BC Backpedal

[orange79]

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/20...ad-espn.ap/index.html?sct=hp_t2_a14&eref=sihp

 

[orlandoorange]

that probably assures uconn a future spot in the acc, can't let public perception be that bc is driving the bus

 

[Noexcuse]

Lets play "Hang Man"
D _ _ _ A _ _

 

[Faegan]

I cannot for the life of me understand how someone with so much experience could possibly make such a glaring PR error. And it goes beyond PR... this could be fodder for a courtroom, if it comes to that.

 

[OrangeXtreme]

Sounds like DeFilippo had an interesting phone call from Swofford.

 

[rrlbees]

I didn't see what the big deal was anyways with what he said. This whole thing is driven by money, which basically comes from football money, which comes from TV. The conferences have done every study imaginable and how teams would impact the TV contracts. Why wouldn't the ACC say "Hey ESPN, which 2 teams gives us the most money in a new contract". Why can't ESPN answer that? I am sure every conference has asked the same question one way or another of whatever networks they are tied to and maybe others as well. How is it different than just negotiating with the networks? And for the teams crying foul, they are all out there pimping themselves to the conferences and networks themselves. I'll mention again a statement made in an article several months ago that Rutgers had been out whoring themselves to every conference that would listen. More so than anyone else. These schools crying for lawsuits should look in the mirror because they would have done the same thing. They are just mad right now because it wasn't them. If ESPN had said to the ACC, "go get Rutgers and UConn", those 2 schools and their whiny fans wouldn't have said a peep.

 

[Czar]

I really, really cannot wait for NBC Sports to start up and have the hilariously corrupt and biased ESPN marginalized from their current position.

 

[Alsacs]

This idiot should have just stated his quote was taken out of context now he has OPENED ESPN up to litigation. This story has been buried on ESPN and the .com now he is spreading the fire. UConn won't get in because of this in fact it probably prevents future ACC expansion against the Big East. If a lawsuit occurred it would get settled because the lawyers of ESPN won't want discovery to take place and if have to disclose all communication it had with the ACC.

 

[orange79]

I didn't see what the big deal was anyways with what he said. This whole thing is driven by money, which basically comes from football money, which comes from TV. The conferences have done every study imaginable and how teams would impact the TV contracts. Why wouldn't the ACC say "Hey ESPN, which 2 teams gives us the most money in a new contract". Why can't ESPN answer that?

^^^ This ^^^

 

[orangecuse]

This idiot should have just stated his quote was taken out of context now he has OPENED ESPN up to litigation. This story has been buried on ESPN and the .com now he is spreading the fire. UConn won't get in because of this in fact it probably prevents future ACC expansion against the Big East. If a lawsuit occurred it would get settled because the lawyers of ESPN won't want discovery to take place and if have to disclose all communication it had with the ACC.

I'm not sure how his quote opens ESPN up to any litigation any more than what has transpired over the years in multiple/various expansions throughout history. Money has always been the main constant. Additonally, one could argue, what legitimate cause of action would there be? Which act, breach of duty, failure of legal obligation, invasion of right, etc. was violated in accordance to applicable law? Any lawsuit likely gets dismissed based on same and prior to discovery. Unlikely that any judge would contribute to such a precedent and the foreseen future chaos that would ensue...

 

[Czar]

Why can't ESPN answer that?

Variety of reasons. ESPN now has its hand in the BCS pie, and it could be construed as manufacturing a college climate ideal to it's vision for college football production. Basically, a whole shitload of unethical stuff that happens when you cross news and entertainment and live sports and money and journalism and yeah. Technically I think no one but the conference itself can have any input as to membership, though I don't know and this is all just guessing. But, I guess, it could sound like tampering or something.

 

[rrlbees]

Variety of reasons. ESPN now has its hand in the BCS pie, and it could be construed as manufacturing a college climate ideal to it's vision for college football production. Basically, a whole shitload of unethical stuff that happens when you cross news and entertainment and live sports and money and journalism and yeah. Technically I think no one but the conference itself can have any input as to membership, though I don't know and this is all just guessing. But, I guess, it could sound like tampering or something.

Every network and every conference is doing the same thing. Flipper just admitted it is all. They are all complicit. ND and NBC? The B12 and Fox? The B10 and ABC? All these people are talking and sharing data.

