Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

CsquaredCC

Boise State Has Filed Suit Against the MWC

Recommended Posts

Just now, Chile_Ute said:

Then BSU should sue the Hair....just sayin’.  

Hair works for the presidents. He didn't make the decision to renege on the agreement but did open is big mouth to the media. 

bsu_retro_bsu_logo_helmet.b_1.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, renoskier said:

How do you know "his words" aren't exactly what all the other presidents wanted communicated?

And they may very well have been communicated privately before he did so publicly. 

Almost everything we discuss here is pure speculation.

Again, that's him acting in dual agency. Presidents are supposed to act in their school's best interest. But he represents ALL the presidents. When you are not acting in your clients best interest and deceiving them, like Boise is claiming, you are in violation of that and there is liability there. 

If someone asks you to do something illegal, it's still gunna be you that gets in trouble for it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, SDSUfan said:

LOL. You'll never get it.  BOIZEE is no longer a "primary draw".  The yawn from the locals hare is every bit as big for The Blue Turds as it is for New Mexico or Wyoming.  You just don't move the needle, at all. All of college football has moved on since you had your 15 minutes. You're just another pretty good P5 program.  That's it.

You might want to check the National TV ratings on MWC games. You also might want to check the attendance numbers of MWC teams when they play Boise versus other MWC teams. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, nocoolnamejim said:

On this point...

As I understand it, BSU is making the argument that the new contract those partners got was largely driven by the extra value that they bring. So if the contract scales upward, why shouldn't BSU's share scale upwards to the same extent?

Reasonable people can, of course, disagree on just how much extra revenue BSU brings to the conference over and above everyone else, but if the previous contract that was negotiated for BSU's re-entry acknowledged an uneven share driven by BSU's value, and if a new contract is negotiated for a lot more money, then I think it's pretty understandable that BSU would expect to still get a premium of some kind. Somewhere between the 1.8M BSU has been getting and what they are saying they should get under the new contract. The conference can certainly make the argument that it shouldn't scale upwards linearly, but if BSU negotiated a premium to rejoin, the partners cannot just arbitrarily end it after a while and expect BSU to just be okay with it.

Those 11 other partners are just as culpable as BSU in this for not working this out privately. Somewhere in all of this there should exist some revenue number that both the conference and BSU can live with. 

I am fine with Boise getting the extra cash..If they get more through litigation so be it.  However, they said they did not vote for the new deal with the tv providers and they have to give their approval for it to be binding.  CBS and Fox don't have to honor a contract that isn't binding.  If Boise prefers ESPN then this potential lawsuit can reopen the negotiations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Wyovanian said:

If you really believe those numbers, there isn't a conference possible for you that wouldn't tell you to go fu-k yourselves. Good luck on that independent contract for $10M.

I agree those numbers don't add up....   Boise St has it's own contract for their home games (normally 6 games), they normally have 2 more OOC games (that don't count for either contract / aka... home teams contract), which only leaves 4 conference away games...  So the question is how much do Boise St fans think these 4 away conference add to the MWC TV contract?   $5 million per game seems pretty high and lets not forget the MWC also includes all other sports.  Football is the big dog in the MWC contract, but basketball would have to be worth multiple millions year, wouldn't it?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Jimbo_Poke said:

As for Boise State earning more in the media rights deal, Ohio State couldn't, Alabama wouldn't, Boise State shouldn't.
 

Not that I get to make this decision, but if Boise State were getting Ohio State/Alabama money, we'd forego the extra $1.8MM.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Jimbo_Poke said:

I don't fault the Utes for leaving for PAC 12.  But even when you guys were beating Bama in big bowl games you guys weren't pulling these stunts or demanding what BSU is.  Those Utah teams were leagues better than any MW Boise State team.  They didn't need last minute trick plays to beat top teams, they outright beat top teams.  As for the tbsuf post above yours I would not want Wyoming doing this because hurting the conference is hurting yourself. 

I just think it is unlikely to have out of 11 University Presidents who are likely getting legal counsel having the side with 10 being wrong.  If they are everyone of them should be canned.  But honestly what is more likely?  As for Boise State earning more in the media rights deal, Ohio State couldn't, Alabama wouldn't, Boise State shouldn't.
 

It would totally be a different thing if BSU were being invited to the table.  But there is bad blood when one is touted superior to the rest (performance of that granted) and receives special treatments.  Where there was a breakdown in this situation was the concessions when they “came back.”

If its BSU’s leadership driving this bus, then it’s on them.  If its BSU’s leadership doing this in interest of the boosters and ghost of Kustra (he died right?!) then shame on BSU’s leadership.  But most of all, shame on Hair.  He now has a pattern of talking out of both sides of his mouth....I can’t help but think he doesn’t play the conference to keep his cush job.

Nothing to really say here.....except GO MWC!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, RSF said:

Boise's invite coincided with Utah's P12 invite.  BYU and TCU's departures were announced months later.

