Any guess on what our "legal damages" are...

[ttowncoug]

my sense is the Cougs and Beavs will say certain members "harmed" the conference and ultimately the Beavs and Cougs are due money for our damages.

Annual revenue delta between the Pac-12 member deal with Apple and the MWC - estimated at $20M. $20M x 5 years (est. length of deal) = $100M.

Beavs/Cougs keep $200M. That gets deducted from and UW, CU, ASU, UA, Oregon and Utah's distribution for this year. (call that $180M). The remaining money comes from any Rose Bowl payments and the like. This could pave the way to dissolve the conference and have WSU/OSU get a greater share of the dissolution.

 

[wazzucougs96]

WSU and OSU will get 0 dollars.

 

[ttowncoug]

WSU and OSU will get 0 dollars.

Schulz is on brand-x stating the legal strategy is being rolled out. Some are speculating this is legal maneuvering to get a bigger piece of the pie.

 

[roses04]

They will pay us something, the big question is how much. A lot was going on behind everyone's back that they don't want to come out. The schools that left are trying to make it sound like the Pac 12 was one big happy family and it is such a shame. But we had no choice. I reality it was a dysfunctional family, I think there are a lot of skeletons in the closet in Colorado, Arizona, Oregon and UW, and needless to say USC and UCLA killed expansion plans a few years ago knowing they were leaving. There are ramifications for not negotiating in Good Faith, when you claim you are.

 

[Cougsocal]

my sense is the Cougs and Beavs will say certain members "harmed" the conference and ultimately the Beavs and Cougs are due money for our damages.

Annual revenue delta between the Pac-12 member deal with Apple and the MWC - estimated at $20M. $20M x 5 years (est. length of deal) = $100M.

Beavs/Cougs keep $200M. That gets deducted from and UW, CU, ASU, UA, Oregon and Utah's distribution for this year. (call that $180M). The remaining money comes from any Rose Bowl payments and the like. This could pave the way to dissolve the conference and have WSU/OSU get a greater share of the dissolution.

Don't you need to be a victim of a tort or breach of contract to be entitled to damages? Leaving a conference for greener pastures at the end of a media contract is neither a breach, nor a tort. While OSU and WSU might be conference remainderman, how were they damaged by the feckless 10? What is your legal theory? I don't see it.

 

[etowncoug]

Better luck suing the networks for colluding to put a competitor (P12 network) out of business.

 

[wazzucougs96]

We'll be lucky to get a USFL level settlement.

 

[dgibbons]

Don't you need to be a victim of a tort or breach of contract to be entitled to damages? Leaving a conference for greener pastures at the end of a media contract is neither a breach, nor a tort. While OSU and WSU might be conference remainderman, how were they damaged by the feckless 10? What is your legal theory? I don't see it.

We don't know who the evildoers were, or really what of the number of legal issues Schulz could be referring to. It could be a tort claim against Fox and/or ESPN for engineering the dissolution of the conference. It could be WSU's legal position regarding the residue of the Pac-12 assets. Could be something else.

 

[PeteTheChop]

We'll be lucky to get a USFL level settlement.

They got $3 from the NFL 🙁

 

[CougPatrol]

I'm thinking we'll end up with a bag of Cub burgers and get told to F-off.

 

[CougPatrol]

It could be WSU's legal position regarding the residue of the Pac-12 assets. Could be something else.

Thanks for narrowing down the possibilities. 😕

 

[dgibbons]

Thanks for narrowing down the possibilities. 😕

If our beloved leader would like to share more details (and there is no reason for him to do so), I'd happily listen.

 

[PeteTheChop]

It could be a tort claim against Fox and/or ESPN for engineering the dissolution of the conference.

D-Gib,

How would that impact future media rights negotiations should WSU and OSU decide to spearhead a rebuilt Pac-12? Would it anger the "wrong people" as the saying goes?

I'm guessing those media giants have a large team of well-paid lawyers, but Dr. Schultz sounds like he has confidence in the attorneys he's hired for this battle.

Per Brand X, DKS said:

"I think people are going to appreciate the fact we’re going to fight the good fight."

Doesn't sound like someone who plans on losing in court

 

[425cougfan]

Schulz is on brand-x stating the legal strategy is being rolled out. Some are speculating this is legal maneuvering to get a bigger piece of the pie.

