I understand that Marshall, Old Dominion, and Southern Miss want to leave C-USA at the end of the academic year. I understand that they would be in breach of contract if they were to leave at this time, leaving themselves open to a lawsuit by C-USA. My question is this: what do these three schools gain from leaving this year for the Sun Belt? Aren't the litigative costs of leaving early more costly than the potential media dollars these three would gain?

Seems to me that they would be better off joining next year and avoiding those departure costs, no?

I think the universities are aware of the cost and are prepared to pay. The damages aren't going to be as high as everyone would have you believe here. I understand this is breach of contract but let's be real here for a second people. This is Conference USA. Marshall is always consistently good. The other two are really inconsistent with one of them nearly losing to an FCS team one week and then beating the number 10 team in the country a few weeks later with a second string quarterback. This isn't the SEC with Georgia, Alabama, and Texas A&M are leaving. If we were in that situation I could understand actual damage being done because those are the three best teams in the conference If you follow what I'm saying. The sbc3 leaving early will leave the league with 11 teams which is plenty of teams to make a schedule. I could understand the damages being much greater if they were leaving and five teams remain. That last part that I mentioned is probably the main reason why Judy and her clan didn't want to negotiate when the sbc3 told them on multiple occasions they was leaving. They know they can't claim too much on damages because there's plenty of teams left over.
I think probably the biggest reason why the sbc3 are prepared to leave is due to the money they'll save on traveling expenses and the greater contract payouts. They'll make more money too by all the schools especially on the east side being so close to each other. I'm sure there's other reasons too. I personally don't see the big deal in staying for another year. Everybody was talking about how ODU desn't bring much value to the conference but now everybody's crying and calling foul because we're leaving for better pastures.

...ultimately, I figure after they crunched the numbers, they found that getting the SBC - ESPN deal rolling early will offset any potential 'penalties' for early departure...

...with that, I am sure they have documented the 'past departures' by other teams, and may well have enough data to show that the average 'penalties' paid by those previous institutions were not all that much in the grand scheme (I've gleaned that from other messages, so... I'm sure it is infallible )

So, if CUSA now comes in and wants, say $5 mill apiece as 'penalties', it can be challenged with the past totals, and I reckon they could end up in court if no resolution is made...

It would be cool if someone had the totals for each CUSA-departed school's 'exit/penalty' fees over the conference's history... THAT average value might be the whole key to the SBC-3's confidence in early departure without major hardships financially...

What else needs to be said....

https://conferenceusa.com/news/2022/2/16...ships.aspx

(02-17-2022 01:30 AM)GreenFreakUAB Wrote:  So, if CUSA now comes in and wants, say $5 mill apiece as 'penalties', it can be challenged with the past totals, and I reckon they could end up in court if no resolution is made...

It would be cool if someone had the totals for each CUSA-departed school's 'exit/penalty' fees over the conference's history... THAT average value might be the whole key to the SBC-3's confidence in early departure without major hardships financially...

Not only that but the last time teams left the conference payout due to media rights were higher. The conference makes a lot less money now so I would think the payouts would reflect that.

(02-17-2022 01:30 AM)GreenFreakUAB Wrote:  ...ultimately, I figure after they crunched the numbers, they found that getting the SBC - ESPN deal rolling early will offset any potential 'penalties' for early departure...

...with that, I am sure they have documented the 'past departures' by other teams, and may well have enough data to show that the average 'penalties' paid by those previous institutions were not all that much in the grand scheme (I've gleaned that from other messages, so... I'm sure it is infallible )

So, if CUSA now comes in and wants, say $5 mill apiece as 'penalties', it can be challenged with the past totals, and I reckon they could end up in court if no resolution is made...

It would be cool if someone had the totals for each CUSA-departed school's 'exit/penalty' fees over the conference's history... THAT average value might be the whole key to the SBC-3's confidence in early departure without major hardships financially...

100%, this post right here.

The Sunbelt also dropped its entry fee, so I imagine the departing schools accommodated that into the departure figure.

I think why we are leaving is due more to our lack of exposure for far too long. At least from Marshall's perspective, anytime we've been able to get on ESPN we do good numbers, just that in this conference it's been too few opportunities.

(02-17-2022 01:30 AM)GreenFreakUAB Wrote:  ...ultimately, I figure after they crunched the numbers, they found that getting the SBC - ESPN deal rolling early will offset any potential 'penalties' for early departure...