True. And in all honesty, BSU was a perfect backfill for Utah. It was a match made in heaven at that time.

But I think the larger point that was being made by the post you were quoting is that BSU and the MWC have never particularly been on great terms. BSU had to openly beg for years to get into the conference before Utah left, and it was only once the conference NEEDED another marquee football program that BSU was allowed in, and even then, the MWC negotiated some pretty humiliating terms such as no all blue uniforms on BSU's blue turf.

BSU kind of returned the favor when the leverage was the other way around and they were thinking about bolting to the Big East by negotiating an unequal revenue distribution.

Neither side feels like the other has ever done any real favors for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, BSUTOP25 said:

Hair works for the presidents. He didn't make the decision to renege on the agreement but did open is big mouth to the media. 

He does, but see my response to Jimbo Poke.  I’m not sure his role is all that altruistic.

Nothing to really say here.....except GO MWC!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, BSUTOP25 said:

At the end of the day, the $1.8M is not that big of a delta — certainly not big enough to ruin a conference relationship over. My personal view has consistently been that the tv exposure is a far bigger consideration for Boise State than the $1.8M. 

I'd agree. I think this is much more about no ESPN than the $1.8. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, renoskier said:

"All involved" obviously aren't on the same page. 

I would assume that would describe all conferences presidents, but they still have to come to an agreement as he is representing all of them. They can't just move forward dragging the other(s). And he certainly can't deceive them to get them all of the same page

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, SparkysDad said:

Because they leveraged it in a legally binding contract when they returned to the MWC?  Just guessing... :ph34r:

Fucsakes, that’s my point.  It should have been come back home and help develop a dominant G5 (hate the term but..) or find you f ucking way.

Nothing to really say here.....except GO MWC!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Rosegreen said:

Boise State President is on the Board of Directors. So when he says that they (Board) want a more germane and equal partnership among the schools, that would include the Boise President. 

Clearing this point up. The Board is composed of all 12 presidents as I understand it, but that does not tell us exactly how each president voted on this. We don't know if BSU is alone on their viewpoint, we only know that a majority of the board voted against it. 

The exact breakdown of the vote and who voted what way is not information that we presently have unless someone has posted it and I haven't seen it.

It could be 11-1 against BSU. It could be 7-5. Thompson's comments that they (Board) want a more germane and equal partnership simply means that some majority of presidents have that viewpoint. It doesn't tell us how big the majority is. I view this as kind of a key point. 

BSU's position on all of this is a lot weaker if it's 11-1 than if it's 7-5 for example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Broncomare said:

What I find interesting, is everyone bad mouthing Boise State, knows deep down if it were their school, they would be doing the same thing.  I don't think we have the full story - on either side.  Just a lot of speculation.  I personally would hate for Boise State to leave the MWC, unless if it was for a P5 invite.  This conference makes sense for regional travel and rivalries.  It sounds to me like Hair was talking out of school when he was here for the MWC Championship game and Boise State was blind sided by what occurred at the Board meeting in mid-December.   I would like to think that Boise was trying to work this out behind closed doors, until Hair opened his mouth.  I also think that Boise State wouldn't start filing on the "divorce" without looking at all of the ramifications and having an Ace in the hole.  I hope in the long run, cooler heads prevail and we all become one big happy, piss bombs, throwing people down stairs, steeling wheelchairs, meeting in the Best Buy parking lot, family again!!

I don't think they would. Most the other schools in this conference(or at least the original core) have history together. We enjoy being in a conference with each other. Hell we formed a new conference when that history was threatened by not being able to play each other every year. I get that Boise doesn't have a shared history with anyone. You've been looking out for yourselves and no one else from the beginning. That's cool I guess but not every school is like that. As someone else upthread said Utah and TCU didn't demand more of our revenue before they got the promotion and they were worlds better than BSU is today. I don't blame them for jumping at the chance to join the big show but when they were here they were good conference mates.  Also you don't see the big dog in other conferences trying to pull this shit. Even Texas was just looking for their 3rd tier rights which was more valuable than other schools they weren't looking to take a larger cut of the tier 1 rights. It hurts the conference which hurts itself.

The presidents signed a dumb deal and now boise gets 1.8 mil more. Fine. Now they have 6 years to see if they can figure something out satisfactory to all parties. But if they try to take more than the 1.8 that was agreed upon then can kick rocks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, e-zone99 said:

I agree those numbers don't add up....   Boise St has it's own contract for their home games (normally 6 games), they normally have 2 more OOC games (that don't count for either contract / aka... home teams contract), which only leaves 4 conference away games...  So the question is how much do Boise St fans think these 4 away conference add to the MWC TV contract?   $5 million per game seems pretty high and lets not forget the MWC also includes all other sports.  Football is the big dog in the MWC contract, but basketball would have to be worth multiple millions year, wouldn't it?

