(10-26-2012 01:44 PM)bearcatlawjd Wrote:  That could work for both parties. Notre Dame could leave early with a lower buyout and if the help out some members with home and home or neutral site game.

Perhaps Aresco will also hint to ND, who has a vote fully equal to a conference(?) that the Big East's generosity and lenience may depend upon how the 7th bowl game and revenue distribution turns out. They scratch our back - we scratch theirs.

(10-26-2012 03:51 PM)dgrace4cards Wrote:  

(10-26-2012 01:52 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  Judging by history, I think ND would rather just spend the buyout money. If ND didn't exercise its flexibility to schedule Big East teams when (a) it was actually in the Big East and (b) actually agreed to play 3 Big East teams per year, then I don't see that being the case when their ACC commitment truly does cramp ND's flexibility (particularly considering they are keeping Navy, USC and Stanford as annual games for certain). The one caveat is that ND would gladly take a Big East one-and-done home game in South Bend (which I'm sure many people here would flatly reject); I'm just talking about actual home-and-home series with Big East teams.

Only leverage I could see here is the timing of leaving, not the money. If Aresco/BE plays hardball and says sorry if you're not interested in playing a few games with us in the future then you can stay in here for 3 more years.....if you want to rethink that then give me a call before the end of the year and we can rethink how long we're going to keep you in the conference.

It's a tough argument. If ND is willing to pay something on par with the WVU exit fee for leaving super early or the Pitt exit fees for leaving in 2 years, then it's highly unlikely that a court is going to force ND to stick around. As I always tell people, courts generally don't like forcing people to *do* things, especially in commercial cases. Instead, if there's any way to smooth it over with money, then courts are predisposed to ruling in that direction. If the Big East tries to obtain something from ND that's much different than WVU for a super early exit or Pitt for a more normal exit, then it's likely going to lose (especially since ND leaving has a much lesser impact as non-football member, so the Big East couldn't rely upon a "We might not be able to have a functioning football league in 2012!" card that it had with WVU).

This may actually not be a game of hardball. College Sports News' Dave O'Brien wrote this the other day:

Notre Dame Receives High Marks for Big East Conference Exit Strategy

Quote:

"Dave O’Brien, editor of College Sports Business News, said it appears Notre Dame learned from the less than amicable departures of the West Virginia Mountaineers and the Pittsburgh Panthers."

"O’Brien praises Notre Dame athletic director Jack Swarbrick for seeking a mutually beneficial solution to a possible early exit. He said that both sides have characterized the negotiations as “extremely cordial."

I think the key is that Aresco made this idea public by choice, today, after "erroneous" reports earlier in the week put ill-timed heat on the BE.

(10-26-2012 03:36 PM)Jeffkills Wrote:  

(10-26-2012 02:35 PM)LaBradfordsTWill Wrote:  Force Notre Dame to play Big East teams at their places for the next three years until they have played everyone once.

Nah, force them to come to our houses.

I'd love to see our boys pound those funboys on The Blue!

Or, they can always pay the nBE $100M... ND's choice...

1. why would they agree to play all away games?
2. ND can do what it wants w/o permission. However, if it violate sthe contract, then the BE could sue for breach of contract and recover damages, but since ND is non-football, damages would be minimal (i.e. 10 million to leave 3 years early)

translation: No, ND won't play at BE houses unless A. they get paid like crazy, and/or they want to.and two, the BE couldnt make ND pay 10000000 for leaving earlt.