Big East CEOs refused to increase exit fees, 'discussing potential legal strategies'

[UCDaveD]

http://brett-mcmurphy.blogs.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/29532522/32679527

 

[UConnSportsGuy]

Marinatto’s email also to league leaders indicated that the Big East "will also be prepared to discuss potential legal strategies in the wake of the departures of Pittsburgh and Syracuse.

Thank you DeFillippo!

That sound you hear from Bristol is the sound of paper shredders working at full speed and the sound of them destroying all of the electronic paper trails on their network!

 

[BBNBE]

Skadden Arps(law firm in 03) will happily accept several more millions dollars in Connecticut tax payer money for no results.

 

[uconnric]

Skadden Arps(law firm in 03) will happily accept several more millions dollars in Connecticut tax payer money for no results.

Gee, maybe the ACC will make BC pay all its defense costs. Flipper will be made to say 45 Hail Marys and 75 Lord's Prayers after attending confession, after which he can flog himself with chains.

 

[sportsart]

So let's see....

No one wants to increase the exit fees and there could be a legal mess.

Yup....the Big East has great potential. Count my school in while I go looking for Jeff Hathaway at the unemployment office.

 

[Rumrunner]

First, this says nothing about suing the ESPN, ACC, SU, Pitt, etc. It says discuss legal strategies. It very well could be the legal strategy of enforcing the exit of Pitt and SU. Without the source document, it's speculation. Of course, the blog post is vague on this important topic.

Second, the schools refused to increase the exit fee at this meeting, then on the conference call following TCU's departure. I guess Marinatto will get the memo some day, there isn't going to be a commitment from UConn because of their private assurances re the ACC, nor from WVU with the prospect of them joining the SEC or Big 12, nor from UofL. Apparently the beat writer for Rutgers says that Rutgers is also balking at the increase in exit fees.

Of course, some Big East true believers know more than the Presidents of those institutions. After all, anonymous posters on the internet have access to more information than do leaders of billion dollar enterprises.

 

[WestCoastHusky]

First, this says nothing about suing the ESPN, ACC, SU, Pitt, etc. It says discuss legal strategies. It very well could be the legal strategy of enforcing the exit of Pitt and SU. Without the source document, it's speculation. Of course, the blog post is vague on this important topic.

Second, the schools refused to increase the exit fee at this meeting, then on the conference call following TCU's departure. I guess Marinatto will get the memo some day, there isn't going to be a commitment from UConn because of their private assurances re the ACC, nor from WVU with the prospect of them joining the SEC or Big 12, nor from UofL. Apparently the beat writer for Rutgers says that Rutgers is also balking at the increase in exit fees.

Of course, some Big East true believers know more than the Presidents of those institutions. After all, anonymous posters on the internet have access to more information than do leaders of billion dollar enterprises.

So what does anyone expect in the meantime? Play with Pitt and SU for 2 more years and let the league disband for football?

 

[ArmyHuskyFan]

Skadden Arps(law firm in 03) will happily accept several more millions dollars in Connecticut tax payer money for no results.

Do these BC duckfaces really think that if BCU was on the outside looking in that they would just take their lumps and walk away with their tail between their legs? They would be doing whatever they can to get to get into another conference, including filing lawsuits against every Tom, Dick, and Harry.

 

[flyonthewall]

I just don't get the ESPN told the ACC to take SU and Pitt to destroy the BE as a FB league scenario. OK, so the football side of the BE is hurt with SU, Pitt and now TCU leaving but the basketball side remains attractive and something that ESPN would want to keep to fill their programming needs. Remember ESPN has a lot of channels and needs something to fill all of that time.

What does ESPN gain from the dissolution of the BE FB conference? They, ESPN, still need to fill their channels with programming and BE FB has been useful for that especially on Wednesday, Thursday and Friday nights. From a money standpoint ESPN would likely pay out the same amount with Pitt and SU in the ACC in that the BE would get less and the ACC more.

I think what happened was that the ACC saw what numbers were being offered to other conferences, looked at their contract with ESPN and saw that they could re-open it if they added two teams. They, the ACC, then talked with ESPN about adding various teams and ESPN likely told them what they would do moneywise with respect to each combination of the 10 teams the ACC had received expressions of interest from. That is what I think the BC AD meant when he supposedly said that 'TV told the ACC what to do.' The ACC then took that info and made their decision about which teams to approach about membership.

Before the BE goes off half cocked and starts suing people it needs to remember that people have long memories and once you sue someone it is VERY difficult to do business with them again.

 

[sportsart]

Rumrunner

Posts are all speculation based on vague information written or revealed by so called writers. I did not see any posts in this thread that said they knew more than the institutions involved.

 

[IthacaMatt]

I just don't get the ESPN told the ACC to take SU and Pitt to destroy the BE as a FB league scenario. OK, so the football side of the BE is hurt with SU, Pitt and now TCU leaving but the basketball side remains attractive and something that ESPN would want to keep to fill their programming needs. Remember ESPN has a lot of channels and needs something to fill all of that time.

