Boomer Esiason says ESPN forced the Big East raid

[upstater]

This has to be sarcastic right? Not everything is BC's fault. There were 3 other schools that needed to block Uconn if that is what actually happened. Do they need to justify themselves too?

Not true. This wasn't the expansion vote. That's a whole other ball of wax. This was totally different. It was the invitation.

 

[UConnRock]

I also find it quite ironic that the ESPN article announcing that the A&M move the the SEC was a done deal mentions only Missouri and Wet Virginia as the next potential SEC member. Is this wishful thinking on their part or do they have information from the ACC that the league will remain together.

 

[Nostical]

The last thing we need is to be out front with litigation. I say leave it to Ms Herbst to keep us in the discussion.

 

[Scalito]

The last thing we need is to be out front with litigation. I say leave it to Ms Herbst to keep us in the discussion.

Agreed. If ESPN instigated the raid, which I seriously doubt, let the Big East file a civil suit for tortious interference or some other action its lawyers can think up. No potential monetary award is worth the trouble of being a named plaintiff in any suit.

 

[Murph]

The last thing we need is to be out front with litigation. I say leave it to Ms Herbst to keep us in the discussion.

Agreed. We played the Blumenthal card the last go around.

 

[Scalito]

I kinda hope it's true. My gut tells me everything comes to a screeching halt, and there will be litigation

There's no reason to waste your time hoping for a legal fix to our situation because it does not exist. Even assuming that ESPN orchestrated the raid in an unlawful manner, there is nothing a court can do but award damages. No court can put the breaks on Syracuse's or Pitt's departure.

 

[Yo_ho_ho_'n_Rum]

I am loathe to accuse anyone of illegal activity just because it is possible or rumored. Or, even to analyze the legality of what might have happened in a way that others will assume that it in fact happened. So, with my apologizes, until I have some facts (and Boomer repeating a rumor he heard is not a fact) I will be keeping quiet on this.

Give BL a break! He is erudite and literate but he is not a litigator. has tried, and to the uninformed, been relatively able to sound and present himself as a litigator/lawyer, but to us working attorneys, he presents as a child who plays (note that I did not use the word "played") with his dad's law books. This story will end not with litigation but with negotiation--a business negotiation based not on: "a civil suit for tortious interference or some other action its lawyers can think up," but rather, on facts, facts to which BL is not privy.

 

[huskypantz]

Give BL a break! He is erudite and literate but he is not a litigator. has tried, and to the uninformed, been relatively able to sound and present himself as a litigator/lawyer, but to us working attorneys, he presents as a child who plays (note that I did not use the word "played") with his dad's law books. This story will end not with litigation but with negotiation--a business negotiation based not on: "a civil suit for tortious interference or some other action its lawyers can think up," but rather, on facts, facts to which BL is not privy.

You should go play with your dad's books on etiquette.

 

[Yo_ho_ho_'n_Rum]

You should go play with your dad's books on etiquette.

What do those etiquette books say about suffering fools huskypantz? is, in this arena, an empty barrel, a particularly loud empty barrel, given his ability to string a cogent, if uninformed, sentence or two together in proper form. Your apparent defense of him is puzzling.

 

[UCDaveD]

ThuGoost?

 

[huskypantz]

What do those etiquette books say about suffering fools huskypantz? is, in this arena, an empty barrel, a particularly loud empty barrel, given his ability to string a cogent, if uninformed, sentence or two together in proper form. Your apparent defense of him is puzzling.

The books say that personal attacks surrounded by tangential ramblings are still personal attacks.

 

[Yo_ho_ho_'n_Rum]

Hpantz, you may be a fool but but I am not qualified to establish such a diagnosis.

 

[Yo_ho_ho_'n_Rum]

ThuGoost?

You make a good point.

Nothing can be argued about that.

 

[Scalito]

The books say that personal attacks surrounded by tangential ramblings are still personal attacks.

Thanks, although it seems that the books' lessons are falling on deaf ears.

 

[Yo_ho_ho_'n_Rum]

Thanks, although it seems that the books' lessons are falling on deaf ears.

That was so very weak, young man. I was hoping for, at best, to issue you a "touche" or, at the very worst, a "mea culpa," ...is that really you?

 

[FfldCntyFan]

I am loathe to accuse anyone of illegal activity just because it is possible or rumored. Or, even to analyze the legality of what might have happened in a way that others will assume that it in fact happened. So, with my apologizes, until I have some facts (and Boomer repeating a rumor he heard is not a fact) I will be keeping quiet on this.

I've heard for nearly two months that there were discussions between the ACC and ESPN regarding what exactly would warrant reopening the television contract to bring it up to market level (what market level became after the ACC signed their last deal).

While I would love to be able to b!tch and moan about how great everyone felt about the way things were until ESPN came along and decided to ruin everything, I personally believe that it was the ACC who initiated these conversations.

 

[huskypantz]

Hpantz, you may be a fool but but I am not qualified to establish such a diagnosis.

Before God we are equally wise and equally foolish.

 

[Scalito]

That was so very weak, young man. I was hoping for, at best, to issue you a "touche" or, at the very worst, a "mea culpa," .

Eh. There's no reason to take the bait. I am confident enough in my own abilities and legal resume that I don't need to measure them against yours on a message board. Nor do I need to defend the merits of any substantive positions I took because, at the end of the day, you agreed with my post that there is no reason for UConn to make a federal case out of this. All you did was insult me, and since that's apparent to others on the board, I'm content.

 

[Mr.Phat]

So, going by the Blaudschun statement that UConn was the first choice over Pitt, and that BC blocked it, it's going to be quite interesting to see how this all plays out. How in the world is BC going to justify this?

Do you have a link for this? First I have heard of it.

 

[upstater]

Do you have a link for this? First I have heard of it.

It was from Blauschun's twitter account.

 

[ZooCougar]

What do those etiquette books say about suffering fools huskypantz? is, in this arena, an empty barrel, a particularly loud empty barrel, given his ability to string a cogent, if uninformed, sentence or two together in proper form. Your apparent defense of him is puzzling.

Time for you to be banned again.

 

[gars44]

Really not a shocker. ESPN was not going to allow the Big East as presently constituted to enter free agency. The Big East basketball tourney would outdraw all other conference tournaments hands down, so the Big East was sure to get a nice payout from someone, so ESPN decided to weaken the basketball product, while gutting the football side.

Right, and with two programs the ACC could live with: Pitt and Syr. So, we need to counter with Temple and Memphis, a few others, and go to the 12/20 model. What's the difference anymore.