggle out of the contract?
Thinking about the FSU lawsuit, I’m not a lawyer and I know FSU signed the deal 7 or 8 years ago but the college football world has drastically changed since then. The ACC hasn’t kept up. No one can really argue that.
From what I hear, the ACC contract says that all teams get paid the same from ESPN as long as there are 15 teams in the conference. After the addition of Stanford, Cal, and SMU there will still be more than 15 teams if FSU leaves.
I get FSU having to pay the exit fee (around $120 million IIRC) but as for the rest- the remaining ACC teams don’t lose money if FSU leaves during this contract. Does that give FSU lawyers an opening to wiggle out of the contract?
Last edited:
FSU was voted out of the playoffs because of money and that's it.
Last year TCU made it in above some better teams.
FSU plays Miami and UF. No reason they shouldn't have been in over a 1 loss team.
LdN
Competitive disadvantage is not a basis for anything legal that I am aware of. Did the grant of rights include a requirement for the ACC to manage the conferences status in a certain matter? How would it be measured?
Don't know if it is or isn't, but some of the initial articles indicated it likely was a legit argument but it was likely easily negated by the advent of 12-Team structure going forward (i.e., FSU should be allowed to leave ACC as the Conference is putting them at a competitive disadvantage). So again, the initial articles said the argument likely was relevant but it no longer had merit due to 12-team structure - don't agree with the latter half of this. If it is a legit argument due to what happened this year, it's still a legit argument in 12-Team structure as they will be at a competitive disadvantage in the ACC "on the margin" for both 1st Round "Bye Seeding" as well as last couple seeds if their record is similar to SEC and B1G teams they're being compared to.
I don’t think anyone is saying competitive disadvantage is the lynchpin of the leave argument, just that it will be mentioned as part of the reason FSU says it has to leave.
I think FSU is basically looking on how to negotiate down the $572 million penalty. They’re certainly going to have to pay the $100 million (or so) early exit fee no matter what. As for the rest, I assume FSU lawyers will ask what actual harm comes to the ACC during this contract if FSU leaves? From what I’ve read, with the addition of Cal, Stanford, and SMU they will have over 15 teams and therefore the per team payout from media rights will be the same. No ACC team will be losing any money if FSU leaves. Then the legal bargaining starts. If there’s no actual harm……….
I assume FSU’s lawsuit was filed in Florida or does it have to be done in North Carolina?
If that's the argument, that the "ACC hasn't kept up", someone has to explain the ACC's winning record on the field of play against the SEC this year. Seems like they have a pretty good argument against the eye test.
Not saying Alabama doesn't deserve to be in. They won their conference as did FSU. The system stinks and next year doesn't make it much better. Why should the 3rd or 4th place SEC team get in over a 2nd place ACC team. Only winners should be in the playoff but that's never going to happen.
True, but details matter. Yeah, the ACC was 6-4 against the SEC this year, but…..
-One third of the ACC wins were by FSU, (over LSU, 9-3 and Florida, 5-7).
-The teams the rest of the ACC beat?
1. South Carolina, 5-7
2. South Carolina, 5-7
3. Vanderbilt, 2-10
4. Texas AM, 7-5
That’s hardly a ringing claim to conference superiority.
The money gap is huge between the ACC and Big/ SEC and it’s only widening…quickly. IIRC both the Big Ten and SEC will be renegotiating their contracts again before the ACC does.
This is from a March, 2022 article so before the PAC dissolved but still a quick side by side comparison.
Power 5 Conference Payout Estimates | Navigate
Our team estimated the rise in average Power 5 conference payouts over the next 8 years. You can see from the chart above that each conference’s average payout is expected […]
nvgt.com
It’s not just a year by year comparison. It’s also cumulative. Over those 8 years, teams like Vanderbilt, Missouri, and hated in state rival Florida, will make an additional $293 million (approx) compared to FSU.
Now, whether FSU will be successful in court is another thing but I totally get why they feel they have to act now and not wait until 2036.
Last edited:
It seems odd that FSU can make an argument of "The ACC harmed us by its football teams not being good enough and thus we didn't make the playoff." But even if they could, a counterargument could be "If the ACC football teams were better then you'd have been more likely to lose playing against them and thus you wouldn't have made the playoff."
I'm old enough to remember when the CFP and talking heads told us that winning the conference wasn't that important 🤷
We have a winner. MONEY is the most important thing. They just won't admit it.
Failure to perform is a winner for FSU, as they move towards a relatively imminent departure from the ACC.
The ACC failed to perform when they negotiated a chump TV deal. They failed to keep up with other majors.
