2013 LGP College Football Thread

Forum for posts that are not hockey-related.

Moderators: Three Stars, dagny, pfim, netwolf

Re: 2013 LGP College Football Thread

Postby canaan on Sun Nov 10, 2013 8:20 pm

Duke Johnson's ankle has ruined 2013 for me
canaan
NHL Third Liner
NHL Third Liner
 
Posts: 38,809
Joined: Tue May 30, 2006 11:13 am
Location: Fritos. On. My. Sub.

Re: 2013 LGP College Football Thread

Postby Rocco on Tue Nov 19, 2013 1:19 pm

Rocco
NHL Third Liner
NHL Third Liner
 
Posts: 35,685
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 8:34 am
Location: Manor Farm

Re: 2013 LGP College Football Thread

Postby newarenanow on Tue Nov 19, 2013 1:47 pm

That decision is that they didn't dismiss it and that the ACC can move forward to have a judgement made on the legality of the exit fee. Terps don't have to pay yet. But that is a step forward for the ACC.
newarenanow
NHL Third Liner
NHL Third Liner
 
Posts: 41,307
Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2006 1:56 pm

Re: 2013 LGP College Football Thread

Postby slappybrown on Tue Nov 19, 2013 1:57 pm

Its enormous. I don't think anyone thought it would be dismissed, but the fact that they now get discovery means that a settlement should be here soon. There is no way Maryland has any interest in giving up the emails surrounding their exit and other internal deliberations. The floor is essentially set at 17.4 and the max at 52.3. I'd bet 30mm-35mm.
slappybrown
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 17,845
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 11:08 am
Location: Noted Board Henchman

Re: 2013 LGP College Football Thread

Postby columbia on Tue Nov 19, 2013 2:00 pm

Is this one of those times where slappy throws around relevant jargon and pretends that he's a lawyer?
columbia
NHL Third Liner
NHL Third Liner
 
Posts: 46,455
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 12:13 am

Re: 2013 LGP College Football Thread

Postby canaan on Tue Nov 19, 2013 2:04 pm

disgunabegud.gif
canaan
NHL Third Liner
NHL Third Liner
 
Posts: 38,809
Joined: Tue May 30, 2006 11:13 am
Location: Fritos. On. My. Sub.

Re: 2013 LGP College Football Thread

Postby shafnutz05 on Tue Nov 19, 2013 2:06 pm

slappybrown wrote: The floor is essentially set at 17.4 and the max at 52.3. I'd bet 30mm-35mm.


ARE WE TALKING ABOUT FILM.PNG
shafnutz05
NHL Third Liner
NHL Third Liner
 
Posts: 56,333
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 5:10 pm
Location: Amish Country

Re: 2013 LGP College Football Thread

Postby Rocco on Tue Nov 19, 2013 2:40 pm

newarenanow wrote:That decision is that they didn't dismiss it and that the ACC can move forward to have a judgement made on the legality of the exit fee. Terps don't have to pay yet. But that is a step forward for the ACC.


It's a matter of time for the Terps.
Rocco
NHL Third Liner
NHL Third Liner
 
Posts: 35,685
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 8:34 am
Location: Manor Farm

Re: 2013 LGP College Football Thread

Postby Rocco on Tue Nov 19, 2013 2:43 pm

slappybrown wrote:Its enormous. I don't think anyone thought it would be dismissed, but the fact that they now get discovery means that a settlement should be here soon. There is no way Maryland has any interest in giving up the emails surrounding their exit and other internal deliberations. The floor is essentially set at 17.4 and the max at 52.3. I'd bet 30mm-35mm.


The ACC has no motivation to settle for anything less than the 52M exit fee, and MD's main argument for why they shouldn't pay is "it's isn't fair!". That's not a solid legal argument.
Rocco
NHL Third Liner
NHL Third Liner
 
Posts: 35,685
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 8:34 am
Location: Manor Farm

Re: 2013 LGP College Football Thread

Postby slappybrown on Tue Nov 19, 2013 3:43 pm

columbia wrote:Is this one of those times where slappy throws around relevant jargon and pretends that he's a lawyer?

lololol

I've already told you I am in advertising. I don't get it.
slappybrown
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 17,845
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 11:08 am
Location: Noted Board Henchman

Re: 2013 LGP College Football Thread

Postby slappybrown on Tue Nov 19, 2013 3:43 pm

Rocco wrote:
slappybrown wrote:Its enormous. I don't think anyone thought it would be dismissed, but the fact that they now get discovery means that a settlement should be here soon. There is no way Maryland has any interest in giving up the emails surrounding their exit and other internal deliberations. The floor is essentially set at 17.4 and the max at 52.3. I'd bet 30mm-35mm.


The ACC has no motivation to settle for anything less than the 52M exit fee, and MD's main argument for why they shouldn't pay is "it's isn't fair!". That's not a solid legal argument.