 

[orange79]

Variety of reasons. ESPN now has its hand in the BCS pie, and it could be construed as manufacturing a college climate ideal to it's vision for college football production. Basically, a whole shitload of unethical stuff that happens when you cross news and entertainment and live sports and money and journalism and yeah. Technically I think no one but the conference itself can have any input as to membership, though I don't know and this is all just guessing. But, I guess, it could sound like tampering or something.

I'm sure it was couched in something similar to the following:

ACC: Hey, WWL. We were just kicking things around and noticed we had a clause in our contract that said we could renegotiate if we expanded by 2 or more teams. Hypothetically, if we were to do that, which teams would maximize the increase in our contract?

ESPN: Well, certainly Notre Dame would pay huge dividends. But they're not going anywhere. So, barring the Irish, I'd say Syracuse and..well, either UConn or Pitt. Doesn't matter.

ACC: Well, hey. Thanks for the input. We'll get back to y'all if anything changes.

 

[Alsacs]

I'm not sure how his quote opens ESPN up to any litigation any more than what has transpired over the years in multiple/various expansions throughout history. Money has always been the main constant. Additonally, one could argue, what legitimate cause of action would there be? Which act, breach of duty, failure of legal obligation, invasion of right, etc. was violated in accordance to applicable law? Any lawsuit likely gets dismissed based on same and prior to discovery. Unlikely that any judge would contribute to such a precedent and the foreseen future chaos that would ensue...

All the Big East would have to show is tortious interference from ESPN as it pertained to ACC expansion.

Here is the definition
Tortious interference with contract rights can occur where the tortfeasor convinces a party to breach the contract against the plaintiff, or where the tortfeasor disrupts the ability of one party to perform his obligations under the contract, thereby preventing the plaintiff from receiving the performance promised. The classic example of this tort occurs when one party induces another party to breach a contract with a third party, in circumstances where the first party has no privilege to act as it does and acts with knowledge of the existence of the contract. Such conduct is termed tortious inducement of breach of contract.
Tortious interference with business relationships occurs where the tortfeasor acts to prevent the plaintiff from successfully establishing or maintaining business relationships. This tort may occur when a first party's conduct intentionally causes a second party not to enter into a business relationship with a third party that otherwise would probably have occurred. Such conduct is termed tortious interference with prospective business relations, expectations, or advantage or with prospective economic advantage.

 

[dash-30-dash]

To what end. No lawsuit is going to make the ACC take anyone. This isn't going anywhere.

 

[KaiserUEO]

guys, the clowns can mea culpa all they want. the fact is, espn probably did have a say, and bc likely did as well.

and to that i say...

good.

and......

F storz.

here are a couple of other facts.....

1. Syracuse is IN the ACC
2. storz is not
3. storz is fighting for their life
4. Syracuse is not
5. ND is BACK in charge in the northeast realignment game of risk. they either stay indy...which would keep the status quo. or they go to the b1g, which would also keep northeast status quo
6. storz will never, EVER!!! be in the b1g. they are just too useless for them
7. we are looking at about 20 years of 5, 12 & 14 team confs which matter. the big12 being 1 of them...the bigeast not being 1.
8. its likely now, that storz and rut will be in that leftover bigeast and will only make the ACC if shlit really hits the fan
9. we should be throwing a party and be happy as pigs in shlit here based on points 1-8
10. for some goddamn reason, we are not.

Oh Lord

 

[sutomcat]

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/20...ad-espn.ap/index.html?sct=hp_t2_a14&eref=sihp

Defilippo and Spaz will both be fired before Syracuse plays a game in the ACC...

 

[orangecuse]

All the Big East would have to show is tortious interference from ESPN as it pertained to ACC expansion.

Here is the definition
Tortious interference with contract rights can occur where the tortfeasor convinces a party to breach the contract against the plaintiff, or where the tortfeasor disrupts the ability of one party to perform his obligations under the contract, thereby preventing the plaintiff from receiving the performance promised. The classic example of this tort occurs when one party induces another party to breach a contract with a third party, in circumstances where the first party has no privilege to act as it does and acts with knowledge of the existence of the contract. Such conduct is termed tortious inducement of breach of contract.
Tortious interference with business relationships occurs where the tortfeasor acts to prevent the plaintiff from successfully establishing or maintaining business relationships. This tort may occur when a first party's conduct intentionally causes a second party not to enter into a business relationship with a third party that otherwise would probably have occurred. Such conduct is termed tortious interference with prospective business relations, expectations, or advantage or with prospective economic advantage.

