Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Interesting article on Ark State suing Miami
Author Message
The Cutter of Bish Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,298
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 220
I Root For: the little guy
Location:
Post: #41
RE: Interesting article on Ark State suing Miami
(02-15-2018 02:51 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  I think that would be an interesting wrinkle.

If I were a judge, and I'm not, then I might also consider what the Miami football team did during those 19 days of closure. In other words, did they conduct practice even if at an off-campus facility? Did they prepare as a unit in any way for another game? Well, they must have because they played Toledo on September 23rd and that was 14 days after the vacated Arkansas State date. I'm assuming that date fell within the 19 day window.

Maybe another way of asking the question...did the hurricane prevent you from doing anything you would have normally done outside of traveling to Jonesboro? If the answer is 'no' then I might not be too sympathetic to Miami's argument.

Right. If you want to hide behind hardship and point to college operations, you have to pry open the can of worms of just how essential football is among those operations.

Football isn't the only sport played or practicing in the season...what did UMFL's other teams do?
02-15-2018 03:32 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Stugray2 Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,236
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 683
I Root For: tOSU SJSU Stan'
Location: South Bay Area CA
Post: #42
RE: Interesting article on Ark State suing Miami
That is legal "advice" only. It does not cover legal actions.

The only principle is money. So the two sides will settle.
02-15-2018 03:40 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ValleyBoy Online
Sun Belt Nationalist
*

Posts: 2,169
Joined: Oct 2010
Reputation: 56
I Root For: GaSo,Troy
Location: Alabama
Post: #43
RE: Interesting article on Ark State suing Miami
(02-15-2018 03:40 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  That is legal "advice" only. It does not cover legal actions.

The only principle is money. So the two sides will settle.

Then what does "representing ASU in legal matters" mean.
READ THE ENTIRE QUOTE.
When did a law suit become a non legal matter.
02-15-2018 03:47 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 44,861
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 2883
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #44
RE: Interesting article on Ark State suing Miami
(02-15-2018 03:30 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  
(02-15-2018 03:24 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  Just seems like Miami should have to pay up. It's rather apparent that they wanted to get out of the game beforehand and are using the hurricane as an excuse to not pay.

In fairness. $650,000 unbudgeted for in February is probably not simple for even most P5's but I would wager if they wanted to admit the liability and kick it to the end of the fiscal year when the conference distribution normally takes place that hasn't come out.

True---but agreeing to pay and actually paying doesnt necessarily have to occur at the same time. You could agree to pay today and set a date in the future to actually settle up. Miami's actions are more like a school that is trying to avoid paying at all.
(This post was last modified: 02-15-2018 04:09 PM by Attackcoog.)
02-15-2018 04:09 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
arkstfan Online
Sorry folks
*

Posts: 25,887
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 994
I Root For: Fresh Starts
Location:
Post: #45
RE: Interesting article on Ark State suing Miami
(02-15-2018 03:47 PM)ValleyBoy Wrote:  
(02-15-2018 03:40 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  That is legal "advice" only. It does not cover legal actions.

The only principle is money. So the two sides will settle.

Then what does "representing ASU in legal matters" mean.
READ THE ENTIRE QUOTE.
When did a law suit become a non legal matter.

This varies by state but in Arkansas state agencies rarely hire outside counsel and then generally for complex litigation.
02-15-2018 04:19 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,183
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2425
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #46
RE: Interesting article on Ark State suing Miami
(02-15-2018 03:01 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  
(02-15-2018 02:11 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(02-15-2018 01:18 PM)YNot Wrote:  HOWEVER, a major weakness in Miami's letter is its interpretation of the contractual provision that states that any games not played will be rescheduled "as such exigencies may dictate or permit." It's hard to claim it reasonable to push the game back 7 or 8 YEARS (and 11 or 12 years after the original contract) when you have reasonable open dates in 2020 *AND* 2021. The original games were to be played within 1 and 3 years after the original contract.

I agree that this is a possible point where AS will be seen to be correct. But, I still don't think so. The reason is, the clause doesn't state that either party has to suffer an onerous financial penalty to reschedule if the original game was canceled for a valid reason. If I understand the letters, AS is asking Miami to give up a home game in 2020 or 2021 to reschedule them. That would cost Miami a a lot of money, making it unreasonable.

Second, games are often scheduled 7 or 8 years out, that's not unusual in college football. If Miami was offering a game in 2034, that would be unreasonable, but 2024 is within the current window of when teams are scheduling games.

For those reasons, I think a judge will tell AS to take 2024 or leave it.

Miami is not being asked to give up anything. The offer to Miami was play in one of those seasons in lieu of paying. Contract does not require that there be any offer of rescheduling.

Miami hasn't scheduled the games at home vs FCS so they aren't really being asked to give up a home game because those games don't exist. I might have New Year's Eve blocked for a date with Jennifer Anniston but am I really giving up a date with Jennifer Anniston if I've never met or spoke to her and make other plans?

Difference is (and no offense intended, as it would apply to me too), you have no reasonable prospect of actually securing a date with JA. She's not taking your call. But what if you were Brad Pitt? Then she's probably taking your call (LOL).

Miami is Brad Pitt. They may never have spoken to FCS Alabama A&T Vo-Tech about a game in 2020, but if they ask them to come down and play for $800,000, AATVT is probably taking the call, so for Miami, it is a real loss if they play at AKST instead.

