Connect with us

Published

on

After months of politicking, Florida State took its first official step toward leaving the ACC on Friday.

Spurred into action by a College Football Playoff snub earlier this month, FSU voted to sue the ACC over the grant of rights. The school alleged restraint of trade, breach of contract and failure to perform over what it describes as years of mismanagement that has locked ACC schools in a ‘deteriorating’ media rights agreement while preventing schools from leaving with ‘draconian’ withdrawal penalties.

Translation: Florida State is ready to depart.

But can it? Here are the most pressing questions after Friday’s decision put Florida State into uncharted waters as the first school to challenge a grant of rights agreement in court.

Why is Florida State doing this now?

Florida State has made it clear that missing the College Football Playoff is not the only reason this is happening. The school has not been shy about stating its displeasure with the conference, and it vowed in August that something had to be done about its future sooner rather than later.

Missing the CFP was the last straw. At that point, the board felt the university simply could not wait any longer to take action. Florida State has been working on its legal argument since the summer. Had Florida State made the playoff, the school would have still challenged the grant of rights at some point in 2024. At its board meeting in August, trustee Justin Roth asked for an exit plan to leave the ACC by August 2024.

How much would leaving the ACC cost?

In the lawsuit, Florida State estimates it would cost $572 million to leave the ACC without a legal victory or settlement. It would forfeit $429 million in media rights through 2036, when the ACC contract with ESPN expires; $13 million in unreimbursed broadcast fees; and an exit fee of $130 million (three times the league’s total operating budget).

What is a grant of rights again? And why is it so important?

The grant of rights is a legal document signed by each current member of the ACC that transfers ownership of media rights from the school to the conference. What this means is that the ACC, not Florida State — or any other member school — owns the rights to broadcasts of games. Schools signed this in 2013 as a reaction to the departure of Maryland to the Big Ten, under the rationale that the grant of rights acts as an insurance policy that would prevent anyone from leaving the league during the duration of the agreement, which in this case is through 2036, because a school without TV revenue would have little value to any other conference or enough revenue to stand as an independent.

In other realignment scenarios, schools either waited out the grant of rights (the Pac-12’s agreement ends in summer 2024) or paid a hefty buyout to leave early (Texas and Oklahoma paid $50 million each to the Big 12 to leave that agreement just one year early).

For Florida State — or any other team looking to leave the ACC — the dollars and duration are far more imposing. With 12 seasons remaining on the existing deal after this school year, the Seminoles would need to either wait far longer than they feel is acceptable or pay a nearly impossible buyout to get their media rights back. And this is in addition to the exit fee.

Hence, option No. 3: Go to court and hope to find a legal framework for exiting sooner and at a lower cost.

What are people saying about FSU’s chances of winning?

The short answer is no one knows. One high-level administrator who has worked with legal teams to evaluate various grant of rights agreements said there are potential legal avenues that could negate the contract, but the truth is no school has ever tried to challenge a modern grant of rights in court, and no one is quite certain how a judge might interpret legal arguments.

While the grant of rights and the league’s TV contract are different documents, there is some overlap, and, as one league administrator noted, with the additions of Cal, Stanford and SMU, the ACC has enough teams to insulate itself against a dissolution of the TV deal even if FSU departs. In a technical sense, that means FSU could leave without costing any other schools TV revenue through 2036.

On the other hand, the loss of FSU would certainly devalue the overall product in the minds of TV partners, and no one would see Florida State for Cal, Stanford and SMU as an even trade.

Moreover, “winning,” in this case, is a nebulous term. Certainly Florida State hopes for a ruling that would entirely negate the grant of rights and the exit fee. Its lawyers argue in the filing that both are “unreasonable restraints of trade in the State of Florida.” They argue that the GOR and withdrawal penalty “operate in a way that prevents Florida State from competing and making the highest and best use of its media rights, and restrains the trade thereof which directly and adversely impacts not just Florida State, but all its student-athletes, coaches, staff and employees connected with its athletic programs.”

But even a favorable ruling would invariably be followed by appeals from the ACC or lawsuits from other member schools. Fighting this to the end figures to be extremely ugly for all parties concerned, so the best outcome might be a negotiated exit fee that would recoup some portion of FSU’s media valuation but not require the Seminoles to pay the whole amount.

