NashBuff
CSU Knob-Slobberer
http://www.omaha.com/article/20100622/BIGRED01/100629859
I wonder if Chip Brown really does spend the time to find out the facts?
I wonder if Chip Brown really does spend the time to find out the facts?
http://www.omaha.com/article/20100622/BIGRED01/100629859
I wonder if Chip Brown really does spend the time to find out the facts?
As the author of that article basically says, it's all speculation right now. Whether from him or Chip Brown, nobody knows how it's going to play out. The Big12 doesn't want CU to stick around an extra year but then can't demand that CU leaves and pays a higher penalty. The lawyers will argue for the next year or so, I imagine.
As long as they hire good ones they should be fine. Besides, from the looks of this article, we may be able to just let knu do the heavy liftingSkidmark said:What's interesting is how stacked the B12 is with attorneys at the highest level of office within the universities. NU Chancellor Pearlman, OU President Boren, UT President Powers, Baylor President Starr, B12 Commish Beebe...the list goes on.
I point this out because CU's leadership does NOT include attornies, yet they find themselves swimming with the sharks.
Bruce Benson: Bachelor's in Geology from CU
Phil Destephano: Bachelors & PhD (humanities) Ohio State, Masters (English) from West Virginia.
Mike Bohn: BA from Kansas, Masters (Sports Admin) Ohio University
Does anybody know when conference revenues are distributed? This will have to be resolved prior to then. While CU doesn't have to write any checks, the Big 12 does. The size of the check they write is what is in question here.
If it isn't settled, they'll write a check in accordance with their position. It will then be up to CU/UNL to get a judgement forcing them to pay the remainder.
The problem with this is -- CU doesn't have the money. The Big 12 holds the television revenues, and then distributes them.
So it won't be CU writing anybody any checks. CU isn't going to "owe" anybody.
The Big 12 just won't PAY CU for their television revenues.
I don't think "damages" matter, at all. At least not according to the Bylaws. They are pretty specific that with a 2 year withdrawal notice, the withdrawing team forfeits (i.e. doesn't get paid) 50% of their conference television revenues for those two years.
So it's not a matter of how much CU will have to PAY to the Big 12. CU doesn't have to PAY the Big 12 a dime. But the Big 12 can WITHHOLD money from their television payout. THAT is the issue -- HOW MUCH can the Big 12 withhold from their payout?
Does anybody know when conference revenues are distributed? This will have to be resolved prior to then. While CU doesn't have to write any checks, the Big 12 does. The size of the check they write is what is in question here.
The problem with this is -- CU doesn't have the money. The Big 12 holds the television revenues, and then distributes them.
So it won't be CU writing anybody any checks. CU isn't going to "owe" anybody.
The Big 12 just won't PAY CU for their television revenues.
I don't think "damages" matter, at all. At least not according to the Bylaws. They are pretty specific that with a 2 year withdrawal notice, the withdrawing team forfeits (i.e. doesn't get paid) 50% of their conference television revenues for those two years.
So it's not a matter of how much CU will have to PAY to the Big 12. CU doesn't have to PAY the Big 12 a dime. But the Big 12 can WITHHOLD money from their television payout. THAT is the issue -- HOW MUCH can the Big 12 withhold from their payout?
As long as they hire good ones they should be fine. Besides, from the looks of this article, we may be able to just let knu do the heavy lifting
A ruthless and vindictive approach would be for the B12 hold 100% of CU's allocation until the specific terms have been ruled upon. Then slow roll CU for months and months while all the details are settled.
It's a good thing there aren't any ruthless or vindictive people in college sports.
Doing so would place the Big 12 in a situation of breaching the contract.
Then CU could sue for damages, attorneys fees, + what they are owed of the television revenues.
The problem with this is -- CU doesn't have the money. The Big 12 holds the television revenues, and then distributes them.
So it won't be CU writing anybody any checks. CU isn't going to "owe" anybody.
The Big 12 just won't PAY CU for their television revenues.
I don't think "damages" matter, at all. At least not according to the Bylaws. They are pretty specific that with a 2 year withdrawal notice, the withdrawing team forfeits (i.e. doesn't get paid) 50% of their conference television revenues for those two years.