What does ESPN gain from the dissolution of the BE FB conference? They, ESPN, still need to fill their channels with programming and BE FB has been useful for that especially on Wednesday, Thursday and Friday nights. From a money standpoint ESPN would likely pay out the same amount with Pitt and SU in the ACC in that the BE would get less and the ACC more.

I think what happened was that the ACC saw what numbers were being offered to other conferences, looked at their contract with ESPN and saw that they could re-open it if they added two teams. They, the ACC, then talked with ESPN about adding various teams and ESPN likely told them what they would do moneywise with respect to each combination of the 10 teams the ACC had received expressions of interest from. That is what I think the BC AD meant when he supposedly said that 'TV told the ACC what to do.' The ACC then took that info and made their decision about which teams to approach about membership.

Before the BE goes off half cocked and starts suing people it needs to remember that people have long memories and once you sue someone it is VERY difficult to do business with them again.

They kept a superior Big East conference (that is, superior to the ACC in hoops for sure) from moving to NBC/Comcast in an open bidding situation. Although SU and Pitt are not tearing it up in football, they are leading brand names for the conference. They have the most history. Although SU has been terrible for the past 10 years, it has a tradition of success that is decades old, and they still have a lot of quality players in the NFL. You forget, SU has won or tied for the Big East football title 4 times, despite our lost decade, and did it by beating Miami, Va Tech and BC, as well as Pitt and West Virginia.

It's popular to talk smack about SU, but in the not-so-distant past, we have beaten Oklahoma, Notre Dame (twice), Penn State, Colorado, Georgia, Georgia Tech, Clemson, Florida, Michigan, Nebraska, Wisconsin - tons of really good programs. We have almost always played the toughest OOC schedule of any Big East team. That's why we are still a brand. We will be back to top 25 status again in a couple years.

 

[Rumrunner]

So what does anyone expect in the meantime? Play with Pitt and SU for 2 more years and let the league disband for football?

I doubt the end game is clear for anybody, but I guarantee it is worth $17 million to explore all options. Apparently, the presidents of RU, WVU, Louisville, and UCONN agree.

So far we have heard about the football-only teleconference where different schools and different scenarios have been laid out. Boise State in, Boise State out, UCF in, ECU, Navy, , etc. Boise State is anathema as an academic institution to many of the football presidents. How are they supposed to be approved by 3/4ths of the entire league, including G'Town, Nova, etc.? All it takes is 3 dissenters to stop approval of any one team.

I think the naivete of just resurrecting the zombie conference with hodge podge schools is getting smacked head on in the face with the difficulties that the Big East has suffered through for the last decade. Disparate schools, geographically, academically, athletically all trying to achieve unity of purpose.

 

[Rumrunner]

Rumrunner

Posts are all speculation based on vague information written or revealed by so called writers. I did not see any posts in this thread that said they knew more than the institutions involved.

I guess I jumped the gun and anticipated the assault on President Herbst. I guess it's ingrained in me after suffering through so many threads of beg harder, she's pathetic, etc.

 

[UConnSportsGuy]

What does ESPN gain from the dissolution of the BE FB conference?

It ensures that they will not have any additional competition.

They saw the writing on the wall....the Big East was going to sign a huge contract with NBC/Comcast and NBC was going to make a huge push in the college athletics world (and make a big push when they turn Versus into NBC Sports Channel...going head to head with ESPN). Now they don't have to worry about that.

Everyone doing these calculations on the contract cost to ESPN don't get it. It wasn't about saving money...it was about eliminating competition from other networks.

 

[HuskyHawk]

I just don't get the ESPN told the ACC to take SU and Pitt to destroy the BE as a FB league scenario. OK, so the football side of the BE is hurt with SU, Pitt and now TCU leaving but the basketball side remains attractive and something that ESPN would want to keep to fill their programming needs. Remember ESPN has a lot of channels and needs something to fill all of that time.

What does ESPN gain from the dissolution of the BE FB conference? They, ESPN, still need to fill their channels with programming and BE FB has been useful for that especially on Wednesday, Thursday and Friday nights. From a money standpoint ESPN would likely pay out the same amount with Pitt and SU in the ACC in that the BE would get less and the ACC more.

I think what happened was that the ACC saw what numbers were being offered to other conferences, looked at their contract with ESPN and saw that they could re-open it if they added two teams. They, the ACC, then talked with ESPN about adding various teams and ESPN likely told them what they would do moneywise with respect to each combination of the 10 teams the ACC had received expressions of interest from. That is what I think the BC AD meant when he supposedly said that 'TV told the ACC what to do.' The ACC then took that info and made their decision about which teams to approach about membership.

This is my of what likely occurred read as well. However, under the particular circumstances, ESPN should have declined to engage the ACC even at this level.

 

[WestCoastHusky]

Unless every BE FB school finds a suitable landing spot if BE blows up, I doubt anyone gonna take this lying down. Do you honestly think all these universities with billion dollar annual budget gonna sit still with ACC and ESPN coming in stealing couple teams and ruin it for everyone else? I suspect this could get real ugly especially with latest comments from Flipper. When someone intentionally try to hurt you like BCU is doing to UCONN, I expect some kind of reaction in return.

