forums

Nebraska to acc Ohio to sec ?

Poptimus said:
Force majeure is nice in theory but in practice almost never serves as a valid excuse for performance. It’s so narrowly construed and courts are reluctant to dictate anything was truly impossible. I don’t anticipate courts will let a wave of COVID-19 cases result in a force majeure defense, but it is a hot topic.

If other conferences are playing football in this climate, the Big 10 and PAC-12 cannot assert force majeure as an excuse for their conferences. They could play, it’s not impossible, and the proof is with the other conferences.
Click to expand...
Obviously they could play, it’s about playing safely. They could play without pads and helmets too. Saying it almost never serves as a valid excuse is stupid. If I owed u 1000 units to be delivered April 1st and I had to shut my plant down to protect my employees from COVID, that is a valid reason to not deliver on time because I think a generational global pandemic would make the cut. Other businesses staying open across the country doesn’t prove it’s not valid

as I said in another post, the schools are the conference and it was they who voted 12-2 not to play so the idea of a lawsuit Against the conference is moronic
 
Advertisement
Miami[]_[]Smoke said:
Obviously they could play, it’s about playing safely. They could play without pads and helmets too. Saying it almost never serves as a valid excuse is stupid. If I owed u 1000 units to be delivered April 1st and I had to shut my plant down to protect my employees from COVID, that is a valid reason to not deliver on time because I think a generational global pandemic would make the cut. Other businesses staying open across the country doesn’t prove it’s not valid

as I said in another post, the schools are the conference and it was they who voted 12-2 not to play so the idea of a lawsuit Against the conference is moronic
Click to expand...
You’re wrong on several points. You’re conflating “delay” with excuse to perform altogether. And what other businesses/conferences do absolutely serves as evidence as to whether a force majeure event exists.

I don’t think you appreciate just how difficult it is to prevail on a force majeure claim. Not a single one was meritorious with respect to events that arose out of the Great Recession, when businesses collapsed and counterparties vanished into thin air. Not one. These conferences could play football, they are simply choosing not to. FWIW, I am a lawyer who helped draft the force majeure contract language for a multinational conglomerate. There are a lot of other factors at play such as a duty to mitigate, notice, etc. But suffice it to say, you can craft the most air tight force majeure language and you’re not going to win absent an extreme scenario (e.g. you need a permit to perform construction, the permitting office is shut down due to COVID with no online capabilities, and that happens to be set forth in your contract). You’re also not likely to prevail on common law claims of impossibility or frustration of purpose. So these conferences absolutely could be sued and found liable for breach of contract.
 
Poptimus said:
You’re wrong on several points. You’re conflating “delay” with excuse to perform altogether. And what other businesses/conferences do absolutely serves as evidence as to whether a force majeure event exists.

I don’t think you appreciate just how difficult it is to prevail on a force majeure claim. Not a single one was meritorious with respect to events that arose out of the Great Recession, when businesses collapsed and counterparties vanished into thin air. Not one. These conferences could play football, they are simply choosing not to. FWIW, I am a lawyer who helped draft the force majeure contract language for a multinational conglomerate. There are a lot of other factors at play such as a duty to mitigate, notice, etc. But suffice it to say, you can craft the most air tight force majeure language and you’re not going to win absent an extreme scenario (e.g. you need a permit to perform construction, the permitting office is shut down due to COVID with no online capabilities, and that happens to be set forth in your contract). You’re also not likely to prevail on common law claims of impossibility or frustration of purpose. So these conferences absolutely could be sued and found liable for breach of contract.
Click to expand...
How is NOt playing football breach of contract BY the conference In the first place? That’s the root of the issue That I already raised. The conference is made up of the schools in it, it’s not a separate entity That is making decisions for the schools. The individual schools voted to decide what the whole conference would do. When you join a conference, you give up some ability to make your own choices (tv, schedule, etc). in return, you make more money than you would going it alone. i almost guarantee there isnt a clause in there saying that the “conference” Has a responsibility to let their schools play football. I would bet it has processes in place On what to do if there is a problem With playing the season, almost certainly the vote that already happened by the member schools, which ended 12-2 to Not play. I’m saying there’s no breach because the collective group of schools, aka “conference”, doesn’t owe it to all other members to play football.
 
Your question makes sense, and there have to be clauses in the contract that provides for situations in which a school can break the Contract. But breaking a contract means the party making that decision is out of the contract, not for a year or season, but for good.
The first question, which we can’t honestly answer, is what contract provisions would allow a school to break the contract. A pandemic, or “act of God” or “Force Majeur” are typically contemplated in contracts, but we won’t know what qualifies under these terms.
But the real problem as I see it is the notion that Nebraska or OSU would withdraw from a conference for 1 year, and then simply return. There Is zero percent chance that can happen. And therefore, with the amount of TV money the Big Ten receives, there is zero percent chance any school is trying to break its conference affiliation with the Big Ten.
 