 

Yep, basketball seems to be an overlooked factor, but a lot of basketball is based on performance, not speculation. I'd guess MWC basketball to be worth somewhere in the neighborhood of 1/12- 1/10 of our total package at this point. That could change if we can get back to where we were ten years ago...

Image result for h.l. mencken quotes

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, OrediggerPoke said:

I typically tell folks when they ask me that there is no going back from the filing of the complaint and that the decision should not be taken lightly.  It has been my experience that the filing of the complaint causes both parties to dig their heels in and drive up litigation and attorney costs for both sides.  The winners I've typically been able to identify in resorting to the filing of the complaint are the lawyers.  That said, sometimes there are no other options. 

 

But given that statute of limitations on breach of contract claims are typically for a couple years, it seems strange to me to file a complaint within a month of an alleged breach of contract.  But I am sure this has all been well thought out by Boise's lawyers and they surely have a gameplan and an ultimate desire.  One which I wouldn't think likely to align with that of the MWC.  Pure speculation by me though.

Its pretty easy why.  Time matters.  The deal is set to start in a few months.  Here's how I see it.

Boise wanted to increase their bonus payout in proportion to the increase in the new deal (basically they wanted it to triple).   Their leverage to do that was based in their ability to hold up the TV deal until they gave their consent on Boise homes games (generally considered the most valuable part of the package).  The presidents had zero interest in increasing the bonus.  In fact, the presidents were ready to end the bonus all together.  The presidents also knew Boise would make 5.8 million a year under the current deal and that Boise would only make about 4.9 million as a football only member of the AAC.  Thus, the presidents opted to ignored the Boise deal, accepted the FOX/CBS proposal without Boise consent (eliminating Boise's only leverage to get a bonus increase)---and, knowing that any realistic Boise realignment option would pay less than the 5.8 in the current deal---dared Boise to object.  

Boise called the MW bluff by filing suit, which reinstates the leverage Boise needs to negotiate a bigger bonus.  In the end, Boise will get a bigger bonus (though less than they are seeking) and they will get a signed declaration indicating that their special deal  can only be altered or ended by mutual agreement of both parties.  Boise is not going anywhere.   The only wild card would be if the presidents are so adamantly against the continuation of the Boise deal that they dont care if Boise leaves.  I dont think they are there....but who knows?  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, renoskier said:

And how do you know this?

More speculation.

Every school is constantly having conversations and keeping your eyes and ears open. You're doing a poor job of you're not. But there was nary a peep from any source anywhere that even whispered that. It would be absolute blind speculation to say they were, being that there is no evidence anywhere that would suggest that

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, kingpotato said:

Every school is constantly having conversations and keeping your eyes and ears open. You're doing a poor job of you're not. But there was nary a peep from any source anywhere that even whispered that. It would be absolute blind speculation to say they were, being that there is no evidence anywhere that would suggest that

other than Harsin bitching at the end of the season

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, VandalPride97 said:

It would be a tremendous favor for Idaho to lend a hand to Boise State in realignment and there would likely need to be some sort of reciprocal favor.  The problem is that AAC BSU can't really offer Idaho any favor that the Vandals would want.   The only thing I can think of is occasional use of the stadium in Boise because our largest alumni population is there.  Otherwise, BSU has nothing to offer.  They can't get us into the MWC, they can't pay us, they won't/can't do home and home, and academic collaboration is very limited when it comes to what BSU brings to the table.  Then again, both schools have new presidents, so maybe they'll want to start mending fences. 

I will say, however, that BSU filing this lawsuit really doesn't do much for their already tarnished reputation for unreliability.  There is a large part of me that thinks "OK, so these guys previously shat on the WAC, then they shat on the Big East, then they sort of shat on the MWV over re-entry and now they just completely shat on the MWC for what appears to be very little reason.  They probably can't be trusted to act in good faith in any partnership" which is a problem that BSU is going to start facing.  I'm not sure the AAC trusts BSU after the Big East fiasco and I really don't think the MWC trusts BSU much anymore, so pretty much any proposal from BSU will be met with skepticism.  There is literally no evidence out there that BSU can be part of a team.  BSU looks hopelessly selfish.

On this point...

I think it's a bit more complicated than that. Yes, BSU has done many of the things that you state, but I think that any school in BSU's position would have tbh. For example, Utah State infamously tried to break the MWC by trying to luring some schools and BYU over to the WAC in backroom dealings. The MWC as a whole existed because a handful of schools held a secret airport meeting.

https://www.coloradoan.com/story/sports/csu/2018/09/28/colorado-state-university-president-secret-meeting-led-creation-mountain-west-conference/1457199002/

The uniqueness of BSU has been how rapid the rise of their football program was has meant that how far and wide these decisions were spread out wasn't in line with historic norms. It isn't exactly normal for a program to go from being at the FCS level in 1996 to being offered four conference upgrades in the next 20 years. (Big West, WAC, MWC, Big East...at the time an upgrade)

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...