Assuming Hawaii gets done..Then what?

[Bullmastiff 1]

They didn't have 24 hours to sign.

Im talking about the GOR that was signed in December, a couple of months later. There are two distinct documents, if you were claiming distress on the MOU, I could get it, but they had months after the MOU when they signed the GOR in december.

Ill be graduating from law school this month at UNLV, but I'm not a contract experts. Hoping to become one though.

Good lord man. I wasn't being literal.

I'm saying the PAC claims of duress are nonsense. They did not have to sign a scheduling agreement with the MWC. They could have signed one with CUSA. They had options.

I'm aware of the separate documents as well.

I'm making the point that people assume everything is iron clad and that may not be the case.

 

[Bullmastiff 1]

I actually agree with you.

It all seems moot to me because UNLV intends to be bound by this contract and I don't see them having any appetite on spending money in court.

I don't know.

There are a lot of moving parts and things are still fluid.

 

[Boston Rebel 2]

They didn't have 24 hours to sign.

Im talking about the GOR that was signed in December, a couple of months later. There are two distinct documents, if you were claiming distress on the MOU, I could get it, but they had months after the MOU when they signed the GOR in december.

Ill be graduating from law school this month at UNLV, but I'm not a contract experts. Hoping to become one though.

You can have a contract but anything can happen in court. Who knows how this turns out. If UNLV fights it or if they do who wins.

 

[dcut03]

You keep saying this, but it's not true. Some examples:

1. West Virginia paid $20 million to leave the Big East for the Big 12 in 2012, which included a base exit fee of $5 million plus an additional $15 million to accelerate the departure from the standard 27-month notice period.
2. Pittsburgh and Syracuse each paid $7.5 million to exit the Big East early for the ACC in 2013, covering their full negotiated fees.
3. Cincinnati, Houston, and UCF actually paid more than the bylaws stated. Bylaws stated the exit fee was to be $10 million with a 27 month notice. They wanted to depart earlier, and instead, they negotiated to pay $18 million each.
4. Oklahoma and Texas paid $50 million each to exit the Big 12 in 2024, which aligned with the Big 12's grant of rights and exit stipulations, representing the full agreed upon cost.

In other news, Florida State and Clemson are still in the midst of their lawsuit regarding the $130 million exit fee and grant of rights through 2036.

1-2. You got me on the Big East stuff I did not look back that far.
3. You are proving my point, they left before the 27 month mark, so the fees went up to the 27 million. It was negotiated DOWN to the 18 mill per team.
4. Looky here. "Oklahoma and Texas agreed to pay a combined $100 million in exit fees to the Big 12 Conference for leaving the conference early to join the SEC in 2024. This was a significant reduction from a potential penalty of $160 million that could have been withheld for leaving early. The $100 million is distributed to the eight legacy members of the Big 12 to offset the revenue reduction caused by Texas and Oklahoma's departure."

Florida and Clemson are different because of that GOR, that we are now locked into as well.

 

[dcut03]

Exactly.

Could they get more than that? Maybe?

But that lineup is every bit as good as current PAC lineup and far bigger markets over all.

That was a few years ago, and inflation/media value has balooned significantly. The PAC was getting about 20 mil per year, and ESPN offered 30 mil AFTER the Cali schools left, the most valuable market in the conference.
The MW is hopefully expected to make the same after losing our best markets and adding lesser markets that likely drop the mean value for the conference as a hole.

 

[RebelinWA]

That was a few years ago, and inflation/media value has balooned significantly. The PAC was getting about 20 mil per year, and ESPN offered 30 mil AFTER the Cali schools left, the most valuable market in the conference.
The MW is hopefully expected to make the same after losing our best markets and adding lesser markets that likely drop the mean value for the conference as a hole.

The only other offer after the Pac borked the ESPN negotiation was Apple. They offered 23m on a scaled subscription streaming contract. It scaled the amount of payout based on the number of subscribers for what would have been an expensive “pac-age”

At 1.7 million subscribers, the per-school payout would match the $31.7 million average that Big 12 schools have. At 5m subscribers, Apple would have paid $50 million.

