Awesome Scenario for MWC

[Packman04]

On 1/18/2025 at 6:24 PM, Spaztecs said:

The left behind MW fans believing they are better than the Pac.

 

i definitely don’t…the PAC is going to be a hell of a bball conference 

[4UNLV]

On 1/19/2025 at 5:03 PM, Packman04 said:

i definitely don’t…the PAC is going to be a hell of a bball conference 

Nobody in the MW has said the MW would be better than the PAC..

[Headbutt]

On 1/19/2025 at 5:39 PM, evilpoke said:

Serious response - do you have links to these? I'd like to see/read them. 

BTW - the PAC DMAs and MW DMAs are pretty even, at least at this stage. 

There's a few posts on this board, some by a Poke fan who is an attorney and does some work in this area.  Like @Spaztecs most folks I've discussed this with (not all attorneys TBH) feel that the courts will see it as the MWC double dipping on the same issue.  The MWC will get some pretty solid alimony, but I doubt it will be what their asking for.  Probably about $75 - $80 mil in total.  The vast majority of that being in withholdings vs cash payments, but hell it's still money, a lot of money for a conference that get's about $4.1 mil/team in media rights.  Wyoming is getting screwed on the deal, but Wyoming has to deal with that.

Anyway, the exit fees combined with the poaching fees won't hold up.  It is possible that only the poaching fees (from a $$ standpoint) will.  That would suck big time for the MWC.

[Headbutt]

On 1/19/2025 at 6:33 PM, 4UNLV said:

Nobody in the MW has said the MW would be better than the PAC..

Not true.  Let's just say that most folks haven't made that claim.

[PTR]

On 1/19/2025 at 6:33 PM, 4UNLV said:

Nobody in the MW has said the MW would be better than the PAC..

Literally nobody. It's Spaztecs little troll act to keep bumping these threads with memes implying people are. 

[evilpoke]

On 1/19/2025 at 7:27 PM, Headbutt said:

There's a few posts on this board, some by a Poke fan who is an attorney and does some work in this area.  Like @Spaztecs most folks I've discussed this with (not all attorneys TBH) feel that the courts will see it as the MWC double dipping on the same issue.  The MWC will get some pretty solid alimony, but I doubt it will be what their asking for.  Probably about $75 - $80 mil in total.  The vast majority of that being in withholdings vs cash payments, but hell it's still money, a lot of money for a conference that get's about $4.1 mil/team in media rights.  Wyoming is getting screwed on the deal, but Wyoming has to deal with that.

Anyway, the exit fees combined with the poaching fees won't hold up.  It is possible that only the poaching fees (from a $$ standpoint) will.  That would suck big time for the MWC.

I'm not a lawyer, but it seems like there are two individual agreements that are in play here:

1. MWC with the individual schools who are leaving and giving up three years in revenue

2. MWC with the PAC and the per-team poaching fee. 

Are both items activated by a MW school leaving for the PAC? Yeah. But I don't understand why that would make a difference in the courts.

In theory, any of those schools left for any other conference and pay the three-year fee (such as Air Force to AAC) - they didn't have to leave for the PAC.

Likewise, the PAC could have brought in schools not from the Mountain West. They just chose to. 

If I'm missing something, please enlighten me. I just don't see anything illegal or underhanded by the MWC. 

Now, will there be negotiating to get that $150M number down? Yeah, probably. 

[Headbutt]

On 1/19/2025 at 8:06 PM, evilpoke said:

I'm not a lawyer, but it seems like there are two individual agreements that are in play here:

1. MWC with the individual schools who are leaving and giving up three years in revenue

2. MWC with the PAC and the per-team poaching fee. 

Are both items activated by a MW school leaving for the PAC? Yeah. But I don't understand why that would make a difference in the courts.

In theory, any of those schools left for any other conference and pay the three-year fee (such as Air Force to AAC) - they didn't have to leave for the PAC.

Likewise, the PAC could have brought in schools not from the Mountain West. They just chose to. 

