Am a diehard Duck fan a have been one since the early 70’s. I think OSU and WSU got shafted as did the people of Oregon and Washington! Quit hiding behind legalese. You screwed over athletes , coaches and their families. If there is a mass exodus of athletes, a pox on all of you who screwed over these remaining two. The 10 should be doing everything they can to help OSU and WSU.
None of us in this chat know what is being discussed in mediation among the 10 schools, and these countering lawyer statements are legal jockeying. As a Duck alumnus and football fan, I am saddened by the destruction of the Pac12, for sure. But, this jeremiad against the UO is ridiculous. They made a decision that is for the best of the UO, for the students, the employees, and even the taxpayers in Oregon. How would turning down millions of dollars now and in the future be the right choice? How would the AD explain the employees he would have been compelled to fire that he did the "right thing" by reducing his revenue by 5 million +? Also, this is much bigger than a football or even athletics decision. This is about placing UO in recruiting (and I am talking about undergraduate tuition paying students, not football players) equity with SOCAL (USC and UCLA) and major metropolitan areas in the East. UO receives 100 million dollars a year LESS than OSU from state funds; so it has to recruit students national for out of state tuition to create revenue. No president or AD in their right mind would have chosen less and less stable revenue and less exposure and less prestige for their institution. If they made a choice like that I would hope they would be fired.
I am still a Duck fan. At the same time I can condemn the way the administrations of 10 schools handled this. Looking into the eyes of each other and saying you are all in on the Pac 12- teamwork, baby, and then doing what they did. I have read every story I can find on this and while, at the end, I understand everyone bailing out to get the best deal they could but it was how it was done, why it was done the way it was done that concerns me. Some significant incompetence from higher ups, some ridiculous one upmanship and unrealistic values. And now basically trying to destroy the Pac 2 chances of hanging on and rebuilding- I am ticked off. I agree with some of your points but the stench is just overwhelming right now at the way it was done.
And I agree with many of your points. I guess I am just coming to realise that this decision was not just about football, or athletics, or even student athletes. It was, in my informed opinion (I am an administrator at a University), likely a decision as much about all of that as about the general well-being of the University of Oregon going into the next 5-10 years. It stinks for sure, and it is a symptom of what is wrong not just with NCAA Football but all of higher ed.
Jason, learning you are an administrator at a university is unsettling based on your comments. You have not done your homework and are badly misinformed on multiple points. UO athletic department runs at a profit, which their AD did a poor job describing where those excess funds go. I believe last year they reported a $5-10M profit. Add that UO has the highest athletic donations dollar amount above every other university in America ... no one at UO will lose their jobs had they took the Apple deal and an "estimated worse case" scenario of $5M less. Oregon Higher Ed said when they allowed the 2 universities to separate from a single Higher Ed Regency to separate Board of Trustees a decade ago, not two, at the sole request UO, they never thought one of the universities would make a financial decision that drastically affected their sister university without consulting with them first. This would include a financial impact study for the combined schools which UO did not do. As stated in the hearing "the State of Oregon owns both universities." The assessment asks by the committed concluded the UO had failed their fiduciary responsibility to the State of Oregon. The only resolution is for UO and Oregon taxpayers to make up the shortfall created by UO administrators like you, who put their own pockets justified on a flimsy, not properly vetted, "possible decline" in revenues of $5M. But we all know it was more so an ego of not wanting to be left behind the upper crust they see themselves part of in College football. The broader good of their sister Research state university was never considered. The damages caused by UO to OSU is -$42M annually, including $10M funding student athlete scholarships. Currently the legislature is looking at making up the difference to keep OSU whole and that very well could be higher taxes. But hey, UO gets to fly everyone to NJ to play Rutgers! Yeah this was about the budget. Not a well thought out reply Jason.