...with that, I am sure they have documented the 'past departures' by other teams, and may well have enough data to show that the average 'penalties' paid by those previous institutions were not all that much in the grand scheme (I've gleaned that from other messages, so... I'm sure it is infallible )

So, if CUSA now comes in and wants, say $5 mill apiece as 'penalties', it can be challenged with the past totals, and I reckon they could end up in court if no resolution is made...

It would be cool if someone had the totals for each CUSA-departed school's 'exit/penalty' fees over the conference's history... THAT average value might be the whole key to the SBC-3's confidence in early departure without major hardships financially...

The SB3 will each pay an additional amount that has six zeroes, and maybe USM “voluntarily” withdraws from hosting the baseball tournament and ODU does the same with tennis. AA6 schools need not apply as replacement nor for the 2022-2023 championship hostings.

C-USA has the upper hand right now because Sunbelt needs to release its schedule and negotiate with its media partners.

(02-17-2022 01:30 AM)GreenFreakUAB Wrote:  ...ultimately, I figure after they crunched the numbers, they found that getting the SBC - ESPN deal rolling early will offset any potential 'penalties' for early departure...

...with that, I am sure they have documented the 'past departures' by other teams, and may well have enough data to show that the average 'penalties' paid by those previous institutions were not all that much in the grand scheme (I've gleaned that from other messages, so... I'm sure it is infallible )

So, if CUSA now comes in and wants, say $5 mill apiece as 'penalties', it can be challenged with the past totals, and I reckon they could end up in court if no resolution is made...

It would be cool if someone had the totals for each CUSA-departed school's 'exit/penalty' fees over the conference's history... THAT average value might be the whole key to the SBC-3's confidence in early departure without major hardships financially...

What was paid by previously departed schools a decade plus ago should have no bearing on what is paid this go around. Once all of the CUSA 3.0 members became full members the remnant from CUSA 2.0 authored new bylaws for exiting to make it harder to leave early and to mirror language used by other conferences to make penalties higher. The 70% of the total exit fee penalty paid by UCONN, or the 300% of the total exit fee penalty paid by WVU are the more applicable comparisons. You can't point to the 2012-2014 exits as your comps because Marshall and USM along with the other scorned by the AAC departures threw those rules away and said let's see someone get out of this without it hurting.

Yes, USM and Marshall were screwed over with how light the fees were from some of the AAC schools that left earlier. That should have no bearing on what they pay to get out of this contract.

(02-17-2022 08:55 AM)SICemDAWGS! Wrote:  

(02-17-2022 01:30 AM)GreenFreakUAB Wrote:  ...ultimately, I figure after they crunched the numbers, they found that getting the SBC - ESPN deal rolling early will offset any potential 'penalties' for early departure...

...with that, I am sure they have documented the 'past departures' by other teams, and may well have enough data to show that the average 'penalties' paid by those previous institutions were not all that much in the grand scheme (I've gleaned that from other messages, so... I'm sure it is infallible )

So, if CUSA now comes in and wants, say $5 mill apiece as 'penalties', it can be challenged with the past totals, and I reckon they could end up in court if no resolution is made...

It would be cool if someone had the totals for each CUSA-departed school's 'exit/penalty' fees over the conference's history... THAT average value might be the whole key to the SBC-3's confidence in early departure without major hardships financially...

What was paid by previously departed schools a decade plus ago should have no bearing on what is paid this go around. Once all of the CUSA 3.0 members became full members the remnant from CUSA 2.0 authored new bylaws for exiting to make it harder to leave early and to mirror language used by other conferences to make penalties higher. The 70% of the total exit fee penalty paid by UCONN, or the 300% of the total exit fee penalty paid by WVU are the more applicable comparisons. You can't point to the 2012-2014 exits as your comps because Marshall and USM along with the other scorned by the AAC departures threw those rules away and said let's see someone get out of this without it hurting.

Yes, USM and Marshall were screwed over with how light the fees were from some of the AAC schools that left earlier. That should have no bearing on what they pay to get out of this contract.

Do you have a link validating your claims? The only evidence we all have is the tweet that shared "no financial penalties" in language for violating the 14 month rule.

Also, this thread is here to share WHY we all want out.