Ash Joshi said:
Your question makes sense, and there have to be clauses in the contract that provides for situations in which a school can break the Contract. But breaking a contract means the party making that decision is out of the contract, not for a year or season, but for good.
The first question, which we can’t honestly answer, is what contract provisions would allow a school to break the contract. A pandemic, or “act of God” or “Force Majeur” are typically contemplated in contracts, but we won’t know what qualifies under these terms.
But the real problem as I see it is the notion that Nebraska or OSU would withdraw from a conference for 1 year, and then simply return. There Is zero percent chance that can happen. And therefore, with the amount of TV money the Big Ten receives, there is zero percent chance any school is trying to break its conference affiliation with the Big Ten.
Click to expand...
Ash Joshi said:
Your question makes sense, and there have to be clauses in the contract that provides for situations in which a school can break the Contract. But breaking a contract means the party making that decision is out of the contract, not for a year or season, but for good.
The first question, which we can’t honestly answer, is what contract provisions would allow a school to break the contract. A pandemic, or “act of God” or “Force Majeur” are typically contemplated in contracts, but we won’t know what qualifies under these terms.
But the real problem as I see it is the notion that Nebraska or OSU would withdraw from a conference for 1 year, and then simply return. There Is zero percent chance that can happen. And therefore, with the amount of TV money the Big Ten receives, there is zero percent chance any school is trying to break its conference affiliation with the Big Ten.
Click to expand...
I’m hearing the Buckeyes will replace the Bengals in the AFC North on a one year deal!
 
Advertisement
Miami[]_[]Smoke said:
as I said in another post, the schools are the conference and it was they who voted 12-2 not to play so the idea of a lawsuit Against the conference is moronic
Click to expand...
This pretty much sums it all up. People act like the conference isn't the schools.

I'm sure there are crystal clear rules in place as to votes within the conference needed to make decisions like they made here. How the fck do you sue the conference when you agreed to the rules on voting on matters like this when you joined the conference?
 
Miami[]_[]Smoke said:
How is NOt playing football breach of contract BY the conference In the first place? That’s the root of the issue That I already raised. The conference is made up of the schools in it, it’s not a separate entity That is making decisions for the schools. The individual schools voted to decide what the whole conference would do. When you join a conference, you give up some ability to make your own choices (tv, schedule, etc). in return, you make more money than you would going it alone. i almost guarantee there isnt a clause in there saying that the “conference” Has a responsibility to let their schools play football. I would bet it has processes in place On what to do if there is a problem With playing the season, almost certainly the vote that already happened by the member schools, which ended 12-2 to Not play. I’m saying there’s no breach because the collective group of schools, aka “conference”, doesn’t owe it to all other members to play football.
Click to expand...
Well the mere fact we are discussing force majeure implies there is a contract, because it is a contractually derived legal principle. It’s not some statutory or common law remedy. This goes back to the conference electing to cancel the season. If it was done pursuant to a vote set forth in the bylaws or other governing document, that’s one thing — assuming those rules were adhered to, something that is debated. But if it wasn’t pursuant to a vote, or if such a topic was not even eligible to be voted on, then you look at the contract between the schools and the conference and what authority does the conference have to unilaterally cancel a season.

If we are going to say this was done in accordance with conference voting procedures, fine. But then force majeure doesn’t even enter the picture.
 
The Franchise said:
This pretty much sums it all up. People act like the conference isn't the schools.

I'm sure there are crystal clear rules in place as to votes within the conference needed to make decisions like they made here. How the fck do you sue the conference when you agreed to the rules on voting on matters like this when you joined the conference?
Click to expand...
Agreed 1000%, but this is 2020. The process is just fine until it doesn't work in your favor. Then it's a problem. Kinda like how CIS works on a daily basis.
 
Advertisement
Bernie 2-0 said:
It’s hard to believe some of the things you read here. Yesterday they had some guy claiming OSU was going to the SEC and Nebraska to the ACC. Unbelievable
Click to expand...
Lots of people are upset. In fact, pretty much everyone whose favorite team doesn’t play in the ACC, SEC or BIG 12. So they will grasp at any straw that seems like better news than just-postponed/cancelled.

My greater fear is that more schools will go the way of UNC and send students home. public schools will do this first as they lost less money relative to price per credit compared to private schools. But if enough Schools go completely online I think it will increase pressure for the last 3 conferences to postpone/cancel their fall seasons.

After all, its tough to maintain the amateur/student-athlete scam if the only people on campus are athletes.
 
Advertisement
Go Canes!! said:
Click to expand...

I’m sure there will be a lawsuit, but this seems like a lot of bluster. I don’t see a single legal claim asserted in that demand letter. No mention of breach of contract or anything of the sort. I’m curious what the legal argument will be in the lawsuit. The Big 10 can tie that lawsuit up in court for well beyond this season, regardless.
 
The Franchise said:
What’s the basis of this lawsuit?
Click to expand...
That’s what I’m saying, it’s vague. The law firm will love the recognition and isn’t concerned this wins since it assuredly isn’t on a contingency fee. No judge will issue some sort of immediate injunction, forcing them to play. The case would take 3-4 years to wind through the court system. It’s a lot of smoke IMO.
 
Advertisement
Poptimus said:
That’s what I’m saying, it’s vague. The law firm will love the recognition and isn’t concerned this wins since it assuredly isn’t on a contingency fee. No judge will issue some sort of immediate injunction, forcing them to play. The case would take 3-4 years to wind through the court system. It’s a lot of smoke IMO.
Click to expand...
If there’s no legal basis for the suit it’ll take a few months to be dismissed and for sanctions to be assessed. Goofballs love to scream lawsuit every time something controversial happens with no real idea what they’re talking about.
 
The Franchise said:
If there’s no legal basis for the suit it’ll take a few months to be dismissed and for sanctions to be assessed. Goofballs love to scream lawsuit every time something controversial happens with no real idea what they’re talking about.
Click to expand...
Fear not, I expect no less than 12 amicus curiae briefs authored by esteemed legal scholars here at CIS in support of the Big 10 playing this season, any of which may dissuade a judge from dismissing the case on summary judgment.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top