I speculate it's a red herring to attempt to distract from his failures. I'm glad they are exploring legal options thoroughly and apparently will use them if warranted. I just doubt there's much here that sticks.

"I think people are going to appreciate the fact we're going to fight the good fight" is conditional and defeatist, if anything. Here's a stronger version: "Our fans can trust that we will explore and, if warranted, pursue every feasible legal avenue and will be in it to win." Don't even have to say that we will, in fact, win. That would be a very strong statement but foolhardy. Maybe Schulz needs a publicist or media consultant, too.

 

[dgibbons]

D-Gib,

How would that impact future media rights negotiations should WSU and OSU decide to spearhead a rebuilt Pac-12? Would it anger the "wrong people" as the saying goes?

I'm guessing those media giants have a large team of well-paid lawyers, but Dr. Schultz sounds like he has confidence in the attorneys he's hired for this battle.

Per Brand X, DKS said:

"I think people are going to appreciate the fact we’re going to fight the good fight."

Doesn't sound like someone who plans on losing in court

You tell me on that. NBC and CBS are out there too. If there is money to be made, my general opinion is bygones become bygones pretty quickly.

 

[Flatlandcoug]

We don't know who the evildoers were, or really what of the number of legal issues Schulz could be referring to. It could be a tort claim against Fox and/or ESPN for engineering the dissolution of the conference. It could be WSU's legal position regarding the residue of the Pac-12 assets. Could be something else.

At the end of the day, WSU and OSU's strongest legal position is likely their claim to the remaining (and future) assets of the conference at the conclusion of the year. My guess is that the programs that are leaving are already trying to make internal arguments why they deserve a share of those future disbursements.

In terms of anti-trust type of lawsuits, it's clear that the B1G and SEC are acting in a manner that is anti-competition and they are stifling the ability of conferences like the Pac-12 from having equal and fair access to their networks. Whether their activities rise to a level that is worthy of a court battle is beyond my paygrade.

 

[ttowncoug]

My take is the Pac-12 schools that weren't negotiating in good faith, were in violation of the bylaws and the rules they put on themselves, and ultimately their behavior caused WSU/OSU significant damages.

It doesn't seem that difficult to prove the bad faith and the fact they openly lied to their conference while negotiating a better deal while they themselves, we involved in a media rights negotiation.

This situation is very different than UCLA/USC and Texas/Oklahoma as they weren't negotiating w/ another conference while telling their existing one they were "all in" on the media rights deal.

 

[PeteTheChop]

Maybe Schulz needs a publicist or media consultant, too.

I think Brand X handles that role pro bono

One reason why I like them even though they went after Coach Leach way too much for my tastes (maybe a vendetta or something?)

 

[95coug]

Don't you need to be a victim of a tort or breach of contract to be entitled to damages? Leaving a conference for greener pastures at the end of a media contract is neither a breach, nor a tort. While OSU and WSU might be conference remainderman, how were they damaged by the feckless 10? What is your legal theory? I don't see it.

When the contract stipulates penalty based on when you provide notice of your departure, rather than on the actual date of departure…it should be pretty easy.

When the same contract stipulates that you sacrifice your claim to assets and media rights as of the date you provide notice….that should also be easy.

There’s zero doubt that WSU and OSU were harmed. And publicly. But I don’t think they even need a tort claim, they just need to follow what’s in the existing conference terms. The other 10 schools are trying to figure out how to get out of that, in the same way FSU and Clemson have been trying for a year to find a way out of the ACC’s grant of rights. They haven’t succeeded, hopefully the 10 won’t either.

 

[etowncoug]

I speculate it's a red herring to attempt to distract from his failures. I'm glad they are exploring legal options thoroughly and apparently will use them if warranted. I just doubt there's much here that sticks.

"I think people are going to appreciate the fact we're going to fight the good fight" is conditional and defeatist, if anything. Here's a stronger version: "Our fans can trust that we will explore and, if warranted, pursue every feasible legal avenue and will be in it to win." Don't even have to say that we will, in fact, win. That would be a very strong statement but foolhardy. Maybe Schulz needs a publicist or media consultant, too.

You most often hear about fighting the good fight during a concession speech.

 

[425cougfan]

You most often hear about fighting the good fight during a concession speech.