For context, their national MLS package has about 2m subscribers. Also, Apple wasn’t willing to guarantee simulcast with linear like they do with MLS with Fix.

 

[dcut03]

I'll ask again.

Why is the PAC scheduling / poaching fees, exit fees so much up for debate or will be negotiated down but somehow the contract UNLV signed is binding and iron clad and seals our fate.

UNLV could claim duress. They only had 24 hours to decide. UNLV could say they were mislead by the MWC and had no other option but to sign.

I mean the PAC is claiming duress...

Which is nonsense since they could have approached CUSA for a scheduling agreement. And if their argument is regionalism, not sure that holds any water since they attempted to poach schools from the AAC.

There's always loopholes.

None of us are lawyers that I know of except @reagan21 but he's useless since he only works on 18th century agrarian law, which isn't helpful n this scenario.

Becuase the GOR has additional specific language protecting the MW even further. We could leave, but all media revenue we earn would still go to the MW. This is why Clemson and FSU is locked in the the ACC.

Could that be sued upon and legally be voided? Maybe. Clemson and FSU are having issues.

But the point that signing the GOR when we did at the very least made things even tougher for UNLV to leave. We had a lot more information when we signed the document vs verbally agreeing at the time. That is what bothers me.

And nothing was binding until we signed it. So the duress argument is much much weaker for UNLV, vs the PAC 2 which had less than a year to figure out their schedules. We had several months to watch things play out before signing.

 

[LVRebel2000]

1-2. You got me on the Big East stuff I did not look back that far.
3. You are proving my point, they left before the 27 month mark, so the fees went up to the 27 million. It was negotiated DOWN to the 18 mill per team.
4. Looky here. "Oklahoma and Texas agreed to pay a combined $100 million in exit fees to the Big 12 Conference for leaving the conference early to join the SEC in 2024. This was a significant reduction from a potential penalty of $160 million that could have been withheld for leaving early. The $100 million is distributed to the eight legacy members of the Big 12 to offset the revenue reduction caused by Texas and Oklahoma's departure."

Florida and Clemson are different because of that GOR, that we are now locked into as well.

On item 3, how is it going down? The contract said that leaving the conference required a 27 month notice and $10 million fee, and if it was less than 27 months, it would be a negotiated deal. So since they wanted to leave with less than the 27 months, they agreed to increase the exit payment from $10 to $18 million.

 

[Masked_rebel]

The only other offer after the Pac borked the ESPN negotiation was Apple. They offered 23m on a scaled subscription streaming contract. It scaled the amount of payout based on the number of subscribers for what would have been an expensive “pac-age”

At 1.7 million subscribers, the per-school payout would match the $31.7 million average that Big 12 schools have. At 5m subscribers, Apple would have paid $50 million.

For context, their national MLS package has about 2m subscribers. Also, Apple wasn’t willing to guarantee simulcast with linear like they do with MLS with Fix.

Im not sure the Pac could've gotten to 1.7 million subscribers.. MLS had to sell out to Inter-Miami and Messi in order to have their substantial subscribers, as well as T-Mobile offering free subscription services to users.

 

[RebelinWA]

Im not sure the Pac could've gotten to 1.7 million subscribers.. MLS had to sell out to Inter-Miami and Messi in order to have their substantial subscribers, as well as T-Mobile offering free subscription services to users.

I would be surprised if they could make it to 200k subscribers without a bespoke package with a mobile provider or something like the Walmart app.

 

[dcut03]

Back to Exit fees.

No one here truly knows how this works. Why the agreed upon exit fees don't hold up most of the time, but we know that they are almost always negotiated down.

What factors into that, it is hard to say.

But we know that MW's exit fees are the highest in college sports based on media value. 3 times the already bloated value ( you can argue that team leaving the conference would actually increase the per team CFP media payout) for 2 years notice. Yes the AAC has something similar, but at least they drop it down to 10 mil if you announce greater that 27 months, I don't believe we have that.