If I'm missing something, please enlighten me. I just don't see anything illegal or underhanded by the MWC. 

Now, will there be negotiating to get that $150M number down? Yeah, probably. 

The MWC signed an agreement with the Pac indicating that they would be made whole by certain teams leaving to the tune of a schedule that both parties agreed on.  That schedule has the MWC being made whole by a payment of $55 million.  In addition, the MWC teams all (or at least 75% of them) agreed to pay punitive damages upon leaving to the tune of 3X the average conference distribution for the year prior to giving notice to leave.  The courts usually don't support contracts that include punitive damages if they enrich the harmed party beyond the level they are harmed ($55 million? Perhaps?), however at least two of the departing 5 signed off on the deal so it probably has some legs, just not the legs it might appear.  This is just how I've read the legal opinions on the deal from folks not associated with the deal.

Soooo, I called up Perry Mason and got his take on it.  Now I'm convinced that the MWC did set the level of actual harm at $55 million for 5 schools, but do have a contract to collect more than that in exit fees, about $84 million if I'm calculating right.  I don't believe the MWC will collect the total $139 million from both deals, and I don't believe the departing 5 are going to get away with just the $55 million in the poaching contract.  There are other claims in the suit that may or may not impact a final resolution, but I think in the end there will be a meeting somewhere in the middle.  I'm GUESSING that will be about $80 million, which is where I come up with my $80 million number.  I'm guessing based on all that other stuff.

If I'm right, then the first $40 million will be collected via withholding conference payouts in July, and then the departing 5 and the Pac 2 will be on the hook for the other $40 million on July 1, 2026.  That's a little over $5.7 million per school.  That $40 million will be deducted in the July '26 payout and the Pac 2 share will be worked out with the departing 5.

In other words...I don't think the MWC is going to get near the windfall they're looking for (and their actions have already indicated that they expected just that) and the other parties are not going to walk away without some serious pain. 

That's just how I read it, I could be way the hell wrong.

[4UNLV]

On 1/19/2025 at 7:06 PM, evilpoke said:

I'm not a lawyer, but it seems like there are two individual agreements that are in play here:

1. MWC with the individual schools who are leaving and giving up three years in revenue

2. MWC with the PAC and the per-team poaching fee. 

Are both items activated by a MW school leaving for the PAC? Yeah. But I don't understand why that would make a difference in the courts.

In theory, any of those schools left for any other conference and pay the three-year fee (such as Air Force to AAC) - they didn't have to leave for the PAC.

Likewise, the PAC could have brought in schools not from the Mountain West. They just chose to. 

If I'm missing something, please enlighten me. I just don't see anything illegal or underhanded by the MWC. 

Now, will there be negotiating to get that $150M number down? Yeah, probably. 

Yep, the two are apples and oranges. They are just not the same.

[LoboMan59]

The full amount. Not. One. Penny. Less. 

[SalinasSpartan]

On 1/19/2025 at 7:06 PM, evilpoke said:

I'm not a lawyer, but it seems like there are two individual agreements that are in play here:

1. MWC with the individual schools who are leaving and giving up three years in revenue

2. MWC with the PAC and the per-team poaching fee. 

Are both items activated by a MW school leaving for the PAC? Yeah. But I don't understand why that would make a difference in the courts.

In theory, any of those schools left for any other conference and pay the three-year fee (such as Air Force to AAC) - they didn't have to leave for the PAC.

Likewise, the PAC could have brought in schools not from the Mountain West. They just chose to. 

If I'm missing something, please enlighten me. I just don't see anything illegal or underhanded by the MWC. 

Now, will there be negotiating to get that $150M number down? Yeah, probably. 

@OrediggerPoke explained the issue with both agreements. I’ll try to repeat it by memory but both as a layperson and someone not as smart.

Both agreements essentially are fees associated with the same thing: MWC members leaving for the Pac. So if the MWC collects both fees in full it becomes something of a windfall because we would be collecting two fees for the same harm, and courts don’t like that. 
 

