Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="JOC44, post: 59813, member: 613"] You guys are saying things like "they can't keep us in if we don't get to vote," but that's not really true. If the bylaws say $5M/27 months and that once a school gives notice it can't vote on anything, then that's probably enforceable. It might not seem fair, but if you agreed to it, the courts generally will hold you to your deal. The one opening expansion creates, though, is that if the new schools are able to join right away, it's a plausible argument that the entire character of the Big East has changed such that it's no longer a mostly eastern conference and it can't have been the contracting intent to be able to force schools to massively increase their travel expenses by creating a national conference when the Big East was designed as an eastern conference with just a couple of western outposts. Basically, an argument similar to what WVU is saying EXCEPT that the changes WVU is complaining about (SU and Pitt leaving) won't actually happen until WVU's 27-month waiting period has ended, while Pitt, SU, and WVU would be forced to suffer these new changes while still a member, all the while being denied a vote. Still not sure that's a winner, but I bet it would create enough risk to force a settlement. Also, is there any reason that we wouldn't put "ACC" on our court this year? Might ruffle some of the more proper people on this board, but if not prohgibited by the conference bylaws, I'd do it and say we're just getting ready for the change (like the Big East is adding teams to get ready for the change). EDIT: It occurred to me that the ACC might not want its logo put on a court while we are a member of another conference, and might prefer SU and Pitt wait rather than litgate. They are more genteel than the Big 12. [/QUOTE]

Verification: What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?