Jump to content
  • USF Bulls fans join us at The Bulls Pen

    It's simple, free and connects you to other South Florida Bulls fans!

  • Members do not see this ad, Register

Big East Possible Agreement With WVU


Recommended Posts


  • Group:  Bull Backers
  • Topic Count:  0
  • Content Count:  4,741
  • Reputation:   127
  • Days Won:  3
  • Joined:  02/25/2004

It'll never be over ...

I'm afraid that you may be right. At least they used to try to hide the fact that it's all about money, now they broadcast it.

Have civil suits ever been about anything else?

I mean just college football in general. As for Civil suits you are 100% correct.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 427
  • Created
  • Last Reply

  • Group:  Member
  • Topic Count:  0
  • Content Count:  260
  • Reputation:   0
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  10/23/2007

and that verbage is far too subjective to interpretation if it were actually to go to court. i remember louisville trying to sue someone when a series got cancelled on them - their contract had this language in it - the court interpreted that to mean any school playing D1 football (including 1-AA teams) and U of L lost the case, since they found 1-AA teams to fill the void. that of course was a KY court, and would not apply specifically to this case, just using it as a comparative reference - and how much would a lawsuit cost? might not be worth it once the legal fees are paid anyway.
Largely depends if FSU litigates it. I don't know the language of the contract, but if it has a clause that sets a standard for a replacement opponent then there's a case. More likely than not, FSU will just cancel on WVU at the last moment and make them have to scramble. WVU has done this kind of stuff before, so they just make it harder on themselves to find out of conference opponents.

The contract says "comparable" opponent - that is a pretty subjective word and difficult to assign a direct meaning to. it can easily be argued that the fact that WVU is expected to be pretty good this year cannot be used in determining damages for a contract that was signed 3 years before WVU's run of success and national attention began. FSU entered this contract when it was thought WVU was mediocre at best. they would have a difficult time arguing they scheduled WVU with the foresight and intent that it would be a game of national interest, because those were not the facts at the time they signed it.

FSU signed a document agreeing to what damages would be in this exact situation, will be kind of hard to get a court to rule otherwise. and even if they did, the legal fees for what would be a 2-4 milliion suit is going to be at least that much if not more. simply is not cost beneficial to proceed. and if FSU brings legal action, they are then taking the position that they intend to honor the return trip to morgantown next year. if they then dont show up, WVU would have a slam dunk case to just sue and get the settlement right back anyway.

this one is done - wvu pays the 500K per the contract and everyone moves on.

also - what are you talking about that WVU has done this kind of stuff before? when did this happen? who did they do this to? I am not aware of WVU cancelling a contract with anyone in the last decade, and most certainly not within 12 months of the scheduled game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Member
  • Topic Count:  0
  • Content Count:  7,040
  • Reputation:   634
  • Days Won:  11
  • Joined:  06/04/2009

and that verbage is far too subjective to interpretation if it were actually to go to court. i remember louisville trying to sue someone when a series got cancelled on them - their contract had this language in it - the court interpreted that to mean any school playing D1 football (including 1-AA teams) and U of L lost the case, since they found 1-AA teams to fill the void. that of course was a KY court, and would not apply specifically to this case, just using it as a comparative reference - and how much would a lawsuit cost? might not be worth it once the legal fees are paid anyway.
Largely depends if FSU litigates it. I don't know the language of the contract, but if it has a clause that sets a standard for a replacement opponent then there's a case. More likely than not, FSU will just cancel on WVU at the last moment and make them have to scramble. WVU has done this kind of stuff before, so they just make it harder on themselves to find out of conference opponents.

The contract says "comparable" opponent - that is a pretty subjective word and difficult to assign a direct meaning to. it can easily be argued that the fact that WVU is expected to be pretty good this year cannot be used in determining damages for a contract that was signed 3 years before WVU's run of success and national attention began. FSU entered this contract when it was thought WVU was mediocre at best. they would have a difficult time arguing they scheduled WVU with the foresight and intent that it would be a game of national interest, because those were not the facts at the time they signed it.