You really think they are getting 52mm? I think that's very unlikely.
slappybrown
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 17,845
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 11:08 am
Location: Noted Board Henchman

Re: 2013 LGP College Football Thread

Postby slappybrown on Tue Nov 19, 2013 3:44 pm

shafnutz05 wrote:
slappybrown wrote: The floor is essentially set at 17.4 and the max at 52.3. I'd bet 30mm-35mm.


ARE WE TALKING ABOUT FILM.PNG

lolol i liked this. dot png is one I can add to the list.
slappybrown
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 17,845
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 11:08 am
Location: Noted Board Henchman

Re: 2013 LGP College Football Thread

Postby Rocco on Tue Nov 19, 2013 3:50 pm

slappybrown wrote:
Rocco wrote:
slappybrown wrote:Its enormous. I don't think anyone thought it would be dismissed, but the fact that they now get discovery means that a settlement should be here soon. There is no way Maryland has any interest in giving up the emails surrounding their exit and other internal deliberations. The floor is essentially set at 17.4 and the max at 52.3. I'd bet 30mm-35mm.


The ACC has no motivation to settle for anything less than the 52M exit fee, and MD's main argument for why they shouldn't pay is "it's isn't fair!". That's not a solid legal argument.

You really think they are getting 52mm? I think that's very unlikely.


I don't see why they would take less than $52M, and I can't think of any solid legal arguments the Terps have to get a judge to lower the number. MD needs to clear this up so they can leave, and the ACC probably isn't too excited to do them any favors.
Rocco
NHL Third Liner
NHL Third Liner
 
Posts: 35,685
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 8:34 am
Location: Manor Farm

Re: 2013 LGP College Football Thread

Postby slappybrown on Tue Nov 19, 2013 4:21 pm

I read the Maryland Complaint that they filed in state court in MD when it first was filed, and if I recall the main arguments were that the new exit fee provision was improperly enacted in that it failed to comply with the ACC bylaws regarding amending its bylaws and that the provision amounted to an illegal restraint of trade and was anticompetitive. I've never seen the ACC bylaws so I can't really speak to the merits, but their arguments don't amount to "it's not fair." They have very specific reasons why they believe it isn't enforceable.

Most every settlement, no matter how good the case, requires a discount from one side or the other. So yes, I can see why the ACC is likely to take less than $52mm. I'd bet the house it surpasses the $20mm WVU got dinged for (though they were paying for the value of an early exit), but I don't see 52mm coming into the ACC's coffers, much as I'd like to see it happen. The ACC has its own legal fees and has some degree of risk, even if much smaller than Maryland's.
slappybrown
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 17,845
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 11:08 am
Location: Noted Board Henchman

Re: 2013 LGP College Football Thread

Postby Rocco on Tue Nov 19, 2013 4:41 pm

Maryland signed the contract. They're now in the position of explaining why they shouldn't be bound by terms to which they agreed. That's a losing hand. They've also argued that because the ACC lined up a replacement and the value of their TV deal didn't decline the ACC suffered no damage, which while true is a different argument that doesn't apply to the exit fee. The article I linked made clear that MD's saying the penalty is illegal and unnecessarily punitive. They're looking for a ruling in equity because the law is against them. If you're arguing for an equitable decision, you're saying that the law is against you but the situation isn't fair. Assuming that MD argues the penalty is illegal in the NC proceeding, if they lose there they'll have a res judicata problem with the MD proceeding.

The ACC has legal fees to be sure, but those fees are pooled amongst teams. They're also interested in proving they are willing to fight to make sure any team in the future that wants to bail knows the exit fee isn't negotiable. They also have the law on their side, which is a position of strength.
Rocco
NHL Third Liner
NHL Third Liner
 
Posts: 35,685
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 8:34 am
Location: Manor Farm

Re: 2013 LGP College Football Thread

Postby slappybrown on Tue Nov 19, 2013 4:46 pm

Rocco wrote:Maryland signed the contract. They're now in the position of explaining why they shouldn't be bound by terms to which they agreed. That's a losing hand. They've also argued that because the ACC lined up a replacement and the value of their TV deal didn't decline the ACC suffered no damage, which while true is a different argument that doesn't apply to the exit fee. The article I linked made clear that MD's saying the penalty is illegal and unnecessarily punitive. They're looking for a ruling in equity because the law is against them. If you're arguing for an equitable decision, you're saying that the law is against you but the situation isn't fair. Assuming that MD argues the penalty is illegal in the NC proceeding, if they lose there they'll have a res judicata problem with the MD proceeding.

The ACC has legal fees to be sure, but those fees are pooled amongst teams. They're also interested in proving they are willing to fight to make sure any team in the future that wants to bail knows the exit fee isn't negotiable. They also have the law on their side, which is a position of strength.

Was it a contract? The by-laws were at 17 and change for the exit fee, and then were amended. Was there something to sign at that point?

I don't anyone disagree that the ACC is in the better spot. I just don't think you get full value on your claims in litigation through settlement.