So higher that average exit fees seems like reason for skepticism that those fees will hold up. Which brings me back to the 2x media value number because that is usually around things are settled, With actually more cases of being negotiated below that number.

So assuming the exit fees are 11 mil, the average value that we see. I think that is a fair assumptions.

Again Harper said they offered us 6 mil in help. So I think it is very reasonable that the cost to jump would be around 5 mil. And that was back when they asked us to jump months ago. They are more desperate now, it is reasonable to see the help increase. SO the cost could be less than that. The eit fees could also reduce as well. So it could be as little as almost a net zero to jump.

Then you have to counter with what benefits we would get from staying. Seems very unlikely we get the 10 mil up front. It could be 0 up front, so we can split the difference can call it 5.

Then the max payout after fhat was 1.8 on top of the base media value for 6 years, then back to the same for everyone else. It seems unlikely we get to 1.8, but we can call it 1.5 mill.

So it really depends on the poaching fees and the delta between the 2 conference to see the actual cost benefit.

Once thing for sure, we are not going to net an additional 25 mil for staying, I think that is apparent.

But I think at this point it probably won't take more than 3 years to break even if we were to leave, and then we would be netting more after that. Especially after that 6 year mark.

Both conferences have a free pass. That isn't a reason to stay anymore. It was before, it isn't now.

 

[dcut03]

On item 3, how is it going down? The contract said that leaving the conference required a 27 month notice and $10 million fee, and if it was less than 27 months, it would be a negotiated deal. So since they wanted to leave with less than the 27 months, they agreed to increase the exit payment from $10 to $18 million.

Because it was> 27 months. That is why. The 10 million exit fee had no bearing.

"

Source: AAC asks for additional $35M from schools wanting to leave early for Big 12​

03.04.2022








The AAC has asked the Houston, UCF and Cincinnati to "each pay an additional $35 million to leave early for the Big 12," according to a source cited by Joseph Duarte of the HOUSTON CHRONICLE. The additional amount is on top of the $10M exit fee, meaning the three schools "would each be on the hook" for $45M to exit in '23. The schools accepted invitations to join the Big 12 last September but are "contractually required to remain in the AAC" through '24. "

So it looks like the 18 was negotiated down from as much as 45 mil. It also looks like SMU did reduce their payout to 27 million themselves as well

 

[Bullmastiff 1]

Becuase the GOR has additional specific language protecting the MW even further. We could leave, but all media revenue we earn would still go to the MW. This is why Clemson and FSU is locked in the the ACC.

Could that be sued upon and legally be voided? Maybe. Clemson and FSU are having issues.

But the point that signing the GOR when we did at the very least made things even tougher for UNLV to leave. We had a lot more information when we signed the document vs verbally agreeing at the time. That is what bothers me.

And nothing was binding until we signed it. So the duress argument is much much weaker for UNLV, vs the PAC 2 which had less than a year to figure out their schedules. We had several months to watch things play out before signing.

I just laid out why the PAC duress argument is nonsense.

They could have done a scgeduling agreement with CUSA.

If they cry regionalism you simply point to their attempt to add Memphis and Tulane and UTSA and South Florida.

The second the dollar total got too high PAC could have walked out and signed a deal with CUSA for fraction of the cost.

 

[Bullmastiff 1]

That was a few years ago, and inflation/media value has balooned significantly. The PAC was getting about 20 mil per year, and ESPN offered 30 mil AFTER the Cali schools left, the most valuable market in the conference.
The MW is hopefully expected to make the same after losing our best markets and adding lesser markets that likely drop the mean value for the conference as a hole.

You cannot seriously be suggesting USU is as valuable to a media partner as Houston. Or that Fresno is as valuable as SMU was at that time. Or SDSU who has pretty poor market penetration is any more valuable than Cincy.

The PAC s top three brands are smaller markets.

Wolken in his article said media insiders did not value Memphis highly and valued WSU/OSU only slightly more. There's a reason that OSU/WSU were left behind. Same reason UNLV UNM RENO did, we didn't meet the metrics.

Could the PAC get to 12 -14 million per? Sure but not through linear. The idea they would take up the 'late times slots' is kinda funny. If those time slots are valuable, the BIG 10 just plops USC, Oregon, Washington and UCLA.

