I think I missed something here. Has it actually been shown anywhere that baylor will not waive the right to sue or whatever?

I've seen several threads with tons of comments about f*** baylor and all that but has anything actually came out yet that those losers will actually try to derail this?

Note: I'm aware of all the s*** their dipshjt president has put out lately, but at this point, I don't think anyone knows what will happen yet.

sue? on the grounds of what?

They can certainly try. It would be lost at summary judgment though. They have no case.

I think they are just dragging their feet. Trying to find a conference while the failboat sinks beneath their feet.

Baylor: where the girls are girls and the guys are too.

[This message has been edited by jabberwalkie09 (edited 9/7/2011 1:51a).]

I don't really know. From what I've read is that baylor will be the final hurdle.

It seems like everyone is blaming them for something that haven't done yet.

Edit: that was meant for BrightAg

Edit (rookie limit): @ Texas Tea...yeah thats what I was trying to say...has it been shown that they WILL NOT waive their right to sue? It seems like KSU, KU, ISU are just as likely to not waive the right to sue

[This message has been edited by RP (edited 9/7/2011 1:52a).]

[This message has been edited by RP (edited 9/7/2011 1:55a).]

If the reports are true, they don't actually even have to sue - only refuse to waive their right to do so.

failboat

Slive may be thinking very broadly here. This is not just about taking A&M. It's about ending a conference and starting a series of events that ends up with 64 teams on the inside and the rest of the 117 FBS schools on the outside.

[This message has been edited by Theo (edited 9/7/2011 1:57a).]

I really don't think this is an actual condition upon getting an invitation, I think it's just something the SEC would like to have. Mike Slive used to be an attorney in the sport's world, he knows the legal elements Baylor would have to prove and he knows they don't have squat. But still, it's not to have a piece of paper saying you won't sue. I just don't see how it's a good end game for the SEC to do that.

I think this may be the sec calling baylor's bluff. Agree not to sue or look like a psycho ex girlfriend and screw yourself out of any future major conference membership.

never knew till tonight texags had such a staggeringly high percentage of posters who are attorneys. Color me impressed.

[This message has been edited by Bayloriswin (edited 9/7/2011 1:58a).]

quote:

---

I think this may be the sec calling baylor's bluff. Agree not to sue or look like a psycho ex girlfriend and screw yourself out of any future major conference membership.

---

No conference is looking their way anyway.

At this point, with OU and oSu talking to the Pac 12 and there being substantial noise about the Big 12 breaking up and 4 16 team conferences, Baylor is now officially standing up for all the little guys about to get screwed. And they're going to get screwed.

A&M leaving to the SEC would not kill the Big 12.

Prove that please.

quote:

---

A&M leaving to the SEC would not kill the Big 12.

Prove that please.

---

I don't think it matters if it kills the big 12. 64 FBS teams excluding the rest of the 117 from a championship...eh...that looks like a possible lawsuit to me.

Maybe I've over thought this and Slive isn't worried about this. But he'd be a dummy not to have.

Again, how would any of that be HIS fault???

We want to affiliate with them and they want us. Everyone else can switch conferences but if A&M does all hell breaks loose? whatever.

torturous interference? (spelling?)

quote:

---

Again, how would any of that be HIS fault???

We want to affiliate with them and they want us. Everyone else can switch conferences but if A&M does all hell breaks loose? whatever.

---

How would it be the SEC's fault if it partnered up with 3 other conferences to basically exclude all but 64 teams from championship consideration?

Forget A&M for a sec. It's not about you guys OTHER than that if this is the move that leads to the big 12 breaking up (set aside proof of legal causation) and all the other teams find homes EXCEPT maybe Baylor and ISU, then ultimately those two teams--Baylor and ISU--might be parties to a lawsuit against the 64 team entity.

Which may not be a horrible lawsuit.

Slive didn't seek us out. We went to them.

No interference. We have every right to leave our conference for another. Every right.

I don't think interference is all Slive is worried about.

I think the facts on that claim are messier than he'd want them to be, but I wonder if he's not thinking more about lawsuits down the line by teams left out of a possible 64 team mega-deal.

Again, why would that be HIS fault? Right now, he's looking out for what's best for his conference. Isn't that the conference commissioner's job?

You can't file a suit against him in hindsight. He has no intentions of screwing over anyone.

Stump is right, we went to them. There is no interference from a third party. The writing was on the wall last year, too bad Baylor didn't get their **** together and start dotting their i's and crossing their t's. Clearly they never learned the 7 P's for success.

quote:

---

Again, why would that be HIS fault? Right now, he's looking out for what's best for his conference. Isn't that the conference commissioner's job?

You can't file a suit against him in hindsight. He has no intentions of screwing over anyone.