(02-17-2022 08:39 AM)ESE84 Wrote:  

(02-17-2022 01:30 AM)GreenFreakUAB Wrote:  ...ultimately, I figure after they crunched the numbers, they found that getting the SBC - ESPN deal rolling early will offset any potential 'penalties' for early departure...

...with that, I am sure they have documented the 'past departures' by other teams, and may well have enough data to show that the average 'penalties' paid by those previous institutions were not all that much in the grand scheme (I've gleaned that from other messages, so... I'm sure it is infallible )

So, if CUSA now comes in and wants, say $5 mill apiece as 'penalties', it can be challenged with the past totals, and I reckon they could end up in court if no resolution is made...

It would be cool if someone had the totals for each CUSA-departed school's 'exit/penalty' fees over the conference's history... THAT average value might be the whole key to the SBC-3's confidence in early departure without major hardships financially...

The SB3 will each pay an additional amount that has six zeroes, and maybe USM “voluntarily” withdraws from hosting the baseball tournament and ODU does the same with tennis. AA6 schools need not apply as replacement nor for the 2022-2023 championship hostings.

C-USA has the upper hand right now because Sunbelt needs to release its schedule and negotiate with its media partners.

Well I guess that’s one benefit CUSA has from not having any legit media deal.

(02-17-2022 08:55 AM)SICemDAWGS! Wrote:  

(02-17-2022 01:30 AM)GreenFreakUAB Wrote:  ...ultimately, I figure after they crunched the numbers, they found that getting the SBC - ESPN deal rolling early will offset any potential 'penalties' for early departure...

...with that, I am sure they have documented the 'past departures' by other teams, and may well have enough data to show that the average 'penalties' paid by those previous institutions were not all that much in the grand scheme (I've gleaned that from other messages, so... I'm sure it is infallible )

So, if CUSA now comes in and wants, say $5 mill apiece as 'penalties', it can be challenged with the past totals, and I reckon they could end up in court if no resolution is made...

It would be cool if someone had the totals for each CUSA-departed school's 'exit/penalty' fees over the conference's history... THAT average value might be the whole key to the SBC-3's confidence in early departure without major hardships financially...

What was paid by previously departed schools a decade plus ago should have no bearing on what is paid this go around. Once all of the CUSA 3.0 members became full members the remnant from CUSA 2.0 authored new bylaws for exiting to make it harder to leave early and to mirror language used by other conferences to make penalties higher. The 70% of the total exit fee penalty paid by UCONN, or the 300% of the total exit fee penalty paid by WVU are the more applicable comparisons. You can't point to the 2012-2014 exits as your comps because Marshall and USM along with the other scorned by the AAC departures threw those rules away and said let's see someone get out of this without it hurting.

Yes, USM and Marshall were screwed over with how light the fees were from some of the AAC schools that left earlier. That should have no bearing on what they pay to get out of this contract.

Our exit fees are comparatively higher than those cases though based on actual value. We’re paying 2x distributions as just exit fees. UCONN paid about that after you include the negotiated penalty. Same with WVU (a bit higher in thier case). You’re saying we should pay 1.4-6 times what the conference pays us annually (which is the best measure of its value) on top of already relatively high exit fees. There’s no precedent for that and it’s way overvaluing the conference.

(02-17-2022 09:32 AM)mturn017 Wrote:  

(02-17-2022 08:55 AM)SICemDAWGS! Wrote:  

(02-17-2022 01:30 AM)GreenFreakUAB Wrote:  ...ultimately, I figure after they crunched the numbers, they found that getting the SBC - ESPN deal rolling early will offset any potential 'penalties' for early departure...

...with that, I am sure they have documented the 'past departures' by other teams, and may well have enough data to show that the average 'penalties' paid by those previous institutions were not all that much in the grand scheme (I've gleaned that from other messages, so... I'm sure it is infallible )

So, if CUSA now comes in and wants, say $5 mill apiece as 'penalties', it can be challenged with the past totals, and I reckon they could end up in court if no resolution is made...

It would be cool if someone had the totals for each CUSA-departed school's 'exit/penalty' fees over the conference's history... THAT average value might be the whole key to the SBC-3's confidence in early departure without major hardships financially...