As for the 'courtesy' nature of the AKST reschedule offer, that assumes AKST is correct in their claim that Miami violated the contract by not playing last year. If AKST is incorrect about that, then the contract says that there is to be an attempt to reschedule.
(This post was last modified: 02-15-2018 04:41 PM by quo vadis.)
02-15-2018 04:34 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 38,242
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7938
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #47
RE: Interesting article on Ark State suing Miami
(02-15-2018 04:19 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  
(02-15-2018 03:47 PM)ValleyBoy Wrote:  
(02-15-2018 03:40 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  That is legal "advice" only. It does not cover legal actions.

The only principle is money. So the two sides will settle.

Then what does "representing ASU in legal matters" mean.
READ THE ENTIRE QUOTE.
When did a law suit become a non legal matter.

This varies by state but in Arkansas state agencies rarely hire outside counsel and then generally for complex litigation.

All of this is a new animal to College Football. Auburn played Syracuse the weekend after 9/11 at the Cuse. We didn't cancel. Auburn played the Canes in Miami during an actual Hurricane in the 70's. The wind was so bad that nobody punted and nobody passed. It was 2 hours of slopping pretty much inside the same 20-30 yards and was punctuated with an Auburn field goal for 3-0 win. But then I was in Legion Field watching Bo beat Bama when we had tornadoes around the stadium in Birmingham.

Richt was trying to buy out of this game before the season started and the Hurricane was just an excuse, and a flimsy one at that, since the game was safely miles away in Arkansas.

Only the current histrionic approach to weather and other feared crises makes this acceptable in the minds of the young folks. We went through Camille, not at the shoreline but close enough. It's rough and dangerous but models and path projections are so advanced today that if you are able and don't get out of the way of one then you're an idiot and whatever happens is your own fault. But in this case Miami was 3 days out from impact when the game would have been played and Arkansas was not in the strike zone.

But when I pointed all of this out at the time and said that they should sue, most folks around here were hyper defensive of the cancellation.

The bottom line was then, and is now, that claiming that college football players needed to evacuate their families when there was plenty of time for that to happen naturally, was a feeble and somewhat unbelievable excuse then and in retrospect even more specious, and the failure to play that game was inexcusable.
(This post was last modified: 02-15-2018 04:47 PM by JRsec.)
02-15-2018 04:43 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,183
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2425
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #48
RE: Interesting article on Ark State suing Miami
(02-15-2018 04:43 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(02-15-2018 04:19 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  
(02-15-2018 03:47 PM)ValleyBoy Wrote:  
(02-15-2018 03:40 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  That is legal "advice" only. It does not cover legal actions.

The only principle is money. So the two sides will settle.

Then what does "representing ASU in legal matters" mean.
READ THE ENTIRE QUOTE.
When did a law suit become a non legal matter.

This varies by state but in Arkansas state agencies rarely hire outside counsel and then generally for complex litigation.

All of this is a new animal to College Football. Auburn played Syracuse the weekend after 9/11 at the Cuse. We didn't cancel. Auburn played the Canes in Miami during an actual Hurricane in the 70's. The wind was so bad that nobody punted and nobody passed. It was 2 hours of slopping pretty much inside the same 20-30 yards and was punctuated with an Auburn field goal for 3-0 win. But then I was in Legion Field watching Bo beat Bama when we had tornadoes around the stadium in Birmingham.

Richt was trying to buy out of this game before the season started and the Hurricane was just an excuse, and a flimsy one at that, since the game was safely miles away in Arkansas.

Only the current histrionic approach to weather and other feared crises makes this acceptable in the minds of the young folks. We went through Camille, not at the shoreline but close enough. It's rough and dangerous but models and path projections are so advanced today that if you are able and don't get out of the way of one then you're an idiot and whatever happens is your own fault. But in this case Miami was 3 days out from impact when the game would have been played and Arkansas was not in the strike zone.

But when I pointed all of this out at the time and said that they should sue, most folks around here were hyper defensive of the cancellation.

The bottom line was then, and is now, that claiming that college football players needed to evacuate their families when there was plenty of time for that to happen naturally, was a feeble and somewhat unbelievable excuse then and in retrospect even more specious, and the failure to play that game was inexcusable.

Not all modern practices are evidence of Political Correctness Run Amok or Millenial Snowflakism. E.g., in the 1970s when i was a kid and my parents loaded us in to our station wagon, we'd spend most of a long drive with both of them filling the car up with cigarette smoke while in the back seat nobody cared whether we were wearing our seat belts or not (usually not). I had great parents, raised all of us well, but in retrospect, we'd have been better off with the 2010+ values that say no smoke in the cabin and everyone buckled up.

In this case, it was obviously prudent for Miami to cancel the ball game, and if it just so happened to coincide with a natural desire on their part to bail on it anyway, chalk that up as a small island of good luck in an ocean of bad that closed their campus for 19 days.

AKST shouldn't win this, and I don't think they will. We'll see. 07-coffee3
(This post was last modified: 02-15-2018 04:56 PM by quo vadis.)
02-15-2018 04:54 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 38,242
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7938
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #49
RE: Interesting article on Ark State suing Miami
(02-15-2018 04:54 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(02-15-2018 04:43 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(02-15-2018 04:19 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  
(02-15-2018 03:47 PM)ValleyBoy Wrote:  
(02-15-2018 03:40 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  That is legal "advice" only. It does not cover legal actions.

The only principle is money. So the two sides will settle.

