http://www.kait8.com/story/37484717/a-st...elled-game

Just reading the contract, it does seem Ark State does not have a leg to stand on. Item 14 seems to have Miami's covered but I admit I am not a lawyer or slept at a Holiday Inn Express.

Pretty cool to actually see these documents.

-- Arkansas State wanted the game to be rescheduled for 2020 or 2021

-- Miami said, nope, our only open date in those seasons is reserved for a home game; we'll play you there in 2024 or 2025

-- Arkansas State said, nope, send us a check asap or we'll sue you in state court in Arkansas

(02-14-2018 09:21 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  http://www.kait8.com/story/37484717/a-st...elled-game

Just reading the contract, it does seem Ark State does not have a leg to stand on. Item 14 seems to have Miami's covered but I admit I am not a lawyer or slept at a Holiday Inn Express.

Pretty cool to actually see these documents.

Except that language only works if playing the game is “impossible”. AStates letter has gone into great detail as to how the game was playable, flights were available, facilities were available, and make-up options were (and still are) available. You are required in these situations to make a reasonable effort to mitigate damages. The Miami case has a serious problem in that area.

The 14th section provides the contract is void if “it becomes impossible to play”. Mark Richt said logistically the game could have been played they just didn’t think it was a good idea. Cross town FIU went to Birmingham and just up the road FAU went to Wisconsin.
Miami had the prerogative to do what it believed was in their best interest but the game was not impossible to play.
Miami asserted it cannot play the earlier dates but has vacancies it “prefers” to use to play an FCS at home though they state it as if they have no choice but to play a home FCS.
The interesting legal question is whether the 11th Amendment bars Miami from seeking removal to Federal Court.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

(02-14-2018 09:52 PM)Wedge Wrote:  -- Arkansas State wanted the game to be rescheduled for 2020 or 2021

-- Miami said, nope, our only open date in those seasons is reserved for a home game; we'll play you there in 2024 or 2025

-- Arkansas State said, nope, send us a check asap or we'll sue you in state court in Arkansas

Sort of. We've been badgering back at forth with Miami since a few months before the game was to be played when they went on a site tour, didn't like the visiting locker room we had, and requested that we let them use the home locker room for the game. (We said no)

Richt had been searching for months to find a way out of the game, and the impending hurricane gave him a way. He made a bunch of public comments after it was cancelled talking about they logistically could have made the trip, they just chose not to. We let them go understanding the Hurricane is a different animal (though our fans weren't as nice)

They've been stringing us along for months in rescheduling. Only willing to play the game on their terms simply because they have to play an FCS school, when we're voluntarily willing to not only give up our FCS opponent to get the game in, but give them a buy game at a far cheaper rate than we are worth. Our administration is convinced they won't come back if we schedule 2025 and turned the date down and asked for the check. Every other school in the country that cancelled that week has either rescheduled for a couple years from now, or paid the buy out.

It's not our problem Miami apparently can't afford 650K.

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.

(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.

(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.

I expect us to get blackballed, but that's not really a major concern. We only play one money game a year, and it has to be for at least 1.8-1.9 million, otherwise no dice. There's only a couple ACC Teams that could even afford that regularly. We've played only one money game against an ACC team in like 15 years, and that was back when we took far less for games.

For that reason, we generally only play SEC, Big 12, and Big 10 teams in guarantees.

I'd rather play sacrificial lamb every few years for Bama or Auburn than travel to some East Coast School far out of our recruiting areas.

(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.

(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.

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.

(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.

One of the advantages a plantiff has is deciding the venue.

(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.

My guess is that game contracts are about to become much more detailed and specific.

(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.

(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.

Which is why they should have just paid the money and been done with the whole thing because it's pretty obvious they don't want to play that game in Jonesboro.

Being that this is sport and there should be some sense of sportsmanship and camaraderie, Miami should consider what is fair for both sides rather than simply what best fits their scheduling goals.

I don't really buy that they want an FCS home game that badly. Miami doesn't tend to generate great attendance anyway. How many fans are going to show up for an FCS game in the Miami metro? Not many. They would actually draw some eyeballs on TV though if they scheduled a Thursday or Friday night game at the home of a G5 opponent. Plenty of people will watch that to see if David knocks off Goliath. Fair to both sides and everybody's happy.

And if they don't want to go to that trouble then just pay ASU their money and go your separate ways. No need to put ASU in am imposition.

(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.

If they offer us that, we're likely going to choose court. We're stubborn creatures.

(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.

The problem they have is that playing the game was not "impossible" (it was a choice) and they have made little to no effort to mitigate the damage that arose from that "choice". Instead, they have actually chosen to actively delay repairing the damage and continue to make repairing it as difficult as possible. Typically, parties are required to try to mitigate the damage where reasonably possible. Thats just basic contract law.

Where not specific--the word "reasonable" is going to guide the court decisions. In other words, Miami doesnt get to return the game whenever they want when they want because the contract was not specific---they have to do it as soon as reasonably possible. Making sure they have an FCS game in every intervening year (which they havent even scheduled) is likely not a good enough reason to delay making good on the AState game for 7 years (especially in an Arkansas court).

Like I said, my guess is Miami pays the $650K and avoids court. Basically, as long as they dont push it to court and start incurring lawyer fees, then simply paying the $650K means they end up with a really cheap home field one-and-done. Thats not a bad outcome for the Hurricanes (which is why Im surprised they pushed it this far).

If Miami doesn’t pay Arkansas State has the option of filing in the Circuit Court of Craighead County where the school is located or in Circuit Court of Pulaski County (Little Rock) because we are an instrumentality of the state and system HQ is there.
The judge can find that it was impossible for Miami to perform the contract and award $0 or Miami could perform and award $650,000 plus costs and interest. The only way to award a number in between is to find that AState had some fault in Miami’s failure to perform.
Strictly speaking if Miami had said let’s wait and play Sunday instead the contract would be breached.
Let’s not forget AState went to Miami in 2014 as required. Offered to mitigate Miami’s expenses if they would play as scheduled or play a day early on Friday and had secured better TV exposure. Offered to reschedule in 2020 or 2021 upon learning there were vacancies on the Miami schedule in those years that AState could accommodate.
Before the AState letters emerged I had predicted Miami would shoot for 2024 and let inflation devalue the buyout even more before canceling. I think the evidence suggests that was correct.
If AState gets blackballed so be it. Telling the world we will travel to your place at a discount in exchange for the promise of a return game that we won’t hold you to isn’t a good look either. Miami renegotiated a return to Toledo and the Rockets required an increased buyout as a condition of that renegotiation. AState was willing to keep the same buyout for 2020 or 2021.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

We'll see what the court says. Or more likely they settle for something less than the full amount and drop the suit, as lawyers will easily eat up $500K for both sides.

(02-15-2018 03:47 AM)Stugray2 Wrote:  We'll see what the court says. Or more likely they settle for something less than the full amount and drop the suit, as lawyers will easily eat up $500K for both sides.

I doubt AState would hire outside counsel. State agencies in Arkansas rarely use employ outside counsel. The only expense would be if they want depose Miami officials or Coach Richt


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The whole contract is a little surprising to me. It appears to be very dated. All the editing seems odd. With computerized documents why not make the edit and reprint? There are signatures without typewritten versions of their names. It just says "Institution" not the actual school name. Changing the governing law is one thing but completely striking it out is bizarre. The indemnification clause is written wrong but to completely strike it? The game in Miami has 3 dates listed. I would expect a specific date.

I think it becomes a question of precedent. There are examples of schools that play under those circumstances and those that don't. Didn't Houston cancel some games because of a hurricane?