Did any other ACC schools think about joining FSU in this suit?

The ACC has been split into various factions since Texas and Oklahoma announced their intended move from the Big 12 to the SEC in summer 2021. A seven-school contingent made waves in spring 2023, effectively pushing the league toward an agreement on imbalanced revenue sharing. Another included a narrower, four-school network of Florida State, Clemson, North Carolina and Miami, seen as the four most valuable commodities should they all hit the market, although UNC athletics director Bubba Cunningham was perhaps FSU’s loudest critic in August when the Seminoles made noise about leaving, and Virginia appears to have eclipsed Miami over the past year as a viable realignment candidate. Then there’s the dialogue between FSU and Clemson, which multiple sources have described as “working in lockstep” for the better part of the past two years as they considered their options.

Still, FSU’s decision was made alone.

Clemson — and perhaps others — could follow Florida State’s lead, but for the time being, those schools are content to let the Seminoles test the uncertain waters and take the initial heat for the decision.

Ultimately, only a handful of ACC teams are likely to have greener pastures elsewhere, but learning just how bulletproof the grant of rights is would be of interest to all 15 existing members. Florida State would welcome other league schools to join and fight the GOR together.

What would happen to the ACC if Florida State leaves?

It’s impossible to know the answer without knowing how many other schools might try to follow FSU’s lead, but the league watched the demise of the Pac-12 this past summer with enough wariness that 12 school presidents voted to add Stanford, Cal and SMU to the league to help shore up its numbers to protect its TV contract.

Aside from Clemson, North Carolina and perhaps one or two others, there’s little incentive for any other ACC schools to leave in the short term. For one thing, there’s not another landing spot that would provide TV revenue (not to mention a TV network) that would match what the league currently has — with or without FSU. Moreover, schools that stick it out would be able to get their cut of the exit fees and media rights buyout from any programs that depart — an amount that could serve as a nice golden parachute long term.

And, as one ACC athletic director told ESPN, the future of the top level of college football is so uncertain at the moment that it’s entirely possible the entire system will get upended in the next three to five years anyway, so waiting out the coming storm long enough to better project what constitutes a safe harbor might be the wisest course of action.

There is one caveat to all of this. The lawsuit claims that the ACC’s current deal with ESPN contains a unilateral option for the TV network in 2027 that must be exercised by February 2025 to extend the deal to 2036. So, if that were the case, ESPN could walk away from the deal in 14 months. Although the grant of rights is a separate document from the television contract, the two are tied together. If ESPN walks away, does that mean the grant of rights is no longer valid because there is no longer a multimedia rights deal? Or does the grant of rights carry on through 2036 no matter what? That remains unclear.

What comes next?

Under the Florida rules of civil procedure, the ACC has 20 days to file a response, which could be a motion to dismiss. Because of the holidays, the league could ask for an extension of 30 days. There are several potential outcomes to watch for: a summary judgment motion, in which a judge decides the outcome of the contract; mediation in which the ACC and Florida State work out their differences; a negotiated settlement; or a jury trial, which would happen if both sides continue to litigate with no end in sight. What remains unknown right now is what approach the ACC will take to fight this in court. The league could ask for a judge to dismiss the case with one simple argument: Florida State willingly signed the grant of rights twice: in 2013, and then again in 2016 when the league’s long-term deal with ESPN was announced.

Those briefed on the discussions are not expecting this to be resolved quickly.

What is a timeline for an ultimate resolution here?

As one ACC AD told ESPN, realignment has ruined the past two summers, and they already told their staff not to let this latest unrest unravel any holiday plans. The takeaway: This is just the start of a very, very long process.

The majority of administrators who spoke with ESPN said they expected it would be at least two to three years before any final resolution, and given the dollar figures at stake and the existential threat FSU’s departure presents to the league, neither side has much incentive to roll over without a serious fight.

Where could Florida State ultimately end up?

To be clear, Florida State does not have an invitation to join another conference right now. Before being publicly available, the grant of rights must be resolved. But let’s play this out if Florida State becomes a free agent.

