|
|
Post by obf on Oct 11, 2023 8:59:02 GMT -8
I almost never post here, but this is actually something I'm pretty familiar with. Pulling in the other schools (other than UW who already wants in) probably can't be done. Asking to file an amicus brief alone also doesn't put the other schools within the reach of the court.
For easier discussion, the arguments that UW is making are roughly paraphrased below. This isn't my endorsement of them, but rather my attempt at translation into non-legalese.
"The statutes under which the Pac2 schools are asking for relief don't allow the court to take action against rights of parties who haven't yet been properly brought in to the litigation. It's on the plaintiff to bring them in if they want that to happen. BUT... For various reasons, those parties can't be forced to participate in the litigation. The law also requires the court to stay out of disputes about the bylaws of voluntary organizations other than in extremely limited circumstances. Because the parties and non-parties have other avenues to resolve their differences -- say through mediation or private and binding arbitration -- the court's involvement isn't appropriate here. Further, the drafters of the bylaws did such a bad job that there isn't an unambiguously right way to read the withdrawal clause. For all of those reasons, the court should butt out and send everyone home to work things out."
Looking at it without my orange reading glasses on, there are some good and some not so good arguments there. There's some case law that says that not every necessary party is an indispensable party, which helps our position. But the case that idea comes from involved sovereign tribes who were more tangentially involved, rather than as primary parties whose rights were at stake. They may be able to differentiate on those grounds. The UW lawyers also did as well as they could to lay out their preferred interpretation of the withdrawal notice clause. Though all of us here prefer the more straightforward reading, their version isn't wholly implausible. I don't think Judge Libey will bite on that interpretation, but it isn't the worst argument ever.
There's a chance they get this tossed on the procedural arguments. I'd put it at 10% - 20%. If they don't, I think the chances they prevail on the bylaw argument is almost nil. If they want to be vindictive and drag things out, the procedural side could create grounds for an appeal that could drag on for a long time. Would they do that? Who knows.
How long could Washington drag this out if they go this route. What is a long time by your definition? Does it time up conference money for months or years? From my totally un educated view... It seems that the traitorous 10 are the ones on the clock.... They have until August 1, 2024 to get something settled and decided, because at that time they really are officially no longer members and the 2 remaining members (OSU and WSU) can do what they want. We already know that the Pac-2 wants to wait to do anything official until 2025 anyways so that the MWC grant of rights can expire. The Pac-2 will have to borrow some money in the interim probably, but time is on the Pac-2 side... I think. IMHO, the easiest thing for the Pac-2 to do is to drag their feet, leave things undecided and ambiguous. Stay in this "day to day unanimous decisions are ok, otherwise no other decisions can be made" mode until August. Including giving the other 10 whatever shares of monies accrue during that time... I mean THAT is fair. Then on August 1, 2024, when OSU and WSU are the only two remaining members you fire Georgie Porgie with cause, remove any and all disbursements to the traitorous 10, and start laying the ground work for building the Pac back up to 10 - 18 members in 2025. This will resolve itself on it's own in just 9 months or so. Delaying a court proceeding for 9 months is nothing  |
|
|
|
Post by orangeattack on Oct 11, 2023 9:00:28 GMT -8
Today's Monty Show podcast is interesting. Talks about a Wilner article on the UW lawsuit. He's pulling for the Pac-2. Expecting negotiating, says he's heard OSU/WSU open to splitting NCAA basketball credits, doesn't know to what degree. Says his sources say Pac-2 and MWC is set to go when the legal issues are solved. Other tidbits. If the leaving schools can drag this out in the courts for months, and it appears they can. The MWC schools have a ton of leverage. Really no other choice I'm not sure I see it this way. OSU and WSU ultimately just need to drag this out to the point where the departing 10 cannot dissolve the conference on their way out. THEY are the ones who need to get control before they leave the conference, and the clock is ticking. |
