|
|
Post by jrbeavo on Oct 5, 2023 14:58:56 GMT -8
Lol... " I sincerely doubt any of the traitors consulted their legal teams about remaining assets, and how to access them..." That was what I responded to. And, it's blatantly false. What happens at a job that isn't run by a board if trustees, or not having time to gather full details is tangent but not what was posted or implied. University boards do not leave and enter new mega financial contracts on some whim of personal ego. Nor is handing out LEGAL advice that can be taken or discarded a reason for losing a law license. Pass the buck and fire? Sure. But, they are not losing their license giving the board legal info than may or may not be acted upon. What's funny is to think that some here think this was a willy nilly decision. That the board listened to the Prez or AD and just said, "... yeah let's do this." BTW it is the university boards that had to approve any such move. The Prez can sign off they agree, but aren't the decision maker. And, to say they're wasn't time to vet... really? I'll say there is a far far greatly likelihood these moves were calculated, researched, vetted, and discussed by at least the other "8" as soon as SC & UCLA made their jump. And, even though OSU/WSU were left out, they probably had these same discussions. How do we keep the Pac10 as one? If not, what's our plan? Do any of us know insider details? Nope. But, to think that the portion of the OP happened is really ludicrously naive. Or, some just want to be argumentative by adding all these tangents that were not at issue in the initial reply. Feel free to connect with any of the Pac12 boards to see if such decisions are made sans legal advice. Because you know the answer... yeah, they were super serious about all this
|
|
|
|
Post by jrbeavo on Oct 5, 2023 15:05:37 GMT -8
Lol... " I sincerely doubt any of the traitors consulted their legal teams about remaining assets, and how to access them..." That was what I responded to. And, it's blatantly false. What happens at a job that isn't run by a board if trustees, or not having time to gather full details is tangent but not what was posted or implied. University boards do not leave and enter new mega financial contracts on some whim of personal ego. Nor is handing out LEGAL advice that can be taken or discarded a reason for losing a law license. Pass the buck and fire? Sure. But, they are not losing their license giving the board legal info than may or may not be acted upon. What's funny is to think that some here think this was a willy nilly decision. That the board listened to the Prez or AD and just said, "... yeah let's do this." BTW it is the university boards that had to approve any such move. The Prez can sign off they agree, but aren't the decision maker. And, to say they're wasn't time to vet... really? I'll say there is a far far greatly likelihood these moves were calculated, researched, vetted, and discussed by at least the other "8" as soon as SC & UCLA made their jump. And, even though OSU/WSU were left out, they probably had these same discussions. How do we keep the Pac10 as one? If not, what's our plan? Do any of us know insider details? Nope. But, to think that the portion of the OP happened is really ludicrously naive. Or, some just want to be argumentative by adding all these tangents that were not at issue in the initial reply. Feel free to connect with any of the Pac12 boards to see if such decisions are made sans legal advice. Because you know the answer... Here is another perspective
As I recall, this was nothing more than a rubber stamp by the BOT and they barely even spoke during the presentation. No questions about scheduling, non football sports, traveling, disposition of the Pac and its assets...it was basically "YES! Lets do this". They hardly did an ounce of diligence, at least not on that call. And contrary to what you're saying, this DID happen quickly and many went to bed the night before believing the Pac GOR was all but assured.
I have always believed that once UO/UW decided to leave, the assumption was that all other schools would scramble for conference life rafts and all of this would have been moot. UO and UW paid slight lip service to the idea of not "giving notice" but it was hardly a heavily vetted legal document.
