|
|
Post by hottubbeaver on Sept 13, 2023 14:11:54 GMT -8
We'll never know what items would have been raised for a vote had today's meeting taken place. It's only logical the defectors hold a majority and if allowed a vote would certainly use it for self serving purposes and not that of the conferences best interests. I"m sill convinced the B1G had nothing to gain by inviting O and W other than they thought it would be the death blow to Pac 12 continuance. Eliminate a power 5 conference equals more tv dollars split among the remaining conferences. There's also the vote at the P5 table the P12 may still reserve right to for now. The problem is, they left survivors and those survivors are fighting back with a fury and from a position of strength both public opinion wise and legally. Well, it wouldn't put it past the other 10 and George to still have "met". Although there are Zoom records there are many ways to have "discussed" ancillary items to gain an idea of consensus if and when the Pac12 officially meets. The TRO was generally granted so no formal vote or decisions could be made. I'm not sure it would cover an "informal" fact finding session?? It would be a bad look, but so was calling for the initial meeting. The ruling on the TRO, as I understood/heard it, (the judge was mumbling and hard to understand during the decision reading), allowed for the meeting to proceed so that day to day conference operation matters could be addressed. He also stipulated any vote taken up need be unanimous in order to pass. This does not change the need for an additional hearing and ruling on who will hold voting power once the TRO is lifted. |
|
jbjam
Freshman
Posts: 129
|
Post by jbjam on Sept 13, 2023 14:15:24 GMT -8
Maybe I'm missing something here but I just took the comment to mean that Kliavkoff and McCarthy kind of look like each other and not some political statement... It seems an apt comparison regardless of political views. They both run once proud institutions wrecked by stupidity and greed... And any of their potentially good acts have been thwarted by radicals whom they've sought to appease that really just wanted the place to fall apart (U$C, UCLA, UW, UO.) |
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Sept 13, 2023 17:28:30 GMT -8
What bugs me is the "conference" is supposely worried about retaining employees? They were going to vote about dissolution today. If that were to happen and pass, there would be a ton of employees looking to get out before being forced out and they would really have a problem. I'd think turning the conference over to someone who actually wants to see the conference remain a going concern would be the best possible scenario for the most employees as far as retaining jobs go. We'll never know what items would have been raised for a vote had today's meeting taken place. It's only logical the defectors hold a majority and if allowed a vote would certainly use it for self serving purposes and not that of the conferences best interests. I"m sill convinced the B1G had nothing to gain by inviting O and W other than they thought it would be the death blow to Pac 12 continuance. Eliminate a power 5 conference equals more tv dollars split among the remaining conferences. There's also the vote at the P5 table the P12 may still reserve right to for now. The problem is, they left survivors and those survivors are fighting back with a fury and from a position of strength both public opinion wise and legally. In the thread with the video of the lawyer commenting on the hearing, he said the Pac's lawyer actually said they were going to discuss or vote (can't remember which) on dissolution at the meeting. I didn't watch the Pac's lawyer presentation, I'm assuming that video is correct. |
|
2ndGenBeaver
Sophomore
Posts: 1,837 
Grad Year: 1991 (MS/CS) 1999 (PhD/CS)
|
Post by 2ndGenBeaver on Sept 13, 2023 19:01:11 GMT -8
I would like to see the remaining, legitimate Pac-12 members unanimously declare that due to the state departed members have conspired to leave the conference in, the conference has decided that only schools with "State" in their name will participate in any NCAA postseason activities this year. A nice parting gift.....
More seriously, I suspect that somewhere in the motions to help pay departing conference members transition costs, there would be a clause tucked in to pay the rest of GK's contract or a generous severance to ease his transition to full time residence in the Big Sky country. There is precedent there - I submit Larry Scott's $1.5M severance payment in 2021......
Go Beavers!