They likely are on the CW or Turner networks with a streaming option that all their fans will bitch and complain about. I would not be shocked if they have to play Tuesday night games. Not ideal for fan experience. Actually pretty awful potentially for attendance especially OSU/WSU who a lot of their fans have to travel 45 minutes or more to attend games.

They'll get more than MWC. How much more id the question. It's definitely not the 18 million they were touting early in.

Better way to do this. Apple TV offered old PAC 18 or 20 million.

Oregon v Oregon State
Washington vs WSU
UTAH Vs USU
CU Vs CSU
ASU vs SDSU
CAL vs FRESNO
UofA vs Gonzaga
Stanford vs Boise

And before you make the argument that we can't use OSU/WSU since they were in both I'll point out both the BIG AND BIG12 passed on them so their value cannot be all that high. If it was, they would have been invited.

I did in state as much as possible because we are talking market penetration.

Tell me one time the new PAC school offers more value than old PAC school to a media partner.

Boise and Stanford probably. Because if you say OSU/WSU/CSU/USU I will question your sanity or current alcohol consumption.

If PAC deal was 12-14 I think the deal is done and they have their 8th already.

I think they may hit 10.

 

[LVRebel2000]

Because it was> 27 months. That is why. The 10 million exit fee had no bearing.

"

Source: AAC asks for additional $35M from schools wanting to leave early for Big 12​

03.04.2022


The AAC has asked the Houston, UCF and Cincinnati to "each pay an additional $35 million to leave early for the Big 12," according to a source cited by Joseph Duarte of the HOUSTON CHRONICLE. The additional amount is on top of the $10M exit fee, meaning the three schools "would each be on the hook" for $45M to exit in '23. The schools accepted invitations to join the Big 12 last September but are "contractually required to remain in the AAC" through '24. "

So it looks like the 18 was negotiated down from as much as 45 mil. It also looks like SMU did reduce their payout to 27 million themselves as well

Okay, that makes sense that it was down to 18 from the requested 35, but IMO, the only reason it was negotiated in the first place, is because that is how the bylaws read. If they had given the 27 month notice, it would have been $10M, no questions asked. Since it was less than 27 months, the bylaws stated that it would be a negotiated settlement.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the MWC bylaws are pretty clear. With at least a years notice, it's around $18M. If it's less than that, the fee doubles to around $36M. I don't see anything about a negotiated payment like was in the AAC docs.

 

[dcut03]

Okay, that makes sense that it was down to 18 from the requested 35, but IMO, the only reason it was negotiated in the first place, is because that is how the bylaws read. If they had given the 27 month notice, it would have been $10M, no questions asked. Since it was less than 27 months, the bylaws stated that it would be a negotiated settlement.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the MWC bylaws are pretty clear. With at least a years notice, it's around $18M. If it's less than that, the fee doubles to around $36M. I don't see anything about a negotiated payment like was in the AAC docs.

There is also a good chance IF they gave their 27 month notice, the 10 million dollar fee would have also been negotiated down even further . Becuase, and I have cited several times, the exit fees are almost ALWAYS negotiated down.

Every bylaws has an "agreed upon" exit fee, and they are almost always negotiatied down. Again, it doesn't make any sense to me, but that's what is happening.

Legally it seems like they would have very little leverage for negotiations, but again and again, they get negotiated down. Even this article it talked about the AAC schools being "on the hook" for 45 million a piece. Sound familiar? I really think it is very unlikely that the exiting 4 pay anywhere near that number.

The fact that the arbitration for the poaching and exit fees were lumped together feels like a win in itself for the PAC. We have all had the argument that the poaching fees are a separate agreement and should be treated seprately, but they are now lumped together.

Poaching fees and exit fees can considered double dipping, because in a way it is. Having them negotiated together can be very advantageous to the PAC. If industry standard is about 2 years of media value for all exit fees, it is very possible that both get negotiated down as the same thing. If each school is stating that they are looking at ~30 mil in fees? Like the AAC, the combined fees COULD be negotiated down to one number.