I believe the 10 are on the very short end of the stick here, facts wise. Won't be long until we find out
|
|
|
|
Post by Henry Skrimshander on Oct 5, 2023 15:16:54 GMT -8
From what I have read, UO and UW had done some research about joining the Big Ten but were committed to at least hearing George's offer and still in the Pac-12 on the night before the decisive meeting. After they saw the offer that night, they called the Big Ten, wrangled an invitation after FOX ponied up. They bailed overnight and let everyone know the following morning. The Board of Trustees rubber-stamped the move the following morning in a 10-MINUTE ZOOM MEETING, with the chairman participating from a golf course in the middle of his round. You seriously think they were totally informed? Now I'm sure they did some research. But it's a total stretch to assume they did a full, comprehensive deep dive on if the conference could be dissolved, how the future money would be divided, or even what the future money would be, before they jumped off the cliff. The conference didn't even know the extent of its assets and liabilities. So how could UW and UO have an informed idea? There was no mention if "totally informed", or "deep dive"! Legal counsel consulted or not was the issue. Even now there is no "deep dive" totally available. But, legal consultation was a part of every university involved total process. I was not responding to your post. Or anyone else's post. |
|
ftd
Junior
"I think real leaders show up when times are hard." Trent Bray 11/29/2023
Posts: 2,517
Member is Online
|
Post by ftd on Oct 5, 2023 15:21:35 GMT -8
Just curious if the big12 offered today to join their league for 30 mil would you take it or roll the dice for the possible pac2 payday? You take it running. The potential revenue in the next two years by maintaining the Pac-12 is tempting, but you have to look beyond those two years and the fate of all athletic programs. I see no sport where the Beavers would be in a better position by choosing a MWC merge over the Big-12. You have to think about baseball, gymnastics, wrestling, etc. Hopefully there is some behind the scenes work being done right now to get the Beavers in. I could see the ASU/UA/UU/CU pushing the Big-12 in order to get it done and get their share of the assets of a dissolved Big-12. You also have to remember the remaining P4 conferences are set up to receive a huge chunk of money if the Pac-12 were to disband. That CFP revenue we are tempted to stay and merge with the MWC for would instead be redistributed to the remaining conferences, with the P4 conferences getting the majority. I'm sure they are all hungry for that so who knows what kind of deal and calls they might be making the Big-12. I think there is a lot of pressure on the Big-12 to take us to clean up the realignment cycle mess. Time will tell! Hopefully we'll know by the end of the season. Pac-12? |
|
|
|
Post by p8nted on Oct 5, 2023 17:56:08 GMT -8
365 Sports claims to have the Baylor Athletic Director on the phone. Regarding Oregon State and Washington State joining the Big-12, "Have they been in any way shape or form in conversations with the Big 12?" Baylor AD: "No, not right now" Why would OSU and WSU leave before we find out what happens in court. If we both leave all 12 get the money. Maybe the pac-2 stays together for 1 more year and then we can take all the assets and move to big 12. Who will you play next year in all sports? |
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Oct 5, 2023 18:19:33 GMT -8
Why would OSU and WSU leave before we find out what happens in court. If we both leave all 12 get the money. Maybe the pac-2 stays together for 1 more year and then we can take all the assets and move to big 12. Who will you play next year in all sports? Is it really difficult to imagine that if OSU and WSU both come away with this whole thing with a ton of money/assets that they could make a scheduling deal with the MWC along with maybe a few ex-Pac-12 schools and others that have open weeks to fill for football? As far as the other sports, those schedules could easily be filled by teams from the MWC, WCC, WAC and Big Sky that would be available and there's a bunch of Cal State schools in the Mountain Pacific Sports Federation. Men's and women's hoops schedules would have to be a mix of schools from all of the above. Basketball would probably be the most difficult to fill and keep it at a reasonably high level. Gymnastics would probably be the easiest to build a schedule for as there are always quad meets to compete in and Denver will no doubt be a sure competitor. Pretty sure the Chaplins can get meets with a lot of the ex-Pac schools and others from throughout the country. Baseball should be fine, though it likely won't be a Pac-12 level schedule. But it wouldn't be if OSU is competing against MWC schools either. The same could be said for softball. It's far from impossible but each month that passes makes it more difficult. At some point it won't be feasible for 2024-25. |
|
escott58
Sophomore
Posts: 1,319
Grad Year: 1983
|
Post by escott58 on Oct 5, 2023 18:26:35 GMT -8
Remember when UW got beat by Montana a couple years ago?