Then what does "representing ASU in legal matters" mean.
READ THE ENTIRE QUOTE.
When did a law suit become a non legal matter.

This varies by state but in Arkansas state agencies rarely hire outside counsel and then generally for complex litigation.

All of this is a new animal to College Football. Auburn played Syracuse the weekend after 9/11 at the Cuse. We didn't cancel. Auburn played the Canes in Miami during an actual Hurricane in the 70's. The wind was so bad that nobody punted and nobody passed. It was 2 hours of slopping pretty much inside the same 20-30 yards and was punctuated with an Auburn field goal for 3-0 win. But then I was in Legion Field watching Bo beat Bama when we had tornadoes around the stadium in Birmingham.

Richt was trying to buy out of this game before the season started and the Hurricane was just an excuse, and a flimsy one at that, since the game was safely miles away in Arkansas.

Only the current histrionic approach to weather and other feared crises makes this acceptable in the minds of the young folks. We went through Camille, not at the shoreline but close enough. It's rough and dangerous but models and path projections are so advanced today that if you are able and don't get out of the way of one then you're an idiot and whatever happens is your own fault. But in this case Miami was 3 days out from impact when the game would have been played and Arkansas was not in the strike zone.

But when I pointed all of this out at the time and said that they should sue, most folks around here were hyper defensive of the cancellation.

The bottom line was then, and is now, that claiming that college football players needed to evacuate their families when there was plenty of time for that to happen naturally, was a feeble and somewhat unbelievable excuse then and in retrospect even more specious, and the failure to play that game was inexcusable.

Not all modern practices are evidence of Political Correctness Run Amok or Millenial Snowflakism. E.g., in the 1970s when i was a kid and my parents loaded us in to our station wagon, we'd spend most of a long drive with both of them filling the car up with cigarette smoke while in the back seat nobody cared whether we were wearing our seat belts or not (usually not). I had great parents, raised all of us well, but in retrospect, we'd have been better off with the 2010+ values that say no smoke in the cabin and everyone buckled up.

In this case, it was obviously prudent for Miami to cancel the ball game, and if it just so happened to coincide with a natural desire on their part to bail on it anyway, chalk that up as a small island of good luck in an ocean of bad that closed their campus for 19 days.

AKST shouldn't win this, and I don't think they will. We'll see. 07-coffee3

I endured the haze of front seat cigarette smoke as well. We rolled the windows down in the back seat and hung our heads out the windows like hound dogs sniffing the breeze just to be able to breath.

But you are just dead wrong about the cancellation. As it turned out Miami was hardly touched. God help us if a crisis truly strikes this nation of histrionic idiots. Those who survive crises are prepared for them and keep their heads.

A lot of the hysteria today is because it drives ratings for the weather channel through the roof which spikes their ad revenue and does the same for the evening news. Then add in the gazillion gallons of water, tape, flashlights and batteries that are sold each time and the merchants buy into it as well. If not for the economic impact of a potential threat they would be treated with caution instead of hysteria and they wouldn't cancel a ball game 5 sates away. And this crap about the players getting back after a storm, if the hurricane made a direct hit they wouldn't be getting back anytime soon anyway. It's a matter of perspective.

Speaking of which, back when I could run for two miles at Mexico Beach without encountering another bungalow, and when most of Florida was still rural, and when every mother's son packed a firearm for forbearance of reptiles, and Clint Eastwood was still herding cows, we had a much safer America even without seatbelts, and with parents puffing away in the front seat, because it was a world where children played freely about the neighborhood without the fear of a pervert lurking close by, without dope being peddled at the neighborhood store's parking lot, without worrying about some internet loner kook shooting us at school, or somebody yelling a religious slogan in preparation for an assault. So for all of this 2010 Nanny State garbage how come things are so screwed up today? I'll take 1950's and 60's America over this nonsensical mess anytime. But then I've seen both and know the difference.

Tommy Lee Jones's character had it about right in "No Country for Old Men". It ended when kids quit saying "No Sir and Yes Sir" and they started coloring their hair and wearing bones in their noses. In other words Quo you can't have law and order and let every Tom, Dick and Harry do whatever the hell it is that suits them. Being a part of a safe society means there has to be a modicum of discipline and respect for that order and then out of that a great deal of respect for each other's privacy and free speech. We lived with liberals and conservatives and managed not to be polarized. In other words the Nanny State should never punish the innocent kid on a bus who stands up to a bully who is trying to steal his lunch or his money. They should just punish the bully.

The problem with this generation is that they want oodles of privileges and rights without any responsibility whatsoever. If somebody at McDonalds gives them coffee that is too hot they are too stupid to test it before pouring down their throats and then can't wait to sue for some free money when they should have learned some common sense. And the attorneys love it because the Nanny State mentality has helped to line their pockets. Gripe about the high cost of healthcare and you have to understand that liability insurance has been a leading contributor to it. Folks today thrive on excuses rather than pride themselves on honoring their word, and then they feel chided, or put upon for being a jerk, they hide behind the excuse of fear of injury to justify avoiding whatever it is they don't like.

I'll tell you right now, I don't want one of them in my foxhole when metal starts flying.

