I don't recall seeing them being announced as such, yet the B1G already included Rutgers in their 2014 schedule and the ACC has included Louisville in their GoR. In the past, conferences receiving new schools were slow to make such announcements for fear of retribution from their old conference when formal exit dates had not been established. IIRC both exits would violate the 27-month timeline per the Big East bylaws. Rutgers had even filed suit against the BE. Maybe someone could point to a link of when these moves were accepted by the Big East.
This is really a semantics issue, as we all know both will be moving on after 2013-2014, but it just struck me a surprising after what has happened over the past few years.
I think the cost of leaving the conference has already been made by all of the teams that have left before U of L and Rutgers. I'm not sure why Rutgers feels a need to go to court unless they feel they can get a lower figure than the schools before them.
The GOR UofL signed is effective upon their date of entrance in the ACC. Rutgers joining the cic could be viewed (legally) as an early exit from the BE. That, imo, is why they have filed suit. Same with MD.
(05-17-2013 09:49 AM)3d2bcards Wrote: [ -> ]I think the cost of leaving the conference has already been made by all of the teams that have left before U of L and Rutgers. I'm not sure why Rutgers feels a need to go to court unless they feel they can get a lower figure than the schools before them.
They want to leave with the 5 million dollar exit fee instead of the 10.
There was a line in the bylaw that dropped the fee back to 5 if BCS AQ was lost.
(05-17-2013 10:40 AM)4x4hokies Wrote: [ -> ] (05-17-2013 09:49 AM)3d2bcards Wrote: [ -> ]I think the cost of leaving the conference has already been made by all of the teams that have left before U of L and Rutgers. I'm not sure why Rutgers feels a need to go to court unless they feel they can get a lower figure than the schools before them.
They want to leave with the 5 million dollar exit fee instead of the 10.
There was a line in the bylaw that dropped the fee back to 5 if BCS AQ was lost.
The BE has never lost AQ status. AQ status has gone away after this year for every conference. The bump to $10 million was with the addition of Navy, which is still happening as far as I know. The law suit must be for a different reason.
(05-17-2013 10:46 AM)Dasville Wrote: [ -> ] (05-17-2013 10:40 AM)4x4hokies Wrote: [ -> ] (05-17-2013 09:49 AM)3d2bcards Wrote: [ -> ]I think the cost of leaving the conference has already been made by all of the teams that have left before U of L and Rutgers. I'm not sure why Rutgers feels a need to go to court unless they feel they can get a lower figure than the schools before them.
They want to leave with the 5 million dollar exit fee instead of the 10.
There was a line in the bylaw that dropped the fee back to 5 if BCS AQ was lost.
The BE has never lost AQ status. AQ status has gone away after this year for every conference. The bump to $10 million was with the addition of Navy, which is still happening as far as I know. The law suit must be for a different reason.
The lawsuit is for a reduction of the exit fee and a reduction of the 27-month notice, as well as to try to get some of the war chest of exit fee money that has yet to be paid.
(05-17-2013 10:46 AM)Dasville Wrote: [ -> ] (05-17-2013 10:40 AM)4x4hokies Wrote: [ -> ] (05-17-2013 09:49 AM)3d2bcards Wrote: [ -> ]I think the cost of leaving the conference has already been made by all of the teams that have left before U of L and Rutgers. I'm not sure why Rutgers feels a need to go to court unless they feel they can get a lower figure than the schools before them.
They want to leave with the 5 million dollar exit fee instead of the 10.
There was a line in the bylaw that dropped the fee back to 5 if BCS AQ was lost.
The BE has never lost AQ status. AQ status has gone away after this year for every conference. The bump to $10 million was with the addition of Navy, which is still happening as far as I know. The law suit must be for a different reason.
That is something the AAC fans tell themselves to make the pain go away.
There is still AQ status and the AAC is sharing their's with four other conferences.
(05-17-2013 11:52 AM)4x4hokies Wrote: [ -> ] (05-17-2013 10:46 AM)Dasville Wrote: [ -> ] (05-17-2013 10:40 AM)4x4hokies Wrote: [ -> ] (05-17-2013 09:49 AM)3d2bcards Wrote: [ -> ]I think the cost of leaving the conference has already been made by all of the teams that have left before U of L and Rutgers. I'm not sure why Rutgers feels a need to go to court unless they feel they can get a lower figure than the schools before them.
They want to leave with the 5 million dollar exit fee instead of the 10.
There was a line in the bylaw that dropped the fee back to 5 if BCS AQ was lost.
