Washington Supreme Court denies review of Pac-12

[WhosYourDawggy]

Dropping Rutgers and the other smaller revenue generating schools from the model does add benefits to the power schools already doing well. Bigger piece of the pie they are creating. Stop subsidizing schools that aren't contributing.

This is what has the potential to make a split off come to be.

And as said, I'm not advocating for it, just saying you can see the handwriting on the wall if you look closely enough.

There are obstacles, but old rivalry and current money aren't really it. There are issues with public institutions and state laws as well as the bowl games. The latter of which is becoming less of a factor now that the rose finally got snacked down.

They aren't problems that can't be resolved.

Just feels like we are headed that way. Like it or not. The money possibility is just too great to ignore.

The only thing about dropping the lower schools is that no one wants to go 6-6 every year. If you drop the bad teams so that only good teams are around, then decent teams become the bad teams. No one at PSU wants to be a bad team but that is what happen if you drop the dregs. The IUs, Vandys, UFs, do have a role to play.

 

[Deep Creek]

…but that is what happen if you drop the dregs. The IUs, Vandys, UFs, do have a role to play.

Irritating the azzz draggin’ lizards are ya?

 

[Wizardhawk]

The only thing about dropping the lower schools is that no one wants to go 6-6 every year. If you drop the bad teams so that only good teams are around, then decent teams become the bad teams. No one at PSU wants to be a bad team but that is what happen if you drop the dregs. The IUs, Vandys, UFs, do have a role to play.

Yes, as I said to deep about that, the mega teams will still want to play against the softer old P5 schools as well as the mid majors.

Having that desire won't kill that model. Even after getting dumped, Rutgers would still play Michigan to get the added revenue just like G5s do now.

Forming a major new league won't force you to only schedule within it.

 

[duckboy33]

The only thing about dropping the lower schools is that no one wants to go 6-6 every year. If you drop the bad teams so that only good teams are around, then decent teams become the bad teams. No one at PSU wants to be a bad team but that is what happen if you drop the dregs. The IUs, Vandys, UFs, do have a role to play.

 

[wazzu31]

Makes complete sense....

Let's define assets....

What assets will the PAC bring to the table?

Is it TV Revenue, Advertising and or Merchandizing.....

This is where the settlements are going to be big. The other 10 members realistically should forfeit all of their revenue and call it full quits. There are a ton of lawsuits and debts coming to the conference which the other 10 would be smart to just give to Oregon State and Washington State. All the ruling is, is that we have full control over assets and if we pull anything Washington can come back in front of the court to plead their case. Nothing in the case ruling says anything about the two schools controlling all the assets plus debts and legal issues. Which pretend lawyer would understand if he actually did the law he pretends to know.

 

[Wizardhawk]

This is where the settlements are going to be big. The other 10 members realistically should forfeit all of their revenue and call it full quits. There are a ton of lawsuits and debts coming to the conference which the other 10 would be smart to just give to Oregon State and Washington State. All the ruling is, is that we have full control over assets and if we pull anything Washington can come back in front of the court to plead their case. Nothing in the case ruling says anything about the two schools controlling all the assets plus debts and legal issues. Which pretend lawyer would understand if he actually did the law he pretends to know.

Not going to happen and you know it.

Again, Wilner said:

Following the high court’s ruling Friday, fans of the departing schools wondered if WSU and OSU would use sole control of the board to hoard the Pac-12’s expected $420 million in revenue for the 2023-24 competition year.

The schools smartly have not divulged their plans, but the Hotline would be surprised if they acted in authoritarian fashion.

One reason: They have been warned against that tactic.

Upon granting his preliminary injunction last month, Whitman County (Wash.) Superior Court Judge Gary Libey was clear in his expectation that WSU and OSU act in a reasonable manner.

“This is not a shutout,” he said at the time. “The (preliminary injunction) is going to be modified to make sure the other 10 are still treated in a fair manner … Nobody’s going to take advantage of somebody else.”

The notion that WSU and OSU would divide $420 million by two never squared with their strategic intentions or the legal reality.

The outbound 10 would seek a temporary restraining order immediately, and the very last thing WSU and OSU want is a return to court.

He believes each school will take around $30m this year and the balance stays to cover liabilities.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

Not going to happen and you know it.

Again, Wilner said:


He believes each school will take around $30m this year and the balance stays to cover liabilities.

I think the most prudent thing is to acknowledge that the other 10 deserve their share -- once contingent liabilities are resolved. No distribution, or very small, so long as they may be on the hook for amounts that aren't certain.

It's not like this doesn't happen all the time. I am settling an estate in our family where my wife and I get a house on a lake. We have a seawall that we found out needs to be replaced. The rest of the estate has been distributed, but because we don't know how much the seawall is going to cost until they actually tear it out and get started, we are holding back a very large sum of money. It's been estimated it will cost between $125 - $300K. No way are we distributing money only to have to go back in a year and try to get some back if it goes higher. The most prudent course of action is to withhold an amount in excess of the worst-case scenario, see what it costs, and then distribute what's left. This happens all the time in estates, business and partnership dissolution, etc.

