(09-06-2017 12:42 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(09-06-2017 12:23 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(09-06-2017 12:15 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  There is a weather clause in contract to get out of game. The clause does not say that weather has to affect the home team in Arkansas. It just says game can be cancelled due to weather (which just happens to be affecting Miami). Game does not have to be made up if there are no dates available. Read the game contract.

The clause very specifically states that option only exist if it is impossible for Miami to travel to Jonesboro for the game

ESPN offered moving the game up a couple days. Miami refused. By doing that, they must fulfill the buyout.

It's not a clear case. "Impossibility" isn't necessarily the fact that the game can or can't be played in Jonesboro, but rather whether all parties are able to fulfill all aspects of the agreement and if this is a force majeure situation. Miami could argue that it is a force majeure situation because the fact that they could arrive to play the game doesn't mean that they'd be able to return home. We can argue whether or not it would actually be safer for Miami players to be in Jonesboro when a hurricane is hitting Florida, but regardless of how one feels about those circumstances, Miami could probably reasonably demonstrate that it would incur additional costs for lodging those players longer, re-chartering a jet for a different date, and other expenses that would have not come up but for the force majeure situation. Was Arkansas State offering to meet any of those additional costs that Miami would have incurred (particularly since many of these college football scheduling agreements have fairly specific expense reimbursement clauses)? If so, then Arkansas State might have more of a case. However, if Arkansas State is just relying upon a liquidated damages clause in this situation, claiming that the game could have been played, and stating that the force majeure clause doesn't apply, I don't think that would hold up.

The practical nature of these situations is that the parties will meet somewhere in the middle (e.g. the liquidated damages amount minus the expenses that Miami would have incurred by having to stay additional days in Jonesboro) because neither party has a 100% clear cut case.

Right now I'm hearing Miami's position on damages is sue us.
Inconvenient and impossible aren't the same thing.