Crunch time for Herbst/Manuel

[CL82]

I can't disagree more strongly. When two parties enter into a deal, each expect the other not to screw them. whether the contract says that or not.

Well, we'll have to agree to disagree on this counselor. The act of entering a contract in one area doesn't create a fiduciary duty in every other area.

The University of Connecticut isn't a party to the contract and ESPN isn't going to step out from behind the curtain and say yeah we've been behind all this. Conference realignment is too far from the subject matter of the contract.

Connecticut paid an incentive for ESPN to stay put and meet certain employment targets. That's what we (and by that I mean you) paid for as citizens of the State and that's exactly what we'll get. No more; no less.

 

[Carl Spackler]

Well, we'll have to agree to disagree on this counselor. The act of entering a contract in one area doesn't create a fiduciary duty in every other area.

The University of Connecticut isn't a party to the contract and ESPN isn't going to step out from behind the curtain and say yeah we've been behind all this. Conference realignment is too far from the subject matter of the contract.

Connecticut paid an incentive for ESPN to stay put and meet certain employment targets. That's what we (and by that I mean you) paid for as citizens of the State and that's exactly what we'll get. No more; no less.

Now that's a liberal mindset. YOu think that Virginia Tech was a mutual party involved with a contract between the university, the state governor of Virginia representing the State of Virgina and any contract with teh ACC or Big East in 2003?

That governor stepped in, and got something done. It's not the only example of a politician, getting a job done for a state institution in a situation that involves the welfare of a state associated university, in these 50 states of the union.

 

[huskymedic]

I hear your point. I still disagree. If I take $5M to expand into Hartford and add thirty new lawyers and thirty or forty other jobs, I don't go ahead and take a case to sue the State of Connecticut. I don't care that the contract doesn't flat out forbid me -- if you take money from someone you owe them something more than taking it and hiring people.

A lawyer with a conscience? Sorry - couldn't resist.

 

[Mr. Wonderful]

ESPN absolutely should be held to the standard of a partner - when it accepts special compensation from the state like it did.

They are certainly not holding up their end.

If I were a politico, I'd have a new favorite target to play hardball with from now on.

 

[HuskyHawk]

Why not Big East for football? Yes, I realize this is hypothetical speculation. But if the ACC wanted UConn sports sans football, why not keep football in tge Big East? I know thet Big East would be pissed, but beggars can't be choosers. They need UConn to help keep them relevant (as a flagship state school)

This is the first real "outside the box" suggestion I've seen.

 

[HuskyHawk]

Well, we'll have to agree to disagree on this counselor. The act of entering a contract in one area doesn't create a fiduciary duty in every other area.

The University of Connecticut isn't a party to the contract and ESPN isn't going to step out from behind the curtain and say yeah we've been behind all this. Conference realignment is too far from the subject matter of the contract.

Connecticut paid an incentive for ESPN to stay put and meet certain employment targets. That's what we (and by that I mean you) paid for as citizens of the State and that's exactly what we'll get. No more; no less.

Who cares? Where the hell is there any indication that ESPN, which does not freaking have a contract with Notre Dame, is involved in this? The mere fact that ESPN may view the ACC rights as more valuable does not even remotely suggest that they directed this to happen. NBC still has the home football games. The ACC made a good move for themselves here. Notre Dame did too. Looking for any other cause is silly.

The Big East got ND b/c it was the only conference that would go along with the split. As soon as any more desireable conference was willing to make the same deal, the BE was likely to lose ND. This shouldn't surprise anyone. Hell we've been speculating about it for a year!

If you want someone to blame, blame the Big East. By bringing in just enough cast-offs to keep the conference afloat, ND's hand wasn't forced. They could stand pat. Once that was true, they weren't joining a conference for football, and the ACC, who needed them the most, was willing to cave. If we had let the BE dissolve, ND would be scrambling and would have much less leverage. They might have joined a league for fb, and UConn would probably be better off. Cincy wouldn't be, but who cares.

 

[CL82]

Now that's a liberal mindset. YOu think that Virginia Tech was a mutual party involved with a contract between the university, the state governor of Virginia representing the State of Virgina and any contract with teh ACC or Big East in 2003?

That governor stepped in, and got something done. It's not the only example of a politician, getting a job done for a state institution in a situation that involves the welfare of a state associated university, in these 50 states of the union.

Hardly. A liberal mindset is "I don't like this outcome, it's not fair, so I'll wish for a change regardless of what the law actually is. In the law wishing don't make it so...and that's a good thing. So it really doesn't matter how much you wish "the govenor would step in and get something done" unless there is a legal basis for it, it's not going to happen.

Most of us lose that "magic thinking" around time we enter first grade. For some, apparently, it lingers on.

 

[CL82]

ESPN absolutely should be held to the standard of a partner - when it accepts special compensation from the state like it did.

They are certainly not holding up their end.

If I were a politico, I'd have a new favorite target to play hardball with from now on.

See now this I can agree with. Prospectively, I wouldn't give them jack .

 

[ruskin]

What a day for Dr. Herbst & Mr. Manuel, eh? Seriously wishing them all the best as they multitask and try to pull a few rabbits out of a hat.

About ESPN: it's time for all the coy nonsense coming from Bristol to stop. They have to stop acting like they're innocent bystanders in all this conference shifting that's killing the I-A school closest to their HQ. (See DiFilippo, Gene, "ESPN told us what to do"). When the Calhoun dust settles, some SERIOUS high level talks need to take place involving ESPN & Disney honchos and Malloy, Blumenthal, state congressmen and legislators with the goal of finding UConn a stable conference home. Not asking for a handout, like ESPN did from state, just a hand.

 

[Waquoit]

It's over, Johnny. It's over!

 

[Rumrunner]

For those too naive to believe it, ND had been talking with the ACC for months, even asking their tv partners what the financial ramifications would be. This isn't my opinion, it was admited to at the press conference. By the way, the ACC should see about a $1m bump per team, ND says and that ND gets 20% of 1/15th of the ACC's media contract with ESPN, which ND is calling revenue neutral.

So ESPN was involved.

 

[UCFBfan]

If ESPN is so involved, and I truly believe they are, why don't the other major networks do something about? Why isn't CBSSports saying anything or crying foul? Why isn't NBC up in arms, especially now that their cash cow is probably gone in 2015? Why doesn't Fox say anything? I just don't understand. It's fine and all for the little bloggers and smaller sites to say something but why aren't the big boys doing something about this? All this shuffling will be affecting them (maybe not Fox). CBS is bound to possibly lose the SEC altogether and NBC is likely to lose ND. I'm very perplexed.....

 

[pj]

If ESPN is so involved, and I truly believe they are, why don't the other major networks do something about? Why isn't CBSSports saying anything or crying foul? Why isn't NBC up in arms, especially now that their cash cow is probably gone in 2015? Why doesn't Fox say anything? I just don't understand. It's fine and all for the little bloggers and smaller sites to say something but why aren't the big boys doing something about this? All this shuffling will be affecting them (maybe not Fox). CBS is bound to possibly lose the SEC altogether and NBC is likely to lose ND. I'm very perplexed.....

It's a bidding war, cash talks, and ESPN has the $5/channel subscription fees. The other networks have 1/10 their voice.