Herbst letter to the Big 12 expressing UConn's interest | Page 3 | The Boneyard

Herbst letter to the Big 12 expressing UConn's interest

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Oct 11, 2011
Messages
4,746
Reaction Score
18,295
I don't know how to interpret Cincy and Houston directing their interests to the Big 12's law firm and Uconn sending it directly to Bowlsby, but it is a bit bizarre.

Cincy and Houston didn't direct their interests to the Big 12 law firm. All of them (Houston, Cincy and UConn) expressed their interest to Bowlsby directly. UConn and Cincy followed the correct process and waited to be contacted by Bowlsby. Houston (Khator) jumped the gun and emailed Bowlsby.

At the teleconference Boren explained the process. He said:

"So at the end of all of that discussion, the direction from the Board was to the commissioner to contact those schools, recontact those schools who have expressed interest to us, who have come to us, and to find out exactly the nature of the interest..."

Cincy and UConn waited to be contacted by Bowlsby (per Boren's statement above) and then responded to him of their interest. Cincy asked for further correspondence to be sent to Cincy's law firm.

Khator didn't wait for the letter from Bowlsby. She emailed him, telling him of Houston's interest, and then he wrote her back in reply to her email (he mentions her email) with the instructions of what law firm to send the info to. Since she had emailed him and already told him of Houston's interest, his letter to her explained the next step which was to send material to the Big 12's law firm.

In other words, Houston skipped the first step, which was to wait for the letter from Bowlsby asking them if they were still interested. She didn't wait, she emailed him.

That's my understanding of it. It has nothing to do with schools getting preferential treatment.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
86,938
Reaction Score
323,095
Cincy and Houston didn't direct their interests to the Big 12 law firm. All of them (Houston, Cincy and UConn) expressed their interest to Bowlsby directly. UConn and Cincy followed the correct process and waited to be contacted by Bowlsby. Houston (Khator) jumped the gun and emailed Bowlsby.

At the teleconference Boren explained the process. He said:

"So at the end of all of that discussion, the direction from the Board was to the commissioner to contact those schools, recontact those schools who have expressed interest to us, who have come to us, and to find out exactly the nature of the interest..."

Cincy and UConn waited to be contacted by Bowlsby (per Boren's statement above) and then responded to him of their interest. Cincy asked for further correspondence to be sent to Cincy's law firm.

Khator didn't wait for the letter from Bowlsby. She emailed him, telling him of Houston's interest, and then he wrote her back in reply to her email (he mentions her email) with the instructions of what law firm to send the info to. Since she had emailed him and already told him of Houston's interest, his letter to her explained the next step which was to send material to the Big 12's law firm.

In other words, Houston skipped the first step, which was to wait for the letter from Bowlsby asking them if they were still interested. She didn't wait, she emailed him.

That's my understanding of it.

Nor did USF and they surely didn't keep it "very brief". USF letter to Big 12 Commissioner-Bob-Bowlsby
 

UConn Dan

Not HuskyFanDan; I lurk & I like
Joined
Feb 25, 2012
Messages
2,854
Reaction Score
9,795
@jostar1 please see the address that was used on the Cinci letter vis-a-vis the instructions in the email to UH. Also, Bowlsby requested the schools general counsel contact info (thus, Cinci followed Bowlsby's instructions).

Bowlsby also could have led off his email to UH and all candidates stating that they had previously contacted him (again so it doesn't look like poaching).

The bottom half of the UConn letter is not shown - Trotter said because he didn't want to publish cell phone numbers. Hmmm
 

UConn Dan

Not HuskyFanDan; I lurk & I like
Joined
Feb 25, 2012
Messages
2,854
Reaction Score
9,795
Nor did USF and they surely didn't keep it "very brief". USF letter to Big 12 Commissioner-Bob-Bowlsby
Well, that letter may have been in response to a letter of inquiry from Bowlsby. I dont think we can tell.
And looks like USF didn't provide general counsel contact information.