No idea if this will happen, but I think it is possible.

 

[dcut03]

You cannot seriously be suggesting USU is as valuable to a media partner as Houston. Or that Fresno is as valuable as SMU was at that time. Or SDSU who has pretty poor market penetration is any more valuable than Cincy.

The PAC s top three brands are smaller markets.

Wolken in his article said media insiders did not value Memphis highly and valued WSU/OSU only slightly more. There's a reason that OSU/WSU were left behind. Same reason UNLV UNM RENO did, we didn't meet the metrics.

Could the PAC get to 12 -14 million per? Sure but not through linear. The idea they would take up the 'late times slots' is kinda funny. If those time slots are valuable, the BIG 10 just plops USC, Oregon, Washington and UCLA.

They likely are on the CW or Turner networks with a streaming option that all their fans will bitch and complain about. I would not be shocked if they have to play Tuesday night games. Not ideal for fan experience. Actually pretty awful potentially for attendance especially OSU/WSU who a lot of their fans have to travel 45 minutes or more to attend games.

They'll get more than MWC. How much more id the question. It's definitely not the 18 million they were touting early in.

Better way to do this. Apple TV offered old PAC 18 or 20 million.

Oregon v Oregon State
Washington vs WSU
UTAH Vs USU
CU Vs CSU
ASU vs SDSU
CAL vs FRESNO
UofA vs Gonzaga
Stanford vs Boise

And before you make the argument that we can't use OSU/WSU since they were in both I'll point out both the BIG AND BIG12 passed on them so their value cannot be all that high. If it was, they would have been invited.

I did in state as much as possible because we are talking market penetration.

Tell me one time the new PAC school offers more value than old PAC school to a media partner.

Boise and Stanford probably. Because if you say OSU/WSU/CSU/USU I will question your sanity or current alcohol consumption.

If PAC deal was 12-14 I think the deal is done and they have their 8th already.

I think they may hit 10.

WSU and OSU were a part of a 10 team conference wirth 30 mil per school by ESPN a couple of years ago. Most of those schools were individually worth about that much to their new conferences.

Obvisously WSU and OSU were left out for a reason. But i can see their individual value still being as good as 20 mil and still left out, especially since they are a bit of a travel concern for say the B12. less of an issue for the B10, and they already got those markets by picking the more valuable team in each state. No need to double dip.

I am not suggesting that USU is as valuable as any of the leaving PAC schools. But there is a massive chasm between 30 mil and 10 mil per school.
10-12 is reasonable, especially since some of those leaving schools.

The PAC was negotiating with CBS, FOX, and ESPN It at least seems that one of them is ready to deal with them. Which is why I think their payouts should be much better, and stable, if they were only streaming and CW before.

It can easily be 10-12 and not have an 8th. Texas state said no, pribably becuase they didn't want a partical share, but they aren't worth a full share, so there is that.

ALl of the other teams are tied to the MW, and none of them can leave, not now.
I can see Sac State being the fallback team at this point. I don't think their announcement was purely coincidental.

Teams like NMSU probably could be had, but they aren't worth much, there is an argument that Sac States would have a better ceiling.

 

[LVRebel2000]

There is also a good chance IF they gave their 27 month notice, the 10 million dollar fee would have also been negotiated down even further . Becuase, and I have cited several times, the exit fees are almost ALWAYS negotiated down.

Every bylaws has an "agreed upon" exit fee, and they are almost always negotiatied down. Again, it doesn't make any sense to me, but that's what is happening.

Legally it seems like they would have very little leverage for negotiations, but again and again, they get negotiated down. Even this article it talked about the AAC schools being "on the hook" for 45 million a piece. Sound familiar? I really think it is very unlikely that the exiting 4 pay anywhere near that number.

The fact that the arbitration for the poaching and exit fees were lumped together feels like a win in itself for the PAC. We have all had the argument that the poaching fees are a separate agreement and should be treated seprately, but they are now lumped together.

