Texas & Georgia Tech to B1G rumors

[Forty_Sixand2]

That's what I thought. GOR is rock solid. Exit fee, not so much. There has been no litigation of challenge to a GOR in the college athletic context. GORs are upheld all the time. Period, end of story.

Fine....whatever you say tiger.


It's "cite" not "site" BTW.

 

[LawDawg]

I have discussed it with people who know a hell of slot more than me. They laugh it off and basically say, that the ACC can not justify its injurious effect in court and the schools all signed it because that was well known. It was a quick patch job to keep GT and UNC out of the B1G at the 11th hour and has since been ridiculed and dismissed.

It won't keep anyone in the conference. Adding ND would.

You are clearly conflating two concepts ... the $50 million exit fee, and the GOR. The exit fee is a contract concept called liquidated damages. It can be argued against if the exiting school can show the actual damages suffered by the conference is less than $50 million agreed to. That is what Maryland is doing. A GOR is basically granting your rights in something - in this case media rights - to another entity. You no longer own those rights ... the entity does. It's the equivalent of granting some exclusive rights to your house or some other property. Once you give them your rights, you no longer have them. You go to another conference you have no media rights to take with you. Once the term of the agreement is over they revert to you. The people you are talking to are talking about the former concept, not the later. Or, they are very stupid/ignorant.

 

[LawDawg]

Fine....whatever you say tiger.


It's "cite" not "site" BTW.

LOL, you finally agree that I am right and you were wrong, and your parting gift is to point out a spelling error. Surprised you didn't mention Hitler.

As you can imagine, I understand what a citation is. But, thanks for participating.

 

[Codaxx]

If I were the Big Ten I'd want Louisville and Kansas. Mainly for basketball, but L'ville football has been pretty good lately. Kansas would fit right in with Indiana, Purdue, and Minnesota.

I'd get two more contiguous markets and would now almost completely surround the state of Missouri.

Then I'd invade Missouri.

-
There is a good chance Mizzu would bolt for the Big 10 with an offer. That was always the apple of their eye

 

[LawDawg]

People who discuss the research money aspect of this don't understand how that all works out. As I said earlier. I have written, had accepted, reviewed and awarded many grants, and big ones (NIH, CDC) and conference affiliation means zippy. The CIC is nice for collaborative research but if you think that B1G schools limit who they work with based on it, your nuts.

On this, we agree. Glad to see a practical experience affirmation of it.

 

[LawDawg]

-
There is a good chance Mizzu would bolt for the Big 10 with an offer. That was always the apple of their eye

Certainly possible due to cultural reasons. The SEC has no GOR to stop them.

 

[Forty_Sixand2]

LOL, you finally agree that I am right and you were wrong, and your parting gift is to point out a spelling error. Surprised you didn't mention Hitler.

As you can imagine, I understand what a citation is. But, thanks for participating.

No, I'm not. I have gotten into this with people as nauseum and don't feel like doing it again. Ask yourself this, if the teams saw so much fluctuation why in the hell would they sign such a deal? That answers your question in the quickest way. It is not a defendable aspect of the agreement. Sorry. Any ACC team can boot when they want if they have the cash to handle the transition and court cases. They all do.

 

[LawDawg]

No, I'm not. I have gotten into this with people as nauseum and don't feel like doing it again. Ask yourself this, if the teams saw so much fluctuation why in the hell would they sign such a deal? That answers your question in the quickest way. It is not a defendable aspect of the agreement. Sorry. Any ACC team can boot when they want if they have the cash to handle the transition and court cases. They all do.

Again, show me one article that says the GOR isn't ironclad. You can't. The Internet is loaded with articles that say otherwise. The reason the teams signed the deal was to get stability ... that is exactly what the GOR does. Period.

As for being defendable, they are used all the time in all areas of our society. Mostly you see it in entertainment and technology. A GOR is like giving away a piece of property - the minute you sign it, you no longer have the right to own it. Period. Again, you are conflating the two concepts and you don't know what you are talking about with regard to the GOR. Still no Hitler?

 

[Forty_Sixand2]

Ok, let me see if I can do this in a circuitous way. I know some people that make these kinds of decisions within the athletic department of a school currently being poached and when I asked the person about this exact part of the deal, it was laughed at and called illegal. The illegality if it was based on the fact that it isn't in the realm of "non-compete" law as it is totally different and is extreme and therefore would not be honored in case theory. This is from one of our dialogues and I am not a lawyer (he/she is) so take it for its worth.

 

[LawDawg]

Ok, let me see if I can do this in a circuitous way. I know some people that make these kinds of decisions within the athletic department of a school currently being poached and when I asked the person about this exact part of the deal, it was laughed at and called illegal. The illegality if it was based on the fact that it isn't in the realm of "non-compete" law as it is totally different and is extreme and therefore would not be honored in case theory. This is from one of our dialogues and I am not a lawyer (he/she is) so take it for its worth.

You don't get it, and that's ok. Non-compete is a contract term. That's contract law. A GOR is a property law term, which is part of property law, not contract law. The day they signed the GOR, the university no longer owned the rights to the media ... the conference did. Period, It isn't arguable. They have nothing ... nada, with regard to their media rights. And, history shows you simply can't win a lawsuit trying to get your rights back in that property, absent fraud. No way a fraud claim wins here. I am sorry, but you are misunderstanding what the people are telling you, or they are idiots. A GOR is in no way extreme ... they happen hundreds of times each day in entertainment and technology. My guess is the people you are talking to understand what they are saying, but they aren't referring to the GOR but instead to the liquidated damages (the $50 mil) buy out.