|
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Oct 5, 2023 18:29:24 GMT -8
Remember when UW got beat by Montana a couple years ago? Outlier. Exceptions to the rule do not disprove the rule. Especially relatively rare exceptions. |
|
|
|
Post by p8nted on Oct 6, 2023 7:39:11 GMT -8
Who will you play next year in all sports? Is it really difficult to imagine that if OSU and WSU both come away with this whole thing with a ton of money/assets that they could make a scheduling deal with the MWC along with maybe a few ex-Pac-12 schools and others that have open weeks to fill for football? As far as the other sports, those schedules could easily be filled by teams from the MWC, WCC, WAC and Big Sky that would be available and there's a bunch of Cal State schools in the Mountain Pacific Sports Federation. Men's and women's hoops schedules would have to be a mix of schools from all of the above. Basketball would probably be the most difficult to fill and keep it at a reasonably high level. Gymnastics would probably be the easiest to build a schedule for as there are always quad meets to compete in and Denver will no doubt be a sure competitor. Pretty sure the Chaplins can get meets with a lot of the ex-Pac schools and others from throughout the country. Baseball should be fine, though it likely won't be a Pac-12 level schedule. But it wouldn't be if OSU is competing against MWC schools either. The same could be said for softball. It's far from impossible but each month that passes makes it more difficult. At some point it won't be feasible for 2024-25. I don't see any value for those schools to buyout games and rearrange travel and schedules at this late point to do OSU and WSU a favor. Just too much Money, damaged relationships, and work for any temporary gain. |
|
|
|
Post by atownbeaver on Oct 6, 2023 8:09:47 GMT -8
atown's and Schrimshander's last 2 posts both make a ton of sense. And neither was on topic. Off the cuff legal advise was never at issue. Legal teams consulted and part of the process was. No other specifics were mentioned. what are you even talking about, all the post are right here... The original post was NativeBeav stating he doubted departing schools consulted their legal counsel on how to access Pac-12 assets. You were the on saying of course they did and believe that they were all told there was safety in numbers. You even doubled down and said: Lol... " I sincerely doubt any of the traitors consulted their legal teams about remaining assets, and how to access them..."
That was what I responded to. And, it's blatantly falseWe are saying, naw, We agree with NativeBeav, they likely did not specifically look at that aspect of leaving, or at least review it in any real detail. For all the reasons previously stated. Nobody is arguing whether or not they consulted with lawyers, they are arguing if they evaluated this specific issue: how do we know try and dissolve the conference and get Pac-12 assets. |
|
|
|
Post by atownbeaver on Oct 6, 2023 8:12:51 GMT -8
Is it really difficult to imagine that if OSU and WSU both come away with this whole thing with a ton of money/assets that they could make a scheduling deal with the MWC along with maybe a few ex-Pac-12 schools and others that have open weeks to fill for football? As far as the other sports, those schedules could easily be filled by teams from the MWC, WCC, WAC and Big Sky that would be available and there's a bunch of Cal State schools in the Mountain Pacific Sports Federation. Men's and women's hoops schedules would have to be a mix of schools from all of the above. Basketball would probably be the most difficult to fill and keep it at a reasonably high level. Gymnastics would probably be the easiest to build a schedule for as there are always quad meets to compete in and Denver will no doubt be a sure competitor. Pretty sure the Chaplins can get meets with a lot of the ex-Pac schools and others from throughout the country. Baseball should be fine, though it likely won't be a Pac-12 level schedule. But it wouldn't be if OSU is competing against MWC schools either. The same could be said for softball. It's far from impossible but each month that passes makes it more difficult. At some point it won't be feasible for 2024-25. I don't see any value for those schools to buyout games and rearrange travel and schedules at this late point to do OSU and WSU a favor. Just too much Money, damaged relationships, and work for any temporary gain. MWC has very, very clearly indicated they are able and willing to rearrange schedules to work in OSU/WSU. That is our backstop in all of this. |
|
|
|
Post by p8nted on Oct 6, 2023 8:42:55 GMT -8
I don't see any value for those schools to buyout games and rearrange travel and schedules at this late point to do OSU and WSU a favor. Just too much Money, damaged relationships, and work for any temporary gain. MWC has very, very clearly indicated they are able and willing to rearrange schedules to work in OSU/WSU. That is our backstop in all of this. Yes. With the goal of future membership when court case is more settled. If that is not there I doubt the offer for a scheduling agreement will remain. Oh so we will help you out so you can poach some members? PAC 2 intent here matters |
|
|
|
Post by rgeorge on Oct 6, 2023 9:08:59 GMT -8
And neither was on topic. Off the cuff legal advise was never at issue. Legal teams consulted and part of the process was. No other specifics were mentioned. what are you even talking about, all the post are right here... The original post was NativeBeav stating he doubted departing schools consulted their legal counsel on how to access Pac-12 assets. You were the on saying of course they did and believe that they were all told there was safety in numbers. You even doubled down and said: Lol... " I sincerely doubt any of the traitors consulted their legal teams about remaining assets, and how to access them..."