You are right about me not being informed about the details of UO's athletic department budget. I have plenty of work to do (even if you think I do it badly) in operating my own school at my own university. But, unless you work in the athletic department at UO or OSU your math is just as speculative as mine. But we can surely agree that Oregon would have lost money with this deal, and unless you are a donor willing to make up the difference you don't get to say where donor dollars would go. As for the legislation that separated the universities, UO might have advocated for it, but it took elected representatives to write and pass the legislation. Maybe the did a poor job of it, but that is not the fault of the current administrators at UO. My main point is not to advocate for the collapse of the Pac12--I hate it as much as you do-- but to point out that the decision made by the UO and UW was not just about football or sports, it was about the overall and long term well-being of the university. My work as a higher ed administrator--even if not at all directly relevant to UO or sports--informs me about the debates and conversations going on in upper administration in higher ed about how all of these puzzle pieces fit together. These are conversations I have on a weekly basis with colleagues at my university. And yes, you are right, I do get paid to do my job as a university administrator, but, I promise you, not very well (and the income tax rate in Italy is 43% on gross income!).
Such BS....that you are a university admin explains all of it. Richard is right. This is the ego of Phil Knight and his quest for a football championship above all else. He donates an average of $100M per year to U of Oregon sports (including building several facilities) and has carte blanche with how it is spent. The $5M shortfall, if there was one (the Apple deal allowed upside for subscriptions and so with Oregon's global brand, they would have done better than $25M). He owns the athletic dept at Oregon and hires the AD himself personally. He was also involved in the hire of the university President, Scholz. It wouldn't surprise me if he was involved in the separation of the regents so he could influence the board for Oregon to cut loose OSU. It is such a flimsy argument this was about a delta of $5M in the budget. The decision lost OSU $40M as Richard pointed out and so net-net to the state, it cost the Oregon taxpayers and student fees $35M per year
If you are saying in your workplace major decisions are openly debated and conversations held then again you differ from the process being exposed where it appears UO President and Athletic Director (AD) conducted last minute negotiations with media companies the morning they had previously said they were going to sign the Pac12 media agreement. I assume putting Trustees in a time compressed decision process - why no one in the UO chain of command didn't say, "wait, lets slow this down. Let's consider the impact more closely." UO Pres Scholtz has been quoted since learning of the financial impact to OSU "better to have one university in a rut than two" of course taking NO responsibility he put his sister school in the rut! It's clear State of Oregon Higher Education does not agree UO Administrators and Trustees "doing what was in the best interest of their university" was in the best interest of the State of Oregon and caused devastating financial consequences to their sister university. BTW, this will have a ripple effect to other Oregon Universities who rely on high dollar non-conference games to fund their entire athletic budget like PSU. Presumably OSU will no longer be able to fund such games and UO will have added responsibility to play more B1G conference games reducing how many regional non-conference games they can play. I suspect the ramification of this will be the ending of the two schools having separate Trustees, going back to a Regency that will manage both schools doing what's best mutually for the 2 State owned schools.
Personally, I understand why the 10 teams decided to leave. But they did it and there are financial consequences for that decision both good and bad. Those 10 cannot now have the power to destroy the Pac-2 entirely. Does anyone here think they should have that right? That is just nuts. Go Cougs, Go Beavs!
You're going to have a hard time telling me this is better for the student athlete. Especially the non-football sports. But, that isn't what this is anymore.....this is essentially professional sports and it's all about the money.
Come on man, they have not made the best decision for the taxpayers of Oregon. The legislature 's own hearing shows that....so much harm has been done to the state..
This impacts athletes, university standingz local businesses, and on
Sure, it negatively impacts OSU, and as a native Oregonian ( I no longer live in Oregon), I hate that. But, UO leaders are responsible to UO and the UO Board of Regents , which has nothing to do with OSU. This is a decision state lawmakers made decades ago (two separate the boards) and this is an unfortunate result of that. Oregon as an institution is now built to be a national brand: it depends on that brand for student recruiting (undergrads not just football player). Asking UO to give up the chance to enhance that national brand would be malpractice. If UO can't recruit and enrolled tuition paying undergrads from SOCal and major metropolitan areas in the East it is doomed as an institution.
A big reason UO receives less state money than OSU is because the state funds the universities on a per-capita basis. The more in-state students you have, the more state money you get. OSU has thousands more in-state students, so it (justifiably) gets more state money.
UO has decided to balance its budget by enrolling more out-of-state students at a higher cost than to enroll in-state students at far lower cost + the state stipend. In-state enrollment is artificially capped, at the expense of in-state kids who might want to go there but are locked out by the UO's quota system.
OSU also has more expensive degrees, primarily engineering, pharmacy and the vet school. So it needs more money to fund the infrastructure necessary in those fields of study.