It looks like UH and Cinci received the same instructions. USF either got different instructions or didn't follow instructions. And UConn -- we kept it brief...I'm just hoping that they already have our general counsel information -- maybe we are just way ahead of the game ...so I'm really not concerned...just curious as to the process.
 

cttxus

The CT-TX-US Connection: Historic, Alive and Well
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
995
Reaction Score
3,726
If the B12 anticipated your interest and response, the addressee (Bowlsby or Sweeney) would be relatively meaningless, especially if it occurred early in the process. However, spelling errors under the university president's signature would, to me anyway, indicate a certain lack of gravitas/seriousness about your interest.
 
Joined
Oct 11, 2011
Messages
4,746
Reaction Score
18,295
@jostar1 please see the address that was used on the Cinci letter vis-a-vis the instructions in the email to UH. Also, Bowlsby requested the schools general counsel contact info (thus, Cinci followed Bowlsby's instructions).

Bowlsby also could have led off his email to UH and all candidates stating that they had previously contacted him (again so it doesn't look like poaching).

The bottom half of the UConn letter is not shown - Trotter said because he didn't want to publish cell phone numbers. Hmmm

Yes, I stand corrected on that. It looks like Bowlsby was holding Houston to sending the letter of interest, even though she had emailed him.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
35,148
Reaction Score
29,362
I don't know if this was intended as a joke, but I burst out laughing when I read it.

I love that you can always count on the fact that within the first 30 posts on any somewhat significant news post about UConn/Big 12, somehow says that it could cause the ACC to invite us.

Not. Gonna. Happen.
Their loss.
 

The Funster

What?
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
2,949
Reaction Score
8,655
C'mon, guys. Nothing is supposed to straight forward or transparent. This is CR. It's all about the "head fakes" and "horse trading". Ask the guy who has made deals with hundreds of people smarter than the average university president...he knows.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
1,789
Reaction Score
4,105
I don't think we are wound tight here. This is such a heavily orchestrated process so as not to divulge any information to the public. But no matter how well managed, there are clues to be found. This feels like a seam that can expose some real information, if we knew how to do it.
 
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
7,501
Reaction Score
15,690
StorrsSouth had this on twitter last night
CqpydDYWEAAJnoV.jpg
 

UConn Dan

Not HuskyFanDan; I lurk & I like
Joined
Feb 25, 2012
Messages
2,854
Reaction Score
9,795
I don't think we are wound tight here. This is such a heavily orchestrated process so as not to divulge any information to the public. But no matter how well managed, there are clues to be found. This feels like a seam that can expose some real information, if we knew how to do it.
The devil is in the details.
 

HuskyHawk

The triumphant return of the Blues Brothers.
Joined
Sep 12, 2011
Messages
31,862
Reaction Score
81,491
There could be a 3rd option,

Letter written to commissioner, but enveloped to Lawyer
No, no, no. That misses the point. Except for BYU these are all public schools subject to FOIA. Bowlsby is sending his emails saying, have your General Counsel contact my lawyer. Now that communication is governed by attorney client privilege on both sides and we don't get yahoos like this posting it on Twitter. A letter from Susan to their lawyer accomplishes nothing.

So what we are seeing here, in each case, are the preliminary letters to Bowlsby. Then he contacts each school and says...hey don't write to me, send it to Polsinelli in KC, and send it from your GC. That ensures that a bunch of CR nuts like us don't go into a frenzy over the actual, meaningful content. Yet here we are anyway.

None of these letters mean anything. They are all merely the initial "expression of interest in joining" from each school that then triggers Bob's emails.
 
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
7,501
Reaction Score
15,690
No, no, no. That misses the point. Except for BYU these are all public schools subject to FOIA. Bowlsby is sending his emails saying, have your General Counsel contact my lawyer. Now that communication is governed by attorney client privilege on both sides and we don't get yahoos like this posting it on Twitter. A letter from Susan to their lawyer accomplishes nothing.