Poaching fees and exit fees can considered double dipping, because in a way it is. Having them negotiated together can be very advantageous to the PAC. If industry standard is about 2 years of media value for all exit fees, it is very possible that both get negotiated down as the same thing. If each school is stating that they are looking at ~30 mil in fees? Like the AAC, the combined fees COULD be negotiated down to one number.

No idea if this will happen, but I think it is possible.

It's possible that they'll get reduced down, but if I'm the MW, I'm playing hardball. The MW contract says that they can withhold the money from the departing schools, so ideally, that should already be happening. You want to try to get the MW to cut the number in half? See you in court. You want to drop it from 18 to 15, well, maybe we'll talk.

 

[LVRebel2000]

WSU and OSU were a part of a 10 team conference wirth 30 mil per school by ESPN a couple of years ago. Most of those schools were individually worth about that much to their new conferences.

Obvisously WSU and OSU were left out for a reason. But i can see their individual value still being as good as 20 mil and still left out, especially since they are a bit of a travel concern for say the B12. less of an issue for the B10, and they already got those markets by picking the more valuable team in each state. No need to double dip.

I am not suggesting that USU is as valuable as any of the leaving PAC schools. But there is a massive chasm between 30 mil and 10 mil per school.
10-12 is reasonable, especially since some of those leaving schools.

The PAC was negotiating with CBS, FOX, and ESPN It at least seems that one of them is ready to deal with them. Which is why I think their payouts should be much better, and stable, if they were only streaming and CW before.

I agree with a lot of your statements, but I think the whole idea of why the MW set the exit fees so high was to try to protect the conference as a whole, right? So if you thought it was a good idea at the time to sign it, and then changed your mind once you got a 'better' offer, I don't see why that becomes the MW's problem.

Are the fees higher than typical? Yes. But it was done like that for a reason. If teams want to leave, fine, but you know the cost.

 

[dcut03]

I just laid out why the PAC duress argument is nonsense.

They could have done a scgeduling agreement with CUSA.

If they cry regionalism you simply point to their attempt to add Memphis and Tulane and UTSA and South Florida.

The second the dollar total got too high PAC could have walked out and signed a deal with CUSA for fraction of the cost.

But why, why would the PAC sign the deal that they did if they had legitimate options besides the MW.

They are pretty dumb, we can see that, but they aren't that dumb.

IF it was so easy to schedule the CUSA, why not do that? They would be able to expand much much easier, and not pay out the nose last year for their OOC games.

The only logical reason is that they were truly under duress.

 

[dcut03]

It's possible that they'll get reduced down, but if I'm the MW, I'm playing hardball. The MW contract says that they can withhold the money from the departing schools, so ideally, that should already be happening. You want to try to get the MW to cut the number in half? See you in court. You want to drop it from 18 to 15, well, maybe we'll talk.

If I were the MW, I would not have allowed the 2 lawsuits to be lumped together. But here we are.

 

[Rebel1986]

But why, why would the PAC sign the deal that they did if they had legitimate options besides the MW.

They are pretty dumb, we can see that, but they aren't that dumb.

IF it was so easy to schedule the CUSA, why not do that? They would be able to expand much much easier, and not pay out the nose last year for their OOC games.

The only logical reason is that they were truly under duress.

They could have easily had an agreement with CUSA or Sunbelt, they just wanted games that would be a better sell to their media!

 

[LVRebel2000]

If I were the MW, I would not have allowed the 2 lawsuits to be lumped together. But here we are.

Not saying you're wrong, but in what way are they lumped together? Are you talking about in regards to them getting mediation?

 

[Bullmastiff 1]

But why, why would the PAC sign the deal that they did if they had legitimate options besides the MW.

They are pretty dumb, we can see that, but they aren't that dumb.

IF it was so easy to schedule the CUSA, why not do that? They would be able to expand much much easier, and not pay out the nose last year for their OOC games.

The only logical reason is that they were truly under duress.

Because they never intended to honor it.

They intended on crippling the MWC. USU UNLV would have put the MWC in a position to where rebuilding would have been near impossible. AFA is gone to the AAC.