What was paid by previously departed schools a decade plus ago should have no bearing on what is paid this go around. Once all of the CUSA 3.0 members became full members the remnant from CUSA 2.0 authored new bylaws for exiting to make it harder to leave early and to mirror language used by other conferences to make penalties higher. The 70% of the total exit fee penalty paid by UCONN, or the 300% of the total exit fee penalty paid by WVU are the more applicable comparisons. You can't point to the 2012-2014 exits as your comps because Marshall and USM along with the other scorned by the AAC departures threw those rules away and said let's see someone get out of this without it hurting.

Yes, USM and Marshall were screwed over with how light the fees were from some of the AAC schools that left earlier. That should have no bearing on what they pay to get out of this contract.

Our exit fees are comparatively higher than those cases though based on actual value. We’re paying 2x distributions as just exit fees. UCONN paid about that after you include the negotiated penalty. Same with WVU (a bit higher in thier case). You’re saying we should pay 1.4-6 times what the conference pays us annually (which is the best measure of its value) on top of already relatively high exit fees. There’s no precedent for that and it’s way overvaluing the conference.

I think 14 months notice = 2 years distribution.
< 14 months notice is the hang up for both parties. Is it an additional 2x? .5x?

(02-17-2022 09:06 AM)rileylives Wrote:  

(02-17-2022 08:55 AM)SICemDAWGS! Wrote:  

(02-17-2022 01:30 AM)GreenFreakUAB Wrote:  ...ultimately, I figure after they crunched the numbers, they found that getting the SBC - ESPN deal rolling early will offset any potential 'penalties' for early departure...

...with that, I am sure they have documented the 'past departures' by other teams, and may well have enough data to show that the average 'penalties' paid by those previous institutions were not all that much in the grand scheme (I've gleaned that from other messages, so... I'm sure it is infallible )

So, if CUSA now comes in and wants, say $5 mill apiece as 'penalties', it can be challenged with the past totals, and I reckon they could end up in court if no resolution is made...

It would be cool if someone had the totals for each CUSA-departed school's 'exit/penalty' fees over the conference's history... THAT average value might be the whole key to the SBC-3's confidence in early departure without major hardships financially...

What was paid by previously departed schools a decade plus ago should have no bearing on what is paid this go around. Once all of the CUSA 3.0 members became full members the remnant from CUSA 2.0 authored new bylaws for exiting to make it harder to leave early and to mirror language used by other conferences to make penalties higher. The 70% of the total exit fee penalty paid by UCONN, or the 300% of the total exit fee penalty paid by WVU are the more applicable comparisons. You can't point to the 2012-2014 exits as your comps because Marshall and USM along with the other scorned by the AAC departures threw those rules away and said let's see someone get out of this without it hurting.

Yes, USM and Marshall were screwed over with how light the fees were from some of the AAC schools that left earlier. That should have no bearing on what they pay to get out of this contract.

Do you have a link validating your claims? The only evidence we all have is the tweet that shared "no financial penalties" in language for violating the 14 month rule.

Also, this thread is here to share WHY we all want out.

I do not have a link, I do have the specific bylaws from the 2015-2016 update from a FOIA request to see the changes made. I do not have a copy of the previous bylaws, only secondhand discussion points on why the changes were made at that time.


"3.06 Withdrawal From Conference
No member of the Conference may withdraw from the Conference except pursuant to and as allowed by this Section 3.06. No member may withdraw from the Conference without providing the Conference prior written notice. Any and all withdrawals from the Conference shall be effective on July 1 of the year specified in the notice of withdrawal; provided, however, that the withdrawing member must afford the Conference notice at least fourteen months prior to the effective date of the withdrawal (i.e. no later than May 1 of the prior year). However, if a Member makes statements or takes actions that evidence intent of such Member to withdraw from the Conference either currently or in the future, such actions will be determined as notice of withdrawal by a three-fourths (3/4) vote of the remaining Members of the Board of Directors. In the event that a member attempts to leave the Conference without fully complying with the notice of withdrawal requirements set forth above, the Conference shall be entitled to equitable relief without having to prove actual injury, irreparable or otherwise, including, but not limited to, an injunction requiring the member to comply fully with the notice of withdrawal requirements set forth above, to fulfill all of its obligations as a Conference member, and to remain in the Conference until the earliest permissible date upon which the member could have, under the circumstances, withdrawn with full and proper prior notice as required above. The members agree that any attempted withdrawal of a member without full compliance with the prior notice requirements set forth above would cause a disruption in the scheduling of competitions among the members for which there is no adequate remedy at law which would cause harm that would not in any respect be compensated by payment of a withdrawal fee, and for which, therefore, equitable relief is appropriate.