But that doesn’t mean that somehow the exit fees aren’t valid. The MWC will be getting paid, it’s just unclear exactly how much and who will be paying. Personally I am hoping WOSU has to foot some of the bill and it doesn’t all fall on the defectors. I blame WOSU for all this far more than I blame the first four defectors. 

[OrediggerPoke]

On 1/20/2025 at 9:18 AM, SalinasSpartan said:

@OrediggerPoke explained the issue with both agreements. I’ll try to repeat it by memory but both as a layperson and someone not as smart.

Both agreements essentially are fees associated with the same thing: MWC members leaving for the Pac. So if the MWC collects both fees in full it becomes something of a windfall because we would be collecting two fees for the same harm, and courts don’t like that. 
 

But that doesn’t mean that somehow the exit fees aren’t valid. The MWC will be getting paid, it’s just unclear exactly how much and who will be paying. Personally I am hoping WOSU has to foot some of the bill and it doesn’t all fall on the defectors. I blame WOSU for all this far more than I blame the first four defectors. 

That’s a pretty good lay person explanation.  
 

As indicated- The question isn’t so much as to whether there will be an exit fee/poaching fee award but: (1) how much will the total award be; and (2) how the award liability will be allocated amongst all of the departing MWC schools and Washington State/Oregon State.  
 

From a procedural perspective, the cases won’t be resolved until after the motion to dismiss stages are over and all of the pending claims are determined and various parties are joined to the two separate lawsuits in order to allow a global settlement of the issues.  

[SalinasSpartan]

On 1/20/2025 at 8:31 AM, OrediggerPoke said:

That’s a pretty good lay person explanation.  
 

As indicated- The question isn’t so much as to whether there will be an exit fee/poaching fee award but: (1) how much will the total award be; and (2) how the award liability will be allocated amongst all of the departing MWC schools and Washington State/Oregon State.  

I feel like I got a passing grade on a test. 
 

[Spaztecs]

On 1/19/2025 at 5:39 PM, evilpoke said:

Serious response - do you have links to these? I'd like to see/read them. 

BTW - the PAC DMAs and MW DMAs are pretty even, at least at this stage. 

The Conzano-Wilner podcast on Friday spoke to that very matter.

[Spaztecs]

On 1/19/2025 at 6:03 PM, Packman04 said:

i definitely don’t…the PAC is going to be a hell of a bball conference 

You're one of the few.

If you've followed these threads there's lots of Pac haters.

[Spaztecs]

On 1/19/2025 at 7:28 PM, PTR said:

Literally nobody. It's Spaztecs little troll act to keep bumping these threads with memes implying people are. 

There is loads of Pac hate,.minimizing, forecasts of doom and gloom coming from the detractors.

I have been supportive and positive about the MW moves, but the haters keep hating and claiming the Pac is garbage. So, I sling it back.

Including yourself.

You guys need to get down on your knees and slobber UNLV s knob. Had they bolted, so would have the AFA.

Then what would you have ?

I'm guessing you still believe the MW would be King.

 

[Bigd]

On 1/20/2025 at 9:08 AM, Spaztecs said:

You're one of the few.

If you've followed these threads there's lots of Pac haters.

There's a difference between being a Pac hater, and recognizing reality. No fans have said the MW will be better than the Pac, but obviously there is a lot of animosity based on the way things went down, and I'm sure every MW fan is rooting against the Pac (and visa versa). 

Your takes a lot more wild than anything I've seen MW fans say.

[Spaztecs]

On 1/20/2025 at 6:58 PM, Bigd said:

There's a difference between being a Pac hater, and recognizing reality. No fans have said the MW will be better than the Pac, but obviously there is a lot of animosity based on the way things went down, and I'm sure every MW fan is rooting against the Pac (and visa versa). 

Your takes a lot more wild than anything I've seen MW fans say.

 

I have been supportive of the MW moves. I only give back the love the MW fans are showing the Pac .

