Tick Tick Tick
- Thread starter Rebel1986
- Start date
Maybe the MWC is stalling because in 2 days time the get double the money if no official letters and checks have been received...This is what is going on during the PAC meeting with the MWC 5!
Which part isnt settled.. They still are required to meet the bylaws for resigning from the conference in order to do so without the doubling of the exit fee. Even the original fee gets reduced, they still get penalized for not resigning within the timeframe required by the bylaws.. And they all had ample time to do so
I'm pretty sure that all of the schools leaving the MW have already signed 'binding' agreements with the PAC, so I highly doubt that they will pull out at this point. My guess is that the 5 departing schools have the checks and paperwork ready to go and will make sure the MWC receives them on time.
That would be very surprising if true. I hope it is, but thought that I had seen otherwise about their commitment to the new PAC conference, but I don't recall the details.
Then why have they waited so long? Is it a voting rights thing- once you submitted resignation you lose your voting rights.
I dont think it's second thoughts, I think they're beyond coming back, and waiting for mediation to solve their fees also doesn't seem like a reason...
Semantics mostly also a poison pill.
1- MWC bylaws state teams must sign an official release and pay 5k dollars to start the process. (Something to that affect).
By not doing this yet, they can argue that they haven't 'officially' left the conference and still have voting rights. Its a ploy, semantics etc.
2-There is/was inherent risk in the PAC rebuild. Smart to not officially leave until the 11th hour in case the rebuild went completely South.
MWC will likely get enough in mediation for Gloria to honor commitments to UNLV and AFA. Although the total payout won't be as much as first estimated.
PAC will be hamstrung a bit on additions. Memphis/Tulane are off the table. Texas State likely 8th member. I think Rice may also be a target. They have a ton of money.
MWC adds NDSU and UC Davis makes FBS jump in 2028ish.
We'll know in 3-5 years if remaining in the MWC was the right call or not.
I think they owe the exit fee + 5000 dollars on June 1st? Right? Or at least a portion of the full exit fee amount.
If the amount they owe isn't settled yet, then they can't fully fulfill the requirements. It is very possible that these mediations provide a legal hold/extension on the official exit process.
They have to give 'timely' notice as I understand it.
I think they'll put in official notice this weekend.
Its more spelled out than that...
June 1st requires the check and notice or exit fees get doubled...if they plan on leaving for 2026 season
June 30th- exit is official and fees are due. Media rights payments are halted...
Correct.
So the PAC waiting till the 11th hour isn't surprising. Could it be a sign that there is concern over there? Sure. But there's no real benefit to them to have already 'officially' left the conference either.
Semantics more than anything with a pinch of cover your own ass in case PAC rebuild went completely sideways.
They know their media numbers and I think they have an 8th member lined up in principle at this point.
They are taking advantage of the bylaws. No reason to give up voting rights before they have to.
Also, exit fees are often negotiated to be paid over time. The whole amount may not come before the end of June. None of the leaving schools likely have the capitial to pay it all now, unless the PAC is helping to pay for all of them.
Also, exit fees are often negotiated to be paid over time. The whole amount may not come before the end of June. None of the leaving schools likely have the capitial to pay it all now, unless the PAC is helping to pay for all of them.
Kinda. Its semantics though.
They have ADs (JD Wicker SDSU for instance) talking about his excitement about what's in store for the PAC. Their own PR and Social media accounts have blasted out graphic after graphic of the new 'PAC'.
Every AD and president has dome and interviews discussing the decision to rebuild the PAC.
I don't think there's a judge in the country that would say 'Yeah but they haven't officially left so they have voting rughts.' They've publicly announced their intentions.
Its really simple. Its gamesmanship and semantics.
So the PAC signing an agreement holds no value because of 'duress'..
But those bylaws are absolutely ironclad..
Are you joining the PAC or not. Yes or no.
We haven't decided yet.
Well then you don't get to vote because you may be voting in a way detrimental to the conference you are in.
Are you in or are you out.
I get what you are saying, but they are just following the bylaws to their advantage. The MW's next contract will likely have different language, but I think they changed it to it's current state because of what SDSU happened a few years before. I think the MW likes having language to gives a leaving team time to change their mind.
The counter argument to the leaving 5 is that they officially have not announced their new media contract, so they want to keep options open to return. Though reality, they do know their media valuation or least of the current 8 ( including Gonzaga). But before then, they shouldn't have signed until they new more concrete numbers.
One's person's "abuse" of semantics is another's being savvy and taking advantage of the rules.
The MW could counter sue the semantics angle to your point. Not sure if it would be worth it, but the door is open for that.
Last edited:
You mean like the contract they willingly signed for a scheduling agreement?
There isn't a judge in the country that would side with them on voting rights issue.
They have publicly announced their intentions to join the PAC. Meaning any vote they cast or didn't cast comes into question.
Do you really think the departing PAC schools want it to come out in discovery when they actually began talks with the PAC? What were the nature of the talks. What votes were taken during those talks.
Think about it for a minute.
I can't see any judge siding with them on this topic bylaws or not.
There's no benefit to them announcing early.
You can't publicly announce and be on record of your intentions to leave and also have a say in current or future decisions in the conference. It creates a conflict of interests.
Again judge simply says are you in or are you out. Here's you saying six months ago your intentions to leave in front of boosters.
Last edited:
There’s also the simple fact that the basis for the exit fees lawsuit was/is “we never said we were leaving”… assuming they give their official notice and pay the $5k fee the basis of the lawsuit is nullified and the jig is up.
If they don’t give official notice and continue on with the lawsuit their negotiating leverage gets worse.
FAFO
I could be wrong but I think some Twitter talking head said an extension was granted on the 'official exit' notice date.
I'm not sure why Gloria would accept that unless she was gaining something somewhere else.
The only way I can see UNLV becoming part of the PAC is this.
PAC says we'll give you 70 million between exit fees and poaching fees but you have to give UNLV a free pass.
MWC will owe UNLV what? 30 million-ish between percentage of exit and poaching fees and the additional 1.5 million per year?
So whatever Gloria gets 20-30 million goes bye bye to UNLV.
Maybe the right play for her is to let UNLV walk. Get the full 70 million. Turn around add NDSU maybe South Dakota State and Montana...
MWC media deal isn't going to be great anyway. Purely a guess we see around 3-4 mil AAV. UNLV leaves, replace with those three schools, probably still get close between 2.5 and 3.
I simply can't see any other way UNLV makes that jump. Im not sure if they even want to or feel they need to.
All comes down to what happens over next 3-5 years whether staying put was the right call.
This silence is getting pretty deafening. 2 weeks and no comments, hints, leaks? Nothing? Maybe it means just that - nothing is happening. Maybe they all gave up and went home.
Similar threads