The withdrawing member shall be responsible for the amount of any and all assessments or debts that the member owes to the Conference as of the effective date of the withdrawal. From the date of notice of withdrawal, the withdrawing member shall have no rights to receive distribution of Conference revenues of any nature (i.e. the Conference shall be entitled to retain distribution for two fiscal years) and shall continue to be obligated to pay Conference expenses, assessments, or debts. Further, the term of office of any Board Member representing a Withdrawing Member shall automatically expire and such Chief Executive Officer shall no longer be a Board Member of the Conference effective as of the notice date or determination of notice to withdraw and such Withdrawing Member shall not be entitled to have a representative on the Board of Directors thereafter. During the period thereafter the number of Board Members shall automatically be reduced by the number of Withdrawing Members; and the Withdrawing Member(s) shall not be permitted to attend any meeting of, vote on any matter before, receive notice of any meeting of, or receive copies of materials distributed to the Board of Directors; the Conference shall however, inform the Chief Executive Officer of a Withdrawing Member about matters (as determined by the Commissioner in his/her sole discretion) that may materially impact the Withdrawing Member during the period prior to the effective date of the withdrawal in a manner disproportionate to the Withdrawing Member and shall provide the Chief Executive Officer of the Withdrawing Member with a reasonable opportunity for discussion with the Board of Directors on such issues as requested Each of the Members agrees that withdrawal of a member from the Conference would cause damage and financial hardship to the Conference and its continuing members, that the financial consequences to the Conference and its continuing members of such withdrawal cannot be measured or estimated with certainty at this time, and that the withholding of distributions pursuant to the preceding paragraph is a reasonable method of compensating the Conference and the continuing members for such damage and financial hardship and is not and shall not be construed as a penalty.

"

Also, understood on the thread topic, was merely responding to a point given in the thread and providing counterpoints on a topic being actively discussed in the thread.

The SB3 want to leave because we hate CUSA. That's the strongest tie binding the conference together: everyone hates it here and would rather be somewhere else.

Nobody wants to hang around a place or stick with an association they hate a minute longer than necessary.

(02-17-2022 09:32 AM)mturn017 Wrote:  

(02-17-2022 08:55 AM)SICemDAWGS! Wrote:  

(02-17-2022 01:30 AM)GreenFreakUAB Wrote:  ...ultimately, I figure after they crunched the numbers, they found that getting the SBC - ESPN deal rolling early will offset any potential 'penalties' for early departure...

...with that, I am sure they have documented the 'past departures' by other teams, and may well have enough data to show that the average 'penalties' paid by those previous institutions were not all that much in the grand scheme (I've gleaned that from other messages, so... I'm sure it is infallible )

So, if CUSA now comes in and wants, say $5 mill apiece as 'penalties', it can be challenged with the past totals, and I reckon they could end up in court if no resolution is made...

It would be cool if someone had the totals for each CUSA-departed school's 'exit/penalty' fees over the conference's history... THAT average value might be the whole key to the SBC-3's confidence in early departure without major hardships financially...

What was paid by previously departed schools a decade plus ago should have no bearing on what is paid this go around. Once all of the CUSA 3.0 members became full members the remnant from CUSA 2.0 authored new bylaws for exiting to make it harder to leave early and to mirror language used by other conferences to make penalties higher. The 70% of the total exit fee penalty paid by UCONN, or the 300% of the total exit fee penalty paid by WVU are the more applicable comparisons. You can't point to the 2012-2014 exits as your comps because Marshall and USM along with the other scorned by the AAC departures threw those rules away and said let's see someone get out of this without it hurting.

Yes, USM and Marshall were screwed over with how light the fees were from some of the AAC schools that left earlier. That should have no bearing on what they pay to get out of this contract.

Our exit fees are comparatively higher than those cases though based on actual value. We’re paying 2x distributions as just exit fees. UCONN paid about that after you include the negotiated penalty. Same with WVU (a bit higher in thier case). You’re saying we should pay 1.4-6 times what the conference pays us annually (which is the best measure of its value) on top of already relatively high exit fees. There’s no precedent for that and it’s way overvaluing the conference.

I’ll add that the high water mark and as best I can tell only case to not get settled out of court was WVU leaving the Big East which left the BE with only 7 members. Temple replaced them, letting the MAC know in May of 2012 that they wouldn’t be playing that fall. Temple paid the MAC 6M total.

