rebecacy - do yourself a favor and start adding tag lines to your posts like "I think", or I believe, or "I heard" Perhaps you heard something that gave you some hope, and perhaps at the time it was relevant and you wanted all your friends to know about it, but the idea that Boren is our best friend is not proving out, A&M is waiting because if they go first, then they will be the target, if they go with 5 or 6, then they are not alone, ISU may very well end up ok and smelling like roses, or whatever - but its clear to me you are no different than the rest of us so stop acting like you know something and just let your opinion be just that - one of thouasands of opinions posted in this forum
Ask yourself
- Thread starter rebecacy
- Start date
Voting to not enforce the fines for leaving would be letting the schools that are leaving override the rights of the remaining schools by a simple majority vote. That would work, IF we were talking about some new policy; however I don't see how you can get around the fact that the penalties were established policy before this shakeup.
There are ways for teams to leave a conference. They all involve paying penalties to the remaining members. Attempts to get around this fact will be dealt with in court, where legal precedent (instead of team affiliation) is the controlling factor.
Don't get me wrong: I think the conference is toast. I just don't agree that the Big Boys can just leave and avoid any fiscal penalties for doing so. That's just paranoia from a fanbase that's used to getting screwed.
We have a significant sum in an ISU escrow account for the SEZ. The entire discussion then and now was around the need for a lead donor. It was not super secret, it was well know -- still is. Chicken Little!!!!
What I will do is go away and let you all decide we are dead, cremated and buried. Never seen a fan base so hell bent on the worse possible scenario happening. I'll be back when it's clear I was on the the right plan.
I'll ask you again. Is your confidence based on the body language from your discussion with that older fellow 2 weeks ago, or do you have new information?
I agree it is not right what they are doing but I dont know how you can enforce the fine if the change the rules before they leave. Every team in this conference is looking for a new conference, so does that mean the last team left gets all the money?
OU is the only school with enough clout to force equal revenue sharing and a conference network,,,,, because TX knows the value of the conference w/o OU drops significantly. Boren carries that torch. Christ my 10 year old nephew figured that one out. Without a real and valid threat of OU leaving it carries no real weight. So show it can be done. He has.
Last edited:
not hell bent on anything and I do think you could be right but I no longer think you know anything more than I do, sorry didn't mean to make it personal and sorry I bought into the BBF theoriy, it was pretty convincing...and now its just well, another theory
CycloneErik
Well-Known Member
So, in the possibly stressful situation, we settle for devouring our own and getting snippy. Outstanding.
I'll pose this hypothetical question to all the CF lawyers out there:
A, B and C are all partners in a business deal where they form a corporation to represent the group. The original contract between the three of them states that any member of the partnership can leave at any time, but will have to pay a financial penalty to do so. If A gets an offer to join a tech firm on the West Coast at the same time that C gets an offer to manage a firm in Atlanta, can the two of them get together and vote to ignore their obligation to B laid out in the original contract?
I believe that B and the corporation would still be able to enforce the agreement to pay an exit fee. Yes, I said B AND the corporation. The exit of the majority of the members would not necessarily cause to corporation to cease to exist.
A, B and C are all partners in a business deal where they form a corporation to represent the group. The original contract between the three of them states that any member of the partnership can leave at any time, but will have to pay a financial penalty to do so. If A gets an offer to join a tech firm on the West Coast at the same time that C gets an offer to manage a firm in Atlanta, can the two of them get together and vote to ignore their obligation to B laid out in the original contract?
I believe that B and the corporation would still be able to enforce the agreement to pay an exit fee. Yes, I said B AND the corporation. The exit of the majority of the members would not necessarily cause to corporation to cease to exist.
Lol, just because people dont see it your way? People aren't "hell bent on the worst possible scenario happening", theyre seeing that there's a good chance some of the better scenarios that involved the big 12 have a good chance of disappearing.
Are there still good scenarios out there? Yes. Are there real, plausible, negative scenarios? Definitely. And to act like people are 'chicken littles' for acknowledging the reality that those possibilities exist, is a bit ridiculous.
That's the way I'm reading it. I'm not negative at all. I think we are going to end up in good shape. However, that is just my belief based on logic.
Rebecacy on the other hand knows something about OU and I just want clarification on what it is that he knows.
Since Rebecacy's response reminds me of Floyd Mayweather acting like a candy *** calling out Larry Merchant. I'm going to assume much like Mayweather, he has no good answer for us.