|
|
|
Post by obf on Oct 11, 2023 9:03:36 GMT -8
Today's Monty Show podcast is interesting. Talks about a Wilner article on the UW lawsuit. He's pulling for the Pac-2. Expecting negotiating, says he's heard OSU/WSU open to splitting NCAA basketball credits, doesn't know to what degree. Says his sources say Pac-2 and MWC is set to go when the legal issues are solved. Other tidbits. If the leaving schools can drag this out in the courts for months, and it appears they can. The MWC schools have a ton of leverage. Really no other choice I think it is the opposite, time is on the Pac-2's side, NOT the other side. If nothing gets set in stone by Aug 1 2024, then the pac 2 is golden. Thats why Georgie and the TT (traitorous ten) were trying to quickly have a board meeting before OSU/WSU could get their ducks (pun intended) in a row. |
|
|
|
Post by p8nted on Oct 11, 2023 9:31:41 GMT -8
If the leaving schools can drag this out in the courts for months, and it appears they can. The MWC schools have a ton of leverage. Really no other choice I think it is the opposite, time is on the Pac-2's side, NOT the other side. If nothing gets set in stone by Aug 1 2024, then the pac 2 is golden. Thats why Georgie and the TT (traitorous ten) were trying to quickly have a board meeting before OSU/WSU could get their ducks (pun intended) in a row. Well who will we play? No MWC merger then no scheduling agreement, no TV contract, nothing |
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Oct 11, 2023 9:44:25 GMT -8
How long could Washington drag this out if they go this route. What is a long time by your definition? Does it time up conference money for months or years? From my totally un educated view... It seems that the traitorous 10 are the ones on the clock.... They have until August 1, 2024 to get something settled and decided, because at that time they really are officially no longer members and the 2 remaining members (OSU and WSU) can do what they want. We already know that the Pac-2 wants to wait to do anything official until 2025 anyways so that the MWC grant of rights can expire. The Pac-2 will have to borrow some money in the interim probably, but time is on the Pac-2 side... I think. IMHO, the easiest thing for the Pac-2 to do is to drag their feet, leave things undecided and ambiguous. Stay in this "day to day unanimous decisions are ok, otherwise no other decisions can be made" mode until August. Including giving the other 10 whatever shares of monies accrue during that time... I mean THAT is fair. Then on August 1, 2024, when OSU and WSU are the only two remaining members you fire Georgie Porgie with cause, remove any and all disbursements to the traitorous 10, and start laying the ground work for building the Pac back up to 10 - 18 members in 2025. This will resolve itself on it's own in just 9 months or so. Delaying a court proceeding for 9 months is nothing We do not know this. If the Pac-2 were wanting to wait 2 years, they'd already be scheduling OOC games to fill their 9 game scheduling gaps. Heck, Fresno State just announced scheduling UCLA and Stanford in the last two days. The longer this goes on, the harder it's going to be to schedule a full slate of games. If the Pac-2 waits until August 1st of next year, we're just about locked into a 3 game schedule. We don't know much, but if there's anything we do know, OSU and WSU wanted this done over a month ago. |
|
|
|
Post by hottubbeaver on Oct 11, 2023 10:03:32 GMT -8
How long could Washington drag this out if they go this route. What is a long time by your definition? Does it time up conference money for months or years? From my totally un educated view... It seems that the traitorous 10 are the ones on the clock.... They have until August 1, 2024 to get something settled and decided, because at that time they really are officially no longer members and the 2 remaining members (OSU and WSU) can do what they want. We already know that the Pac-2 wants to wait to do anything official until 2025 anyways so that the MWC grant of rights can expire. The Pac-2 will have to borrow some money in the interim probably, but time is on the Pac-2 side... I think. IMHO, the easiest thing for the Pac-2 to do is to drag their feet, leave things undecided and ambiguous. Stay in this "day to day unanimous decisions are ok, otherwise no other decisions can be made" mode until August. Including giving the other 10 whatever shares of monies accrue during that time... I mean THAT is fair. Then on August 1, 2024, when OSU and WSU are the only two remaining members you fire Georgie Porgie with cause, remove any and all disbursements to the traitorous 10, and start laying the ground work for building the Pac back up to 10 - 18 members in 2025. This will resolve itself on it's own in just 9 months or so. Delaying a court proceeding for 9 months is nothing Some excellent points in your post. Come August there is no legal dispute as to who has control of the conference. My guess is scheduling is already quietly in the works or already done and we can wait this out. |
