(03-24-2014 01:59 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(03-24-2014 11:42 AM)Tbringer Wrote:  You are right, repeating the same incorrect info wont make it true. the Big East that was is now defunct. the AAC is a new conference with a few members of the previous conference and the Big East is a new bb conference made of some original members of the original Big East conference.

Do you have a source supporting your view that the AAC is legally a "new conference"? Because the entity formerly known as the Big East Conference, whose commissioner is and was Mike Aresco, who invited UCF, UH, SMU, Temple and Memphis in 2011-12 as full members starting in 2013-14, whose headquarters are in PRovidence, which has an autobid to all NCAA tournaments, is the American Athletic Conference. The Big East name, the MSG contract, and (I believe) the intellectual property rights to the basketball records (and maybe the other Olympic sports) were sold by the AAC to the new Big East Conference, but that would not have been possible if the AAC was not the successor to the old Big East--it would not have been theirs to sell.

Quote:There isn't any info to support the new AAC having legal rights to sue conferences for taking teams from the defunct BE conference, just wishful thinking.

That's true, but it's true because of the settlements with each team who left. Notice also that Rutgers settled their litigation with the AAC, based on the bylaws of the old BE, because the AAC legally IS the old BE.

Isn't there a tax id # that can be checked? Who does the IRS think is a new conference?

(03-24-2014 02:03 PM)Dasville Wrote:  Isn't there a tax id # that can be checked? Who does the IRS think is a new conference?

The AAC might actually have two Tax IDs, because (at least for a long time) the Big East Football Conference was a separate entity from the Big East Conference.

Another item, the AAC also continued the Big East-ESPN TV contract for football, signed in 2006 (I think) and running through 2013. (The new AAC-ESPN contract started for basketball this season, starts for football next season.)

Against all that, Tbringer has--nothing.

I’m not sure what this genius isn’t understanding. The Big East conference changed its name, in an attempt to rebrand itself, to The American Athletic Conference effective 7/1/13. Literally, the conference commissioner, Mike Aresco, went to work at his office in Providence, RI on June 30th, went home, probably had a nice dinner, maybe watched Leno or caught ballgame on the tube, went to bed at a good hour, then woke up the next day went into the same exact office on July 1st, with nothing changing other than the conference name. The seven Catholic schools are the ones that broke away from the conference to start a new conference, and instead of creating a new name for that conference, they purchased the rights to use the Big East name for around $100 million. Just google it, stop trying to sound like you know what you’re talking about. You don’t.

(03-24-2014 02:16 PM)TopperCard Wrote:  Literally, the conference commissioner, Mike Aresco, went to work at his office in Providence, RI on June 30th, went home, probably had a nice dinner, maybe watched Leno or caught ballgame on the tube, went to bed at a good hour, then woke up the next day went into the same exact office on July 1st

I'm guessing he is a Letterman fan myself.

(03-24-2014 02:19 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(03-24-2014 02:16 PM)TopperCard Wrote:  Literally, the conference commissioner, Mike Aresco, went to work at his office in Providence, RI on June 30th, went home, probably had a nice dinner, maybe watched Leno or caught ballgame on the tube, went to bed at a good hour, then woke up the next day went into the same exact office on July 1st

I'm guessing he is a Letterman fan myself.

You're probably right.

(03-24-2014 11:42 AM)Tbringer Wrote:  

(03-24-2014 11:13 AM)prp Wrote:  

(03-24-2014 11:01 AM)Tbringer Wrote:  

(03-24-2014 10:51 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(03-23-2014 09:10 AM)TerryD Wrote:  Maryland "knows" because Maryland has their own hands full of any "muck" people think will be uncovered during discovery.

It took part in all of these decisions and voted in favor of them along with all of the other Old Guard ACC schools.

Their hands are full of the same "blood" that other people want them to "expose".

None of that will help them with their legal case. They would have the same "unclean hands" as their court opponent.

A lot of this is true. And I say this as a MD alum. SMH

(03-23-2014 10:21 PM)Tbringer Wrote:  no, the AAC is a new conference , the Big East rights were retained by the basketball schools

The Big East is the new conference. They bought the name and records. It is similar to the Baltimore Ravens and Cleveland Browns. The legal entity that was the Cleveland Browns that was founded in the 1940's moved to Baltimore. They changed their name and their history started fresh. A new entity was established circa 1999 that inherited the records of the old Browns before they left town. The Browns are the new entity legally speaking. But records-wise, the Ravens are the new team as their records only go back to 1996.