The BE has never lost AQ status. AQ status has gone away after this year for every conference. The bump to $10 million was with the addition of Navy, which is still happening as far as I know. The law suit must be for a different reason.
That is something the AAC fans tell themselves to make the pain go away.
There is still AQ status and the AAC is sharing their's with four other conferences.
Which kind of makes it not "theirs," doesn't it?
(05-17-2013 10:46 AM)Dasville Wrote: [ -> ] (05-17-2013 10:40 AM)4x4hokies Wrote: [ -> ] (05-17-2013 09:49 AM)3d2bcards Wrote: [ -> ]I think the cost of leaving the conference has already been made by all of the teams that have left before U of L and Rutgers. I'm not sure why Rutgers feels a need to go to court unless they feel they can get a lower figure than the schools before them.
They want to leave with the 5 million dollar exit fee instead of the 10.
There was a line in the bylaw that dropped the fee back to 5 if BCS AQ was lost.
The BE has never lost AQ status. AQ status has gone away after this year for every conference. The bump to $10 million was with the addition of Navy, which is still happening as far as I know. The law suit must be for a different reason.
Something caused the exit fee to temporarily drop back to $5mm, because these were the 3 points of contention from the Rutgers side.
1. The exit fee dropped to $5mm, then was raised back to $10mm by a vote taken at a President's meeting this past year. Rutgers was in a transition between presidents and wanted to register a vote against the raised exit fee anyway, but was not allowed to (because they didn't have a president at the meeting).
2. The by-laws say schools can only share in the revenues
collected while they are a member. Rutgers is arguing that the Big East had not yet collected any exit fees from WVU and TCU (who were long gone) or Pitt/Syr (who should have paid an installment) so the conference was artificially delaying receipt of exit fees to avoid paying schools that leave the fees they earned.
3.Rutgers is asking to be compensated for the $1mm+ in revenue lost when the WVU home was lost and replaced at the last minute with a Temple road game.
(05-17-2013 12:47 PM)krup Wrote: [ -> ] (05-17-2013 10:46 AM)Dasville Wrote: [ -> ] (05-17-2013 10:40 AM)4x4hokies Wrote: [ -> ] (05-17-2013 09:49 AM)3d2bcards Wrote: [ -> ]I think the cost of leaving the conference has already been made by all of the teams that have left before U of L and Rutgers. I'm not sure why Rutgers feels a need to go to court unless they feel they can get a lower figure than the schools before them.
They want to leave with the 5 million dollar exit fee instead of the 10.
There was a line in the bylaw that dropped the fee back to 5 if BCS AQ was lost.
The BE has never lost AQ status. AQ status has gone away after this year for every conference. The bump to $10 million was with the addition of Navy, which is still happening as far as I know. The law suit must be for a different reason.
Something caused the exit fee to temporarily drop back to $5mm, because these were the 3 points of contention from the Rutgers side.
1. The exit fee dropped to $5mm, then was raised back to $10mm by a vote taken at a President's meeting this past year. Rutgers was in a transition between presidents and wanted to register a vote against the raised exit fee anyway, but was not allowed to (because they didn't have a president at the meeting).
2. The by-laws say schools can only share in the revenues collected while they are a member. Rutgers is arguing that the Big East had not yet collected any exit fees from WVU and TCU (who were long gone) or Pitt/Syr (who should have paid an installment) so the conference was artificially delaying receipt of exit fees to avoid paying schools that leave the fees they earned.
3.Rutgers is asking to be compensated for the $1mm+ in revenue lost when the WVU home was lost and replaced at the last minute with a Temple road game.
What was the date of the vote to re-implement the $10mm?
(05-17-2013 02:25 PM)Dasville Wrote: [ -> ] (05-17-2013 12:47 PM)krup Wrote: [ -> ] (05-17-2013 10:46 AM)Dasville Wrote: [ -> ] (05-17-2013 10:40 AM)4x4hokies Wrote: [ -> ] (05-17-2013 09:49 AM)3d2bcards Wrote: [ -> ]I think the cost of leaving the conference has already been made by all of the teams that have left before U of L and Rutgers. I'm not sure why Rutgers feels a need to go to court unless they feel they can get a lower figure than the schools before them.
They want to leave with the 5 million dollar exit fee instead of the 10.
There was a line in the bylaw that dropped the fee back to 5 if BCS AQ was lost.
The BE has never lost AQ status. AQ status has gone away after this year for every conference. The bump to $10 million was with the addition of Navy, which is still happening as far as I know. The law suit must be for a different reason.
Something caused the exit fee to temporarily drop back to $5mm, because these were the 3 points of contention from the Rutgers side.
