Tuesday, April 23, 2013

ACC releases basketball rotations for 2013-14

The ACC announced the basketball schedules for next year. We don't have dates yet, but we know who we will play. As we knew, Notre Dame and Syracuse will be our permanent rivals that we play twice each year. As part of the rotation, we will also have two-game series with Georgia Tech and Virginia Tech. 

The remaining home games will be Pitt, Florida State, Maryland, Clemson and Duke. The other road games will be Miami, UNC, Wake Forest, NC State and Virginia.

Not knowing how Donahue will finish out his recruiting class, I think this is a reasonable mix. We can win eight ACC games and should be a solid NCAA Tourney candidate. 

From a Marketing standpoint, it is nice to have Duke along with Syracuse and Notre Dame. There are enough elite teams to sell to our fickle fans.


EL MIZ said...

if this team isn't a Tournament team next year, the Don should be prepping his resume.

that being said, I feel good about our chances. if Hanlan, Anderson, Odio, and Rahon all continue to progress, we should be on the cusp. if Clifford stays healthy, (big if) we are dancing for sure.

NEDofSavinHill said...

The entire grant of rights agreement may be meaningless. If the lawsuit against Maryland goes to trial and no settlement is reached then it is up to the judge to determine if the $50 mil exit fee is valid or an illegal restraint of trade. If the latter the grant of rights provision which is much more onerous. wouldn't stand up to legal scrutiny.

WI_Eagle said...

8-10 in the conference ain't gonna get us in to the dance.

Ry said...

An exit fee is far different from the grant of rights and wouldn't be looked at under the same lens at all.

Scott said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Scott said...

Let me add some perspective to the legal issues.

Only the state court judge in North Carolina will decide whether the $52 mil exit fee is a reasonable/enforceable liquidated damages provision, or an unenforceable penalty. The ACC by-laws have an ironclad forum selection clause requiring this issue be heard there. Admittedly, the provision could have been drafted better, but I'm confident it will hold up (particularly if you factor in a little ACC home cooking). You have to be a very creative lawyer to defend a long list of tangible and intangible harms to the ACC brand name, image, marketing initiatives, and loss of gate/ratings/licensing revenues by having to deal with 2 years of lame duck games with Maryland.

The antitrusst suit the Terps filed in Maryland is a desperate attempt to invalidate the ACC by-laws, to kill the forum selection clause, so they can argue the merits of the exit fee in their own backyard. I'm an antitrust lawyer, and it's one of the weakest cases I've ever seen. To claim that exit fees & non-compete restrictions (which exist in every BCS conference and business joint-venture) is naked cartel is laughable. The case will be dismissed. The Terps only filed it to increase costs, and conduct a fishing expedition for improvident emails the ACC would like to keep quiet.

As for the GOR, I agree that many GOR deals (like the Big 12) are just a heightened form of exit penalty, and at greater risk to be struct down. However, the ACC approached ESPN with the GOR proposal to increase it's payout by $2-$3 million per year/per school, under the guise that ESPN can make a bigger investment if the conference is stable. The point being, the ACC schools bargained for and recieved new and fresh consideration for the GOR ... and each school president voluntarily agreed to pool its revenues (unlike exit penalties, a GOR is not subject to super-majority vote, it only applies to willing schools). Overall,, the purpose of the ACC GOR was not just to hand-cuff traitor schools, that was incidental, the real purpose was to post bond deepen the media partnership payout, after the initial media deal was already set. I think the ACC GOR deal sits on much stronger ground than the Big 12.

EL MIZ said...

Scott, thanks for the input. Interesting stuff.