I honestly don't know what came first, UO's dependence on out-of-state students or its receiving less money (less than half the state dollars per capita) per student. But whatever the historical causes, the current reality is that UO has to recruit out-of-state students to bring in the bulk of its operating revenue, which surely influenced their decision.
Fascinating that the land-grant universities-neither with a law school- are going toe-to-toe with the large, urban schools. As a Dawg fan I say, Go Cougs! and Go Beavers! Let justice prevail.
Eugene, Oregon has a population just over 165,000. The city is in Lane county and there are both urban and suburban regions, as well as a few areas with a kind of urban-suburban mix.Jan 25, 2023
LOL!! People who have spent time in Eugene or Springfield do not consider those towns "urban" environments. Corvallis and a 20 mile radius, the size of even a small city, is well over 300,000 population. I do not consider Corvallis "urban" either. Its a loose term. If you grew up in a town of 100 I am sure both Corvallis and Eugene seem urban. But we Beavers do appreciate your support!
So much smoke and mirrors, Washington. So what you want from OSU and WSU is a free pass. "Just trust what we tell you." Sure. Greed made these schools walk out on more than 100 years worth of athletic tradition. Just "taking their word for it" would be an interesting tale of fraud and deceit.
I have my own bags of popcorn to heat up for this discussion.
It is repulsive. This is who the regents in each state are hiring to run their universities? Scuzzy corporate elitist types who can never take responsibility for their actions?! Sounds like what is wrong with America is wrong with the PAC12
Since you don't want to be the commissioner, will you consider becoming the associate commissioner with Yogi Roth as the commish?? Come on Brian you got this!!
LOL!! I would be a really bad commissioner because I would work directly for the Presidents / Chancellors and I can't repeat the lies they would want me to tell to protect their personal agendas. Commissioners are a reflection of the people they work for. Larry Scott and GK were exactly that.
I get the sense that the lid on Pandora's box is about to be cracked open. I will be particularly interested to see what communications involved FOX & ESPN. While those entities have no standing with respect to the Pac-12 board make-up, I can only imagine that any communications between FOX or ESPN and the leaving institutions that indicate undue broadcaster influence will put the offending entity squarely in the crosshairs of future Pac-2 torts lawsuits.
If it’s up to the departed 10 schools, they would leave WSU/OSU with nothing, or even a big bill. WSU/OSU must do everything in their power to protect their programs.
Wow! So the same University who is "led" by Ana Mari Cauce, who deflected criticism from herself on this very blog, is now trying to further damage her own state school and the PAC12 to which she was a partner? This lady is a real class act. Just who hired her?
I want to hear / see the conversations between the Traitorous Ten universities, the P12 commissioner, ESPN, Fox, etc. The discovery should be very tasty.
Surely the 10 deserters - via their armada of attorneys - know Discovery is inevitable should they not reach a settlement. Surely they know whether said Discovery would cause embarrassment or expose them to legal trouble - which leads me to believe they truly have nothing to hide or are simply positioning for a settlement.
The collective statement from the deserters sounds a little hollow, IMO. And I am a Ducks lifer.
There had to be a lot of “Secret Squirrel” conversations amongst the deserting 10. The Judge in the Case should request all correspondence between the 10 prior to the BIG and Other conference invitations , where there’s smoke there’s alot of fire.
Whatever you do, OSU & WSU, do NOT call any of the departing presidents/chancellors for testimony - unless, of course, you want to hear nothing but sanctimonious drivel.
Reps from the leaving schools surely would do everything possible to avoid showing their faces. They all stayed away from the hearing in Washington last month. Then at the hearing in Salem, they ran for the exits the moment they finished giving their testimony--not even having the courtesy of listening to OSU's president's comments.
Yes, that is very important. But it would also be fun to watch them squirm if/when the judge asks them with simple question, "So, are you leaving the Pac?" It would be hard to get a more legal pronouncement of their leaving than before a judge in court. More popcorn-worthy stuff.
They're saying they're not parties to the lawsuit.
They're also saying they are members of the Board of Executives for the Pac-12 Conference, meaning they govern the Pac-12.
The Pac-12 *is* a party to the suit; the defendant, to be specific.