WSU and OSU are in the drivers seat, as they should be. So long as they don't do anything dumb, they will get to control the distribution and it's not going to be in a manner the departing 10 like ... tough shit, you are the ones leaving for greener pastures.

 

[Wizardhawk]

I think the most prudent thing is to acknowledge that the other 10 deserve their share -- once contingent liabilities are resolved. No distribution, or very small, so long as they may be on the hook for amounts that aren't certain.

It's not like this doesn't happen all the time. I am settling an estate in our family where my wife and I get a house on a lake. We have a seawall that we found out needs to be replaced. The rest of the estate has been distributed, but because we don't know how much the seawall is going to cost until they actually tear it out and get started, we are holding back a very large sum of money. It's been estimated it will cost between $125 - $300K. No way are we distributing money only to have to go back in a year and try to get some back if it goes higher. The most prudent course of action is to withhold an amount in excess of the worst-case scenario, see what it costs, and then distribute what's left. This happens all the time in estates, business and partnership dissolution, etc.

WSU and OSU are in the drivers seat, as they should be. So long as they don't do anything dumb, they will get to control the distribution and it's not going to be in a manner the departing 10 like ... tough shit, you are the ones leaving for greener pastures.

I was only passing along what the top reporter in the Pac had to say on it. He's in California so it's not like he has strong bias in the matter. He's interviewed quite a few sources around this and that was his assessment from those sources.

He believes each team will get close to $30m and that the actual amount will be decided fairly quickly.

Of course he could be wrong. It's just interesting to get the views of those closer to the story than what we hear online and more remote media.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

I was only passing along what the top reporter in the Pac had to say on it. He's in California so it's not like he has strong bias in the matter. He's interviewed quite a few sources around this and that was his assessment from those sources.

He believes each team will get close to $30m and that the actual amount will be decided fairly quickly.

Of course he could be wrong. It's just interesting to get the views of those closer to the story than what we hear online and more remote media.

Could be. Part of any settlement would be a clause that if there are future contingencies that hit, they may have to pony up.

One thing we know for sure is that the lawyers are the winners here.

 

[duckboy33]

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

Could be. Part of any settlement would be a clause that if there are future contingencies that hit, they may have to pony up.

One thing we know for sure is that the lawyers are the winners here.

Here it is ... partial payment not yet announced, plus agreement for future contingencies:

 

[wazzu31]

Here it is ... partial payment not yet announced, plus agreement for future contingencies:

Oh only if somebody literally had said this would happen but got told no it can’t possibly happen.

 

[Wizardhawk]

Oh only if somebody literally had said this would happen but got told no it can’t possibly happen.

lol @ taking a victory lap before knowing the details. If they take something close to $30m each it's nothing near what you claimed.

There's no chance they all agreed to something that screws themselves.

 

[wazzu31]

lol @ taking a victory lap before knowing the details. If they take something close to $30m each it's nothing near what you claimed.

There's no chance they all agreed to something that screws themselves.

It is precisely what I predicted. You are the one that tossed the $30 million number which I never disputed cause the numbers are all speculation at the moment. The only time I disputed anything was when the golden shower boy tried saying all 10 were going to walk away with everything they would be owed.

But I still say all 10 should have just forfeited what they had coming to get off the hook for the future litigation. Cause at least the way I read it, is those lawsuits against the conference you will still be a part off. Which I may be incorrect on and disregard my statement.

 

[Wizardhawk]

It is precisely what I predicted. You are the one that tossed the $30 million number which I never disputed cause the numbers are all speculation at the moment. The only time I disputed anything was when the golden shower boy tried saying all 10 were going to walk away with everything they would be owed.

But I still say all 10 should have just forfeited what they had coming to get off the hook for the future litigation. Cause at least the way I read it, is those lawsuits against the conference you will still be a part off. Which I may be incorrect on and disregard my statement.

So, you pat yourself on the back for being right, but follow up by stating all 10 should have forfeited it all and that's clearly not what happened.

You drunk already?

$30m wasn't my number. I made no predictions. That was Wilner's number and I said he could well be wrong.

I'd just wait to claim being right until you know what the exact terms are. The details will come out since both of our schools have to publicly report their financials.

 

[wazzu31]

So, you pat yourself on the back for being right, but follow up by stating all 10 should have forfeited it all and that's clearly not what happened.

You drunk already?

$30m wasn't my number. I made no predictions. That was Wilner's number and I said he could well be wrong.

I'd just wait to claim being right until you know what the exact terms are. The details will come out since both of our schools have to publicly report their financials.

You tossed out Wilner’s number then tried complaining about my comment and putting words in my mouth when that had nothing to do with my argument against pretend lawyer.

I was and am 100% correct on what I said. I’ve never once claimed we are going to take all the money or put a number on it. I just gave a clear reasoning on why in the settlement it would be a smart move to give up all the money that is owed to in exchange for not being exempt from all of the lawsuits.