The ideal conference might be the Big Ten — where it would give that league its first foothold in Florida, and allow the conference to challenge the SEC by making inroads south. Florida State president Richard McCullough arrived in 2021 from Harvard and has been working hard for admission to the Association of American Universities, which is valued by the Big Ten. A majority of the league’s schools are AAU members.

Florida State would not be choosy, though, and would certainly welcome an invite to the SEC, which would needle in-state rival Florida.

But there is one wild-card scenario out there. If a judge rules in favor of Florida State, the school would be forced to withdraw from the ACC and leave the league at the end of that athletic year. If that happens before the SEC or Big Ten is ready to expand, the Big 12 would be the only option remaining.

It is important to note here that the entire reason the ACC pushed for its schools to sign a grant of rights is because Florida State flirted with leaving the league in 2012 for … the Big 12.

Continue Reading

Sports

Trump plan cuts funding for brain injury research

Published

on

By

Trump plan cuts funding for brain injury research

The Trump administration’s 2026 fiscal budget request to Congress eliminates major federal funding for traumatic brain injury (TBI) research and education, potentially undercutting efforts to address head injuries in sports, particularly at the high school and youth levels.

The White House’s proposed budget, released Friday, includes eliminating the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention umbrella agency responsible for TBI research, including the $8.25 million marked for brain injury research and public education about the dangers of concussions. The CDC is facing $3.59 billion in budget cuts.

Although the president proposes the federal budget, it is up to Congress to approve a final budget bill, so the TBI program could be restored or moved to a different agency. The White House did not respond to an ESPN request for comment.

The budget proposal comes after the CDC on April 1 placed all five staffers devoted to administering the government’s main traumatic brain injury program on paid administrative leave, CDC employees told ESPN. Paid administrative leave means the workers are still government employees.

The budget cuts would “roll back decades of progress,” said Dr. Owen Perlman, a brain injury specialist and board member of the Brain Injury Association of America.

Among the items targeted is Heads Up, a concussion-prevention program for youth and high school coaches, athletic trainers and other sports officials. The CDC staffers put on leave administered the program. Forty-five states participate in the program to varying degrees, a CDC official said, asking not to be identified.

Staffers interviewed by ESPN declined to speak on the record, citing fears of administration retribution.

“We’re really worried about the hundreds of thousands of coaches who have to take this training,” the CDC official said. “This is really built in, and we’ve lost the whole team” behind the program.

Some Heads Up training is part of coaches’ and other sports officials’ state compliance requirements. The CDC official said hundreds of email queries are arriving every week asking how to comply as the federal program shuts down. The Heads Up website says more than 10 million people have participated in its online training programs.

Congress first approved TBI research funding in 1996. Legislation to keep the program going expired at the end of 2024, and a House bill to renew it has yet to advance out of committee.

In a 2018 CDC survey, 12% of adult respondents reported experiencing a head injury in the previous 12 months, including but not limited to sports-related activities. A follow-up study was being prepared when the staffers were placed on leave. The research data was part of a program to measure TBI prevalence and boost prevention, care and recovery efforts.

The Heads Up website remained active Monday but offered no clues regarding the program’s endangered status.

“In the last month, I don’t think the public has felt an impact,” a laid-off CDC employee said. “But when those websites, trainings and materials get pulled down or when they can’t be updated, I think that’s when the public will feel it.”

In the proposed White House budget, the National Institutes of Health would retain an institute devoted to overall brain research, although the name would slightly change. The institute focuses on medical issues such as stroke and migraines, and it’s unclear whether TBI programs would be absorbed into it.

Hospitals and universities conducting TBI research funded by the CDC are bracing for potential funding cutbacks.

“We might not [get] the next year of renewal or the next wave of funding. And that’s sad and scary and impactful for all kinds of people, including myself in this project,” said Christine Baugh, an assistant professor at the University of Colorado’s School of Medicine who is studying how parents decide whether to let their children play contact sports and whether brain-injury awareness campaigns influence their decisions.

On April 23, the National Academy of Sciences received orders to cancel work on two TBI workshops, one of which analyzed the risks of repeated head impacts on children. Both workshops had already been held. One of the workshop organizers, Dr. Fred Rivara, a pediatrics professor at the University of Washington, told ESPN that the cancellation affected funding for publishing the information, and he called the potential cuts “tragic.”

“That’s a perfect example of how this change in, or devastation of, funding at the CDC is impacting people,” Rivara said. “They want to know, for sports: What about these repetitive impacts? Are they bad for kids? It’s a perfect example of the impact of this.”

Traumatic brain injuries have lifelong repercussions on a person’s physical, cognitive, emotional and behavioral health, Perlman said.

Even though some states fund TBI-treatment programs independently of the federal government, concerns are growing about a domino effect if Congress fails to renew funding.

“For many people with concussions or certainly moderate or severe brain injuries, there’s no endpoint,” Perlman said. “It’s a lifetime problem, and there needs to be lifetime funding for it.”

Continue Reading

Sports

Stanley Cup playoff picks: Who wins every second-round series?

Published

on

By

Stanley Cup playoff picks: Who wins every second-round series?

The first round of the 2025 Stanley Cup playoffs is complete. Eight of the teams that made the postseason bracket have moved on, and eight others have been eliminated.

Before the second-round series begin, ESPN’s experts have identified their picks for each matchup. Which four teams will move on to the conference finals?

More: Full schedule
Betting intel

Atlantic Division

John Buccigross: Panthers in seven
Ryan Callahan: Panthers in six
Cassie Campbell-Pascall: Panthers in six
Sachin Chandan: Panthers in six
Meghan Chayka: Panthers in six
Ryan S. Clark: Panthers in seven
Linda Cohn: Panthers in six
Rachel Doerrie: Panthers in six
Ray Ferraro: Panthers in six
Emily Kaplan: Panthers in seven
Tim Kavanagh: Maple Leafs in six
Peter Lawrence-Riddell: Panthers in six
Steve Levy: Panthers in six
Vince Masi: Panthers in six
Victoria Matiash: Panthers in six
Sean McDonough: Panthers in six
Mark Messier: Panthers in six
AJ Mleczko: Panthers in six
Arda Öcal: Maple Leafs in six
Kristen Shilton: Maple Leafs in seven
John Thoering: Panthers in six
Bob Wischusen: Panthers in six
Greg Wyshynski: Panthers in six

Consensus prediction: Panthers (20 of 23 picks)


Metropolitan Division

John Buccigross: Capitals in seven
Ryan Callahan: Capitals in seven
Cassie Campbell-Pascall: Capitals in six
Sachin Chandan: Capitals in six
Meghan Chayka: Hurricanes in six
Ryan S. Clark: Capitals in seven
Linda Cohn: Capitals in six
Rachel Doerrie: Capitals in six
Ray Ferraro: Capitals in seven
Emily Kaplan: Capitals in seven
Tim Kavanagh: Capitals in six
Peter Lawrence-Riddell: Hurricanes in seven
Steve Levy: Capitals in five
Vince Masi: Hurricanes in six
Victoria Matiash: Hurricanes in six
Sean McDonough: Capitals in seven
Mark Messier: Hurricanes in six
AJ Mleczko: Hurricanes in five
Mike Monaco: Hurricanes in six
Arda Öcal: Capitals in six
Kristen Shilton: Hurricanes in six
John Thoering: Capitals in seven
Bob Wischusen: Capitals in seven
Greg Wyshynski: Capitals in seven

Consensus prediction: Capitals (16 of 24 picks)


Central Division

John Buccigross: Stars in seven
Ryan Callahan: Stars in five
Sachin Chandan: Stars in six
Ryan S. Clark: Stars in seven
Linda Cohn: Jets in seven
Rachel Doerrie: Stars in six
Ray Ferraro: Stars in six
Emily Kaplan: Stars in six
Tim Kavanagh: Stars in seven
Peter Lawrence-Riddell: Stars in six
Steve Levy: Stars in seven
Vince Masi: Jets in seven
Victoria Matiash: Jets in seven
Sean McDonough: Stars in six
Mark Messier: Stars in six
Mike Monaco: Stars in six
Arda Öcal: Stars in six
Kristen Shilton: Stars in six
John Thoering: Stars in seven
Bob Wischusen: Jets in seven
Greg Wyshynski: Stars in six

Consensus prediction: Stars (17 of 21 picks)