(02-17-2022 09:41 AM)SICemDAWGS! Wrote:  

(02-17-2022 09:06 AM)rileylives Wrote:  

(02-17-2022 08:55 AM)SICemDAWGS! Wrote:  

(02-17-2022 01:30 AM)GreenFreakUAB Wrote:  ...ultimately, I figure after they crunched the numbers, they found that getting the SBC - ESPN deal rolling early will offset any potential 'penalties' for early departure...

...with that, I am sure they have documented the 'past departures' by other teams, and may well have enough data to show that the average 'penalties' paid by those previous institutions were not all that much in the grand scheme (I've gleaned that from other messages, so... I'm sure it is infallible )

So, if CUSA now comes in and wants, say $5 mill apiece as 'penalties', it can be challenged with the past totals, and I reckon they could end up in court if no resolution is made...

It would be cool if someone had the totals for each CUSA-departed school's 'exit/penalty' fees over the conference's history... THAT average value might be the whole key to the SBC-3's confidence in early departure without major hardships financially...

What was paid by previously departed schools a decade plus ago should have no bearing on what is paid this go around. Once all of the CUSA 3.0 members became full members the remnant from CUSA 2.0 authored new bylaws for exiting to make it harder to leave early and to mirror language used by other conferences to make penalties higher. The 70% of the total exit fee penalty paid by UCONN, or the 300% of the total exit fee penalty paid by WVU are the more applicable comparisons. You can't point to the 2012-2014 exits as your comps because Marshall and USM along with the other scorned by the AAC departures threw those rules away and said let's see someone get out of this without it hurting.

Yes, USM and Marshall were screwed over with how light the fees were from some of the AAC schools that left earlier. That should have no bearing on what they pay to get out of this contract.

Do you have a link validating your claims? The only evidence we all have is the tweet that shared "no financial penalties" in language for violating the 14 month rule.

Also, this thread is here to share WHY we all want out.

I do not have a link, I do have the specific bylaws from the 2015-2016 update from a FOIA request to see the changes made. I do not have a copy of the previous bylaws, only secondhand discussion points on why the changes were made at that time.


"3.06 Withdrawal From Conference
No member of the Conference may withdraw from the Conference except pursuant to and as allowed by this Section 3.06. No member may withdraw from the Conference without providing the Conference prior written notice. Any and all withdrawals from the Conference shall be effective on July 1 of the year specified in the notice of withdrawal; provided, however, that the withdrawing member must afford the Conference notice at least fourteen months prior to the effective date of the withdrawal (i.e. no later than May 1 of the prior year). However, if a Member makes statements or takes actions that evidence intent of such Member to withdraw from the Conference either currently or in the future, such actions will be determined as notice of withdrawal by a three-fourths (3/4) vote of the remaining Members of the Board of Directors. In the event that a member attempts to leave the Conference without fully complying with the notice of withdrawal requirements set forth above, the Conference shall be entitled to equitable relief without having to prove actual injury, irreparable or otherwise, including, but not limited to, an injunction requiring the member to comply fully with the notice of withdrawal requirements set forth above, to fulfill all of its obligations as a Conference member, and to remain in the Conference until the earliest permissible date upon which the member could have, under the circumstances, withdrawn with full and proper prior notice as required above. The members agree that any attempted withdrawal of a member without full compliance with the prior notice requirements set forth above would cause a disruption in the scheduling of competitions among the members for which there is no adequate remedy at law which would cause harm that would not in any respect be compensated by payment of a withdrawal fee, and for which, therefore, equitable relief is appropriate.