Tortious interference...do not really see causation or how it applies here or in any other previous expansion cases throughout history. This is not Brown & Williamson vs. CBS Corporate and 60 minutes where the potential defendants signed some confidentiality agreement as one Jeffrey Wigand did. No such contract exists amongst any of the parties. If this was a classic case, then Conference USA would have sued the Big East under same when the Big East raided it back in '03 and so on and so on...good luck Big East showing cause...

 

[orange79]

guys, the clowns can mea culpa all they want. the fact is, espn probably did have a say, and bc likely did as well.

and to that i say...

good.

and......

F storz.

here are a couple of other facts.....

1. Syracuse is IN the ACC
2. storz is not
3. storz is fighting for their life
4. Syracuse is not
5. ND is BACK in charge in the northeast realignment game of risk. they either stay indy...which would keep the status quo. or they go to the b1g, which would also keep northeast status quo
6. storz will never, EVER!!! be in the b1g. they are just too useless for them
7. we are looking at about 20 years of 5, 12 & 14 team confs which matter. the big12 being 1 of them...the bigeast not being 1.
8. its likely now, that storz and rut will be in that leftover bigeast and will only make the ACC if shlit really hits the fan
9. we should be throwing a party and be happy as pigs in shlit here based on points 1-8
10. for some goddamn reason, we are not.

Oh Lord

Some of us are very happy. Very, very happy.

 

[sufan]

Defilippo and Spaz will both be fired before Syracuse plays a game in the ACC...

-----------------------

The interesting part is not what Defilippo said but the idea that somehow the 11 other ACC schools decided to choose a school based on what he wanted.

 

[Jake]

What Flipper really meant today was "I'm sorry that I told the truth."

 

[KaiserUEO]

-----------------------

The interesting part is not what Defilippo said but the idea that somehow the 11 other ACC schools decided to choose a school based on what he wanted.

why are we all ignoring this......the same article also said coach K was somewhat in charge.

what if his idea of expansion was...the current 12 plus nova, gtown, st johns and nd for all sports but football????

if they pulled that off, Syracuse would be on a plane to idaho every other year.....

what if maryland and the virginas said ' shlit!...hey bc we need you to block this too, what do you want in return??' and the answer would obviously be...'no cow schools from new england'.

 

[sufan]

All the Big East would have to show is tortious interference from ESPN as it pertained to ACC expansion.

Here is the definition
Tortious interference with contract rights can occur where the tortfeasor convinces a party to breach the contract against the plaintiff, or where the tortfeasor disrupts the ability of one party to perform his obligations under the contract, thereby preventing the plaintiff from receiving the performance promised. The classic example of this tort occurs when one party induces another party to breach a contract with a third party, in circumstances where the first party has no privilege to act as it does and acts with knowledge of the existence of the contract. Such conduct is termed tortious inducement of breach of contract.
Tortious interference with business relationships occurs where the tortfeasor acts to prevent the plaintiff from successfully establishing or maintaining business relationships. This tort may occur when a first party's conduct intentionally causes a second party not to enter into a business relationship with a third party that otherwise would probably have occurred. Such conduct is termed tortious interference with prospective business relations, expectations, or advantage or with prospective economic advantage.

--------------------

The Big East invited TCU last year, plans to invite up to 6 schools now and invited 3 all sports schools in 2003. Obviously, they are and were considering schools based on TV markets and potential revenues as well as fit and geography and so on.

And what about the recent Big 10 add or PAC 12 adds or SEC adds: they didn't consider TV markets and potential revenue???

But the bottom line is that SU and Pitt along with 8 or more other schools first contacted the ACC.

 

[nralecuse]

Every network and every conference is doing the same thing. Flipper just admitted it is all. They are all complicit. ND and NBC? The B12 and Fox? The B10 and ABC? All these people are talking and sharing data.

Agree
GO ORANGE !

 

[sufan]

why are we all ignoring this......the same article also said coach K was somewhat in charge.

what if his idea of expansion was...the current 12 plus nova, gtown, st johns and nd for all sports but football????

if they pulled that off, Syracuse would be on a plane to idaho every other year.....

what if maryland and the virginas said ' shlit!...hey bc we need you to block this too, what do you want in return??' and the answer would obviously be...'no cow schools from new england'.

--------------------

Really the article by Defilippo provides little understanding of what the ACC was collectively thinking, what schools like FSU were thinking.

The most interesting part was his mention that the Pitt to the Big 12 rumor might have caused the ACC to act to choose Pitt in combination with SU at this time. UConn isn't going anywhere and Pitt has a geography, athletic program and academics that fit the ACC well.