So either these 10 schools are, in fact, parties to the suit, or They're acknowledging that they no longer have governance authority over the Pac-12 - the latter of which is precisely the case that WSU and OSU are making.
Send In The Lawyers! Equals, send in the high-paid clowns.
This cannot be settled? File Chapter 7. Liquidate. OSU and WSU keep the Pac-12 trademark and are paid 'whatever', by assets leftover or otherwise, for being left behind.
Senseless to give lawyers more bank.
The 'villains' are the idiots, including those at OSU and WSU, who allowed a century-plus-old conference to bite the dust. Those who made decisions born out of hubris and when given a choice, made the exact incorrect business decision time after time.
Am a diehard Duck fan a have been one since the early 70’s. I think OSU and WSU got shafted as did the people of Oregon and Washington! Quit hiding behind legalese. You screwed over athletes , coaches and their families. If there is a mass exodus of athletes, a pox on all of you who screwed over these remaining two. The 10 should be doing everything they can to help OSU and WSU.
Agree, but in this day and age, morals are simply a word and greed an asset.
sadly true.
Well said
None of us in this chat know what is being discussed in mediation among the 10 schools, and these countering lawyer statements are legal jockeying. As a Duck alumnus and football fan, I am saddened by the destruction of the Pac12, for sure. But, this jeremiad against the UO is ridiculous. They made a decision that is for the best of the UO, for the students, the employees, and even the taxpayers in Oregon. How would turning down millions of dollars now and in the future be the right choice? How would the AD explain the employees he would have been compelled to fire that he did the "right thing" by reducing his revenue by 5 million +? Also, this is much bigger than a football or even athletics decision. This is about placing UO in recruiting (and I am talking about undergraduate tuition paying students, not football players) equity with SOCAL (USC and UCLA) and major metropolitan areas in the East. UO receives 100 million dollars a year LESS than OSU from state funds; so it has to recruit students national for out of state tuition to create revenue. No president or AD in their right mind would have chosen less and less stable revenue and less exposure and less prestige for their institution. If they made a choice like that I would hope they would be fired.
I am still a Duck fan. At the same time I can condemn the way the administrations of 10 schools handled this. Looking into the eyes of each other and saying you are all in on the Pac 12- teamwork, baby, and then doing what they did. I have read every story I can find on this and while, at the end, I understand everyone bailing out to get the best deal they could but it was how it was done, why it was done the way it was done that concerns me. Some significant incompetence from higher ups, some ridiculous one upmanship and unrealistic values. And now basically trying to destroy the Pac 2 chances of hanging on and rebuilding- I am ticked off. I agree with some of your points but the stench is just overwhelming right now at the way it was done.
And I agree with many of your points. I guess I am just coming to realise that this decision was not just about football, or athletics, or even student athletes. It was, in my informed opinion (I am an administrator at a University), likely a decision as much about all of that as about the general well-being of the University of Oregon going into the next 5-10 years. It stinks for sure, and it is a symptom of what is wrong not just with NCAA Football but all of higher ed.
Jason, learning you are an administrator at a university is unsettling based on your comments. You have not done your homework and are badly misinformed on multiple points. UO athletic department runs at a profit, which their AD did a poor job describing where those excess funds go. I believe last year they reported a $5-10M profit. Add that UO has the highest athletic donations dollar amount above every other university in America ... no one at UO will lose their jobs had they took the Apple deal and an "estimated worse case" scenario of $5M less. Oregon Higher Ed said when they allowed the 2 universities to separate from a single Higher Ed Regency to separate Board of Trustees a decade ago, not two, at the sole request UO, they never thought one of the universities would make a financial decision that drastically affected their sister university without consulting with them first. This would include a financial impact study for the combined schools which UO did not do. As stated in the hearing "the State of Oregon owns both universities." The assessment asks by the committed concluded the UO had failed their fiduciary responsibility to the State of Oregon. The only resolution is for UO and Oregon taxpayers to make up the shortfall created by UO administrators like you, who put their own pockets justified on a flimsy, not properly vetted, "possible decline" in revenues of $5M. But we all know it was more so an ego of not wanting to be left behind the upper crust they see themselves part of in College football. The broader good of their sister Research state university was never considered. The damages caused by UO to OSU is -$42M annually, including $10M funding student athlete scholarships. Currently the legislature is looking at making up the difference to keep OSU whole and that very well could be higher taxes. But hey, UO gets to fly everyone to NJ to play Rutgers! Yeah this was about the budget. Not a well thought out reply Jason.