Old man rant over.
(This post was last modified: 02-15-2018 05:37 PM by JRsec.)
02-15-2018 05:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
msm96wolf Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,558
Joined: Apr 2006
Reputation: 180
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #50
RE: Interesting article on Ark State suing Miami
I think the primary people that are passionate is Ark State fans. Again, I think Miami has the contract on their side with a hurricane meeting the clause. However, the right thing is to do pay ASU something. Even if Miami wanted to be cheap, they should have offered 400-500K. There is no such thing a free legal services. Not to be cold, if it comes to state funded lawyers verse corporate lawyers for contracts. I will go with Corporate, still you have to think it will cost Miami more though than just paying the money. I agree from a common sense view, it makes no sense for Miami actions. Worst case, they could ask the ACC help and take out of future distributions. I see a judge with any sense telling both to go to arbitration because neither side is going to come out a winner with a lawsuit.
02-15-2018 05:21 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,800
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3312
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #51
RE: Interesting article on Ark State suing Miami
(02-14-2018 11:57 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  
(02-14-2018 11:43 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(02-14-2018 11:33 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  
(02-14-2018 11:06 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  
(02-14-2018 10:46 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  Again, I think this goes to arbitration and there will be a ~500K payout and Ark St will likely not be on any future ACC schedules or ACC Payday games.

Arkansas State may well get blackballed, but Miami signed a contract and they need to abide by it in good faith.

If the Canes didn't want to play that game in Jonesboro then they shouldn't have agreed to the deal.

I can't blame Arkansas State for looking out for their own interests.

Yes, but if you read the contract there is a section 14 force majeure clause. It seems Miami has every legal right to invoke that clause. In the same way Ark St is looking out for their own interest, you can't blame Miami then looking out for theirs by using the clause in their best interest. Right and wrong has nothing to do with legal contracts. I see both sides. I can see ASU thinking their entitled to something but I also see Miami seeing they are not entitled to pay. It will come down somewhere in the middle. I see a judge sending this to arbitration ASU getting 400-500K. Probably both sides pay more in legal fees than it is truly worth.

If the game in question was being played in Miami, there wouldnt have been an issue. The problem with the Miami case is there wasnt a hurricane in Arkansas and Miami had plenty of time to get out of Dodge. Basically, every move they have made is to avoid playing the game and its fairly obvious at this point. I have no idea why they dont just pay the $650K. They basically will be getting a one and done for $650K. Thats a bargain.

To get out of Dodge but what about returning? I think Miami should have split the difference. Offered the 25/26 dates or 500K instead of invoking clause 14 and going to court. Simplest and fairest agreement.

The Hurricane was a valid reason, it is ASU wants the game sooner than Miami is willing to agree too. I glanced the contract, unless there was a mandated time frame to return the game, Miami appears to have followed the letter of the contract. I will agree maybe not the spirit, but contracts are soulless creatures. I know it probably not the popular stance but I believe Miami has every much of right to look of for themselves as ASU does. If it wasn't a P5 playing at a G5, there probably wouldn't even be a story or discussion. Both sides need to meet in the middle because both sides of legitimate arguments.
04-cheers

Other schools played on the road. Houston stayed in San Antonio. Force majeure does not apply. It was simply inconvenient, not impossible.
02-15-2018 05:27 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,800
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3312
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #52
RE: Interesting article on Ark State suing Miami
(02-15-2018 12:13 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(02-14-2018 11:36 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  Force Majure only applies if it is practically impossible for Miami to travel to Jonesboro for the game (Since there was obviously not a hurricane in Arkansas) both sides have admitted it was very possible for Miami to make the trip. They CHOSE not to make the trip in order to allow student athletes to help their families with the storm.

If you read our letter, that's what our claim is from the beginning.

I'll defer to the lawyers we have in the house, but it would surprise me if a court were to interpret "impossible" in a strict, logical or mathematical sense. If that's the definition of the word here, then it would have little practical meaning, because it's probably the case that is "possible" to somehow play the game even if the USA were under a nuclear attack at the time. Very few things like this are literally impossible. To me, clause 14 is meant to indicate that the game can be canceled if there is a significant, unexpected emergency that makes the game being played by either team unreasonable under the circumstances.

So IMO it will come down to whether Miami's actions were 'reasonable' given the spirit of the Force Majeur clause, and I think it very likely a court will conclude that it was.

Everybody else who had a road game played it. So since Miami was an outlier, its hard to interpret that as reasonable.
02-15-2018 05:28 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,800
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3312
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #53
RE: Interesting article on Ark State suing Miami
(02-15-2018 04:43 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(02-15-2018 04:19 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  
(02-15-2018 03:47 PM)ValleyBoy Wrote:  
(02-15-2018 03:40 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  That is legal "advice" only. It does not cover legal actions.

The only principle is money. So the two sides will settle.

Then what does "representing ASU in legal matters" mean.
READ THE ENTIRE QUOTE.
When did a law suit become a non legal matter.

This varies by state but in Arkansas state agencies rarely hire outside counsel and then generally for complex litigation.

All of this is a new animal to College Football. Auburn played Syracuse the weekend after 9/11 at the Cuse. We didn't cancel. Auburn played the Canes in Miami during an actual Hurricane in the 70's. The wind was so bad that nobody punted and nobody passed. It was 2 hours of slopping pretty much inside the same 20-30 yards and was punctuated with an Auburn field goal for 3-0 win. But then I was in Legion Field watching Bo beat Bama when we had tornadoes around the stadium in Birmingham.

Richt was trying to buy out of this game before the season started and the Hurricane was just an excuse, and a flimsy one at that, since the game was safely miles away in Arkansas.

