(02-08-2014 07:49 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Yeah, the salesmanship coming out of ACC folks here is just too funny. I don't know whom they think they are fooling. Probably too much back and forth cheerleader talk going on in their ACC forum here which breeds this kind of extreme thinking.

(02-08-2014 05:37 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(02-08-2014 05:09 PM)SeaBlue Wrote:  

(02-08-2014 03:52 PM)TerryD Wrote:  I guess that because I have subpoenas issued maybe 3-4 times a week, I just don't see this as all of that big of a deal.

I think the hope is that Pitt and the ACC will think otherwise.

Having been subpoenaed a number of times in the past, fishing expeditions rarely work. I doubt Pitt has bad counsel, and Pitt's retiring president is an Pa attorney himself. I thought Pitt was to name a new guy this weekend.

We did. His name is Dr. Patrick Gallagher and before today he was the acting deputy commerce secretary and headed the National Institute of Standards and Technology.

IF they start digging into how the finances were figured.... about entrance/exit fees, how much you want to bet that some of those ESPN Negotiating dollars come into it and how far their own hand dipped into the cookie jar for school placement.

(02-08-2014 10:43 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  

(02-08-2014 07:49 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Yeah, the salesmanship coming out of ACC folks here is just too funny. I don't know whom they think they are fooling. Probably too much back and forth cheerleader talk going on in their ACC forum here which breeds this kind of extreme thinking.

You wish. I havnt said a single thing in regards to this subject. I don't have the facts. It is ACC folks who are making all the insinuating remarks in regards to the morals and such of Maryland.

Nice try.

(02-08-2014 10:41 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(02-08-2014 07:34 AM)CougarRed Wrote:  

(02-08-2014 04:37 AM)OrangeCrush22 Wrote:  What's Maryland trying to accomplish with this? Are they trying to prove that the ACC courted Penn State, if so, why does that matter?

The ACC voted to increase the exit fee to $50M on Sept 13, 2011. Pitt joined on Sept 18, 2011. Pitt filed suit against the Big East in May of 2012 seeking to escape the 27-month notice clause. West Va had done so, at a cost of $20M. Pitt's final price was $7.5M, and the lawsuit was settled in July 2012. It was against this backdrop that Maryland gave notice it was leaving the ACC in November 2012.

I'm guessing there is correspondence between Pitt and the ACC about the Big East exit clause that would be damning against the ACC's attempt to enforce its own exit clause. The ACC may have "unclean hands."

Pitt's exit fee was lower because Pitt was forced to stay in the Big East for an additional year (as was Syracuse), while WVU bolted at the end of the same school year in which they announced they were leaving. WVU (and/or the Big 12) had to pay more to ransom WVU out of the Big East asap.

Very sound analysis. There is obviously the potential that Pitt or the ACC may have made statements in one or more communications adverse to their current position with UMD. Publicly, though, both the ACC and Syracuse were pretty consistent on honoring existing Big East contract, i.e., the ACC was not asking SU or Pitt to breach their membership agreements with the Big East. Pitt broke ranks by suing to get out early. I don't recall Pitt's arguments. They may have been: "you can't make us stay as long as the cost of leaving can be covered by damages." The theory on the cost of damages may be as important as anything.

I would love to know the timing of conversations between Big Ten Rutgers and Maryland. All are on record as to certain things:



http://www.nj.com/rutgersfootball/index....rutge.html

Quote:Delany tried to downplay the importance of the millions of cable subscribers in the state, insisting that he didn’t consult with any television partner before charging to the East Coast.

What would the Fox say?