FSU signed a document agreeing to what damages would be in this exact situation, will be kind of hard to get a court to rule otherwise. and even if they did, the legal fees for what would be a 2-4 milliion suit is going to be at least that much if not more. simply is not cost beneficial to proceed. and if FSU brings legal action, they are then taking the position that they intend to honor the return trip to morgantown next year. if they then dont show up, WVU would have a slam dunk case to just sue and get the settlement right back anyway.

this one is done - wvu pays the 500K per the contract and everyone moves on.

also - what are you talking about that WVU has done this kind of stuff before? when did this happen? who did they do this to? I am not aware of WVU cancelling a contract with anyone in the last decade, and most certainly not within 12 months of the scheduled game.

well fsu better hurry up and sue before wv sues them. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Member
  • Topic Count:  0
  • Content Count:  1,867
  • Reputation:   202
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  08/13/2003

Bingo! From @CBSSports: Big East, WVU nearing $20M settlement & WVU trying to find 2012 replacement for Big East http://bit.ly/zHTczD

it's happening!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Member
  • Topic Count:  0
  • Content Count:  1,011
  • Reputation:   240
  • Days Won:  2
  • Joined:  11/06/2011

Bingo! From @CBSSports: Big East, WVU nearing $20M settlement & WVU trying to find 2012 replacement for Big East http://bit.ly/zHTczD

it's happening!!

Doesn't sound like anything new to me, until they find the replacement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Member
  • Topic Count:  0
  • Content Count:  19,525
  • Reputation:   992
  • Days Won:  24
  • Joined:  09/01/2006

Bingo! From @CBSSports: Big East, WVU nearing $20M settlement & WVU trying to find 2012 replacement for Big East http://bit.ly/zHTczD

it's happening!!

Interesting if they make WVU help find a replacement for 2012 or face higher penalties. That would be help to keep others from jumping ship early.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Member
  • Topic Count:  0
  • Content Count:  820
  • Reputation:   5
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  07/14/2011

Downside of this for BE football for upcoming season Boise St would have been replacement, now Memphis appears to be option.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Member
  • Topic Count:  0
  • Content Count:  1,204
  • Reputation:   49
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  09/04/2007

Downside of this for BE football for upcoming season Boise St would have been replacement, now Memphis appears to be option.

Except Boise refused. Looks like no agreement with WVU unless they can get someone in to replace them prior to the 27 month window. Works for Pitt and Cuse too in that case.

If all three want to leave and all three want to pay $20M and can get UCF, SMU, and Houston in for next year then they probably will be allowed to go. But we clearly want replacements.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Member
  • Topic Count:  0
  • Content Count:  820
  • Reputation:   5
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  07/14/2011

Downside of this for BE football for upcoming season Boise St would have been replacement, now Memphis appears to be option.

Except Boise refused. Looks like no agreement with WVU unless they can get someone in to replace them prior to the 27 month window. Works for Pitt and Cuse too in that case.

If all three want to leave and all three want to pay $20M and can get UCF, SMU, and Houston in for next year then they probably will be allowed to go. But we clearly want replacements.

I am saying If the BE would have done this agreement a month ago it would have been Boise St, now the replacement for WVU in 2012 will be Memphis, since they will be the option that appears to be able to move first out of ConfUSA, if Pitt and Cuse want out you are right pay and get someone in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Member
  • Topic Count:  0
  • Content Count:  24,750
  • Reputation:   3,107
  • Days Won:  87
  • Joined:  12/15/2009

Downside of this for BE football for upcoming season Boise St would have been replacement, now Memphis appears to be option.

Except Boise refused. Looks like no agreement with WVU unless they can get someone in to replace them prior to the 27 month window. Works for Pitt and Cuse too in that case.

If all three want to leave and all three want to pay $20M and can get UCF, SMU, and Houston in for next year then they probably will be allowed to go. But we clearly want replacements.

We don't just want replacements ... we NEED replacements. A seven team conference just isn't viable. Memphis and Boise won't be here until 2013, so if WVU wants to leave early, they pay out the ass and help us get someone else in for 2012. Any other way would create far too much trouble to find replacement games at this point in the year for all remaining BE teams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

It appears you are using ad blocking tools.  This site is supported through ads.  Please disable in order to enjoy full access to The Bulls Pen.  Registration is free and reduces ads.