---

Okay, let's start over.

Imagine 3 years from now. Imagine that there are basically 4 superconferences--Pac 16, SEC, Big 16 and ACC. Each as 16 teams. Those conferences partner together and exclude the rest of what is left from the FBS 117 to form a +1 playoff for a championship.

At that point you have some problems. And yes, some would be caused by the SEC. It has nothing to do with you or us or OU or any one team leaving in particular. Other than ours is one of the conferences to be cannibalized leaving teams like Baylor and ISU and maybe others on the outside looking in on that 64 team deal.

And here's the thing: that's what is probably going to happen. Slive can say he just wants 13 or 14. But OU will go. Then we will. Then you'll have more motivation to get to 16...and once you're at 16 you're going to want that plus 1.

but again, Baylor threatening litigation vs. SEC over TEXAS A&M leaving has nothing to do with your point. This isn't tied in with your scenario.

what i'm saying is this move is not what will cause everything to blow up. It doesn't guarantee that the Big 12 will cease. Thus, the SEC is not liable whatsoever. If you say they are, then what about the Big 10, Pac 10? Big East?

I see what you're saying but this move is not tied in to that. That would be if he made the move later to add more teams and exclude the smaller schools.

quote:

---

but again, Baylor threatening litigation vs. SEC over TEXAS A&M leaving has nothing to do with your point. This isn't tied in with your scenario.

what i'm saying is this move is not what will cause everything to blow up. It doesn't guarantee that the Big 12 will cease. Thus, the SEC is not liable whatsoever. If you say they are, then what about the Big 10, Pac 10? Big East?

I see what you're saying but this move is not tied in to that. That would be if he made the move later to add more teams and exclude the smaller schools.

---

No, you don't see what I'm saying. It doesn't matter if this move "causes" the Big 12 to break up. It is going to happen. And if Slive sees the chain of events unfolding he might want protection right now against any future action by any team in the Big 12 in the future should they be left out of the 64 team pot.

You've got to get past thinking about the tortious interference angle.

If you want to look at a liable party(s), then look at ESPN/LHN. It's just about killed a conference. No school should have to live with that. Every school has free will. But apparently that excludes A&M. Right.

*grabs popcorn* It was mentioned earlier in another thread that the University has a responsibility to the well being of the school first, and the conference second due to precedence.

[This message has been edited by jabberwalkie09 (edited 9/7/2011 2:26a).]

So how do you get protection? If a school or schools did try to sue, they wouldn't win. There is no guarantee that every school has to be taken care of. If there is, then what/where is it?

quote:

---

If you want to look at a liable party(s), then look at ESPN/LHN. It's just about killed a conference. No school should have to live with that. Every school has free will. But apparently that excludes A&M. Right.

---

LOL. Forget the tortious interference claim. He might be worried about an anti-trust claim several years down the road from any old big 12 team left out of the deal.

Baylor will sue for the tv contract that was signed last year, when the remaining ten acted like they played well. Theo, you're a dumbass, they have no case for being left out of "superconferences.". It's the tv deal the Big12-2 signed last year. Which we were all a part of. Good god Theo, get in the kitchen and make me a pie.

Anti-trust? In college athletics? Do tell.....

I understand what you are saying Theo, but playing in a 64 team FBS is not a constitutional right...I wanted to play in the NFL, but I wasn't good enough, I didn't sue the NFL because I wasn't good enough to play

What grounds would they sue on, that they have the right to be one of the 64 teams?

quote:

---

So how do you get protection? If a school or schools did try to sue, they wouldn't win. There is no guarantee that every school has to be taken care of. If there is, then what/where is it?

---

How do you get protection from an anti-trust claim? Don't enter into an agreement that restrains trade, for one.

At the end of the day, college football might well be heading somehere very anti-competitive. I don't think Slive is the only one worried about that. I think Scott is, too. And Delaney.

It sucks because Scott and Delaney already weakened our conference and got what they wanted, but I think all three of them have some concerns about the superconference deal.

If Slive thought you guys would come and OU would stay, he'd do it. He doesn't give two ****s about the Big 12 and is fine having a weak sister next door. But if everyone expands...that's a different story.

quote:

---

I understand what you are saying Theo, but playing in a 64 team FBS is not a constitutional right...I wanted to play in the NFL, but I wasn't good enough, I didn't sue the NFL because I wasn't good enough to play

What grounds would they sue on, that they have the right to be one of the 64 teams?

---

It's anti-competitive. I mean, it just is. 64 of 117 FBS teams deciding who the champion is is anti-competitive.

Rio Freo...there was no tv contract signed last year, we intentionally did not sign anything

It's been like that for a long time Theo.

Why haven't there been suits already???