Exactly. You can tell this is a guy who uses process to cover his ass and doesn't actually push to achieve anything impactful. Or, at least, that's what everything he says and does seems to indicate. It's not about actually winning, getting a good settlement, or using legal machinery to force a desired outcome outside of the legal process itself ... it's about having "fought the good fight" when he explains why WSU got bent over again. Cool, Kirk.

To be perhaps painfully clear, I know situations don't always lend themselves to unconventional action, and he's far from the only university administrator to be focused on covering one's ass. The entire atmosphere selects for that in academia, especially, and even in business far too often. It's just hard to see how anyone could see this and not read it as a white flag kind of quote, much less think WSU is really going to push meaningfully on any of this.

 

[Cougsocal]

When the contract stipulates penalty based on when you provide notice of your departure, rather than on the actual date of departure…it should be pretty easy.

When the same contract stipulates that you sacrifice your claim to assets and media rights as of the date you provide notice….that should also be easy.

There’s zero doubt that WSU and OSU were harmed. And publicly. But I don’t think they even need a tort claim, they just need to follow what’s in the existing conference terms. The other 10 schools are trying to figure out how to get out of that, in the same way FSU and Clemson have been trying for a year to find a way out of the ACC’s grant of rights. They haven’t succeeded, hopefully the 10 won’t either.

Have you noticed that most of this talk is by people who haven't gone to law school? Sure WSU has be "harmed," it has been relegated from the big leagues. But you aren't entitled to compensation simply because you've been "harmed." As I see it, WSU and OSU are likely the conference remainder man. The real question is what besides the liabilities (which everyone will conceded) are the conference assets? There is a potential pot of gold out there, but much of it will be fought over and litigated. I just don't see that the Pac-2 will be handed a share of the NCAA revenues, like they are just another power 5 conference.

 

[dgibbons]

Exactly. You can tell this is a guy who uses process to cover his ass and doesn't actually push to achieve anything impactful. Or, at least, that's what everything he says and does seems to indicate. It's not about actually winning, getting a good settlement, or using legal machinery to force a desired outcome outside of the legal process itself ... it's about having "fought the good fight" when he explains why WSU got bent over again. Cool, Kirk.

To be perhaps painfully clear, I know situations don't always lend themselves to unconventional action, and he's far from the only university administrator to be focused on covering one's ass. The entire atmosphere selects for that in academia, especially, and even in business far too often. It's just hard to see how anyone could see this and not read it as a white flag kind of quote, much less think WSU is really going to push meaningfully on any of this.

Are you saying the committee he formed will not save us?

And edit to add- It sounds like the only significant movement is that WSU has hired outside counsel.

 

[moondawgie]

When the contract stipulates penalty based on when you provide notice of your departure, rather than on the actual date of departure…it should be pretty easy.

When the same contract stipulates that you sacrifice your claim to assets and media rights as of the date you provide notice….that should also be easy.

There’s zero doubt that WSU and OSU were harmed. And publicly. But I don’t think they even need a tort claim, they just need to follow what’s in the existing conference terms. The other 10 schools are trying to figure out how to get out of that, in the same way FSU and Clemson have been trying for a year to find a way out of the ACC’s grant of rights. They haven’t succeeded, hopefully the 10 won’t either.

You conveniently ignore that it has to be notice of actual departure prior to 8/1/24. No one has done that, they are leaving after 8/1/24. Also, "deliver" has very specific legal connotations that aren't satisfied by simply saying you are leaving after the agreement expires.

 

[CougPatrol]

If our beloved leader would like to share more details (and there is no reason for him to do so), I'd happily listen.

LOL, i was kidding.

 

[moondawgie]

My take is the Pac-12 schools that weren't negotiating in good faith, were in violation of the bylaws and the rules they put on themselves, and ultimately their behavior caused WSU/OSU significant damages.

It doesn't seem that difficult to prove the bad faith and the fact they openly lied to their conference while negotiating a better deal while they themselves, we involved in a media rights negotiation.

This situation is very different than UCLA/USC and Texas/Oklahoma as they weren't negotiating w/ another conference while telling their existing one they were "all in" on the media rights deal.

Hurt feelings legal theory is iffy at best.

 

[COUGinNCW]

smoking gun would be Fox and ESPN colluding to keep Apple Out of CFB. The universities were just self serving assholes that stabbed WSU in the back but not sure how that is a crime/anti trust.