Tell me why you would sign this awful deal with the MWC when CUSA would absolutely have done a deal with you.

 

[Bullmastiff 1]

But why, why would the PAC sign the deal that they did if they had legitimate options besides the MW.

They are pretty dumb, we can see that, but they aren't that dumb.

IF it was so easy to schedule the CUSA, why not do that? They would be able to expand much much easier, and not pay out the nose last year for their OOC games.

The only logical reason is that they were truly under duress.

They were not under duress. There were options. CUSA. SBC. PAC cannot claim regionalism when they then attempted to poach the AAC schools.

Did the PAC explore other conferences? If not why? Why only the MWC? Again can't use regionalism when their next move was AAC schools. And not just one AAC school but four of them.

There is no duress. Unless CUSA and SBC said no. If the PAC never attempted to get a better deal with those conferences vs signing a bad deal with MWC that's on them and again points to available alternative options, they chose to ignore. That nullifies the duress.

 

[Rebel1986]

They were not under duress. There were options. CUSA. SBC. PAC cannot claim regionalism when they then attempted to poach the AAC schools.

Did the PAC explore other conferences? If not why? Why only the MWC? Again can't use regionalism when their next move was AAC schools. And not just one AAC school but four of them.

There is no duress. Unless CUSA and SBC said no. If the PAC never attempted to get a better deal with those conferences vs signing a bad deal with MWC that's on them and again points to available alternative options, they chose to ignore. That nullifies the duress.

It is 100% about the PAC2 greed! Their is no requirement for them to stay in a conference, except that they want to keep all of the PAC money for themselves, which would be lost if they shut down the conference. Knowing how lawsuits tend to move forward in the private industry, I would look at going after the PAC money as liquidated damages beyond the agreement amount, due to the obvious fraud by the PAC2 who fully understood they had no intent to ever honor the agreement while using the MWC not only to build their own conference back up, but also for financial gain in regards to keeping the PAC money.

 

[Bullmastiff 1]

It is 100% about the PAC2 greed! Their is no requirement for them to stay in a conference, except that they want to keep all of the PAC money for themselves, which would be lost if they shut down the conference. Knowing how lawsuits tend to move forward in the private industry, I would look at going after the PAC money as liquidated damages beyond the agreement amount, due to the obvious fraud by the PAC2 who fully understood they had no intent to ever honor the agreement while using the MWC not only to build their own conference back up, but also for financial gain in regards to keeping the PAC money.

PACs case hinges on duress.

I just laid out options they had outside of the MWC. If they did not shop themselves to other conferences that is on them.

 

[Bullmastiff 1]

It is 100% about the PAC2 greed! Their is no requirement for them to stay in a conference, except that they want to keep all of the PAC money for themselves, which would be lost if they shut down the conference. Knowing how lawsuits tend to move forward in the private industry, I would look at going after the PAC money as liquidated damages beyond the agreement amount, due to the obvious fraud by the PAC2 who fully understood they had no intent to ever honor the agreement while using the MWC not only to build their own conference back up, but also for financial gain in regards to keeping the PAC money.

Where the PAC actually may have a case is the poaching fees and them being excessive. But they have to prove duress first.

 

[LVRebel2000]

Where the PAC actually may have a case is the poaching fees and them being excessive. But they have to prove duress first.

There are always options. Sure, there are varying levels of preference as to what they would have preferred. They could have just played each other 12 times if it really came down to worst case. Or, schedule random games vs PAC, AAC, or any other schools with an opening in their schedule.

Instead, they thought the best option with the most competitive schools that are also mostly regional, would be to ask the MW to revise the conference schedule and treat them basically like a conference member. That comes at a cost.

Also, given that it is well known that the only way the PAC 2 schools would keep all of the NCAA credits ($$$), they needed to have a fully active conference by a certain date. The MW knew this, as did everyone else, which is why they put that stipulation in place. Why would the MW help the PAC 2 schools, knowing that theyre likely going to try to poach schools?

 

[Bullmastiff 1]

There are always options. Sure, there are varying levels of preference as to what they would have preferred. They could have just played each other 12 times if it really came down to worst case. Or, schedule random games vs PAC, AAC, or any other schools with an opening in their schedule.