So what we are seeing here, in each case, are the preliminary letters to Bowlsby. Then he contacts each school and says...hey don't write to me, send it to Polsinelli in KC, and send it from your GC. That ensures that a bunch of CR nuts like us don't go into a frenzy over the actual, meaningful content. Yet here we are anyway.

None of these letters mean anything. They are all merely the initial "expression of interest in joining" from each school that then triggers Bob's emails.
But they do in a sense...because then the bozo's who call themselves journalists..the ones like McMurphy who have been touting schools like Memphis (and no I don't think C. Austin Cox is a journalist) would be posting letters from a school such as Memphis. So far the ONLY communication we have seen from FOIA institutions are Cincy, Houston and UConn. All dated around a similar date. Where are the others?
 
Joined
Apr 25, 2014
Messages
5,292
Reaction Score
19,788
No, no, no. That misses the point. Except for BYU these are all public schools subject to FOIA. Bowlsby is sending his emails saying, have your General Counsel contact my lawyer. Now that communication is governed by attorney client privilege on both sides

This isn't true. Attorney/Client privilege only applies to communications between the attorney and the client. Once it's been sent to a third-party, it's no longer privileged.
 

MattMang23

Adding Nothing to the Conversation
Joined
Sep 21, 2011
Messages
5,150
Reaction Score
14,742
Is it not possible that the letter was not snail mailed but, rather, emailed to the recipient? Who mails stuff nowadays?

She could have just written Bowlsby's address on the letter then emailed it to both the attorney and the Commissioner.
 
Joined
Oct 11, 2011
Messages
4,746
Reaction Score
18,295
But they do in a sense...because then the bozo's who call themselves journalists..the ones like McMurphy who have been touting schools like Memphis (and no I don't think C. Austin Cox is a journalist) would be posting letters from a school such as Memphis. So far the ONLY communication we have seen from FOIA institutions are Cincy, Houston and UConn. All dated around a similar date. Where are the others?
We saw the letter from USF:
USF letter to Big 12 Commissioner-Bob-Bowlsby
 
Joined
Oct 11, 2011
Messages
4,746
Reaction Score
18,295
But they do in a sense...because then the bozo's who call themselves journalists..the ones like McMurphy who have been touting schools like Memphis (and no I don't think C. Austin Cox is a journalist) would be posting letters from a school such as Memphis. So far the ONLY communication we have seen from FOIA institutions are Cincy, Houston and UConn. All dated around a similar date. Where are the others?

Here is the letter Colorado State sent. They addressed it to the Big 12 Conference address and to the Big 12's lawyer.
http://www.coloradoan.com/story/sports/csu/2016/08/24/csu-pitch-big-12/89264410/
 

HuskyHawk

The triumphant return of the Blues Brothers.
Joined
Sep 12, 2011
Messages
31,862
Reaction Score
81,491
This isn't true. Attorney/Client privilege only applies to communications between the attorney and the client. Once it's been sent to a third-party, it's no longer privileged.

Yes, I phrased it badly. Not trying to over-lawyer this. But in improves the chances that it would be considered Attorney Work Product.
 

CL82

2023 NCAA Men’s Basketball National Champions
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
56,515
Reaction Score
206,305
This isn't true. Attorney/Client privilege only applies to communications between the attorney and the client. Once it's been sent to a third-party, it's no longer privileged.
I would expect that communications between attorneys aren't subject to FOIA.
 
Joined
May 29, 2015
Messages
1,741
Reaction Score
7,580
I would expect that communications between attorneys aren't subject to FOIA.

If one or more of the attorneys are state employees, they likely are. Especially if it's not in a trial setting.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Online statistics

Members online
87
Guests online
2,791
Total visitors
2,878

Forum statistics

Threads
155,799
Messages
4,032,032
Members
9,865
Latest member
Sad Tiger


Top Bottom