You are right about me not being informed about the details of UO's athletic department budget. I have plenty of work to do (even if you think I do it badly) in operating my own school at my own university. But, unless you work in the athletic department at UO or OSU your math is just as speculative as mine. But we can surely agree that Oregon would have lost money with this deal, and unless you are a donor willing to make up the difference you don't get to say where donor dollars would go. As for the legislation that separated the universities, UO might have advocated for it, but it took elected representatives to write and pass the legislation. Maybe the did a poor job of it, but that is not the fault of the current administrators at UO. My main point is not to advocate for the collapse of the Pac12--I hate it as much as you do-- but to point out that the decision made by the UO and UW was not just about football or sports, it was about the overall and long term well-being of the university. My work as a higher ed administrator--even if not at all directly relevant to UO or sports--informs me about the debates and conversations going on in upper administration in higher ed about how all of these puzzle pieces fit together. These are conversations I have on a weekly basis with colleagues at my university. And yes, you are right, I do get paid to do my job as a university administrator, but, I promise you, not very well (and the income tax rate in Italy is 43% on gross income!).
Such BS....that you are a university admin explains all of it. Richard is right. This is the ego of Phil Knight and his quest for a football championship above all else. He donates an average of $100M per year to U of Oregon sports (including building several facilities) and has carte blanche with how it is spent. The $5M shortfall, if there was one (the Apple deal allowed upside for subscriptions and so with Oregon's global brand, they would have done better than $25M). He owns the athletic dept at Oregon and hires the AD himself personally. He was also involved in the hire of the university President, Scholz. It wouldn't surprise me if he was involved in the separation of the regents so he could influence the board for Oregon to cut loose OSU. It is such a flimsy argument this was about a delta of $5M in the budget. The decision lost OSU $40M as Richard pointed out and so net-net to the state, it cost the Oregon taxpayers and student fees $35M per year
If you are saying in your workplace major decisions are openly debated and conversations held then again you differ from the process being exposed where it appears UO President and Athletic Director (AD) conducted last minute negotiations with media companies the morning they had previously said they were going to sign the Pac12 media agreement. I assume putting Trustees in a time compressed decision process - why no one in the UO chain of command didn't say, "wait, lets slow this down. Let's consider the impact more closely." UO Pres Scholtz has been quoted since learning of the financial impact to OSU "better to have one university in a rut than two" of course taking NO responsibility he put his sister school in the rut! It's clear State of Oregon Higher Education does not agree UO Administrators and Trustees "doing what was in the best interest of their university" was in the best interest of the State of Oregon and caused devastating financial consequences to their sister university. BTW, this will have a ripple effect to other Oregon Universities who rely on high dollar non-conference games to fund their entire athletic budget like PSU. Presumably OSU will no longer be able to fund such games and UO will have added responsibility to play more B1G conference games reducing how many regional non-conference games they can play. I suspect the ramification of this will be the ending of the two schools having separate Trustees, going back to a Regency that will manage both schools doing what's best mutually for the 2 State owned schools.
Now that- 100 % agree.
Personally, I understand why the 10 teams decided to leave. But they did it and there are financial consequences for that decision both good and bad. Those 10 cannot now have the power to destroy the Pac-2 entirely. Does anyone here think they should have that right? That is just nuts. Go Cougs, Go Beavs!
You're going to have a hard time telling me this is better for the student athlete. Especially the non-football sports. But, that isn't what this is anymore.....this is essentially professional sports and it's all about the money.
Come on man, they have not made the best decision for the taxpayers of Oregon. The legislature 's own hearing shows that....so much harm has been done to the state..
This impacts athletes, university standingz local businesses, and on
Sure, it negatively impacts OSU, and as a native Oregonian ( I no longer live in Oregon), I hate that. But, UO leaders are responsible to UO and the UO Board of Regents , which has nothing to do with OSU. This is a decision state lawmakers made decades ago (two separate the boards) and this is an unfortunate result of that. Oregon as an institution is now built to be a national brand: it depends on that brand for student recruiting (undergrads not just football player). Asking UO to give up the chance to enhance that national brand would be malpractice. If UO can't recruit and enrolled tuition paying undergrads from SOCal and major metropolitan areas in the East it is doomed as an institution.