 

[Forty_Sixand2]

Well the person seems pretty comfortable with the idea that the school can switch conferences whenever they want and have no issues with media branding. Maybe it is a precedent thing. Maybe he/she assumes the conference would not enforce it and would want a clean break. Whatever the case, I don't think they are morons considering where they work. Who knows....

I have not read the agreement. Maybe loopholes are all over it. I'm a doctor, not a lawyer.

 

[xpuctaqpGT]

As far as the $50 million exit fee....

Both Maryland and FSU voted against that. Depending on how the courts decide...I could see a scenario where the damages would be limited to the $20 million they did agree to under the previous conference contract.

Even still, everyone going forward in the ACC did agree to the terms. So if GT of our own free will agreed to a $50 million exit fee....I don't see us being able to get out of it. We signed the contract.

 

[LawDawg]

Well the person seems pretty comfortable with the idea that the school can switch conferences whenever they want and have no issues with media branding. Maybe it is a precedent thing. Maybe he/she assumes the conference would not enforce it and would want a clean break. Whatever the case, I don't think they are morons considering where they work. Who knows....

I have not read the agreement. Maybe loopholes are all over it. I'm a doctor, not a lawyer.

I wouldn't want you operating on me if that's a picture of you and you have those long claws!

One last shot ... stop and think what the conferences were wanting when they agreed to the GOR. Stability. Both the BigXII and the ACC wanted to stabilize their conferences as they were either getting poached (ACC) or being threatened from within (BiGXII). Why would they all agree to basically give their rights to their media to the conference if they felt that they could move on at any time. Big boys like these guys don't sign agreements like that.

As for precedent, there are thousands of cases that provide a precedent. One of the things I've been saying is this isn't new. Every contract signed by a singer to a record company, or an actor/writer to a production company involves the granting of IP rights. If these were so easily broken, the movie and recording business would be crazy dysfunctional, and they aren't.

Anyway, doesn't look like I'll change your mind, and vice versa.

 

[LawDawg]

As far as the $50 million exit fee....

Both Maryland and FSU voted against that. Depending on how the courts decide...I could see a scenario where the damages would be limited to the $20 million they did agree to under the previous conference contract.

Even still, everyone going forward in the ACC did agree to the terms. So if GT of our own free will agreed to a $50 million exit fee....I don't see us being able to get out of it. We signed the contract.

THE GOR, yes. The liquidated damages you could still argue. Courts frown on the use of liquidated damages as a penalty. So, where the liquidated damages ($50 mil in this instance) bears no relation to the actual damages that were incurred, the court can strike that part of the contract as being a penalty.

See, the thing about contract law is that you basically are allowed to break a contract, so long as you pay any damages for doing so. That is why you can break a lease, or an employment contract. The law disfavors the idea that I can force someone to do something by contract they don't want to do. Again, so long as I am made whole for your breach, I typically can't make you perform your contract.

Imagine that I am an asshole and your boss. We have an employment agreement that says you have to work for me or else pay liquidated damages of $5 million. Yet, you leaving me wouldn't damage me in any way near $5 million. That part of the contract will be seen as as a penalty to try and force your participation with me, and because it bears no relation to the actual damages I incur if you leave, it would be unenforceable.

Maryland will try to show that the damages to the ACC are far less than $50 mil. They will show that bringing in Lousiville and Notre Dame, as well as the stability provided by the GOR, minimizes the damages the ACC will experience. I think Maryland will succeed, but will have to pay some damages.

 

[john01992]

ive seen this debated on another college football board that was conference realignment orientated. the guys there seem to really know what they are talking about and were under the consensus that MD cant use the "we didnt sign this so it doesnt apply to us" argument about the 52 mill exit fee.

 

[Codaxx]

I think it is far more complex than people think. The law is never black and white. Suing State institutions are even more murky. Each state is different, but all the talk here is whether or not a conference could win the case. If the Big 12 sued Texas, they may want to talk to Mr Leach. Leach had to ask permission to sue TTech. Shockingly, that was denied by the state legislature. HE tried to appeal TTU's immunity and was denied by the Texas Supreme Court. I am not sure the Big 12 would have much more luck.

 

[Codaxx]

I wouldn't want you operating on me if that's a picture of you and you have those long claws!

One last shot ... stop and think what the conferences were wanting when they agreed to the GOR. Stability. Both the BigXII and the ACC wanted to stabilize their conferences as they were either getting poached (ACC) or being threatened from within (BiGXII). Why would they all agree to basically give their rights to their media to the conference if they felt that they could move on at any time. Big boys like these guys don't sign agreements like that.

As for precedent, there are thousands of cases that provide a precedent. One of the things I've been saying is this isn't new. Every contract signed by a singer to a record company, or an actor/writer to a production company involves the granting of IP rights. If these were so easily broken, the movie and recording business would be crazy dysfunctional, and they aren't.

Anyway, doesn't look like I'll change your mind, and vice versa.

I am not sure the GORs are signed to grant stability or if they are signed to create the appearance of stability.

 

[Forty_Sixand2]

But I want to go to the B1G!!!

Anyway, not that kind of doctor . I don't get involved until a lot of people are sick and I don't touch people, ha ha.

We will see. I am just passing along what I hear.

 

[starbigd]

if not for the LHN it would of been on espn or espn2 and a lot more people could of seen it.

NO, it would not have. STILL can't figure out how Tier 3 works, can you?

 

[john01992]

NO, it would not have. STILL can't figure out how Tier 3 works, can you?

dude it was a very good ole miss team vs a struggling texas team. it was their best ooc matchup of the year and a lot of people would of be interested.

that game on the LHN was espn trying to cover their ass with the failure of the LHN