Instead, they thought the best option with the most competitive schools that are also mostly regional, would be to ask the MW to revise the conference schedule and treat them basically like a conference member. That comes at a cost.

Also, given that it is well known that the only way the PAC 2 schools would keep all of the NCAA credits ($$$), they needed to have a fully active conference by a certain date. The MW knew this, as did everyone else, which is why they put that stipulation in place. Why would the MW help the PAC 2 schools, knowing that theyre likely going to try to poach schools?

Give this man a damn prize.

You 100% get it.

CUSA/SBC were options.

Call up your old PAC mates and ask them if they would be willing to drop an FCS opponent and schedule you (OSU/WSU)

Fire alarm goes off there are three doors and one has smoke billowing under it.

'Oh no fire! I'm under duress! Whatever should I do!'

I don't know, check the two doors that don't have smoke?

 

[Loyal Coug1]

But why, why would the PAC sign the deal that they did if they had legitimate options besides the MW.

They are pretty dumb, we can see that, but they aren't that dumb.

IF it was so easy to schedule the CUSA, why not do that? They would be able to expand much much easier, and not pay out the nose last year for their OOC games.

The only logical reason is that they were truly under duress.

Um, yes they ARE that dumb.

 

[Bullmastiff 1]

Um, yes they ARE that dumb.

Your boards still thinking 15 million in media money or is their growing concern. ?

 

[Boston Rebel 2]

UNLV signed a deal that keeps them in the conference even if the amount owed to them gets cut to a fraction. With no out for the Big 12. Allegedly when they signed it UNLV had an out if recruited by a P5 conference what happened to that? UNLV once again taking stupidity to an art form.

 

[Meister_Rebel]

UNLV signed a deal that keeps them in the conference even if the amount owed to them gets cut to a fraction. With no out for the Big 12. Allegedly when they signed it UNLV had an out if recruited by a P5 conference what happened to that? UNLV once again taking stupidity to an art form.

We can still leave for a P5 conference without penalty. It's written in Section 7 of the GOR.

 

[Boston Rebel 2]

We can still leave for a P5 conference without penalty. It's written in Section 7 of the GOR.

Ok there is an article out there saying we are locked in.

 

[Bullmastiff 1]

We can still leave for a P5 conference without penalty. It's written in Section 7 of the GOR.

Or we just claim 'duress' like the PAC.

Seems to be the kryptonite to any contract.

 

[Loyal Coug1]

Your boards still thinking 15 million in media money or is their growing concern. ?

The dipshits on my Coug board, aside from flooding it with mega political threads (OK I join in), aren't saying shit about the media deal or our future 8th member. Because they know the All-Knowing Loyal One is right about the reverse merger, and that the Pac-2 has become the laughingstock of the college sports world. They are just too chicken shit to admit it and bow to my superior intelligence and insight. Stupid Cougs. But I soldier on.

 

[Bullmastiff 1]

The dipshits on my Coug board, aside from flooding it with mega political threads (OK I join in), aren't saying shit about the media deal or our future 8th member. Because they know the All-Knowing Loyal One is right about the reverse merger, and that the Pac-2 has become the laughingstock of the college sports world. They are just too chicken shit to admit it and bow to my superior intelligence and insight. Stupid Cougs. But I soldier on.

Well if they don't recognize your genius they are obviously idiots.

 

[Meister_Rebel]

Ok there is an article out there saying we are locked in.

Whatever article you've read is wrong. Here is the GOR: https://www.scribd.com/document/828...ant-of-rights-agreement#fullscreen&from_embed

 

[bcvegaspt2]

The dipshits on my Coug board, aside from flooding it with mega political threads (OK I join in), aren't saying shit about the media deal or our future 8th member. Because they know the All-Knowing Loyal One is right about the reverse merger, and that the Pac-2 has become the laughingstock of the college sports world. They are just too chicken shit to admit it and bow to my superior intelligence and insight. Stupid Cougs. But I soldier on.