1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

BCS leagues expanding - yeah?

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Moderator1, Apr 19, 2010.

  1. dixiehack

    dixiehack Well-Known Member

    PAC-2 doing unto others.

    IMG_6063.jpeg
     
  2. MileHigh

    MileHigh Moderator Staff Member

  3. micropolitan guy

    micropolitan guy Well-Known Member

    MileHigh likes this.
  4. ChrisLong

    ChrisLong Well-Known Member

    College football: Athleticism, pride, pageantry, lawsuits.
     
  5. MileHigh

    MileHigh Moderator Staff Member

    Tradition, greed, bullshit.
     
    I Should Coco, ChrisLong and HanSenSE like this.
  6. micropolitan guy

    micropolitan guy Well-Known Member

    According to some legal "experts" on the OSU fanboi pages, since the Pac-2's contract with the MWC has expired (it was not renewed on Sept. 1), the poaching fees cannot be charged because the contract no longer is in effect.

    The exit fees due the MWC, to be paid by the departing members, are still in effect and are not being challenged.
     
  7. Neutral Corner

    Neutral Corner Well-Known Member

    I thought that was the whole point of the Pac not committing to another season with the MWC, that the no poaching agreement had expired and that freed them to recruit other MWC teams without the penalty.
     
  8. Neutral Corner

    Neutral Corner Well-Known Member

  9. micropolitan guy

    micropolitan guy Well-Known Member

    [​IMG]

    A copy of the pertinent part of the Pac-2's legal brief. I'm not an attorney, maybe someone here who is can weigh in.
     
  10. PCLoadLetter

    PCLoadLetter Well-Known Member

    So the Pac 12 is suing because it doesn't like the agreement it signed ten months ago?

    Yeah, good luck with that.
     
    wicked and Neutral Corner like this.
  11. franticscribe

    franticscribe Well-Known Member

    I'd like to read the whole thing and have not (quickly) found it. But the arguments they're asserting in this graph are the right kinds of arguments you make to attack an otherwise lawfully signed contract. You would expect them to be plead that way at a bare minimum. So in other words, nothing surprising in this particular excerpt.
     
    MileHigh likes this.
  12. micropolitan guy

    micropolitan guy Well-Known Member

    According to my family legal beagle:

    "If it's considered unenforceable in contract law, it doesn't matter if it was signed. It's unenforceable.

    "It was signed under duress, while acknowledging that section was unenforceable."

    Many a prenup has been voided.

    Also, my other legal sources tell me it is essentially a non-compete clause, which is illegal and unenforceable in California.
     
    Last edited: Sep 24, 2024
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page