1. The exit fee dropped to $5mm, then was raised back to $10mm by a vote taken at a President's meeting this past year. Rutgers was in a transition between presidents and wanted to register a vote against the raised exit fee anyway, but was not allowed to (because they didn't have a president at the meeting).
2. The by-laws say schools can only share in the revenues collected while they are a member. Rutgers is arguing that the Big East had not yet collected any exit fees from WVU and TCU (who were long gone) or Pitt/Syr (who should have paid an installment) so the conference was artificially delaying receipt of exit fees to avoid paying schools that leave the fees they earned.
3.Rutgers is asking to be compensated for the $1mm+ in revenue lost when the WVU home was lost and replaced at the last minute with a Temple road game.
What was the date of the vote to re-implement the $10mm?
Here is the timeframe according to an article I found-
"The claim points out that on June 26 of this year, the Presidential Oversight Committee of the BCS approved a four-team playoff to replace the current BCS playoff. As part of the new format, the Big East’s AQ status was eliminated.
As a result, Rutgers claims that the withdrawal fee was limited to $5 million as of June 26, 2012.
The Big East attempted to amend its bylaws in recognition to losing its AQ status last fall. During its presidents meeting on Nov. 13, the Big East called for a vote to increase the withdrawal fee for football schools from $5 million to $10 million."
(05-17-2013 10:46 AM)Dasville Wrote: [ -> ] (05-17-2013 10:40 AM)4x4hokies Wrote: [ -> ]There was a line in the bylaw that dropped the fee back to 5 if BCS AQ was lost.
The BE has never lost AQ status. AQ status has gone away after this year for every conference. The bump to $10 million was with the addition of Navy, which is still happening as far as I know. The law suit must be for a different reason.
The loophole you are hoping for was not actually left open ... the language described it as the BCS "or successor thereto". So notice that The American would not have AQ status in the CFP counts as legally equivalent that they lost AQ status in the BCS.
There would be a legal question regarding when The American was formally notified of that and when Rutgers formally submitted their notice of departure, which is the kind of thing that supporter can argue until they are blue in the face but which will in fact be settled by blazing lawyers at 20 paces.
(05-17-2013 05:23 PM)BruceMcF Wrote: [ -> ] (05-17-2013 10:46 AM)Dasville Wrote: [ -> ] (05-17-2013 10:40 AM)4x4hokies Wrote: [ -> ]There was a line in the bylaw that dropped the fee back to 5 if BCS AQ was lost.
The BE has never lost AQ status. AQ status has gone away after this year for every conference. The bump to $10 million was with the addition of Navy, which is still happening as far as I know. The law suit must be for a different reason.
The loophole you are hoping for was not actually left open ... the language described it as the BCS "or successor thereto". So notice that The American would not have AQ status in the CFP counts as legally equivalent that they lost AQ status in the BCS.
There would be a legal question regarding when The American was formally notified of that and when Rutgers formally submitted their notice of departure, which is the kind of thing that supporter can argue until they are blue in the face but which will in fact be settled by blazing lawyers at 20 paces.
I'm a UofL fan so I'm not looking for a loophole. The cheaper the exit fee the better. We will pay whatever is required. Didn't know about the language of the contract or the timing of the vote and exit notification. Thanks for the info!
(05-17-2013 07:39 PM)Dasville Wrote: [ -> ] (05-17-2013 05:23 PM)BruceMcF Wrote: [ -> ] (05-17-2013 10:46 AM)Dasville Wrote: [ -> ] (05-17-2013 10:40 AM)4x4hokies Wrote: [ -> ]There was a line in the bylaw that dropped the fee back to 5 if BCS AQ was lost.
The BE has never lost AQ status. AQ status has gone away after this year for every conference. The bump to $10 million was with the addition of Navy, which is still happening as far as I know. The law suit must be for a different reason.
The loophole you are hoping for was not actually left open ... the language described it as the BCS "or successor thereto". So notice that The American would not have AQ status in the CFP counts as legally equivalent that they lost AQ status in the BCS.
There would be a legal question regarding when The American was formally notified of that and when Rutgers formally submitted their notice of departure, which is the kind of thing that supporter can argue until they are blue in the face but which will in fact be settled by blazing lawyers at 20 paces.
I'm a UofL fan so I'm not looking for a loophole. The cheaper the exit fee the better. We will pay whatever is required. Didn't know about the language of the contract or the timing of the vote and exit notification. Thanks for the info!
Time to just move on with what has happened. The bleeding has to stop before the healing can begin...