Houston Chronicle exclusive: Texas, Oklahoma reach out to SEC about joining conference. | Page 33 | The Boneyard

Houston Chronicle exclusive: Texas, Oklahoma reach out to SEC about joining conference.

BlueDogs said:
Well, you asked how to calculate damages, and I told you. Tortious interference is not hard to prove. The elements are: (1) the existence of a valid and enforceable contract between plaintiff and another (yes); (2) defendant’s awareness of the contractual relationship )yes); (3) defendant’s intentional and unjustified inducement of a breach of the contract (alleged by Big12 ); (4) a breach by the other party caused by defendant’s wrongful conduct (not yet ripe), but ; and (5) damages ( seems eminently provable). ESPN would want to hang their hat on No. 4, which is why Texas and OU have publicly said they are sticking around through end of term. The OSU situation appears to another case, which in concert with the Texas and OU situation, raise the question whether there is a potential RICO case. Beyond tortuous interference, claims based upon unfair trade practices and fraud in the inducement (possibly going back to ESPN paying up to dissuade the Big12 from expanding ) might also be in play. Obviously, until more info is known, it is difficult to say ESPN did something wrongful, though the optics do not look great.
Expand ...
What would damages be since none of the Little 12 have left the conference?
 
UCFBfan said:
I am still wondering why there is complete radio silence from FOX. The Big 12 is a large portion of their College FB product. They are losing their top 2 brands in that conference yet nothing has been said.....it's very bizarre yet I'm not sure what I expect to be said....I guess I'm surprised that none of the three billion articles that have been written over the past three weeks have even mentioned FOX and their contract and how this might impact them or the remaining Big 12 schools.
Expand ...

They are a minority stake in the B12 vs. ESPN, who is driving the bus ( Big 12 Announces New Media Rights Deal With ESPN & FOX Sports Media Group ) . With that being said, I wonder if they are on the side of protecting the product and standing behind Bowlsby silently as he confronts ESPN on the legal side of things.

One other interesting piece to this puzzle which I have missed entirely, which has probably been mentioned in this thread is that both Fox & ESPN rejected early negotiations back in May on the upcoming contract lapse in a few years:
www.heartlandcollegesports.com

ESPN, FOX Decline Early TV Negotiations with Big 12 Conference

The college football world has been quiet for the better part of nearly a decade since massive conference realignment took place. There are already rumbling that things may begin to pick up in the next couple of years as the TV contracts near their conclusion across the college football...
www.heartlandcollegesports.com www.heartlandcollegesports.com

ESPN/Texas/OK absolutely had to know at that stage they were jettisoning themselves, so I wonder if they clued Fox in at that time or pulled the rug out from them as well.
 
.-.
CL82 said:
What would damages be since none of the Little 12 have left the conference?
Expand ...
CL82... see my prior post. I think it’s relatively clear how to calculate damages.
 
BlueDogs said:
CL82... see my prior post. I think it’s relatively clear how to calculate damages.
Expand ...
I didn’t. That’s why I asked.

Explain it to me like I’m a three year old? (Or just explain it to me.)
 
CL82 said:
I didn’t. That’s why I asked.

Explain it to me like I’m a three year old? (Or just explain it to me.)
Expand ...
As stated, the damages element doesn’t seem to be that complicated, assuming the other elements could be satisfied:

The measure of damages would the Big12 would likely generate if it were whole at the time of GOR renegotiation versus what it would command absent it’s 2 chief assets, and then apply a ten year discounted cash flow. The concept of damages in relation to future business losses are handled by courts all the time. The Big12 reported $439M with each team getting between $38-42M. The AAC commands $111M with teams getting between $5-7M. That’s a $300M a year differential. If you assume the little B12 can get $150M or $200M a year in a new GOR, thats a loss of over a $1B before considering special or punitive damages. I think it is quite reasonable to sue ESPN for $3-5 Billion in damages if they can actually prove material and knowing misconduct.