Only the current histrionic approach to weather and other feared crises makes this acceptable in the minds of the young folks. We went through Camille, not at the shoreline but close enough. It's rough and dangerous but models and path projections are so advanced today that if you are able and don't get out of the way of one then you're an idiot and whatever happens is your own fault. But in this case Miami was 3 days out from impact when the game would have been played and Arkansas was not in the strike zone.

But when I pointed all of this out at the time and said that they should sue, most folks around here were hyper defensive of the cancellation.

The bottom line was then, and is now, that claiming that college football players needed to evacuate their families when there was plenty of time for that to happen naturally, was a feeble and somewhat unbelievable excuse then and in retrospect even more specious, and the failure to play that game was inexcusable.

I wouldn't say "inexcusable." I would simply say it wasn't legally justified. Pay up or play and they are trying to avoid both.
02-15-2018 05:36 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,183
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2425
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #54
RE: Interesting article on Ark State suing Miami
(02-15-2018 05:12 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(02-15-2018 04:54 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(02-15-2018 04:43 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(02-15-2018 04:19 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  
(02-15-2018 03:47 PM)ValleyBoy Wrote:  Then what does "representing ASU in legal matters" mean.
READ THE ENTIRE QUOTE.
When did a law suit become a non legal matter.

This varies by state but in Arkansas state agencies rarely hire outside counsel and then generally for complex litigation.

All of this is a new animal to College Football. Auburn played Syracuse the weekend after 9/11 at the Cuse. We didn't cancel. Auburn played the Canes in Miami during an actual Hurricane in the 70's. The wind was so bad that nobody punted and nobody passed. It was 2 hours of slopping pretty much inside the same 20-30 yards and was punctuated with an Auburn field goal for 3-0 win. But then I was in Legion Field watching Bo beat Bama when we had tornadoes around the stadium in Birmingham.

Richt was trying to buy out of this game before the season started and the Hurricane was just an excuse, and a flimsy one at that, since the game was safely miles away in Arkansas.

Only the current histrionic approach to weather and other feared crises makes this acceptable in the minds of the young folks. We went through Camille, not at the shoreline but close enough. It's rough and dangerous but models and path projections are so advanced today that if you are able and don't get out of the way of one then you're an idiot and whatever happens is your own fault. But in this case Miami was 3 days out from impact when the game would have been played and Arkansas was not in the strike zone.

But when I pointed all of this out at the time and said that they should sue, most folks around here were hyper defensive of the cancellation.

The bottom line was then, and is now, that claiming that college football players needed to evacuate their families when there was plenty of time for that to happen naturally, was a feeble and somewhat unbelievable excuse then and in retrospect even more specious, and the failure to play that game was inexcusable.

Not all modern practices are evidence of Political Correctness Run Amok or Millenial Snowflakism. E.g., in the 1970s when i was a kid and my parents loaded us in to our station wagon, we'd spend most of a long drive with both of them filling the car up with cigarette smoke while in the back seat nobody cared whether we were wearing our seat belts or not (usually not). I had great parents, raised all of us well, but in retrospect, we'd have been better off with the 2010+ values that say no smoke in the cabin and everyone buckled up.

In this case, it was obviously prudent for Miami to cancel the ball game, and if it just so happened to coincide with a natural desire on their part to bail on it anyway, chalk that up as a small island of good luck in an ocean of bad that closed their campus for 19 days.

AKST shouldn't win this, and I don't think they will. We'll see. 07-coffee3

I endured the haze of front seat cigarette smoke as well. We rolled the windows down in the back seat and hung our heads out the windows like hound dogs sniffing the breeze just to be able to breath.

But you are just dead wrong about the cancellation. As it turned out Miami was hardly touched. God help us if a crisis truly strikes this nation of histrionic idiots. Those who survive crises are prepared for them and keep their heads.

A lot of the hysteria today is because it drives ratings for the weather channel through the roof which spikes their ad revenue and does the same for the evening news. Then add in the gazillion gallons of water, tape, flashlights and batteries that are sold each time and the merchants buy into it as well. If not for the economic impact of a potential threat they would be treated with caution instead of hysteria and they wouldn't cancel a ball game 5 sates away. And this crap about the players getting back after a storm, if the hurricane made a direct hit they wouldn't be getting back anytime soon anyway. It's a matter of perspective.

Speaking of which, back when I could run for two miles at Mexico Beach without encountering another bungalow, and when most of Florida was still rural, and when every mother's son packed a firearm for forbearance of reptiles, and Clint Eastwood was still herding cows, we had a much safer America even without seatbelts, and with parents puffing away in the front seat, because it was a world where children played freely about the neighborhood without the fear of a pervert lurking close by, without dope being peddled at the neighborhood store's parking lot, without worrying about some internet loner kook shooting us at school, or somebody yelling a religious slogan in preparation for an assault. So for all of this 2010 Nanny State garbage how come things are so screwed up today? I'll take 1950's and 60's America over this nonsensical mess anytime. But then I've seen both and know the difference.

Tommy Lee Jones's character had it about right in "No Country for Old Men". It ended when kids quit saying "No Sir and Yes Sir" and they started coloring their hair and wearing bones in their noses. In other words Quo you can't have law and order and let every Tom, Dick and Harry do whatever the hell it is that suits them. Being a part of a safe society means there has to be a modicum of discipline and respect for that order and then out of that a great deal of respect for each other's privacy and free speech. We lived with liberals and conservatives and managed not to be polarized. In other words the Nanny State should never punish the innocent kid on a bus who stands up to a bully who is trying to steal his lunch or his money. They should just punish the bully.