The Big East is a new conference with a new corporate charter. However they retained the basketball records from the old conference. The AAC is a new conference records-wise for basketball, but maintained the old autobid. Their football records, I believe, keep the old Big East records (for example the BCS bid this past year).

the Big East autobid was left in place for the remainder of that contract( over now) to avoid legal issues, that was decided before the name change I believe. The basketball schools retained the name and conference Big East, the AAC is new. The hybrid conference with Pitt, SU, WVU, etc. is no more and none of the teams in the AAC were in the Big East when VT, BC. Or Miami left.

Repeating the same incorrect statement over and over won't make it true. You're wrong. Time to move on.

You are right, repeating the same incorrect info wont make it true. the Big East that was is now defunct. the AAC is a new conference with a few members of the previous conference and the Big East is a new bb conference made of some original members of the original Big East conference.

There isn't any info to support the new AAC having legal rights to sue conferences for taking teams from the defunct BE conference, just wishful thinking.

Exit terms were settled. Leaving teams were voted out cutting all ties to the conference. Who's talking lawsuits anyway?

(03-24-2014 02:31 PM)Dasville Wrote:  Exit terms were settled. Leaving teams were voted out cutting all ties to the conference. Who's talking lawsuits anyway?

Someone said that Maryland was looking for information about the ACC and ESPN conspiring, to show that the ACC had "unclean hands" (I forget what that was supposed to prove actually about Maryland's disputed $51M exit fee or their antitrust treble damages suit.)

Someone said, that could lead to the Big East suing the ACC based on the information made public, a smoking gun that the ACC and ESPN conspired to loot the Big East.

That fed into the argument about who would be suing the ACC. The AAC would inherit the claims of the old Big East, but I'm pretty sure that the exit settlements with Syracuse, Pitt and Louisville would have had a clause about the Big East not suing the ACC.

If nothing else, the ACC would have made double damn sure that Louisville got that clause in their exit agreement, since the Maryland-ACC lawsuit was already underway.

EDIT: Oh, and I noticed that Tbringer also thinks that the new Big East headquarters is in Providence. It's not, the old Big East headquarters is the new American Athletic Conference headquarters. The "new BE HQ" is still a conference room in thd Manhattan offices of the Big East's law firm.

(03-24-2014 02:48 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(03-24-2014 02:31 PM)Dasville Wrote:  Exit terms were settled. Leaving teams were voted out cutting all ties to the conference. Who's talking lawsuits anyway?

Someone said that Maryland was looking for information about the ACC and ESPN conspiring, to show that the ACC had "unclean hands" (I forget what that was supposed to prove actually about Maryland's disputed $51M exit fee or their antitrust treble damages suit.)

Someone said, that could lead to the Big East suing the ACC based on the information made public, a smoking gun that the ACC and ESPN conspired to loot the Big East.

That fed into the argument about who would be suing the ACC. The AAC would inherit the claims of the old Big East, but I'm pretty sure that the exit settlements with Syracuse, Pitt and Louisville would have had a clause about the Big East not suing the ACC.

If nothing else, the ACC would have made double damn sure that Louisville got that clause in their exit agreement, since the Maryland-ACC lawsuit was already underway.

EDIT: Oh, and I noticed that Tbringer also thinks that the new Big East headquarters is in Providence. It's not, the old Big East headquarters is the new American Athletic Conference headquarters. The "new BE HQ" is still a conference room in thd Manhattan offices of the Big East's law firm.

Thanks for the summary. If you take that scenario and play it out in court, it would take years to resolve. I know how the SEC handled adding teams from other conferences.

http://espn.go.com/college-football/stor...s-join-sec

excerpt:

SEC presidents voted to accept Texas A&M last week, but the invitation was contingent on Texas A&M being free of legal issues regarding its departure from the Big 12. Several Big 12 schools, including Baylor, have said they have not waived their right to consider litigation.



While Maryland is in litigation with the ACC, I think there is reason believe that the Big Ten would withhold paying them any conference money until the matter is resolved. Didn't the Big Ten force Penn St. to play in the conference for no money for a while?

(03-23-2014 09:44 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  I see this getting settled as no one wants to go through this except the media and curious fans.

They still have to agree on a number, though. And they haven't been able to agree on a number even after 16 months of back-and-forth.