Any that’s my general opinion assuming what the Big12 alleges is proven to be true. My guess is all this gets financially engineered into a global settlement. The Little Big12 needs to sustain its revenue and will fight line he’ll fit that for some guaranteed period.
 
BlueDogs said:
As stated, the damages element doesn’t seem to be that complicated, assuming the other elements could be satisfied:

The measure of damages would the Big12 would likely generate if it were whole at the time of GOR renegotiation versus what it would command absent it’s 2 chief assets, and then apply a ten year discounted cash flow. The concept of damages in relation to future business losses are handled by courts all the time. The Big12 reported $439M with each team getting between $38-42M. The AAC commands $111M with teams getting between $5-7M. That’s a $300M a year differential. If you assume the little B12 can get $150M or $200M a year in a new GOR, thats a loss of over a $1B before considering special or punitive damages. I think it is quite reasonable to sue ESPN for $3-5 Billion in damages if they can actually prove material and knowing misconduct.

Any that’s my general opinion assuming what the Big12 alleges is proven to be true. My guess is all this gets financially engineered into a global settlement. The Little Big12 needs to sustain its revenue and will fight line he’ll fit that for some guaranteed period.
Expand ...
Keep in mind that Bowlsby has stated that he has no evidence of tampering regarding Oklahoma and Texas. He only has evidence of tampering with the remaining eight schools. Since none of them left there doesn’t appear to be any damages. Your calculation assumes evidence of tampering between Oklahoma and or Texas.
 
CL82 said:
Keep in mind that Bowlsby has stated that he has no evidence of tampering regarding Oklahoma and Texas. He only has evidence of tampering with the remaining eight schools. Since none of them left there doesn’t appear to be any damages. Your calculation assumes evidence of tampering between Oklahoma and or Texas.
Expand ...
Yes, the predicate for anything is provable culpability and until that is done, it’s all idle conjecture.
 
BlueDogs said:
Yes, the predicate for anything is provable culpability and until that is done, it’s all idle conjecture.
Expand ...
So… no ascertainable damages.
 
.-.
CL82 said:
Yeah pretty much.
Expand ...
Nope. There are wrongful acts which are grounded in legally recognizable causes of action and damages are intended to compensate for loss or injury which arises from it. Your question was whether damages are ascertainable ( i.e., whether damages are quantifiable or calculable). If the harm is calculable on a reasonable economic basis, as has been done in many tortious interference and unfair trade practices cases, then it is a ascertainable. Provable is a different animal. Provable means whether it can be established by a preponderance of the evidence that the loss or harm as alleged was proximately caused by the wrongful act. You can’t conflate the two. Also, in cases where damages are difficult to calculate equitable relief is available in the form of injunctions.
 
BlueDogs said:
Nope. There are wrongful acts which are grounded in legally recognizable causes of action and damages are intended to compensate for loss or injury which arises from it. Your question was whether damages are ascertainable ( i.e., whether damages are quantifiable or calculable). If the harm is calculable on a reasonable economic basis, as has been done in many tortious interference and unfair trade practices cases, then it is a ascertainable. Provable is a different animal. Provable means whether it can be established by a preponderance of the evidence that the loss or harm as alleged was proximately caused by the wrongful act. You can’t conflate the two. Also, in cases where damages are difficult to calculate equitable relief is available in the form of injunctions.
Expand ...
You are missing the point. Bowlsby said he had evidence of one more attempts by ESPN to get members schools to leave after OU and Texas. No schools left. How was the Big 12 damaged by the alleged tampering? You still haven't answered that question.
 
Last edited:
If Clemson and FSU or ND join the SEC, that pretty much forces the B1G to expand. I like our chances if that happens.
 
CL82 said:
You are missing the point. Bowlsby said he had evidence of one more attempts by ESPN to get members schools to leave after OU and Texas. No schools left. How was the Big 12 damaged by the alleged tampering? You still haven't answered that question.
Expand ...
i give.
 