The problem with this generation is that they want oodles of privileges and rights without any responsibility whatsoever. If somebody at McDonalds gives them coffee that is too hot they are too stupid to test it before pouring down their throats and then can't wait to sue for some free money when they should have learned some common sense. And the attorneys love it because the Nanny State mentality has helped to line their pockets. Gripe about the high cost of healthcare and you have to understand that liability insurance has been a leading contributor to it. Folks today thrive on excuses rather than pride themselves on honoring their word, and then they feel chided, or put upon for being a jerk, they hide behind the excuse of fear of injury to justify avoiding whatever it is they don't like.

I'll tell you right now, I don't want one of them in my foxhole when metal starts flying.

Old man rant over.


To me, 1950s values are fatally marred by the subjugation of African-Americans that existed at that time. Then again, it was during the 50s that values evolved and this subjugation began to end. That aside, I agree that cultural values back then were far superior to what we have today. I also grew up in a neighborhood in which doors were open and fear was largely absent. Yes, we did see scary movies in first grade about being aware of perverts offering us candy to get us in to cars, and so I guess that was real then. But we didn't have to worry about that plus shooters killing people in the schools, etc.

IMO, Miami did have the right to cancel the game, to me that is fully consistent with the terms of the contract with AKST. We'll just have to agree to disagree, and see what happens in court.
(This post was last modified: 02-15-2018 06:23 PM by quo vadis.)
02-15-2018 06:23 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
arkstfan Online
Sorry folks
*

Posts: 25,887
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 994
I Root For: Fresh Starts
Location:
Post: #55
Interesting article on Ark State suing Miami
(02-15-2018 05:28 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(02-15-2018 12:13 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(02-14-2018 11:36 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  Force Majure only applies if it is practically impossible for Miami to travel to Jonesboro for the game (Since there was obviously not a hurricane in Arkansas) both sides have admitted it was very possible for Miami to make the trip. They CHOSE not to make the trip in order to allow student athletes to help their families with the storm.

If you read our letter, that's what our claim is from the beginning.

I'll defer to the lawyers we have in the house, but it would surprise me if a court were to interpret "impossible" in a strict, logical or mathematical sense. If that's the definition of the word here, then it would have little practical meaning, because it's probably the case that is "possible" to somehow play the game even if the USA were under a nuclear attack at the time. Very few things like this are literally impossible. To me, clause 14 is meant to indicate that the game can be canceled if there is a significant, unexpected emergency that makes the game being played by either team unreasonable under the circumstances.

So IMO it will come down to whether Miami's actions were 'reasonable' given the spirit of the Force Majeur clause, and I think it very likely a court will conclude that it was.

Everybody else who had a road game played it. So since Miami was an outlier, its hard to interpret that as reasonable.


FIU and Georgia Southern both had home games and moved them to Birmingham.
FIU narrowly escaped an FCS and GaSo lost to one.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
02-15-2018 07:01 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 38,242
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7938
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #56
RE: Interesting article on Ark State suing Miami
(02-15-2018 06:23 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(02-15-2018 05:12 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(02-15-2018 04:54 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(02-15-2018 04:43 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(02-15-2018 04:19 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  This varies by state but in Arkansas state agencies rarely hire outside counsel and then generally for complex litigation.

All of this is a new animal to College Football. Auburn played Syracuse the weekend after 9/11 at the Cuse. We didn't cancel. Auburn played the Canes in Miami during an actual Hurricane in the 70's. The wind was so bad that nobody punted and nobody passed. It was 2 hours of slopping pretty much inside the same 20-30 yards and was punctuated with an Auburn field goal for 3-0 win. But then I was in Legion Field watching Bo beat Bama when we had tornadoes around the stadium in Birmingham.

Richt was trying to buy out of this game before the season started and the Hurricane was just an excuse, and a flimsy one at that, since the game was safely miles away in Arkansas.

Only the current histrionic approach to weather and other feared crises makes this acceptable in the minds of the young folks. We went through Camille, not at the shoreline but close enough. It's rough and dangerous but models and path projections are so advanced today that if you are able and don't get out of the way of one then you're an idiot and whatever happens is your own fault. But in this case Miami was 3 days out from impact when the game would have been played and Arkansas was not in the strike zone.

But when I pointed all of this out at the time and said that they should sue, most folks around here were hyper defensive of the cancellation.

The bottom line was then, and is now, that claiming that college football players needed to evacuate their families when there was plenty of time for that to happen naturally, was a feeble and somewhat unbelievable excuse then and in retrospect even more specious, and the failure to play that game was inexcusable.

Not all modern practices are evidence of Political Correctness Run Amok or Millenial Snowflakism. E.g., in the 1970s when i was a kid and my parents loaded us in to our station wagon, we'd spend most of a long drive with both of them filling the car up with cigarette smoke while in the back seat nobody cared whether we were wearing our seat belts or not (usually not). I had great parents, raised all of us well, but in retrospect, we'd have been better off with the 2010+ values that say no smoke in the cabin and everyone buckled up.

In this case, it was obviously prudent for Miami to cancel the ball game, and if it just so happened to coincide with a natural desire on their part to bail on it anyway, chalk that up as a small island of good luck in an ocean of bad that closed their campus for 19 days.

AKST shouldn't win this, and I don't think they will. We'll see. 07-coffee3

I endured the haze of front seat cigarette smoke as well. We rolled the windows down in the back seat and hung our heads out the windows like hound dogs sniffing the breeze just to be able to breath.