|
|
|
Post by p8nted on Oct 11, 2023 10:12:04 GMT -8
From my totally un educated view... It seems that the traitorous 10 are the ones on the clock.... They have until August 1, 2024 to get something settled and decided, because at that time they really are officially no longer members and the 2 remaining members (OSU and WSU) can do what they want. We already know that the Pac-2 wants to wait to do anything official until 2025 anyways so that the MWC grant of rights can expire. The Pac-2 will have to borrow some money in the interim probably, but time is on the Pac-2 side... I think. IMHO, the easiest thing for the Pac-2 to do is to drag their feet, leave things undecided and ambiguous. Stay in this "day to day unanimous decisions are ok, otherwise no other decisions can be made" mode until August. Including giving the other 10 whatever shares of monies accrue during that time... I mean THAT is fair. Then on August 1, 2024, when OSU and WSU are the only two remaining members you fire Georgie Porgie with cause, remove any and all disbursements to the traitorous 10, and start laying the ground work for building the Pac back up to 10 - 18 members in 2025. This will resolve itself on it's own in just 9 months or so. Delaying a court proceeding for 9 months is nothing Some excellent points in your post. Come August there is no legal dispute as to who has control of the conference. My guess is scheduling is already quietly in the works or already done and we can wait this out. Not sure how you schedule when you can't tell OOC teams, which is almost the entire schedule, what you will pay them to visit and that there is NO tv coverage or contract? Games would almost have got be one and done deals as there is no guarantee how much schedule you need in a year or two? super complex and messy to schedule |
|
|
|
Post by 93beav on Oct 11, 2023 10:22:31 GMT -8
I think it is the opposite, time is on the Pac-2's side, NOT the other side. If nothing gets set in stone by Aug 1 2024, then the pac 2 is golden. Thats why Georgie and the TT (traitorous ten) were trying to quickly have a board meeting before OSU/WSU could get their ducks (pun intended) in a row. Well who will we play? No MWC merger then no scheduling agreement, no TV contract, nothing At some point, it will be immaterial whether the PAC-2 need to wait for the legal resolution to do a scheduling agreement with the MWC. Everyone just has to take their chances. Technically, I think we could play each other multiple times, if we REALLY had to pull a rabbit out of the hat. However, they've also engaged with that scheduling master that was previously used and I'm confident they have a Plan B, C, D, etc. |
|
|
|
Post by hottubbeaver on Oct 11, 2023 10:23:24 GMT -8
Some excellent points in your post. Come August there is no legal dispute as to who has control of the conference. My guess is scheduling is already quietly in the works or already done and we can wait this out. Not sure how you schedule when you can't tell OOC teams, which is almost the entire schedule, what you will pay them to visit and that there is NO tv coverage or contract? Games would almost have got be one and done deals as there is no guarantee how much schedule you need in a year or two? super complex and messy to schedule We didn't break the eggs, but that wont stop us from cooking up a mean omelette. Holding the keys to a P5 conference is a big enough chip to persuade schools on the outside wanting in, to look beyond the terms of a couple games on their schedule next year (WSU/OSU) and focus on the dividends payable beyond next season. I agree it's not without difficulty but there is enough in it for both sides to figure out how to make it work. |
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Oct 11, 2023 11:06:24 GMT -8
