At this point who knows. I look at the PAC case and think they have to convince a judge the poaching fees are excessive and the agreement was signed under duress.
1- Duress..Sure I guess they could but if I'm the MWC lawyers I'm pointing to the fact that were able to cobble a schedule together for this upcoming season in less time so we're they really under duress?
2- Poaching fees were excessive. Maybe ? But you signed the contract. And you went ahead and piached anyway so they appear not to have been excessive enough. So either you didn't view them as excessive or you signed the contract in bad faith intending to challenge them in court from the start.
Not saying the MWC case doesn't have some holes as well but PAC case doesn't feel any stronger.
I don't think either side wants this to see arbitration or a court room.
There have been more and more reports that at least UNLV is not expected the full amounts, actually they might be expecting significantly reduced amount than what is promised.
They also seemed to get both of our new coaching contracts financed without counting on any GOR-bonus money, which I think is a smart thing if nothing else to CYA.
I can see the argument for the PAC, yes they signed it, but the agreement wasn't fair. They were in a desperate state without a lot of options. I can see them signing the agreement knowing that the terms were not fair, knowing that they would have a case to sue down the road. Either that or they truly thought they would merge.
I get it from their perspective, the PAC 2 was completely screwed over and didn't that much compensation for it. Did the PAC fight the MW much on that initial agreement, or quietly go along knowing they would sue later? They would probably have a better case if they have documentation on countering their agreement to a more reasonable amount. Either way it is a little weird.
Bottom line is our bottom line will not be as good as it looked when this was brought up months ago. And it looks like we signed a document that made it at least tough to get out of this conference, if it looks like the wrong move after this is settled. That is unfortunate.
It is very possible that Harper/UNLV just thought that being a big fish in a small pond was the better play for a Playoff invite and P4 invite down the road. There is an argument for that, easier path to get a near perfect record, at the expense of SOS. We wouldn't win any ties that way, but less risk for a loss.
Honestly this upcoming year could really dictate that down the road. If UNLV can get over the hump and finally beat Boise on the Road, and then potentially beat them a second time in a championship game, perception of the program would be huge. We would get more benefit of the doubt with "ties" in the upcoming years.
If we lose to them again this year, especially twice, we will not get the benefit down the road if it is between us and them, or really whichever PAC champion it may be.