But you are just dead wrong about the cancellation. As it turned out Miami was hardly touched. God help us if a crisis truly strikes this nation of histrionic idiots. Those who survive crises are prepared for them and keep their heads.

A lot of the hysteria today is because it drives ratings for the weather channel through the roof which spikes their ad revenue and does the same for the evening news. Then add in the gazillion gallons of water, tape, flashlights and batteries that are sold each time and the merchants buy into it as well. If not for the economic impact of a potential threat they would be treated with caution instead of hysteria and they wouldn't cancel a ball game 5 sates away. And this crap about the players getting back after a storm, if the hurricane made a direct hit they wouldn't be getting back anytime soon anyway. It's a matter of perspective.

Speaking of which, back when I could run for two miles at Mexico Beach without encountering another bungalow, and when most of Florida was still rural, and when every mother's son packed a firearm for forbearance of reptiles, and Clint Eastwood was still herding cows, we had a much safer America even without seatbelts, and with parents puffing away in the front seat, because it was a world where children played freely about the neighborhood without the fear of a pervert lurking close by, without dope being peddled at the neighborhood store's parking lot, without worrying about some internet loner kook shooting us at school, or somebody yelling a religious slogan in preparation for an assault. So for all of this 2010 Nanny State garbage how come things are so screwed up today? I'll take 1950's and 60's America over this nonsensical mess anytime. But then I've seen both and know the difference.

Tommy Lee Jones's character had it about right in "No Country for Old Men". It ended when kids quit saying "No Sir and Yes Sir" and they started coloring their hair and wearing bones in their noses. In other words Quo you can't have law and order and let every Tom, Dick and Harry do whatever the hell it is that suits them. Being a part of a safe society means there has to be a modicum of discipline and respect for that order and then out of that a great deal of respect for each other's privacy and free speech. We lived with liberals and conservatives and managed not to be polarized. In other words the Nanny State should never punish the innocent kid on a bus who stands up to a bully who is trying to steal his lunch or his money. They should just punish the bully.

The problem with this generation is that they want oodles of privileges and rights without any responsibility whatsoever. If somebody at McDonalds gives them coffee that is too hot they are too stupid to test it before pouring down their throats and then can't wait to sue for some free money when they should have learned some common sense. And the attorneys love it because the Nanny State mentality has helped to line their pockets. Gripe about the high cost of healthcare and you have to understand that liability insurance has been a leading contributor to it. Folks today thrive on excuses rather than pride themselves on honoring their word, and then they feel chided, or put upon for being a jerk, they hide behind the excuse of fear of injury to justify avoiding whatever it is they don't like.

I'll tell you right now, I don't want one of them in my foxhole when metal starts flying.

Old man rant over.


To me, 1950s values are fatally marred by the subjugation of African-Americans that existed at that time. Then again, it was during the 50s that values evolved and this subjugation began to end. That aside, I agree that cultural values back then were far superior to what we have today. I also grew up in a neighborhood in which doors were open and fear was largely absent. Yes, we did see scary movies in first grade about being aware of perverts offering us candy to get us in to cars, and so I guess that was real then. But we didn't have to worry about that plus shooters killing people in the schools, etc.

IMO, Miami did have the right to cancel the game, to me that is fully consistent with the terms of the contract with AKST. We'll just have to agree to disagree, and see what happens in court.

I'm fine with disagreeing over the contract matters. My initial reaction to the decision was a strong one and it hasn't changed.

Civil rights and women's rights are always excepted when I look back at what we had in the 50's and 60's. Advances in both of those areas were needed and thank you for pointing out that the changes started in that generation, actually 70 years prior. People tend to forget that. But when barriers are kicked down we always go to far and then it takes abuses for them to be returned and then that is usually an overreaction as well. Frankly I would have thought that we would have started to erect better social norms, but quite frankly there are too many profiting from the lack of them.
02-15-2018 07:21 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
OdinFrigg Offline
Gone Fishing
*

Posts: 1,860
Joined: Oct 2017
Reputation: 439
I Root For: Canine & Avian
Location: 4,250 mi sw of Oslo
Post: #57
RE: Interesting article on Ark State suing Miami
Miami needs to agree to give ASU the home game at the first mutually available date. Beyond the contract, it is the collegial and respectable thing to do. If Miami loses a little money, so be it. ASU lost revenue as well.

Miami's reason for canceling is understandable. But a good faith make-up is a reasonable expectation.

All this posturing is unneccessary.
02-15-2018 08:32 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
billybobby777 Offline
The REAL BillyBobby
*

Posts: 11,898
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 502
I Root For: ECU, Army
Location: Houston dont sleepon
Post: #58
RE: Interesting article on Ark State suing Miami
(02-14-2018 10:46 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  I posted this question on the Sunbelt page where the was more discussion after I posted here, but where does the lawsuit get filed? The agreement was an ACC Contract which is based in NC or does it happen in Arkansas home of ASU? In addition, Miami scheduling is 1 OOC away game which is part of their scheduling philosophy which is what most ACC teams do. The agreement has to work for both teams not what works best for ASU only.

Again, I think this goes to arbitration and there will be a ~500K payout and Ark St will likely not be on any future ACC schedules or ACC Payday games.