.-.
DoctorWho85 said:
If Clemson and FSU or ND join the SEC, that pretty much forces the B1G to expand. I like our chances if that happens.
Expand ...
I don't, at least for the B1G, but do for the ACC.

Personally, I'd like to see FSU and Clemson leave, not only because it creates a potential opening for UConn but because I'd like to see the efficacy of GORs established. That litigation would be a popcorn moment of a sort since it is underpinning the stability of conferences right now.
 
CL82 said:
I don't, at least for the B1G, but do for the ACC.

Personally, I'd like to see FSU and Clemson leave, not only because it creates a potential opening for UConn but because I'd like to see the efficacy of GORs established. That litigation would be a popcorn moment of a sort since it is underpinning the stability of conferences right now.
Expand ...
End of the day, if ACC schools could move, would they move? In 15 years, will the ACC teams be the same as we see today? How long can the top ACC schools afford to get paid less than peer schools?
With the exception of the core 8 ACC schools (FSU is a relative newcomer) there is not much history among the schools. All of this points to LT instability.
 
CL82 said:
I don't, at least for the B1G, but do for the ACC.

Personally, I'd like to see FSU and Clemson leave, not only because it creates a potential opening for UConn but because I'd like to see the efficacy of GORs established. That litigation would be a popcorn moment of a sort since it is underpinning the stability of conferences right now.
Expand ...
Let's say both conference came calling, B1G moves the arrow for more fan interest. Outside of UNC and Duke they're a pretty lackluster basketball conference as of late. B1G is better across the board in all sports. PLus it's significantly more money. I'd rather see UConn play Michigan, MSU, OSU, Indiana, Illinois and Purdue every year than Syracuse, UNC, Louisville, Pitt and tobacco road.
 
DoctorWho85 said:
Let's say both conference came calling, B1G moves the arrow for more fan interest. Outside of UNC and Duke they're a pretty lackluster basketball conference as of late. B1G is better across the board in all sports. PLus it's significantly more money. I'd rather see UConn play Michigan, MSU, OSU, Indiana, Illinois and Purdue every year than Syracuse, UNC, Louisville, Pitt and tobacco road.
Expand ...
I would rather be in the Big 10 both for money, but mostly for the stability, since I think they will be one the last conferences standing. I do, however, think that the fact that we are not AAU makes it unlikely that we would get an invite from the B1G.
 
DoctorWho85 said:
Let's say both conference came calling, B1G moves the arrow for more fan interest. Outside of UNC and Duke they're a pretty lackluster basketball conference as of late. B1G is better across the board in all sports. PLus it's significantly more money. I'd rather see UConn play Michigan, MSU, OSU, Indiana, Illinois and Purdue every year than Syracuse, UNC, Louisville, Pitt and tobacco road.
Expand ...
Big10, no question.
 
.-.
BiG has to go PAC next. I would think 2 or 4 with USC being one of them.
 
uconndogs said:
BiG has to go PAC next. I would think 2 or 4 with USC being one of them.
Expand ...
The SEC moves (UT, OU, FSU, Clemson) make sense geographically with mostly contiguous states. It doesn't seem to make sense from a geography perspective that the BIG 10 add PAC 12 teams. It would seem that they would potentially look to UVa, UNC, if the ACC loses FSU and Clemson. Maybe even UConn to lock up the full NE quadrant.
 
Ajs120102 said:
They certainly aren’t acting like a school imminently getting invited. Especially with that Twitter post trying to advertise themselves.
Expand ...
Agreed. Thinking back to all the marketing that was done by BXII candidates 5 years ago, it definitely does not feel like it.

To be honest, I question Vernon's credibility since he seems to have crossed over from journalist to fan on this topic.

You aren't sending tweets out like this if you are speaking with sources that can confirm something is happening. It reads like a Boneyard post.

I could be wrong and he does have something on this but it feels off.

 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,296
Messages
4,561,822
Members
10,457
Latest member
Storytory


Top Bottom