So it's not a matter of how much CU will have to PAY to the Big 12. CU doesn't have to PAY the Big 12 a dime. But the Big 12 can WITHHOLD money from their television payout. THAT is the issue -- HOW MUCH can the Big 12 withhold from their payout?
I don't think this is entirely accurate. I believe the actual wording of the bylaws is that the school would have to forfeit said percentage for specific notification period in the case of "hardship" caused to conference. I believe that the hardship wording is actually in the document. People have come out saying that the contract has been very poorly worded to enforce the penalty in the case of no hardship being caused which the Big 12(10) and their mouthpieces have been trumpeting loud and clear to the world that they are in fact getting richer not poorer. Thus why CU and NU actually have a solid legal argument.
I don't think this is entirely accurate. I believe the actual wording of the bylaws is that the school would have to forfeit said percentage for specific notification period in the case of "hardship" caused to conference. I believe that the hardship wording is actually in the document. People have come out saying that the contract has been very poorly worded to enforce the penalty in the case of no hardship being caused which the Big 12(10) and their mouthpieces have been trumpeting loud and clear to the world that they are in fact getting richer not poorer. Thus why CU and NU actually have a solid legal argument.
Yes, but it's up to us to prove it. We're not the ones who are writing the check. The Big 12 can pretty much arbitrarily withhold whatever amount they deem appropriate and make us take them to court to get more.
I'm gonna look for the article, but a Delaware attorney, where the Big XII is incorporated and where any case will be heard, stated that liquidated damages need to be proven before before a court prior being paid.
In order for a liquidated damages clause to be considered valid by a Delaware court, it has to meet two main requirements. First, the court has to find that the actual damages that would be caused by the defendant’s breach are either uncertain or not able to be accurately calculated.
Second, the amount the parties agreed upon as liquidated damages must be reasonable. With respect to reasonableness, the Court considers whether the amount is rationally related to any measure of damages the plaintiff could conceivably sustain as a result of a breach. And, the harder it is to calculate the loss, the easier it is for the Court to find that the amount agreed upon as liquidated damages is reasonable.
Here is an article I found.. It is interesting that the chose Delaware law to govern..
http://www.delawarebusinesslawyerblog.com/2008/09/liquidated_damages_in_delaware.html
So that makes it sound like the Mack 10 is actually going to argue that there's no way of knowing what the damage is by CU and UNL leaving, while the schools will argue that it's easy to determine - look at the new TV deals, and the statements by league officials that there won't be any financial loss.
I would assume the attorneys for the conference will start dragging in things like basketball tournament revenues, baseball tourney revenues, bowl appearance fees, long-term effects on TV deals, etc. as unknowns that keep you from arriving at an amount of liquidated damages...
Look, forget the legal positions for a minute, at the end of the day you have 10 member schools plus the Big 12 conference who have a vested interest in getting their pound of flesh from CU and NU.
Collectively they can afford to withold our distribution and drag this out indefinitely since the burden will be on CU and NU to force them to pay us. The deep pockets are on their side, not ours and allowing them to litigate this to death will costs us a sh**load, so even if we have a great case, we'd be wise to settle this quickly somewhere in the middle and move on.
Yes, they can do that, and probably will, but they all have realignment skeletons in the closet, and if this gets to trial there'll be a lot of egg on a lot of faces, especially UTs. Ultimately there'll be a quiet settlement out of court, at least with CU. NU appears willing to fight this until the end.
But the emails of every member school in the Big 12 (except Baylor) are already 100% public record.
Any email at all that was sent by any person at any of the state schools is already available, all you have to do is ask.
But the emails of every member school in the Big 12 (except Baylor) are already 100% public record.
Any email at all that was sent by any person at any of the state schools is already available, all you have to do is ask.
Yes, they can do that, and probably will, but they all have realignment skeletons in the closet, and if this gets to trial there'll be a lot of egg on a lot of faces, especially UTs. Ultimately there'll be a quiet settlement out of court, at least with CU. NU appears willing to fight this until the end.
But the emails of every member school in the Big 12 (except Baylor) are already 100% public record.
Any email at all that was sent by any person at any of the state schools is already available, all you have to do is ask.