|
|
|
|
Post by Werebeaver on Sept 13, 2023 19:03:18 GMT -8
I would like to see the remaining, legitimate Pac-12 members unanimously declare that due to the state departed members have conspired to leave the conference in, the conference has decided that only schools with "State" in their name will participate in any NCAA postseason activities this year. A nice parting gift..... More seriously, I suspect that somewhere in the motions to help pay departing conference members transition costs, there would be a clause tucked in to pay the rest of GK's contract or a generous severance to ease his transition to full time residence in the Big Sky country. There is precedent there - I submit Larry Scott's $1.5M severance payment in 2021...... Go Beavers! Why give Arizona State a pass? |
|
2ndGenBeaver
Sophomore
Posts: 1,837
Grad Year: 1991 (MS/CS) 1999 (PhD/CS)
|
Post by 2ndGenBeaver on Sept 13, 2023 19:06:57 GMT -8
I would like to see the remaining, legitimate Pac-12 members unanimously declare that due to the state departed members have conspired to leave the conference in, the conference has decided that only schools with "State" in their name will participate in any NCAA postseason activities this year. A nice parting gift..... More seriously, I suspect that somewhere in the motions to help pay departing conference members transition costs, there would be a clause tucked in to pay the rest of GK's contract or a generous severance to ease his transition to full time residence in the Big Sky country. There is precedent there - I submit Larry Scott's $1.5M severance payment in 2021...... Go Beavers! Why give Arizona State a pass? They don't really amount to any level of success in much of anything (ok, maybe baseball), but I couldn't find an easy to state rule that would exclude them..... thoughts? Go Beavers! |
|
|
|
Post by bucktoothvarmit on Sept 13, 2023 19:12:36 GMT -8
Why give Arizona State a pass? They don't really amount to any level of success in much of anything (ok, maybe baseball), but I couldn't find an easy to state rule that would exclude them..... thoughts? Go Beavers! I believe ASU self imposed a bowl ban already....... |
|
|
|
Post by hottubbeaver on Sept 14, 2023 11:01:35 GMT -8
We'll never know what items would have been raised for a vote had today's meeting taken place. It's only logical the defectors hold a majority and if allowed a vote would certainly use it for self serving purposes and not that of the conferences best interests. I"m sill convinced the B1G had nothing to gain by inviting O and W other than they thought it would be the death blow to Pac 12 continuance. Eliminate a power 5 conference equals more tv dollars split among the remaining conferences. There's also the vote at the P5 table the P12 may still reserve right to for now. The problem is, they left survivors and those survivors are fighting back with a fury and from a position of strength both public opinion wise and legally. In the thread with the video of the lawyer commenting on the hearing, he said the Pac's lawyer actually said they were going to discuss or vote (can't remember which) on dissolution at the meeting. I didn't watch the Pac's lawyer presentation, I'm assuming that video is correct. There is clearly more than good reason, based on prior actions, to suspect the worst from some of the exiting members. |
|
escott58
Sophomore
Posts: 1,319
Grad Year: 1983
|
Post by escott58 on Sept 14, 2023 12:36:50 GMT -8
This is just my opinion (which is easily swayed by Orange glasses), but I begin to see a pattern with the phantom and egregious calls against us when playing the "big market" teams. The P12 breakup shines a light on a Commissioner and T10 coming after monies they should have no right to, so I wonder what other compromises they've done. I wouldn't be surprised to see shenanigans exposed with further legal actions. Like I said, it's JMHO.
|
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Sept 14, 2023 14:12:42 GMT -8
This is just my opinion (which is easily swayed by Orange glasses), but I begin to see a pattern with the phantom and egregious calls against us when playing the "big market" teams. The P12 breakup shines a light on a Commissioner and T10 coming after monies they should have no right to, so I wonder what other compromises they've done. I wouldn't be surprised to see shenanigans exposed with further legal actions. Like I said, it's JMHO. Someone on the board was talking about conspiracy theories a few weeks ago and I started thinking about a scenario in which OSU and WSU winds up losing in court and then the flags start flying at key points in key games and they all go against OSU and WSU. Wouldn't want either team winning the final Pac-12 title, would they? Just a potential conspiracy theory, LOL. |
|
|
|
Post by korculabeav on Sept 15, 2023 11:31:02 GMT -8
It is evident from the filed complaint that George acted in his own self interest and not for the good of the remaining members. I am curious what the Kliavkoff defenders on here think about this latest revelation? I found a youtube of the actual hearing last night, watched and listened to the arguments. Here's a link if anyone else is interested: www.youtube.com/live/etM1LEzz8Ws?si=uAYbb3yvtEe8nlQDKilavkoff may or may not be a bad actor, capable or incapable of the skill necessary to adequately navigate the conference through this storm. He's not truly the captain of the ship in total control, he answers to a lot of other people. After listening to the arguments presented by both sides, he clearly was put in a no win position after the Duck and Husky girlfriended each other and bailed in the final hour of negotiations. 1. He answers to the conference BOD. That appears to be is a legal question that needs to be resolved. Who, legally, is now a voting BOD member? 2. There is nearly an entire years worth of P12 sports left to be played. According to defense counsel, that equates to roughly 500 million in expected revenue to the conference IF the conference and schools meet their obligations under the contract. This is a very real concern, they might not be able to live up to the terms of the contract without the ability of the commissioner to make decisions regarding conference, employee retention plans.. This impacts all current and soon to be former members and he was acting on his fiduciary duty, as I see it, in wanting this issue addressed. Should it be legally determined OSU and WSU are the only two remaining members with a right to vote on conference issues under the by-laws, it would still be in our interests to see this seasons conference games live up to the terms set forth in media and advertising contracts so the expected revenue is earned as agreed to. If there were bad actors, and it sure appears there were, I find it hard to point the finger solely at the commissioner for the existing members at the time failing to agree to a new media deal. Where Kliavkoff glaringly behaved as a "bad actor" was pushing forth a full conference board meeting even after letters of concern from the presidents of OSU and WSU stating such meeting was inappropriate. That board meeting would likely have put forth a vote on the table to dissolve the conference that would have further damaged WSU & OSU significantly. That is a gross dereliction of his duty to the conference and its members. |