(03-24-2014 02:48 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(03-24-2014 02:31 PM)Dasville Wrote:  Exit terms were settled. Leaving teams were voted out cutting all ties to the conference. Who's talking lawsuits anyway?

Someone said that Maryland was looking for information about the ACC and ESPN conspiring, to show that the ACC had "unclean hands" (I forget what that was supposed to prove actually about Maryland's disputed $51M exit fee or their antitrust treble damages suit.)

Someone said, that could lead to the Big East suing the ACC based on the information made public, a smoking gun that the ACC and ESPN conspired to loot the Big East.

That fed into the argument about who would be suing the ACC. The AAC would inherit the claims of the old Big East, but I'm pretty sure that the exit settlements with Syracuse, Pitt and Louisville would have had a clause about the Big East not suing the ACC.

If nothing else, the ACC would have made double damn sure that Louisville got that clause in their exit agreement, since the Maryland-ACC lawsuit was already underway.

EDIT: Oh, and I noticed that Tbringer also thinks that the new Big East headquarters is in Providence. It's not, the old Big East headquarters is the new American Athletic Conference headquarters. The "new BE HQ" is still a conference room in thd Manhattan offices of the Big East's law firm.

Keep in mind, the ACC never asked anybody to breach their contract with the Big East. The Big East by-laws had specific provisions relating to notice and exit fees relating to conference withdrawal that the ACC fully anticipated that Syracuse, Pitt and Notre Dame would comply with. Pitt ended up suing the Big East, but that was presumably their call, not the ACC's. I don't know how it went down with Louisville, but I can't believe the ACC's approach would have been any different. Louisville and Rutgers undoubtedly benefitted from WVU's precedent of forcing their way out early for an enhanced exit fee.

(03-24-2014 03:53 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

(03-23-2014 09:44 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  I see this getting settled as no one wants to go through this except the media and curious fans.

They still have to agree on a number, though. And they haven't been able to agree on a number even after 16 months of back-and-forth.

Is it a number they have to agree on or a factor?

(03-24-2014 04:09 PM)Dasville Wrote:  

(03-24-2014 03:53 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

(03-23-2014 09:44 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  I see this getting settled as no one wants to go through this except the media and curious fans.

They still have to agree on a number, though. And they haven't been able to agree on a number even after 16 months of back-and-forth.

Is it a number they have to agree on or a factor?

I have a few cases that are over five years old. They will likely settle before the trial date.

Sometimes, litigation moves slower in state courts than a lot of people think or would like.

(03-24-2014 05:39 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(03-24-2014 04:09 PM)Dasville Wrote:  

(03-24-2014 03:53 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

(03-23-2014 09:44 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  I see this getting settled as no one wants to go through this except the media and curious fans.

They still have to agree on a number, though. And they haven't been able to agree on a number even after 16 months of back-and-forth.

Is it a number they have to agree on or a factor?

I have a few cases that are over five years old. They will likely settle before the trial date.

Sometimes, litigation moves slower in state courts than a lot of people think or would like.

Terry:
1) How much do you think Maryland will pay?
2) Does this significantly weaken the power of GOR?
3) If this does indeed significantly weaken the power of GOR, could this not trigger raids on the Big 12 and/or ACC?

(03-24-2014 05:56 PM)Wilkie01 Wrote:  

(03-24-2014 05:39 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(03-24-2014 04:09 PM)Dasville Wrote:  

(03-24-2014 03:53 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

(03-23-2014 09:44 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  I see this getting settled as no one wants to go through this except the media and curious fans.

They still have to agree on a number, though. And they haven't been able to agree on a number even after 16 months of back-and-forth.

Is it a number they have to agree on or a factor?

I have a few cases that are over five years old. They will likely settle before the trial date.

Sometimes, litigation moves slower in state courts than a lot of people think or would like.

Terry:
1) How much do you think Maryland will pay?
2) Does this significantly weaken the power of GOR?
3) If this does indeed significantly weaken the power of GOR, could this not trigger raids on the Big 12 and/or ACC?