Not sure how you schedule when you can't tell OOC teams, which is almost the entire schedule, what you will pay them to visit and that there is NO tv coverage or contract? Games would almost have got be one and done deals as there is no guarantee how much schedule you need in a year or two? super complex and messy to schedule We didn't break the eggs, but that wont stop us from cooking up a mean omelette. Holding the keys to a P5 conference is a big enough chip to persuade schools on the outside wanting in, to look beyond the terms of a couple games on their schedule next year (WSU/OSU) and focus on the dividends payable beyond next season. I agree it's not without difficulty but there is enough in it for both sides to figure out how to make it work. If we have a decent sized Pac-whatever conference next year it'll very likely be a P5 conference, it's apparently already been discussed among the powers that be and they decided to do nothing for a couple years (apparently there's some kind of time limit written in according to some accounts, I think it has to do with the original playoff agreement ending in 2026) if the Pac is a full conference. If it's just the Pac-2, that opens up a whole can of worms. Apparently 1 director can have veto power right now, so technically Schulz can torpedo dropping the Pac's P5 status, but is that something he'd really want to do? There's already rumors that many of the rest of the board have privately said that won't work for conference with just 2 teams, as it's unfair to Everybody else. It'd pretty much guarantee the Pac loses P5 status at the first possible juncture. If true, getting to a full sized conference by next year is probably an imperative, which could pretty much eliminate the idea of teams scheduling us with future conference entry in mind. There's so many possible factors in this conversation. |
|
|
|
Post by sparty on Oct 11, 2023 11:37:55 GMT -8
From my totally un educated view... It seems that the traitorous 10 are the ones on the clock.... They have until August 1, 2024 to get something settled and decided, because at that time they really are officially no longer members and the 2 remaining members (OSU and WSU) can do what they want. We already know that the Pac-2 wants to wait to do anything official until 2025 anyways so that the MWC grant of rights can expire. The Pac-2 will have to borrow some money in the interim probably, but time is on the Pac-2 side... I think. IMHO, the easiest thing for the Pac-2 to do is to drag their feet, leave things undecided and ambiguous. Stay in this "day to day unanimous decisions are ok, otherwise no other decisions can be made" mode until August. Including giving the other 10 whatever shares of monies accrue during that time... I mean THAT is fair. Then on August 1, 2024, when OSU and WSU are the only two remaining members you fire Georgie Porgie with cause, remove any and all disbursements to the traitorous 10, and start laying the ground work for building the Pac back up to 10 - 18 members in 2025. This will resolve itself on it's own in just 9 months or so. Delaying a court proceeding for 9 months is nothing We do not know this. If the Pac-2 were wanting to wait 2 years, they'd already be scheduling OOC games to fill their 9 game scheduling gaps. Heck, Fresno State just announced scheduling UCLA and Stanford in the last two days. The longer this goes on, the harder it's going to be to schedule a full slate of games. If the Pac-2 waits until August 1st of next year, we're just about locked into a 3 game schedule. We don't know much, but if there's anything we do know, OSU and WSU wanted this done over a month ago. Great points. I tend to agree with you. Can't see how being in limbo helps with recruiting either. What do you tell a recruit. Wait two years and we can tell you more. |
|
|
|
Post by orangeattack on Oct 11, 2023 11:42:48 GMT -8
Some excellent points in your post. Come August there is no legal dispute as to who has control of the conference. My guess is scheduling is already quietly in the works or already done and we can wait this out. Not sure how you schedule when you can't tell OOC teams, which is almost the entire schedule, what you will pay them to visit and that there is NO tv coverage or contract? Games would almost have got be one and done deals as there is no guarantee how much schedule you need in a year or two? super complex and messy to schedule The general consensus is that there is already a tentative agreement with the MWC already in place to make this work if the reverse merger were to be the plan going forward. This is complex and messy to schedule for everyone but it is not rocket science. Oregon and UW declared they were joining the big 10 a matter of weeks ago and that schedule is already out. Not sure why everyone thinks this needs to be done a full year in advance. |
|
|
|
Post by orangeattack on Oct 11, 2023 11:47:24 GMT -8