|
|
|
Post by hottubbeaver on Sept 15, 2023 11:42:09 GMT -8
I found a youtube of the actual hearing last night, watched and listened to the arguments. Here's a link if anyone else is interested: www.youtube.com/live/etM1LEzz8Ws?si=uAYbb3yvtEe8nlQDKilavkoff may or may not be a bad actor, capable or incapable of the skill necessary to adequately navigate the conference through this storm. He's not truly the captain of the ship in total control, he answers to a lot of other people. After listening to the arguments presented by both sides, he clearly was put in a no win position after the Duck and Husky girlfriended each other and bailed in the final hour of negotiations. 1. He answers to the conference BOD. That appears to be is a legal question that needs to be resolved. Who, legally, is now a voting BOD member? 2. There is nearly an entire years worth of P12 sports left to be played. According to defense counsel, that equates to roughly 500 million in expected revenue to the conference IF the conference and schools meet their obligations under the contract. This is a very real concern, they might not be able to live up to the terms of the contract without the ability of the commissioner to make decisions regarding conference, employee retention plans.. This impacts all current and soon to be former members and he was acting on his fiduciary duty, as I see it, in wanting this issue addressed. Should it be legally determined OSU and WSU are the only two remaining members with a right to vote on conference issues under the by-laws, it would still be in our interests to see this seasons conference games live up to the terms set forth in media and advertising contracts so the expected revenue is earned as agreed to. If there were bad actors, and it sure appears there were, I find it hard to point the finger solely at the commissioner for the existing members at the time failing to agree to a new media deal. Where Kliavkoff glaringly behaved as a "bad actor" was pushing forth a full conference board meeting even after letters of concern from the presidents of OSU and WSU stating such meeting was inappropriate. That board meeting would likely have put forth a vote on the table to dissolve the conference that would have further damaged WSU & OSU significantly. That is a gross dereliction of his duty to the conference and its members. Defense counsel claimed that was not on the agenda sent out to all parties for the meeting in question. Without having read the by-laws in their entirety I don't know if an item can be raised and voted on which is not on the agenda. Any issue requiring a vote may need to be raised, seconded, and then put on the agenda for a vote at a subsequent meeting. Basically without knowing the procedures set forth in the bylaws leads to a lot of guessing, speculation, and ifs. |
|
|
|
Post by orangeattack on Sept 15, 2023 15:06:17 GMT -8
This is just my opinion (which is easily swayed by Orange glasses), but I begin to see a pattern with the phantom and egregious calls against us when playing the "big market" teams. The P12 breakup shines a light on a Commissioner and T10 coming after monies they should have no right to, so I wonder what other compromises they've done. I wouldn't be surprised to see shenanigans exposed with further legal actions. Like I said, it's JMHO. Someone on the board was talking about conspiracy theories a few weeks ago and I started thinking about a scenario in which OSU and WSU winds up losing in court and then the flags start flying at key points in key games and they all go against OSU and WSU. Wouldn't want either team winning the final Pac-12 title, would they? Just a potential conspiracy theory, LOL. On the flip side - as long as OSU and WSU apparently stand to control the conference when the rest remain, you would think there would be an incentive NOT to make the path to a championship more difficult. |
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Sept 15, 2023 15:12:50 GMT -8
Where Kliavkoff glaringly behaved as a "bad actor" was pushing forth a full conference board meeting even after letters of concern from the presidents of OSU and WSU stating such meeting was inappropriate. That board meeting would likely have put forth a vote on the table to dissolve the conference that would have further damaged WSU & OSU significantly. That is a gross dereliction of his duty to the conference and its members. Defense counsel claimed that was not on the agenda sent out to all parties for the meeting in question. Without having read the by-laws in their entirety I don't know if an item can be raised and voted on which is not on the agenda. Any issue requiring a vote may need to be raised, seconded, and then put on the agenda for a vote at a subsequent meeting. Basically without knowing the procedures set forth in the bylaws leads to a lot of guessing, speculation, and ifs. In a regular meeting, which the September 13, 2023, meeting was not, agendas must be distributed at least four weeks beforehand. In a special meeting, the Commissioner sets the agenda. But regardless of the agenda going in, anything can be added to the agenda at any regular meeting by a two-thirds vote. So, basically anything could possibly be on the agenda, regardless of what the actual agenda pre-meeting was. |
|
|
|
Post by korculabeav on Sept 15, 2023 16:52:22 GMT -8
Defense counsel claimed that was not on the agenda sent out to all parties for the meeting in question. Without having read the by-laws in their entirety I don't know if an item can be raised and voted on which is not on the agenda. Any issue requiring a vote may need to be raised, seconded, and then put on the agenda for a vote at a subsequent meeting. Basically without knowing the procedures set forth in the bylaws leads to a lot of guessing, speculation, and ifs. In a regular meeting, which the September 13, 2023, meeting was not, agendas must be distributed at least four weeks beforehand. In a special meeting, the Commissioner sets the agenda. But regardless of the agenda going in, anything can be added to the agenda at any regular meeting by a two-thirds vote. So, basically anything could possibly be on the agenda, regardless of what the actual agenda pre-meeting was. exactly. Hence Kliavkoff was prepared to introduce voting and actions regarding asset management and conference dissolution. Both potentially destructive to the Pac 2. |
|
