Page 2 of 2
Big 12 Has A New Problem--Good For Big East
Posted: Tue Oct 18, 2011 8:47 pm
by smupony94
Been in works for awhile
Big 12 Has A New Problem--Good For Big East
Posted: Tue Oct 18, 2011 8:51 pm
by NickSMU17
GRGB wrote:Stallion wrote:So what if a Big East school decides to just breach that Contract-they'd owe:
5 Million Buy Out Clause
+
Additional Damages, if proven
-Mitigation Damages
So say a Big East team loses game with Louisville-they would have to reduce their damages by amount they recovered by playing a different team. If they lost damages as a result of TV Contract they would have to mitigate damages based on new Contract which very likely is going to be more valuable than old Contract since the Big East rejected that lucrative TV Contract last March. In fact, if the Big East Contract isn't clearly written and provide for a reasonable Penalty specifically related to the 27 month provision, the Court might just limit damages to the 5 Million Buy Out Clause. You'd have to look closely at the Big East Agreement but Louisville might just breach the Contract and say Adios. Big East then though might have tortious interference with Contract claim against the Big 12 with similiar damage/mitigation issues.
Don't forget that big east could lose NCAA aq status if they drop below 8 teams. That would be a direct result of any team leaving before the 27 month period.
That could be huge.
They changed that rule...
Big 12 Has A New Problem--Good For Big East
Posted: Tue Oct 18, 2011 9:02 pm
by 2ndandlong
NickSMU17 wrote:GRGB wrote:Stallion wrote:So what if a Big East school decides to just breach that Contract-they'd owe:
5 Million Buy Out Clause
+
Additional Damages, if proven
-Mitigation Damages
So say a Big East team loses game with Louisville-they would have to reduce their damages by amount they recovered by playing a different team. If they lost damages as a result of TV Contract they would have to mitigate damages based on new Contract which very likely is going to be more valuable than old Contract since the Big East rejected that lucrative TV Contract last March. In fact, if the Big East Contract isn't clearly written and provide for a reasonable Penalty specifically related to the 27 month provision, the Court might just limit damages to the 5 Million Buy Out Clause. You'd have to look closely at the Big East Agreement but Louisville might just breach the Contract and say Adios. Big East then though might have tortious interference with Contract claim against the Big 12 with similiar damage/mitigation issues.
Don't forget that big east could lose NCAA aq status if they drop below 8 teams. That would be a direct result of any team leaving before the 27 month period.
That could be huge.
They changed that rule...
Dutch
Where are his fireworks?
Big 12 Has A New Problem--Good For Big East
Posted: Tue Oct 18, 2011 9:25 pm
by Dooby
Biggest problem with BYU is their refusal to play on Sundays in any sport. Even though Big XII's basketball championship hasn't been on a Sunday in years, this irks ESPN to no end because the want the option.
Re: Big 12 Has A New Problem--Good For Big East
Posted: Tue Oct 18, 2011 9:42 pm
by Dutch
2ndandlong wrote:Where are his fireworks?
fireworks go in the [deleted] thread
Re: Big 12 Has A New Problem--Good For Big East
Posted: Tue Oct 18, 2011 10:06 pm
by GRGB
NickSMU17 wrote:GRGB wrote:Stallion wrote:So what if a Big East school decides to just breach that Contract-they'd owe:
5 Million Buy Out Clause
+
Additional Damages, if proven
-Mitigation Damages
So say a Big East team loses game with Louisville-they would have to reduce their
The damages by amount they recovered by playing a different team. If they lost damages as a result of TV Contract they would have to mitigate damages based on new Contract which very likely is going to be more valuable than old Contract since the Big East rejected that lucrative TV Contract last March. In fact, if the Big East Contract isn't clearly written and provide for a reasonable Penalty specifically related to the 27 month provision, the Court might just limit damages to the 5 Million Buy Out Clause. You'd have to look closely at the Big East Agreement but Louisville might just breach the Contract and say Adios. Big East then though might have tortious interference with Contract claim against the Big 12 with similiar damage/mitigation issues.
Don't forget that big east could lose NCAA aq status if they drop below 8 teams. That would be a direct result of any team leaving before the 27 month period.
That could be huge.
They changed that rule...
Who did? Ur not a conference under 8, right?
Big 12 Has A New Problem--Good For Big East
Posted: Tue Oct 18, 2011 10:15 pm
by NickSMU17
NCAA last year
Re: Big 12 Has A New Problem--Good For Big East
Posted: Tue Oct 18, 2011 10:16 pm
by GRGB
Scout.com aug 2011
"Without 8 FBS full members (after a two year waiver period), the WAC and BIg East can both lose their seats on the governance panel for the NCAA.  All FBS conferences get a seat, while FCS and non-football conferences get rotating spots (kind of like the UN Security Council - superpowers are guaranteed permanent seats, while other continents rotate).
The WAC and Big East would also lose their ability to invite an FCS football to FBS.
For the Big East, that wouldn't be a big issue, as they could still possibly attract existing  CUSA or MAC teams.  
Also, the Big East, if it adds the service academics as football only members, could get to 8 football teams, but still not meet the NCAA criteria of 8 full football members.
For the WAC, losing its ability to invite an FCS school to the FBS level would be huge. "
Re: Big 12 Has A New Problem--Good For Big East
Posted: Tue Oct 18, 2011 10:32 pm
by GRGB
Proposal 2010-100
The new rule allows for seven active D-1 schools who all must play men's basketball and at least six must play Football.
Big 12 Has A New Problem--Good For Big East
Posted: Tue Oct 18, 2011 10:45 pm
by NickSMU17
It had been discussed on here that they changed it but I am not sure
Re: Big 12 Has A New Problem--Good For Big East
Posted: Tue Oct 18, 2011 11:21 pm
by GRGB
Neither am I. It looks like 7 total 6 fb min to be a conference.
Pitt cuse leave but are held through 2013.
B12 has to have 10 for fox contract in 2012
Mizzu won't want to stay if they are leaving. They've indicated that should they leave they would do so in time so that they can play in 2012.
14 is easier to sch than 13 for the sec.
If UL or Wv leave BE, then they would not drop BE below 6 until 2014 season, but why should cuse and Pitt stay only to enable UL to bypass 27 month rule?
Seems they could sue for specific performance and prevent departure before 2014. Or sue b12 poacher for tort.
The theory then being: b12 needs another school for 2012 or 2013 and cannot come from BE.