I don't know where all this is headed, but it could get ugly soon especially with latest comments from Flipper.

 

[flyonthewall]

Keep in mind that the BE bylaws, like those of every conference, provide a mechanism for teams to withdraw. So Pitt and SU gave notice and will pay the $5 million at some point and negotiate about the 27 month thing. Not sure what TCU is subject to.

So Pitt and SU leave and follow the bylaws in doing so, maybe even some other schools as well. What is the claim the left behind schools have? Well we know there was a procedure for schools to withdraw but we just didn't mean it?

 

[UConnSportsGuy]

Keep in mind that the BE bylaws, like those of every conference, provide a mechanism for teams to withdraw. So Pitt and SU gave notice and will pay the $5 million at some point and negotiate about the 27 month thing. Not sure what TCU is subject to.

So Pitt and SU leave and follow the bylaws in doing so, maybe even some other schools as well. What is the claim the left behind schools have? Well we know there was a procedure for schools to withdraw but we just didn't mean it?

No one will be suing Pitt or SU...as you said, they have the right to leave with certain terms. The lawsuits will be primarily against ESPN, but also include the ACC.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

I think we are simply seeing the Big East football schools not bidding against themselves as they solicit interest from potential new members. Boise, Navy and friends will negotiate terms with the Big East football schools soon enough. There isn't any reason to jump the gun on that.

Why wouldn't the Big East evaluate legal strategies related to the ACC taking Pitt and Syracuse? The Syracuse fans on this board seem to think they can screw people over without consequences. If we were talking about trucking or trash hauling instead of universities, the harmed parties would not be evaluating legal strategies. Actions have consequences.

 

[businesslawyer]

"The Big East is our business partner. If you convince member schools to leave it, and join you, we will fulfill our contract with you to renegotiate fees in good faith. But please do not expect us to sit down with you and provide you with information that is aimed to assist you in causing material harm to our business partner."

That would be a statement that satisfied ESPN's covenant of good faith and fair dealing with the Big East. I do not know what ESPN said or did, but I am fairly confident that ESPN did not say the foregoing.

 

[huskeynut]

I don't know how many schools need to vote for the increased exit fees, but I bet Uconn, USF, Louisville, UWV and Cinncy aren't going to vote for increased fees. And why should they! If offers come their way, they are going.

Litigation, if any, would have to be in Federal court. Don't see that happening any time soon.

 

[businesslawyer]

I think we are simply seeing the Big East football schools not bidding against themselves as they solicit interest from potential new members. Boise, Navy and friends will negotiate terms with the Big East football schools soon enough. There isn't any reason to jump the gun on that.

Why wouldn't the Big East evaluate legal strategies related to the ACC taking Pitt and Syracuse? The Syracuse fans on this board seem to think they can screw people over without consequences. If we were talking about trucking or trash hauling instead of universities, the harmed parties would not be evaluating legal strategies. Actions have consequences.

To be clear, I do not see any basis to allege that Syracuse did anything legally wrong. ESPN -- there is a theory if facts support it. BC -- almost definitely conspired with others in violation of the Sherman Act. Pitt -- you would have to prove it acted in bad faith voting against the Big East TV contract, which by all reports probably wasn't the case, but possible if those facts exist. Syracuse -- I don't see anything that makes me think they did anything legal wrong. Boeheim whining about having to play 3 seasons in the league is not a legal wrong.

 

[WestCoastHusky]

It could very well be all the basketball school that are leading the lawsuit. Remember losing SU and Pitt basketball will damage them too if they don't get a comparable or better TV deal. Football schools might not want to sue but all the basketball schools got nothing to lose and everything to gain by suing ESPN and the ACC.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

It could very well be all the basketball school that are leading the lawsuit. Remember losing SU and Pitt basketball will damage them too if they don't get a comparable or better TV deal. Football schools might not want to sue but all the basketball schools got nothing to lose and everything to gain by suing ESPN and the ACC.

There are 17 plaintiffs by my count. The 14 Big East member schools plus Fox, Comcast and CBS.

I suspect that ESPN is much more worried about the last 3 than the first 14 right now, and that concern inspired the retraction orgy yesterday.

 

[06029]

The only one that profits in a lawsuit is the lawyers. The BE has no suit against Pitt and Cuse if they followed established bylaws and procedures. A suit against ESPN? Talk about biting the hand that feeds you. A comparable TV deal was in front of the BE already and it was rejected by the whole BE. Now the conference composition is changed. If ESPN feels that future BE composition is not comparable to the prior BE in terms of TV eyeballs and ratings, they will be able to prove their case for a lower contract very easily. If the BE argument is collusion, very hard to prove especially if you have 11 ACC presidnets all on the stand saying the same thing and no paper trail to prove it. A giant waste of money. If the BB's are leading the legal charge, Uconn needs to be real careful about having their expressed desire to be in another conference coming back to bite them. I am sure some lawyer could argue that Uconn's public statements are undermining the ability of the BE to rebuild itself/expand with the best possible teams. I'm not saying its right, but if someone is in a suing mood, everyone should duck and cover.