ISU says it has not given up it's right to sue SEC

Im not a lawyer but the first thing I would throw out would be the fact they didn't sue nebby or Colorado last year. I would think that would set some sort of precedence
 
I thought that they got their panties in a bunch because they got some new agreement not to break up the league and A&m is doing that now.
 
how is this going t play now that the Arkansas ad is on the record saying the big 12 tried to get them to leave the sec?
 
JonDMiller said:
Iowa State retains legal rights to block Texas A&M departure | The Des Moines Register | DesMoinesRegister.com

I think this is probably the smart play for them
Click to expand...

I would want to see the contract between the schools and the conference, but if I were advising ISU and reading the tea leaves that the conference was likely toast, I absolutely would not sue. But in closed door meetings, I would whisper in Baylor's, TT's and K-State's presidents' ears how smart it is to sue in the hopes that they did. Then, when they sued, I would go show the Big East or whoever that I am a team player and am not going to resort to litigation if a team has an economic reason to leave the conference. No conference is going to want to take the crybaby team that runs into court when someone leaves, the presidents will think "what if my team gets an invite somewhere, do I want to end up getting sued?"
 
Do some scrolling around the internet guys. Almost every school in the Big 12 has the right to sue A/M still on the table, because the Board of Regents exercises that right. Tech president said they still have it as well. This is a piece of terrible reporting being done by the register. The only team threatening to sue right now is Baylor.
 
ISU is free to do as it wishes, but burning bridges may not be the wisest move. Would another conference want ISU after the way it is acting in this matter? Bad move unless it is the only move you have.
 
Related to why TAMU leaving is different than talking to Arky or Neb leaving, the legal issue here is "tortious interference", which basically is interference by a third party in a contractual relationship that results in a breach of that contract and harm to the litigating party.

When Nebraska and Colorado left, the Big 12 did not dissolve and their media rights deals (one of which was expiring) were completely unaffected. Thus, there is no harm and hence no legal case.

Again, contacting Arky did not affect their contractual status as they did not leave the SEC due to those contacts, hence no legal case.

TAMU leaving the Big 12 may or may not kill the conference, but it will definitely breach the Billion dollar media rights deal signed by the Big 12 schools this past year. And clearly that is a harm for every school, to the tune of over $100M per school, not the kind of damages that can be papered over.

The lawsuit threat is real, and this situation is different than the Nebraska/Arky ones. Furthermore, Iowa State is doing the right thing here by protecting their interests, and not waiving their right to sue - especially because they would have a good case.
 
It's a good move on their part. They see the writing on the wall and future isn't promising. Hopefully they don't settle for a pay off.
 
I don't see what the big deal is? ISU has, in no way, said anything or displayed any interest in sueing anyone. ISU has little to no power, so what would they possibly gain from this?
 
Hawkfromnorwalk said:
If ISU had a chair at another table they wouldn't be pulling this stunt. They really are desperate.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily. If they were to sue over this, all it would mean is that ISU would (unsurprisingly) prefer to remain in the Big 12 rather than go to the Big East. You cannot conclusively assume anything more than that.
 
The fact that they didn't sue Nebraska and Colorado has no bearing on their abilityt ot sue A&M, and the ability to sue and sueing are two different things. All the schools are saying is that they have not forfeited their right to sue.

Secondly, why would they sign away their right to take legal action with nothing in return. I wouldn't do it even if I was a school like Texas, and especiallly wouldn't do it if I was Iowa State, KU, etc. ALso I wouldn't sign a waiver even if I believed I had another place to land because you never know what could happen. A school would have to be stupid to waive their legal rights with nothing in return.
 
Hawkfromnorwalk said:
If ISU had a chair at another table they wouldn't be pulling this stunt. They really are desperate.
Click to expand...

This is not a stunt it is a legitimate position. If Michigan State decided they wanted to leave for the Big East and teh Big East asked the Big Ten schools to sign a waiver to waive the right to take legal action against them I would hope Iowa would not sign it with nothing in return.
 
eyekwah said:
ISU is free to do as it wishes, but burning bridges may not be the wisest move. Would another conference want ISU after the way it is acting in this matter? Bad move unless it is the only move you have.
Click to expand...

Burning bridges? Their not the one backing out of contract and leaving for another conference.

Hawkfromnorwalk said:
If ISU had a chair at another table they wouldn't be pulling this stunt. They really are desperate.
Click to expand...

What stunt? Read the article by Witosky. Iowa State isn't suing they just aren't giving up their right to sue. Why would they?
 
Cyclones17 said:
Burning bridges? Their not the one backing out of contract and leaving for another conference.



What stunt? Read the article by Witosky. Iowa State isn't suing they just aren't giving up their right to sue. Why would they?
Click to expand...

"The SEC has stated that to consider an institution for membership, there must be no contractual hindrances to its departure.â€￾

Baylor and Iowa State are attempting to block the A&M departure. Why aren't any of the other schools doing this?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top