Miami is in the wrong here and you feel the need to say “Ark St will likely not be on any future ACC schedules or ACC payday games.”—what an ACC homer sore loser comment. Arky St usually gets more actual fans to its football games than Wake, Duke and Miami and BC so....
02-15-2018 11:13 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
chiefsfan Offline
No Seriously, they let me be a mod
*

Posts: 43,750
Joined: Sep 2007
Reputation: 1063
I Root For: ASU
Location:
Post: #59
RE: Interesting article on Ark State suing Miami
(02-15-2018 04:34 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(02-15-2018 03:01 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  
(02-15-2018 02:11 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(02-15-2018 01:18 PM)YNot Wrote:  HOWEVER, a major weakness in Miami's letter is its interpretation of the contractual provision that states that any games not played will be rescheduled "as such exigencies may dictate or permit." It's hard to claim it reasonable to push the game back 7 or 8 YEARS (and 11 or 12 years after the original contract) when you have reasonable open dates in 2020 *AND* 2021. The original games were to be played within 1 and 3 years after the original contract.

I agree that this is a possible point where AS will be seen to be correct. But, I still don't think so. The reason is, the clause doesn't state that either party has to suffer an onerous financial penalty to reschedule if the original game was canceled for a valid reason. If I understand the letters, AS is asking Miami to give up a home game in 2020 or 2021 to reschedule them. That would cost Miami a a lot of money, making it unreasonable.

Second, games are often scheduled 7 or 8 years out, that's not unusual in college football. If Miami was offering a game in 2034, that would be unreasonable, but 2024 is within the current window of when teams are scheduling games.

For those reasons, I think a judge will tell AS to take 2024 or leave it.

Miami is not being asked to give up anything. The offer to Miami was play in one of those seasons in lieu of paying. Contract does not require that there be any offer of rescheduling.

Miami hasn't scheduled the games at home vs FCS so they aren't really being asked to give up a home game because those games don't exist. I might have New Year's Eve blocked for a date with Jennifer Anniston but am I really giving up a date with Jennifer Anniston if I've never met or spoke to her and make other plans?

Difference is (and no offense intended, as it would apply to me too), you have no reasonable prospect of actually securing a date with JA. She's not taking your call. But what if you were Brad Pitt? Then she's probably taking your call (LOL).

Miami is Brad Pitt. They may never have spoken to FCS Alabama A&T Vo-Tech about a game in 2020, but if they ask them to come down and play for $800,000, AATVT is probably taking the call, so for Miami, it is a real loss if they play at AKST instead.

As for the 'courtesy' nature of the AKST reschedule offer, that assumes AKST is correct in their claim that Miami violated the contract by not playing last year. If AKST is incorrect about that, then the contract says that there is to be an attempt to reschedule.

Can you please quit using AKST? Alaska State University is as much a party to the suit as the ACC is.
02-16-2018 12:28 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,183
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2425
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #60
RE: Interesting article on Ark State suing Miami
(02-15-2018 05:28 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(02-15-2018 12:13 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(02-14-2018 11:36 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  Force Majure only applies if it is practically impossible for Miami to travel to Jonesboro for the game (Since there was obviously not a hurricane in Arkansas) both sides have admitted it was very possible for Miami to make the trip. They CHOSE not to make the trip in order to allow student athletes to help their families with the storm.

If you read our letter, that's what our claim is from the beginning.

I'll defer to the lawyers we have in the house, but it would surprise me if a court were to interpret "impossible" in a strict, logical or mathematical sense. If that's the definition of the word here, then it would have little practical meaning, because it's probably the case that is "possible" to somehow play the game even if the USA were under a nuclear attack at the time. Very few things like this are literally impossible. To me, clause 14 is meant to indicate that the game can be canceled if there is a significant, unexpected emergency that makes the game being played by either team unreasonable under the circumstances.

So IMO it will come down to whether Miami's actions were 'reasonable' given the spirit of the Force Majeur clause, and I think it very likely a court will conclude that it was.

Everybody else who had a road game played it. So since Miami was an outlier, its hard to interpret that as reasonable.

I don't think any court will find that line persuasive. Other schools were in different locations, and in an emergency, even a distance of 5-10 miles can make a difference in projected risks, to say nothing of differing organizational logistics.

What I think you and others miss is that when it comes to emergencies, courts are likely to give the party that acts in the claimed interest of safety every benefit of the doubt, rather than hold them to a hard line. That's a football-first mentality that thrives in the mind of the rabid fan but is regarded as having little/no place in the minds of government decision-makers. Courts are especially unlikely, from the safety of months-later hindsight, to second-guess decisions made by responsible officials who had to act in real-time in the face of mounting danger and incomplete/rapidly changing information. In those cases, it is very difficult to argue against a decision that errs on the side of safety.

IMO, anyone who thinks anything but a homer ARK-State court will view that contract clause about Force Majeure through a cold, calculating, "well, you could have done this or that to play the game" eye is fooling themselves. When balancing safety vs a football game, the football game means nothing.

Heck, I'd bet most judges will think ARK-State is nuts for thinking that Miami should have been expending any organizational time and brain-power in thinking about how to make the game happen in that situation. It isn't reasonable to expect that anyone at Miami would have even 3 minutes of time to take a phone call from ARK-State about game arrangements. The reasonable expectation would be that it went without saying that all athletics were canceled and the entire university was mobilizing strictly to address safety issues related to the approaching storm.
(This post was last modified: 02-16-2018 10:26 AM by quo vadis.)
02-16-2018 10:16 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.