Maryland is not subjected to the GOR Maryland was not a party to the GOR Maryland was only a party to the contract that had the exit fees

so it is meaningless for the GOR that is why Maryland is making the case that 52.2 million is not a realistic damage number and it is punitive and it is also why Maryland is also trying to show that in the past the ACC gave no consideration to harm that might have come to the Big 10 if the ACC lured away Big 10 teams

if it was a GOR case them Maryland would be the one that would be forced to show damages while the ACC sat back and allowed Maryland to set the value of damages and then the ACC could make a claim for those same damages

with an exit penalty it requires the conference to prove they have suffered those damages in that amount.....a GOR requires the opposite for the team leaving to prove they were damaged and their claims of potential damages for a contract they are willingly breaking opens the conference up to make those same claims since they are the ones still honoring the contract

IIRC the ACC withheld $12-14 million from Maryland last fiscal year. By June of this year the ACC will have withheld another $18-22 million depending on how Maryland's leftover NCAA shares are accounted. That's $30-$36 million the ACC will have from UM at fiscal year end. Past that point the ACC has to attempt to collect on any judgment it receives and since it's not likely that the ACC is going to seize a Maryland team bus in the State of VA or NC you probably have an effective stalemate unless the ACC can figure out a way to attach Maryland's future NCAA related revenues at the source.


And why are people conflating a GOR with an Exit Fee? They are two separate things and the B12 and ACC have both.

I know that the exit fee and GOR are to different animals, but the courts are looking at them in about the same way. Read the article on the strength of Big 12's GOR that currently posted on this site.

(03-24-2014 06:49 PM)Wilkie01 Wrote:  I know that the exit fee and GOR are to different animals, but the courts are looking at them in about the same way. Read the article on the strength of Big 12's GOR that currently posted on this site.

Has any court anywhere looked at a collegiate athletic conference GOR? I don't think it's happened yet. Until it does, there are two possibilities.

1. The court will look at it much as it looks at most intellectual property GORs, an irrevocable transfer of a property.

Or

2. The court will look at it as a thinly-disguised exit penalty and toss it out as excessive. Discovery here will focus on discussions within the conference of why they were instituting a GOR.

EDIT:

Quote:And why are people conflating a GOR with an Exit Fee? They are two separate things and the B12 and ACC have both.

Because in the case of the Big 12 and the ACC, the GOR is a thinly disguised replacement for a high exit fee as a barrier to leaving the confernence. (In the cases of the Big Ten, PAC and SEC it's easier to argue that the GOR is necessary to create the conference network. OTOH, in those cases it's also easier to "unwind" the GOR if anyone ever wants to move--if Penn State wants to join the ACC, they can exchange their 1/14 share of the BTN for their media rights.)[/quote]

(03-24-2014 06:32 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  IIRC the ACC withheld $12-14 million from Maryland last fiscal year. By June of this year the ACC will have withheld another $18-22 million depending on how Maryland's leftover NCAA shares are accounted. That's $30-$36 million the ACC will have from UM at fiscal year end. Past that point the ACC has to attempt to collect on any judgment it receives and since it's not likely that the ACC is going to seize a Maryland team bus in the State of VA or NC you probably have an effective stalemate unless the ACC can figure out a way to attach Maryland's future NCAA related revenues at the source.


And why are people conflating a GOR with an Exit Fee? They are two separate things and the B12 and ACC have both.

If the ACC does get a judgment in excess of the withheld funds, why wouldn't they just domesticate the judgment in the state of Maryland and then execute said domesticated judgment against said "team buses?"

(03-24-2014 09:17 PM)NestaKnight1 Wrote:  

(03-24-2014 06:32 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  IIRC the ACC withheld $12-14 million from Maryland last fiscal year. By June of this year the ACC will have withheld another $18-22 million depending on how Maryland's leftover NCAA shares are accounted. That's $30-$36 million the ACC will have from UM at fiscal year end. Past that point the ACC has to attempt to collect on any judgment it receives and since it's not likely that the ACC is going to seize a Maryland team bus in the State of VA or NC you probably have an effective stalemate unless the ACC can figure out a way to attach Maryland's future NCAA related revenues at the source.


And why are people conflating a GOR with an Exit Fee? They are two separate things and the B12 and ACC have both.

If the ACC does get a judgment in excess of the withheld funds, why wouldn't they just domesticate the judgment in the state of Maryland and then execute said domesticated judgment against said "team buses?"

It's my understanding that to collect in MD, the MD Legislature has to appropriate the money. I don't know the procedures for executing a judgment out of state against a component unit of the State.

(03-24-2014 06:49 PM)Wilkie01 Wrote:  I know that the exit fee and GOR are to different animals, but the courts are looking at them in about the same way. Read the article on the strength of Big 12's GOR that currently posted on this site.

What courts? None of the GoRs have yet been argued in front of a court. And there's no evidence that they any court will treat a GoR the same as an exit fee.