That was what I responded to. And, it's blatantly falseWe are saying, naw, We agree with NativeBeav, they likely did not specifically look at that aspect of leaving, or at least review it in any real detail. For all the reasons previously stated. Nobody is arguing whether or not they consulted with lawyers, they are arguing if they evaluated this specific issue: how do we know try and dissolve the conference and get Pac-12 assets. Yep... read! You added and are arguing against the exact point I made. Read...lol You added much more specific detail and ancillary BS that was not part of the OP or response, or relevant. FFS, pretty simple concept. Sincerely doubted they consulted... I said blatantly false. They did. What? They consulted but just decided that most importa t aspect, $$, wasn't part if that decision! 🤣 Everything else tossed in... deep dive, fully vetted, evaluated... and added fodder. And, your own words show it. They were absolutely "consulted" in every aspect of leaving. Everything about your specifics is made up. You nor anyone here knows any such specifics about each schools procedures & processes during the 12+ months. |
|
|
|
Post by atownbeaver on Oct 6, 2023 9:10:59 GMT -8
MWC has very, very clearly indicated they are able and willing to rearrange schedules to work in OSU/WSU. That is our backstop in all of this. Yes. With the goal of future membership when court case is more settled. If that is not there I doubt the offer for a scheduling agreement will remain. Oh so we will help you out so you can poach some members? PAC 2 intent here matters There is only two real possible outcome here. 1) another conference (Big 12, the original point of this thread) takes us. In that case they schedule for us, and we just need to fill an OOC slate, and most non-revenue sports will have no problem filling in teams among the hundreds of schools out there with basketball, baseball, gymnastics, golf, soccer, track, etc... programs. 2) we reverse merge with the MWC... and then the same is true. There is that outside possibility people have floated that I don't think really happens: WSU/OSU run as the Pac-2 for one season. I am not sure it ever comes down this this. Either the Big-12 is going to make a move and be enticed to do so because of a possible advantage OSU and WSU have in controlling the conference, or WSU/OSU are going to bring in teams ASAP. Scheduling is not any significant issue, per se. |
|
|
|
Post by jrbeavo on Oct 6, 2023 9:31:31 GMT -8
what are you even talking about, all the post are right here... The original post was NativeBeav stating he doubted departing schools consulted their legal counsel on how to access Pac-12 assets. You were the on saying of course they did and believe that they were all told there was safety in numbers. You even doubled down and said: Lol... " I sincerely doubt any of the traitors consulted their legal teams about remaining assets, and how to access them..."
That was what I responded to. And, it's blatantly falseWe are saying, naw, We agree with NativeBeav, they likely did not specifically look at that aspect of leaving, or at least review it in any real detail. For all the reasons previously stated. Nobody is arguing whether or not they consulted with lawyers, they are arguing if they evaluated this specific issue: how do we know try and dissolve the conference and get Pac-12 assets. Yep... read! You added and are arguing against the exact point I made. Read...lol You added much more specific detail and ancillary BS that was not part of the OP or response, or relevant. FFS, pretty simple concept. Sincerely doubted they consulted... I said blatantly false. They did. What? They consulted but just decided that most importa t aspect, $$, wasn't part if that decision! 🤣 Everything else tossed in... deep dive, fully vetted, evaluated... and added fodder. And, your own words show it. They were absolutely "consulted" in every aspect of leaving. Everything about your specifics is made up. You nor anyone here knows any such specifics about each schools procedures & processes during the 12+ months. You can argue about process, or you can argue about outcomes. Certainly, few people are privy to organizations processes, but we can all observe the outcomes...which are quite public. The turn-around time between agreeing to the GOR w Apple and the Pac to Oregon and Washington leaving for the B10 was demonstrably small. In addition, the sloppiness with which they conducted the BOT 'hearing' is also well known. Finally, the reality that SC and UCLA found themselves in when they left (no board seat, and seeming acceptance of that...along with Colorado) makes it a little hard to argue that they were legally prepared for the fallout from their decision.
You can claim that you're confident that the process was calculated and diligent, but the outcome doesn't really suggest that.
|
|