 

[Quickdraw]

The nPAC is a better basketball and football conference. Both conferences need to step it up a bunch though to be good. Each has a few good teams in each major sport. BSU is the only standout in football as is Gonzaga in basketball. SUDS has been solid in MBB until this year …so far. That said, yeah I am definitely rooting against the PAC because of how things went including the lawsuit. Why would I have good will towards schools that have done that. Can’t wait for the end of the suit and our relationship. To say that only MWC fans are talking shit though is definitely the pot kettle scenario though. July 2026 can’t come soon enough.

[OrediggerPoke]

On 1/19/2025 at 7:27 PM, Headbutt said:

There's a few posts on this board, some by a Poke fan who is an attorney and does some work in this area.  Like @Spaztecs most folks I've discussed this with (not all attorneys TBH) feel that the courts will see it as the MWC double dipping on the same issue.  The MWC will get some pretty solid alimony, but I doubt it will be what their asking for.  Probably about $75 - $80 mil in total.  The vast majority of that being in withholdings vs cash payments, but hell it's still money, a lot of money for a conference that get's about $4.1 mil/team in media rights.  Wyoming is getting screwed on the deal, but Wyoming has to deal with that.

Anyway, the exit fees combined with the poaching fees won't hold up.  It is possible that only the poaching fees (from a $$ standpoint) will.  That would suck big time for the MWC.

If you’re referring to me, I just read through Spaztecs post.  I disagree entirely with his legal analysis.  I see the anti-trust arguments raised by the plaintiffs in the two separate lawsuits as each having little chance of legal argument success. And I doubt the plaintiffs see them as realistic avenues to success either.

The legal argument that the plaintiffs raised in both suits that I see as the real crux of the case is that the MWC is seeking to be compensated for the same harm twice through the exit and poaching fees. In contract law, courts typically seek to avoid results that allow for double recovery of the same harm or that otherwise may result in the award of a penalty or a windfall. After I read the CSU/Utah State suit, it seemed to me that their suit was more about trying to allocate some of the exit fee liability to Washington State and Oregon State than anything.

What I foresee is that both cases will be narrowed down through the motion to dismiss arguments and hearings (likely with some of the anti-trust claims to be dismissed). Following those arguments and following answers by the MWC, I would speculate that we will see: (1) a flurry of joinder motions to bring in all of the parties into each case; (2) and ultimately a global settlement to both cases that will set forth a total liability of all PAC schools to the MWC and that will allocate that liability amongst the departing schools and WSU/OSU.  The total liability will almost certainly be less than the combined exit and poaching fees the MWC seeks but it will likely be a very substantial amount.  

[Ds214]

On 1/20/2025 at 10:31 AM, OrediggerPoke said:

That’s a pretty good lay person explanation.  
 

As indicated- The question isn’t so much as to whether there will be an exit fee/poaching fee award but: (1) how much will the total award be; and (2) how the award liability will be allocated amongst all of the departing MWC schools and Washington State/Oregon State.  
 

From a procedural perspective, the cases won’t be resolved until after the motion to dismiss stages are over and all of the pending claims are determined and various parties are joined to the two separate lawsuits in order to allow a global settlement of the issues.  

I think this is right, but I think people are severely underestimating the fundamental truth in sports antitrust cases: sports are different. The very first case that ever dealt with sports and antitrust law held that baseball is exempt from antitrust analysis because sports are different. While they’ve walked that back, courts are very deferential to sports leagues and regulations the leagues find appropriate.

Also, hypothetically, if OSU and WSU entered into an agreement never intending to fulfill its terms, how are they not liable for fraudulent inducement? It’s too early in the lawsuit for counterclaims to be mandatory, but I’d be surprised if that (or at least an unclean hands defense) doesn’t become prevalent.

Lastly, here’s a note on the ACC’s experience with this very issue. Unless it’s settled, it probably isn’t resolved soon. And if a court did issue a shocking blow and strike down entire agreements, expect the Big Bros to step in and protect themselves

https://www.wakeforestlawreview.com/2024/09/fumbling-in-court-exploring-the-florida-state-acc-lawsuit/