Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="Alsacs, post: 40172, member: 652"]
First off, the Big East is not going to be actually able to show actual causation because the case you mentioned and fact that ESPN did not physically make the ACC expand, but the Big East could prove proximate causation by showing that ESPN was in contact with the ACC, and through communication the ACC wanting to get more money from ESPN was told to poach teams from the Big East which resulted in the Big East not being able to generate a contract they believed it could receive on the open market. By taking two of the three valuable brands the Big East had it caused the Big East value to plummet and as a result will lead to lesser television contract from either ESPN, FOX, or Comcast. Secondly, in the eyes of the Big East while I severely disagree with this argument they say that when they expand to add teams from another conference they approach that conference and give them a heads up of their plans. While the Big East in my mind incorrectly believes what the ACC  does and just poaches team without a heads up to the Big East is interference. I do not believe a lawsuit brought against ESPN would ever see a courtroom, but my point is if the Big East could show proximate causation due to ESPN outside influence and brought a lawsuit and got through pleading stage and went to discovery. It would lead to some facts and communications that ESPN would not want public. Thus, it would be likely they would settle the lawsuit to prevent harm to the company.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?