The withdrawing member shall be responsible for the amount of any and all assessments or debts that the member owes to the Conference as of the effective date of the withdrawal. From the date of notice of withdrawal, the withdrawing member shall have no rights to receive distribution of Conference revenues of any nature (i.e. the Conference shall be entitled to retain distribution for two fiscal years) and shall continue to be obligated to pay Conference expenses, assessments, or debts. Further, the term of office of any Board Member representing a Withdrawing Member shall automatically expire and such Chief Executive Officer shall no longer be a Board Member of the Conference effective as of the notice date or determination of notice to withdraw and such Withdrawing Member shall not be entitled to have a representative on the Board of Directors thereafter. During the period thereafter the number of Board Members shall automatically be reduced by the number of Withdrawing Members; and the Withdrawing Member(s) shall not be permitted to attend any meeting of, vote on any matter before, receive notice of any meeting of, or receive copies of materials distributed to the Board of Directors; the Conference shall however, inform the Chief Executive Officer of a Withdrawing Member about matters (as determined by the Commissioner in his/her sole discretion) that may materially impact the Withdrawing Member during the period prior to the effective date of the withdrawal in a manner disproportionate to the Withdrawing Member and shall provide the Chief Executive Officer of the Withdrawing Member with a reasonable opportunity for discussion with the Board of Directors on such issues as requested Each of the Members agrees that withdrawal of a member from the Conference would cause damage and financial hardship to the Conference and its continuing members, that the financial consequences to the Conference and its continuing members of such withdrawal cannot be measured or estimated with certainty at this time, and that the withholding of distributions pursuant to the preceding paragraph is a reasonable method of compensating the Conference and the continuing members for such damage and financial hardship and is not and shall not be construed as a penalty.

"

Also, understood on the thread topic, was merely responding to a point given in the thread and providing counterpoints on a topic being actively discussed in the thread.

I wonder if we can find the 2021 bylaws...that is out of date and not tangible really...

Any internet warriors out there who can find the current bylaws?

(02-17-2022 10:10 AM)rileylives Wrote:  I wonder if we can find the 2021 bylaws...that is out of date and not tangible really...

Any internet warriors out there who can find the current bylaws?

...I've always heard that some of this stuff was 'unavailable to the general public' or something... not sure what any other conferences do in terms of 'full disclosure', but seems like this C-USA issue is another one which folks get disgruntled about... not that this stuff HAS to be available to the public... ...or DOES it?

(02-17-2022 01:04 AM)rtist Wrote:  I understand that Marshall, Old Dominion, and Southern Miss want to leave C-USA at the end of the academic year. I understand that they would be in breach of contract if they were to leave at this time, leaving themselves open to a lawsuit by C-USA. My question is this: what do these three schools gain from leaving this year for the Sun Belt? Aren't the litigative costs of leaving early more costly than the potential media dollars these three would gain?

Seems to me that they would be better off joining next year and avoiding those departure costs, no?

Under the previous deal with ESPN, SBC schools were making a bit less than $900k per school annually. With the additional inventory and schools in the new deal, the annual per school payout initially jumps to $1.5 million, and after 4 years would escalate to $2 million per year (which would then be on par what the new '23 AAC schools are going to get through 2031). As a result, there's substantial interest to start the new deal sooner than later, not only for the 2022-23 money but to also start the clock on the escalator.

(02-17-2022 07:52 AM)ODUODUODU Wrote:  What else needs to be said....

https://conferenceusa.com/news/2022/2/16...ships.aspx

At least this much...

https://sunbeltsports.org/news/2021/9/15...onsor.aspx

(02-17-2022 11:54 AM)CoachMaclid Wrote:  

(02-17-2022 01:04 AM)rtist Wrote:  I understand that Marshall, Old Dominion, and Southern Miss want to leave C-USA at the end of the academic year. I understand that they would be in breach of contract if they were to leave at this time, leaving themselves open to a lawsuit by C-USA. My question is this: what do these three schools gain from leaving this year for the Sun Belt? Aren't the litigative costs of leaving early more costly than the potential media dollars these three would gain?

Seems to me that they would be better off joining next year and avoiding those departure costs, no?

Under the previous deal with ESPN, SBC schools were making a bit less than $900k per school annually. With the additional inventory and schools in the new deal, the annual per school payout initially jumps to $1.5 million, and after 4 years would escalate to $2 million per year (which would then be on par what the new '23 AAC schools are going to get through 2031). As a result, there's substantial interest to start the new deal sooner than later, not only for the 2022-23 money but to also start the clock on the escalator.

That's false. The new AAC teams are starting at 2 million and it goes up over time. So you guys will eventually get what the new AAC adds start at. I don't know why the sun belt guys are repeating this stuff on your money going up but the new AAC adds stay stagnant. All reports I read said the AAC new teams will start at 2-2.5 and it goes up over the deal til 2031. Show me something that says it stays stagnant at 2 million ....

Article that says AAC new adds expected to start above 2 million and it escalates from there

https://sports.yahoo.com/american-athlet...44710.html

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk