Florida State v. ACC, ACC v. FSU and conference realignment’s next step

Years of private grumblings, months of public frustration and 50 minutes of talks over Zoom came down to a three-word phrase Florida State board of trustees chairperson Peter Collins said Friday morning.

FSU vs. ACC.

Or, if you prefer the conference’s telling, ACC vs. FSU.

That fight will now play out in the courts — plural — after the conference and one of its marquee programs filed separate suits against each other over a 24-hour period.

Only half a billion dollars and the stability of the entire college football landscape hang in the balance.

FSU’s argument was the first to become public, thanks to an emergency virtual board meeting. Trustees unanimously approved a seven-count lawsuit that, if successful, will allow the Seminoles to leave their conference home for the last three decades as soon as this summer.

FSU officials said repeatedly the 38-page filing in the Leon County Circuit Court was not a direct response to the 13-0 ‘Noles being snubbed from the College Football Playoff in favor of 12-1 Texas and 12-1 Alabama. But the first line of the suit’s introduction was telling:

“The stunning exclusion of the ACC’s undefeated football champion from the 2023-2024 College Football Playoff (”CFP”) in deference to two one-loss teams from two competing Power Four conferences crystalized the years of failures by the ACC to fulfill its most fundamental commitments to FLORIDA STATE and its members.”

Those commitments fall into a pair of buckets.

The first is financial. The SEC and Big Ten will soon pay their schools twice what FSU will get from the ACC — a difference of about $30 million annually, according to the ’Noles. FSU’s suit argues the ACC’s “incompetence at the bargaining table unfairly” hurt Florida State and its conference colleagues. Examples include lagging behind SEC and the Big Ten with the launch of a conference TV network and an ESPN deal that’s longer and lesser than the TV contracts for other major conferences.

That’s part of the antitrust argument that Florida State is prevented from “competing in the marketplace to obtain the best economic terms for its athletic media rights, its student-athletes, and its athletics programs in the relevant market.”

The second bucket is athletic competition. The ACC has not lived up to its mission of being “at the forefront” of sports or fostering “quality competitive opportunities” to compete in championships, the suit said. The playoff snub (in part because of FSU’s weaker strength of schedule) is one data point. Another is the ACC’s decision to add Cal, Stanford and SMU — historically mediocre football programs that will “further dilute (media rights) values” and “necessarily handicap ACC members vying for a position in future CFPs.”

Stay updated on Tampa Bay’s sports scene

Subscribe to our free Sports Today newsletter

We’ll send you news and analysis on the Bucs, Lightning, Rays and Florida’s college football teams every day.

You’re all signed up!

Want more of our free, weekly newsletters in your inbox? Let’s get started.

Explore all your options

The ACC’s handling (or mishandling) of those commitments is at the heart of FSU’s seven-count complaint, including claims of breach of contract and “fundamental failure or frustration of contractual purpose.”

Another count centers on the enforceability of an exit fee that could reach $572 million. That figure comes from a $130 million payment, plus the forfeiture of all media rights through 2036, when the ACC-ESPN deal can expire.

FSU argues those penalties are “held over the heads of ACC members in terrorem” — in fear — and “unconscionable.”

The ACC, unsurprisingly, disagrees.

The Charlotte-based conference filed its own lawsuit against FSU’s trustees Thursday evening in Mecklenburg County (North Carolina) Superior Court. It argues Florida State “knowingly and voluntarily” granted the “irrevocable” and “exclusive” TV rights for FSU home games to the ACC through 2036 via the contract called a grant of rights.

“The ACC has not breached the Grant of Rights …” its suit said.

FSU accepted and kept the millions of dollars paid out annually by that grant of rights. Therefore, the ACC argues, that grant of rights stands — and so does the nine-figure penalty to escape it.

So who’s right? That will depend on a judge (or judges). Both filings are complaints for declaratory judgment — requests for a judge to weigh the arguments and determine whether they’re valid before any formal move is made.

If FSU is correct, the ‘Noles found their escape valve to the Big Ten or SEC. Others like Clemson and North Carolina will likely follow in a move that could cause the ACC to implode as a major conference and further consolidate the sport’s power programs into the Power Two.

If the ACC is correct, FSU will have to stay or find half a billion dollars to exit. A third option (a negotiated settlement) was raised by FSU’s outside counsel, David Ashburn of Tallahassee’s Greenberg Traurig law firm.

Either way, years of behind-the-scenes gripes and months of on-camera discontent converged over a 24-hour period late this week with arguably the most important matchup in the history of Florida college sports.

FSU vs. ACC.

Or ACC vs. FSU.

• • •

Sign up for the Sports Today newsletter to get daily updates on the Bucs, Rays, Lightning and college football across Florida.

Never miss out on the latest with your favorite Tampa Bay sports teams. Follow our coverage on Instagram, X and Facebook.