ADVERTISEMENT

KXLY article w/ Bob Ferguson

chugspig said:
Supreme Court decision on path forward tomorrow

Ferguson say it’s a question of if we can “usurp the association”. Usurp by definition generally means to take power by force illegally. Get ready for extreme disappointment as our AG fights in back rooms against WSU.
Click to expand...
There is absolutely no way our top state leaders allow WSU to gain any real advantage or ability to withhold money from UW in this situation. Zero chance. It would be political suicide. We live in a one party state.

The state is run by "progressive" Democrats, and Seattle and the UW and major Seattle corporations are the power brokers. None would allow WSU to win.

This case would have to go to a higher level in order to have any chance for us to win.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cougini5591, WaltherPPK and UberCougars
chugspig said:
Supreme Court decision on path forward tomorrow

Ferguson say it’s a question of if we can “usurp the association”. Usurp by definition generally means to take power by force illegally. Get ready for extreme disappointment as our AG fights in back rooms against WSU.
Click to expand...
WTF does Ferguson have to do with the Washington Supreme Court? Is he going to go in and be the de facto mutt attorney and argue their case? I'm so confused.
 
Unfortunately, WSU and OSU will not get a fair ruling in the state of Washington, too much Husky influence. Needs to be taken to a state that has no school in the pac 12. Idaho or Montana would be a good place, but don't think that's possible. Most conferences have exit fees in place, unfortunately the Pac 12 didn't, their penalty was you forfeit all funds when you leave. Now they don't like the rule, so they are trying to make the courts rewrite the rules after the fact. Make the exiting schools pay 20 million per school, that leaves WSU and OSU with 100 million each. Then use the rest of the funds to payoff all debts, any remaining is split 12 ways. Sounds fair and simple to me. However, logic never seems to work in the court system.
 
Last edited:
Ferguson is a real prick. I can't stand that guy.

The legal matter Bob is whether, according to the by-laws, WSU and OSU are the voting and controlling members.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WaltherPPK
Loyal Coug1 said:
WTF does Ferguson have to do with the Washington Supreme Court? Is he going to go in and be the de facto mutt attorney and argue their case? I'm so confused.
Click to expand...
Maybe try to un-confuse yourself. The AG's office submitted a brief in support of the Supreme Court taking direct review.
 
dgibbons said:
Maybe try to un-confuse yourself. The AG's office submitted a brief in support of the Supreme Court taking direct review.
Click to expand...
I'm fine with this.

What I am not fine with Bob inserting his opinion on this matter. When he uses the phrase “usurp the association” it doesn't lend me confidence he is supporting WSU on this matter. He should stay neutral.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mikalalas
ttowncoug said:
I'm fine with this.

What I am not fine with Bob inserting his opinion on this matter. When he uses the phrase “usurp the association” it doesn't lend me confidence he is supporting WSU on this matter. He should stay neutral.
Click to expand...
I agree. Hard to understand why the AG is taking a position in a dispute between two state agencies.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mikalalas
dgibbons said:
I agree. Hard to understand why the AG is taking a position in a dispute between two state agencies.
Click to expand...
That is a very misleading statement Bellevue Bob. Not Baghdad Bob. The dispute is NOT about WSU/OSU "usurping" anything, it is about proper enforcement of the clearly stated conference bylaws, specifically about how those rules have been applied in the past by those schools that now want to say that the rules mean something else. He needs to keep his nose out of this and keep his biased opinion to himself!
 
  • Like
Reactions: mikalalas, Cougini5591 and WaltherPPK
ttowncoug said:
I'm fine with this.

What I am not fine with Bob inserting his opinion on this matter. When he uses the phrase “usurp the association” it doesn't lend me confidence he is supporting WSU on this matter. He should stay neutral.
Click to expand...
Especially when you consider that he went on to say that the court should take direct review because this issue could cause harm to the people of Washington.

Regardless of which way the court rules, it's going to cause harm to people of Washington. It's just a question of which people we're OK with harming, how much, and which ones agreed to accept harm X for action Y.
 
How_did_this_happen? said:
There is absolutely no way our top state leaders allow WSU to gain any real advantage or ability to withhold money from UW in this situation. Zero chance. It would be political suicide. We live in a one party state.

The state is run by "progressive" Democrats, and Seattle and the UW and major Seattle corporations are the power brokers. None would allow WSU to win.

This case would have to go to a higher level in order to have any chance for us to win.
Click to expand...
This aged well!😆
 
  • Like
Reactions: longtimecoug
roses04 said:
Unfortunately, WSU and OSU will not get a fair ruling in the state of Washington, too much Husky influence. Needs to be taken to a state that has no school in the pac 12. Idaho or Montana would be a good place, but don't think that's possible. Most conferences have exit fees in place, unfortunately the Pac 12 didn't, their penalty was you forfeit all funds when you leave. Now they don't like the rule, so they are trying to make the courts rewrite the rules after the fact. Make the exiting schools pay 20 million per school, that leaves WSU and OSU with 100 million each. Then use the rest of the funds to payoff all debts, any remaining is split 12 ways. Sounds fair and simple to me. However, logic never seems to work in the court system.
Click to expand...
Looks like a fair ruling to me
 
Now that the Washington State Supreme Court has refused to hear the appeal by the rest of the Pac-12 and granted the WSU and OSU claim to control the Pac-12 I was wondering if any of you who posted absurd over the top claims in the above thread would like to withdraw some of your comments.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Coug1990, KRUSTYtheCOUG and mikalalas
I am happy to eat crow on this, I was wrong and pleased as hell the ruling worked out in the favor of the Pac 2. I have been disappointed by the supreme courts rulings too many times, so I was preparing myself for the worst.
 
  • Like
Reactions: justinbgocougs and WindyCityCoug
Coug-Vandal said:
I understand that. Again, look at the built in assumptions that led you and others to this conclusion. Maybe next time you will be less shocked.
Click to expand...
Okay.

Money and power run this country. Those are my baseline assumptions.

Are there exceptions? Sure.

Neither WSU nor OSU have these attributes...at least relative to the other schools in the conference.
 
How_did_this_happen? said:
Okay.

Money and power run this country. Those are my baseline assumptions.

Are there exceptions? Sure.

Neither WSU nor OSU have these attributes...at least relative to the other schools in the conference.
Click to expand...
At that level of generality it would be hard to argue. However, lots of people and organizations have money and power and some of them oppose others who also have money and power. The money and power comment explains how Fox Sports was able to undermine the Pac12 but does very little to explain whether the Washington State Supreme Court would side with UW or WSU and OSU in a dispute over who rightly had control over the collapsed Pac-12. Courts are far from perfect decision making bodies but it actually helps to have facts and good arguments on your side. WSU and OSU did--UW didn't.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KRUSTYtheCOUG
You must log in or register to reply here.
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back