Pacific Division

John Buccigross: Oilers in seven
Ryan Callahan: Golden Knights in six
Cassie Campbell-Pascall: Oilers in seven
Sachin Chandan: Oilers in seven
Meghan Chayka: Golden Knights in seven
Ryan S. Clark: Golden Knights in seven
Linda Cohn: Oilers in seven
Rachel Doerrie: Golden Knights in seven
Ray Ferraro: Golden Knights in seven
Emily Kaplan: Golden Knights in seven
Tim Kavanagh: Golden Knights in six
Peter Lawrence-Riddell: Golden Knights in six
Steve Levy: Golden Knights in seven
Vince Masi: Oilers in six
Victoria Matiash: Golden Knights in six
Sean McDonough: Golden Knights in seven
Mark Messier: Oilers in seven
AJ Mleczko: Golden Knights in six
Mike Monaco: Oilers in six
Arda Öcal: Oilers in six
Kristen Shilton: Oilers in seven
John Thoering: Golden Knights in seven
Bob Wischusen: Golden Knights in seven
Greg Wyshynski: Oilers in seven

Consensus prediction: Golden Knights (14 of 24 picks)

Continue Reading

Sports

Kings GM Blake out after another 1st-round exit

Published

on

By

Kings GM Blake out after another 1st-round exit

The Los Angeles Kings will not bring back Rob Blake, the team’s general manager and vice president of hockey operations, after a fourth straight first-round playoff exit.

Blake didn’t have a contract beyond the 2024-25 season. The status of coach Jim Hiller, who has two years left on his contract after Blake elevated him to head coach this season, will be in the hands of the next general manager.

Blake, 55, was elevated to the job in April 2017 after serving as assistant general manager under Dean Lombardi beginning in 2013-14, the last time the Kings won the Stanley Cup.

In eight seasons as GM, Blake’s teams made the Stanley Cup playoffs five times. However, Los Angeles failed to advance past the first round each time, getting swept by the Vegas Golden Knights in 2018 and then being eliminated by the Edmonton Oilers for four straight postseasons, including the Kings’ Game 6 elimination last week.

The Kings had a .557 points percentage in the standings during his eight seasons as general manager, as Blake attempted to bridge the team’s two Stanley Cup championships in 2012 and 2014 to the next wave of stars like 22-year-old forward Quinton Byfield.

“On behalf of the entire organization, I would like to thank Rob for his dedication to the LA Kings and the passion he brought to his role,” Kings team president Luc Robitaille said in a statement. “Reaching this understanding wasn’t easy and I appreciate Rob’s partnership in always working toward what is best for the Kings. Rob deserves a great deal of credit and respect for elevating us to where we are today. He has been an important part of the Kings and will always be appreciated for what he has meant to this franchise.”

Blake’s tenure with the Kings saw them take big swings in acquiring key players, sometimes at a significant cost. In 2022, he shipped defenseman Brock Faber, a runner-up for rookie of the year last season, to the Minnesota Wild for winger Kevin Fiala, who tied with Adrian Kempe for the lead in goals this season for Los Angeles. He signed veteran forwards such as Phillip Danault and Warren Foegele as free agents and swung trades for players such as winger Viktor Arvidsson and defenseman Vladislav Gavrikov.

His most notorious trade was the one that sent three roster players to Winnipeg for center Pierre-Luc Dubois in 2023 and getting him on an 8-year, $68 million contract as the potential successor to franchise center Anze Kopitar. But Dubois was a one-and-done bust in Los Angeles and was flipped to the Washington Capitals for goalie Darcy Kuemper last offseason. Blake saved face on that one: Kuemper is a finalist for the Vezina Trophy as the NHL’s top regular-season goaltender. Blake also traded away franchise goalie Jonathan Quick and young defenseman Sean Durzi, now a steady hand for the Utah Hockey Club. Blake also traded draft assets to dump the contract of goalie Cal Petersen, whom the GM signed to a regrettable 3-year, $15 million deal.

In moving on from Blake, the Kings are also parting ways with a franchise icon. He spent 14 seasons of his Hall of Fame career with Los Angeles, and his No. 4 is retired with the team.

Continue Reading

Trending