I'll read the article you posted. But wasn't the motion to dismiss the NC case based on sovereign immunity? That has nothing to do with the merits arguments they might make as previewed by their Maryland complaint.
slappybrown
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 17,845
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 11:08 am
Location: Noted Board Henchman

Re: 2013 LGP College Football Thread

Postby slappybrown on Tue Nov 19, 2013 4:56 pm

Rocco, that article is awful for a number of reasons. I read it and:

Despite Maryland's negative vote on increasing the exit fee, "each member, including the University of Maryland, has agreed to be bound by the vote of the Council," Judge Robert N. Hunter Jr. wrote in the appeals court's decision.


No, no it didn't. It recited the allegations in the Complaint. Its a motion to dismiss.

North Carolina's Court of Appeals rejected that argument, saying it doesn't apply to the ACC's claim that the penalty is due because Maryland broke its contract.


Same point.

I skimmed it quickly, and nothing in the NC decision has anything to do with what Maryland has or has not alleged. It doesn't even address what they allege in the MD lawsuit (and presumably what they'd argue in defense in NC case), nor should it, because the Appeals court was reviewing a motion to dismiss regarding jurisdiction, sovereign immunity, and comity. The MD complaint, if I recall, isn't seeking solely an equitable remedy. They have actual an actual breach of contract claim, as I said above.
slappybrown
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 17,845
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 11:08 am
Location: Noted Board Henchman

Re: 2013 LGP College Football Thread

Postby shafnutz05 on Tue Nov 19, 2013 4:57 pm

If I pass the bar, can I join the CJ on this page?
shafnutz05
NHL Third Liner
NHL Third Liner
 
Posts: 56,333
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 5:10 pm
Location: Amish Country

Re: 2013 LGP College Football Thread

Postby canaan on Tue Nov 19, 2013 5:00 pm

CJ?
canaan
NHL Third Liner
NHL Third Liner
 
Posts: 38,809
Joined: Tue May 30, 2006 11:13 am
Location: Fritos. On. My. Sub.

Re: 2013 LGP College Football Thread

Postby shafnutz05 on Tue Nov 19, 2013 5:01 pm

:pop:
shafnutz05
NHL Third Liner
NHL Third Liner
 
Posts: 56,333
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 5:10 pm
Location: Amish Country

Re: 2013 LGP College Football Thread

Postby slappybrown on Tue Nov 19, 2013 5:02 pm

Colloquy of Jenius (shad is a poor speller)
slappybrown
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 17,845
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 11:08 am
Location: Noted Board Henchman

Re: 2013 LGP College Football Thread

Postby shafnutz05 on Tue Nov 19, 2013 5:04 pm

slappybrown wrote:Colloquy of Jenius (shad is a poor speller)


Very well played.
shafnutz05
NHL Third Liner
NHL Third Liner
 
Posts: 56,333
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 5:10 pm
Location: Amish Country

Re: 2013 LGP College Football Thread

Postby newarenanow on Tue Nov 19, 2013 5:44 pm

What does the Dude have to say about this.
newarenanow
NHL Third Liner
NHL Third Liner
 
Posts: 41,307
Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2006 1:56 pm

Re: 2013 LGP College Football Thread

Postby ExPatriatePen on Tue Nov 19, 2013 5:53 pm

newarenanow wrote:What does the Dude have to say about this.

http://dudeofwv.blogspot.com/

:) :pop:
ExPatriatePen
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 22,691
Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2006 3:57 pm
Location: Source, Destination, Protocol, Port, size, sequence number, check sum... Yep, that about covers it.

Re: 2013 LGP College Football Thread

Postby Rocco on Tue Nov 19, 2013 6:14 pm

slappybrown wrote:
Rocco wrote:Maryland signed the contract. They're now in the position of explaining why they shouldn't be bound by terms to which they agreed. That's a losing hand. They've also argued that because the ACC lined up a replacement and the value of their TV deal didn't decline the ACC suffered no damage, which while true is a different argument that doesn't apply to the exit fee. The article I linked made clear that MD's saying the penalty is illegal and unnecessarily punitive. They're looking for a ruling in equity because the law is against them. If you're arguing for an equitable decision, you're saying that the law is against you but the situation isn't fair. Assuming that MD argues the penalty is illegal in the NC proceeding, if they lose there they'll have a res judicata problem with the MD proceeding.

The ACC has legal fees to be sure, but those fees are pooled amongst teams. They're also interested in proving they are willing to fight to make sure any team in the future that wants to bail knows the exit fee isn't negotiable. They also have the law on their side, which is a position of strength.

Was it a contract? The by-laws were at 17 and change for the exit fee, and then were amended. Was there something to sign at that point?


They are part of the ACC. They agreed to be bound by the by-laws, and the by-laws were changed. The understanding, at least with one school, was that the change was immediate. MD had no problems with previous exit fees.

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/201 ... er-schools
Rocco
NHL Third Liner
NHL Third Liner
 
Posts: 35,685
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 8:34 am
Location: Manor Farm

PreviousNext

Return to NHR

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: blackjack68 and 8 guests

e-mail