We didn't break the eggs, but that wont stop us from cooking up a mean omelette. Holding the keys to a P5 conference is a big enough chip to persuade schools on the outside wanting in, to look beyond the terms of a couple games on their schedule next year (WSU/OSU) and focus on the dividends payable beyond next season. I agree it's not without difficulty but there is enough in it for both sides to figure out how to make it work. If we have a decent sized Pac-whatever conference next year it'll very likely be a P5 conference, it's apparently already been discussed among the powers that be and they decided to do nothing for a couple years (apparently there's some kind of time limit written in according to some accounts, I think it has to do with the original playoff agreement ending in 2026) if the Pac is a full conference. If it's just the Pac-2, that opens up a whole can of worms. Apparently 1 director can have veto power right now, so technically Schulz can torpedo dropping the Pac's P5 status, but is that something he'd really want to do? There's already rumors that many of the rest of the board have privately said that won't work for conference with just 2 teams, as it's unfair to Everybody else. It'd pretty much guarantee the Pac loses P5 status at the first possible juncture. If true, getting to a full sized conference by next year is probably an imperative, which could pretty much eliminate the idea of teams scheduling us with future conference entry in mind. There's so many possible factors in this conversation. LOL yes 100%. Because WSU and OSU did not choose to be put in this position and the intention would be to build back the conference. There's no way that he WOULDN'T torpedo dropping the Pac's P5 status, and he would FOREVER be crucified by WSU alum/fanbase for voluntarily relegating WSU to G5 status. |
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Oct 11, 2023 12:05:39 GMT -8
We do not know this. If the Pac-2 were wanting to wait 2 years, they'd already be scheduling OOC games to fill their 9 game scheduling gaps. Heck, Fresno State just announced scheduling UCLA and Stanford in the last two days. The longer this goes on, the harder it's going to be to schedule a full slate of games. If the Pac-2 waits until August 1st of next year, we're just about locked into a 3 game schedule. We don't know much, but if there's anything we do know, OSU and WSU wanted this done over a month ago. Great points. I tend to agree with you. Can't see how being in limbo helps with recruiting either. What do you tell a recruit. Wait two years and we can tell you more. I think limbo would kill recruiting, and even be worse for the transfer portal. Imagine 20-30, or more, players transferring out in January or March because we only have a full slate of guaranteed games next year. You would not be able to replace them with good players for the same reason. |
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Oct 11, 2023 12:12:00 GMT -8
If we have a decent sized Pac-whatever conference next year it'll very likely be a P5 conference, it's apparently already been discussed among the powers that be and they decided to do nothing for a couple years (apparently there's some kind of time limit written in according to some accounts, I think it has to do with the original playoff agreement ending in 2026) if the Pac is a full conference. If it's just the Pac-2, that opens up a whole can of worms. Apparently 1 director can have veto power right now, so technically Schulz can torpedo dropping the Pac's P5 status, but is that something he'd really want to do? There's already rumors that many of the rest of the board have privately said that won't work for conference with just 2 teams, as it's unfair to Everybody else. It'd pretty much guarantee the Pac loses P5 status at the first possible juncture. If true, getting to a full sized conference by next year is probably an imperative, which could pretty much eliminate the idea of teams scheduling us with future conference entry in mind. There's so many possible factors in this conversation. LOL yes 100%. Because WSU and OSU did not choose to be put in this position and the intention would be to build back the conference. There's no way that he WOULDN'T torpedo dropping the Pac's P5 status, and he would FOREVER be crucified by WSU alum/fanbase for voluntarily relegating WSU to G5 status. You apparently didn’t understand what I intended in my next two sentences. There would be tremendous pressure on Schulz to play along of there were no others siding with him. Do you alienate the rest of of the board and insure the long term death of P5 status fro the PAC just to get 2 years? |
|