Cool, then go have fun in the Big10 and leave the Pac12 to us. All 10 of the schools are greedy pigs
A big reason UO receives less state money than OSU is because the state funds the universities on a per-capita basis. The more in-state students you have, the more state money you get. OSU has thousands more in-state students, so it (justifiably) gets more state money.
UO has decided to balance its budget by enrolling more out-of-state students at a higher cost than to enroll in-state students at far lower cost + the state stipend. In-state enrollment is artificially capped, at the expense of in-state kids who might want to go there but are locked out by the UO's quota system.
OSU also has more expensive degrees, primarily engineering, pharmacy and the vet school. So it needs more money to fund the infrastructure necessary in those fields of study.
I honestly don't know what came first, UO's dependence on out-of-state students or its receiving less money (less than half the state dollars per capita) per student. But whatever the historical causes, the current reality is that UO has to recruit out-of-state students to bring in the bulk of its operating revenue, which surely influenced their decision.
Good post.
Thank you for voicing yourself as a Ducks fan, far too many casual fans are destroying your school, I wish your voice was heard over theirs
Fascinating that the land-grant universities-neither with a law school- are going toe-to-toe with the large, urban schools. As a Dawg fan I say, Go Cougs! and Go Beavers! Let justice prevail.
UO is not an "urban" school.
Eugene, Oregon has a population just over 165,000. The city is in Lane county and there are both urban and suburban regions, as well as a few areas with a kind of urban-suburban mix.Jan 25, 2023
Urban vs Suburban Living in Eugene, Oregon
lanecountyhomes.net
LOL!! People who have spent time in Eugene or Springfield do not consider those towns "urban" environments. Corvallis and a 20 mile radius, the size of even a small city, is well over 300,000 population. I do not consider Corvallis "urban" either. Its a loose term. If you grew up in a town of 100 I am sure both Corvallis and Eugene seem urban. But we Beavers do appreciate your support!
Gentlemen: Let's not argue over semantics. I think we all can agree that this is a "David vs. Goliath" moment in the PAC12.
Good. Let the truth come out and let’s get to the bottom of this. Hopefully the networks can be held accountable
So much smoke and mirrors, Washington. So what you want from OSU and WSU is a free pass. "Just trust what we tell you." Sure. Greed made these schools walk out on more than 100 years worth of athletic tradition. Just "taking their word for it" would be an interesting tale of fraud and deceit.
I have my own bags of popcorn to heat up for this discussion.
It is repulsive. This is who the regents in each state are hiring to run their universities? Scuzzy corporate elitist types who can never take responsibility for their actions?! Sounds like what is wrong with America is wrong with the PAC12
Since you don't want to be the commissioner, will you consider becoming the associate commissioner with Yogi Roth as the commish?? Come on Brian you got this!!
LOL!! I would be a really bad commissioner because I would work directly for the Presidents / Chancellors and I can't repeat the lies they would want me to tell to protect their personal agendas. Commissioners are a reflection of the people they work for. Larry Scott and GK were exactly that.
Toooo funny Brian!!
Well said!
Pop enough for me too!
I get the sense that the lid on Pandora's box is about to be cracked open. I will be particularly interested to see what communications involved FOX & ESPN. While those entities have no standing with respect to the Pac-12 board make-up, I can only imagine that any communications between FOX or ESPN and the leaving institutions that indicate undue broadcaster influence will put the offending entity squarely in the crosshairs of future Pac-2 torts lawsuits.
If it’s up to the departed 10 schools, they would leave WSU/OSU with nothing, or even a big bill. WSU/OSU must do everything in their power to protect their programs.
Wow! So the same University who is "led" by Ana Mari Cauce, who deflected criticism from herself on this very blog, is now trying to further damage her own state school and the PAC12 to which she was a partner? This lady is a real class act. Just who hired her?
See you are a man of the people Brian M!!!
Laughed out loud at the repeated statements in the pleadings that OSU and WSU cannot show irreparable injury. Who is kidding who?
