Court issues restraining order in favor of OSU and WSU for Control of PAC
Link:
Link
24 Replies
2
2hhoop3
2y
hopefully a judge rules sooner rather than later to definitively give control of all decision making and assets to the remaining two. Their first order of business should be to withhold from the departing schools that portion of any current year distributions necessary to cover their respective portion of liabilities for the Comcast overpayment and any other obligations existing prior to their departure. After that, they have a whole host of options, alternatives and courses of action to possibly consider.
(In response to this post by patit hoo)
S
Stech
2y
(In response to this post by patit hoo)
2y
They want to make sure that the conference is operating with staff for the full year, so they don't want employees to bail before July 1, 2024. Klav probably wants there to be some bonuses for employees to stay until the end.
(In response to this post by Stech)
S
Stech
2y
him of course, but he’s gone either way. He lost almost his entire Conference, and says screw the two that stayed. Now we know why he lost his Conference. The problem with the selfish ones, is it often catches up to them in the long run.
(In response to this post by mrcaniac)
2y
severance or golden parachute.
It was a "it's for the kids" angle, and the Judge saw through it - and said they could do that with a unanimous vote (which sets a precedent moving forward).
(In response to this post by Stech)
My first move if I'm the Beavs-Cougs axis is fire that loser.
(In response to this post by Stech)
H
hokieZ71
2y
The ACC is gonna stick around as is for another decade at least.
(In response to this post by patit hoo)
S
Stech
2y
if you count the Mag 7 +1. If it doesn’t happen by then, I agree it could be many years before any school breaks away.
(In response to this post by hokieZ71)
2y
So it's not happening.
(In response to this post by Stech)
S
Stech
2y
I have not, especially with all the surprises over the last 2-3 years. Is your post an opinion, or do you have the inside information that it’s definitely not happening?
(In response to this post by tarheelblue)
2y
(In response to this post by Stech)
S
Stech
2y
what will be contraction too, if the ACC becomes the non May 7+1 and Stanford,Cal and SMU. IMHO they will renegotiate how much they will pay to the leftovers like they did with the PAC the last couple of years. They need to cut costs now.
(In response to this post by tarheelblue)
2y
The strategy of getting 8 ACC teams to vote to dissolve the conference is almost impossible. The other ACC schools will challenge any attempt to dissolve the conference in court just like how Oregon State and Washington State are challenging the attempt to dissolve the Pac-12.
** Edited by tarheelblue at 9/12/2023, 12:40:46 PM
(In response to this post by Stech)
2
2hhoop3
2y
are challenging the process and WHO actually has a say in the dissolution or future. The break up occurred when the others left, so it was already done.
The ACC is a functioning conference with a long term media contract so any move to dissolve is different than the PAC. In addition, besides the legal and financial hurdles, there are additional perception and public opinion issues that not only the ACC and its members will face but, will fall to the networks and conference suitors as well. I do not see things surrounding the present ACC situation having a quick, or necessarily clean, resolution. I do believe that with the benefit of more hindsight it will become clear whether the long term GOR was a hindrance or help for the conference and the majority of its members.
(In response to this post by tarheelblue)
S
Stech
2y
fully hold up in court. The Mag 7+1 will just make a case that when they signed it, it was a totally different conference now that the 8 are leaving. Sure they would pay some money, but they also would likely make much more money in their new conference. Again, I don't think it is probable, but it's much more possible than zero IMHO.
One thing, if they don't do it by June 30th, I don't think anybody is going anywhere, but why did North Carolina, Florida State and Clemson vote against expansion when they know if the conference stays together they will make more money? Why do you think they didn't?
** Edited by Stech at 9/12/2023, 12:52:37 PM
(In response to this post by tarheelblue)
2y
Then that's only 3 votes to dissolve the conference. Which means they're 5 votes short. No ACC team is going to vote to dissolve the conference in the next 9 months without a guarantee of a spot in the SEC or B1G (and not at some ridiculous no-money deal like SMU took). And neither of those conferences even wants to expand right now.
(In response to this post by Stech)
S
Stech
2y
USC, UCLA, Oregon, Washington. The only Conference that announces it ahead of time is the B12, and many think they did it to make it so the PAC could not get a TV deal. However, the SEC and B1G are more stealth with their approach.
PS Remember the EPN/SEC folks said some pretty derogatory things about the ACC expansion. At the very least, it makes you wonder why say that? 🤔
(In response to this post by tarheelblue)
2y
The B1G and SEC have never tried to add teams still under a GoR. And they never will.
(In response to this post by Stech)
S
Stech
2y
(In response to this post by tarheelblue)
E
EDGEMAN
2y
After looking at the OK + UT additions, I see the SEC only taking another two (max) in the next round, and the B1X just added 4 PAC-12 schools, so they're done for now.
(In response to this post by tarheelblue)
R
ren_hoek
2y
+3 minimum to get to 20 schools, at the expense of the Big12. Arizona, ASU, and Utah to get a 5 team western division.
(In response to this post by tarheelblue)
2y
The only thing that those 2 can do is tell the schools they want that they will have an invite waiting for them in 2037. Anything else is contract tampering.
(In response to this post by tarheelblue)
2y
And keep winning this year. That's the best form of revenge.
(In response to this post by patit hoo)