 

[dgibbons]

smoking gun would be Fox and ESPN colluding to keep Apple Out of CFB. The universities were just self serving assholes that stabbed WSU in the back but not sure how that is a crime/anti trust.

Is that WSU's claim to make, or Apple's claim to make?

 

[ttowncoug]

Hurt feelings legal theory is iffy at best.

Some litigation attorney is working on the strategy right now.

The "hurt feelings" theory is minimizing the bad faith that UW and Oregon created. You don't get to tell the pac-12 we are all in while you are negotiating a better deal with the Big-10 if you are truly working with the Pac-12 in "good faith." Proving "bad faith" won't be hard.

 

[COUGinNCW]

Is that WSU's claim to make, or Apple's claim to make?

Hell, you’re the lawyer.

But I’d say they both have a claim.
But you’re need to sue to get them to turn anything over so you’d need a pretty strong witness (espn insider etc) to go down that road or you could look like a real douche bag.

Public records requests are easier but unless the uw etc was stupid enough to agree via email or text to help Fox keep Apple out instead of just looking for “the best deal” I don’t know what they would find that would constitute collusion.

 

[dgibbons]

Hell, you’re the lawyer.

But I’d say they both have a claim.
But you’re need to sue to get them to turn anything over so you’d need a pretty strong witness (espn insider etc) to go down that road or you could look like a real douche bag.

Public records requests are easier but unless the uw etc was stupid enough to agree via email or text to help Fox keep Apple out instead of just looking for “the best deal” I don’t know what they would find that would constitute collusion.

IMO, Apple's claim to make.

 

[PeteTheChop]

Are you saying the committee he formed will not save us?

And edit to add- It sounds like the only significant movement is that WSU has hired outside counsel.

Hopefully Dr. Schulz has access to the war chest to hire big-time counsel.

John Calzano and John Willner seem to think there's a pot of gold awaiting WSU and OSU next summer if they can successfully maneuver through the contractual stuff. The folks at Brand Z (Die Cougs) are saying the same from what I've heard.

Gotta figure Klaitkoff wouldn't do anything to interfere with OSU and WSU on these matters

 

[dgibbons]

Hopefully Dr. Schulz has access to the war chest to hire big-time counsel.

John Calzano and John Willner seem to think there's a pot of gold awaiting WSU and OSU next summer if they can successfully maneuver through the contractual stuff. The folks at Brand Z (Die Cougs) are saying the same from what I've heard.

Gotta figure Klaitkoff wouldn't do anything to interfere with OSU and WSU on these matters

Nothing George can do. The bylaws say what the bylaws say.

 

[wazzucougs96]

IMO, Apple's claim to make.

Nevermind the fact that out bidding someone is not collusion

 

[COUGinNCW]

Speaking of Bylaws, are the Terrible 10 (defectors) still voting members? If so, couldn’t they vote to change the bylaws to ensure they get all the NCAA basketball credits etc.?

 

[COUGinNCW]

Nevermind the fact that out bidding someone is not collusion

I never said it was. If FOX and ESPN agreed to “keep Apple out of CFB” that would be collusion.

 

[ttowncoug]

Nevermind the fact that out bidding someone is not collusion

no...but disclosing confidential information and terms to Fox, in attempt for your own gain, and there's, which resulting in damages to other parties is.

I don't see Apple wanting to waste a bunch of money going down this rabbit hole.

 

[dgibbons]

Nevermind the fact that out bidding someone is not collusion

Not if there turns out to be nothing to bid on.

 

[dgibbons]

Speaking of Bylaws, are the Terrible 10 (defectors) still voting members? If so, couldn’t they vote to change the bylaws to ensure they get all the NCAA basketball credits etc.?

I would be surprised if any member retains voting rights after providing the exit notice.

 

[95coug]

Have you noticed that most of this talk is by people who haven't gone to law school? Sure WSU has be "harmed," it has been relegated from the big leagues. But you aren't entitled to compensation simply because you've been "harmed." As I see it, WSU and OSU are likely the conference remainder man. The real question is what besides the liabilities (which everyone will conceded) are the conference assets? There is a potential pot of gold out there, but much of it will be fought over and litigated. I just don't see that the Pac-2 will be handed a share of the NCAA revenues, like they are just another power 5 conference.

The Pac-whatever won't be handed anything after August 2024. But they continue to have rights to CFP/NCAA tourney payouts and other shares of NCAA revenues until then.