So going from like 30 million tv money to like 5 million tv money isn’t harmful?
I have been salivating over discovery.
I want to hear / see the conversations between the Traitorous Ten universities, the P12 commissioner, ESPN, Fox, etc. The discovery should be very tasty.
Surely the 10 deserters - via their armada of attorneys - know Discovery is inevitable should they not reach a settlement. Surely they know whether said Discovery would cause embarrassment or expose them to legal trouble - which leads me to believe they truly have nothing to hide or are simply positioning for a settlement.
The collective statement from the deserters sounds a little hollow, IMO. And I am a Ducks lifer.
Actually I think this is a hail mary. See if they can get it thrown out. They would not be doing their job if they did not try it.
What job is that? The job of screwing over your conference "partners"? Yep, they are doing that with great aplomb
There had to be a lot of “Secret Squirrel” conversations amongst the deserting 10. The Judge in the Case should request all correspondence between the 10 prior to the BIG and Other conference invitations , where there’s smoke there’s alot of fire.
This whole situation smells like rotten fish !!
Whatever you do, OSU & WSU, do NOT call any of the departing presidents/chancellors for testimony - unless, of course, you want to hear nothing but sanctimonious drivel.
Reps from the leaving schools surely would do everything possible to avoid showing their faces. They all stayed away from the hearing in Washington last month. Then at the hearing in Salem, they ran for the exits the moment they finished giving their testimony--not even having the courtesy of listening to OSU's president's comments.
They do not necessarily need testimony from those university leaders. They need access to all the emails and voicemails over the last couple of years.
Yes, that is very important. But it would also be fun to watch them squirm if/when the judge asks them with simple question, "So, are you leaving the Pac?" It would be hard to get a more legal pronouncement of their leaving than before a judge in court. More popcorn-worthy stuff.
Let's walk through this logic a bit.
They're saying they're not parties to the lawsuit.
They're also saying they are members of the Board of Executives for the Pac-12 Conference, meaning they govern the Pac-12.
The Pac-12 *is* a party to the suit; the defendant, to be specific.
So either these 10 schools are, in fact, parties to the suit, or They're acknowledging that they no longer have governance authority over the Pac-12 - the latter of which is precisely the case that WSU and OSU are making.
Well said, Joe!
Send In The Lawyers! Equals, send in the high-paid clowns.
This cannot be settled? File Chapter 7. Liquidate. OSU and WSU keep the Pac-12 trademark and are paid 'whatever', by assets leftover or otherwise, for being left behind.
Senseless to give lawyers more bank.
The 'villains' are the idiots, including those at OSU and WSU, who allowed a century-plus-old conference to bite the dust. Those who made decisions born out of hubris and when given a choice, made the exact incorrect business decision time after time.
Stop this nonsense.
Reads like something out of trumps lawyers' playbook. Like everyone I can't wait for the discovery.
Old fashion popcorn popper for me and cold beer.
While that is true, we try to maintain a politics free zone here. 🧡🖤
Come on! Politics don't belong here.
Once again, my only comment is; “it’s got to be the truth...you can’t make this sh*t up”
Awesome game on the horizon. Time for the nation to see the power that resides in the Great Northwest 💪🏼🏈💪🏼
GO DAWGS
Who goes 0-12? Oh yeah the 2008 Go Dawgs football team lol lol
I seem to remember a game seven years ago, almost to the day, in Eugene...70-21 Washington in Autzen
Ouch
GO DAWGS
that was tough
GO DAWGS
If you really meant "GO DAWGS" and cared about justice you would get rid of the person at your University who brought down the PAC12
Methinks between a host of ADs, chancellors, presidents, media negotiators, networks, etc there’s more than enough blame to go around...
Football is what we’re talking about
GO DAWGS
Enough blame?
The smoke is still lingering from the pistol and you act as if it is equal distribution?
Mr. Gulickson,
Our son and daughter will be in attendance this Saturday along with their Husky friends. I am envious. It should be a great game.
My wife and I will be watching from Alexandria, VA, sigh! We will do so using our FUBO account, which is turning out to be a good investment.
Looks like rain on game day. Perfect weather for the rivalry. Good luck! But GO DUCKS!!!
Well half that equation got out before the ink was dry on the big 10 contract . Feeling guilty maybe ?