Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

CU has rejoined the Big 12 and broken college football - talking out asses continues

hokiehead said:
thanks for answering.

to be clear -- you're saying that:
  • what's described could be considered fraud and if so, would be a way out of the GoR...
  • but there's near zero chance that FSU didn't have legal representation and sound advisement....
  • so this likely does NOT have any legs
am I following correctly?
Click to expand...
Not exactly. To prove fraudulent inducement, FSU would need to prove that the ACC folks (a) knew they were misrepresenting material facts (puffery or hopefulness is not knowing misrepresentation typically); (b) misrepresented those facts with a specific intent FSU would rely/act on them; and (c) that FSU’s reliance was objectively reasonable.

I doubt FSU could prove any of the elements.
 
wsp4820 said:
Not exactly. To prove fraudulent inducement, FSU would need to prove that the ACC folks (a) knew they were misrepresenting material facts (puffery or hopefulness is not knowing misrepresentation typically); (b) misrepresented those facts with a specific intent FSU would rely/act on them; and (c) that FSU’s reliance was objectively reasonable.

I doubt FSU could prove any of the elements.
Click to expand...
thank you
 
Summary of Pac-9 meeting:

- real numbers
- a few options (larger upsides vs guaranteed $$$)
- no resolution as members take time to evaluate

This afternoon, UA meets and might decide that none of the options is as good as the Big 12 offer so they announce the move. Seeing some speculation they'll slow play it instead of deciding today.
 
wsp4820 said:
Not exactly. To prove fraudulent inducement, FSU would need to prove that the ACC folks (a) knew they were misrepresenting material facts (puffery or hopefulness is not knowing misrepresentation typically); (b) misrepresented those facts with a specific intent FSU would rely/act on them; and (c) that FSU’s reliance was objectively reasonable.

I doubt FSU could prove any of the elements.
Click to expand...
It actually goes to show how iron clad their GOR is. Ie, If their best chance of getting out of the gor is to claim outright deceptive fraud, then they are stuck.

They can try to fight that uphill battle in court, but their media rights will be tied up the entire time they fight it.

Only real way they get out is if ESPN AND the ACC wants them out, which neither has an incentive to want.
 
jaybird said:
It actually goes to show how iron clad their GOR is. Ie, If their best chance of getting out of the gor is to claim outright deceptive fraud, then they are stuck.

They can try to fight that uphill battle in court, but their media rights will be tied up the entire time they fight it.

Only real way they get out is if ESPN AND the ACC wants them out, which neither has an incentive to want.
Click to expand...
ESPN might want it if it means FSU & Clemson become part of their SEC content & Fox is not a threat to add them to the B1G.
 
meeting brainstorming GIF by South Park
 
hokiehead said:
so, the Pac 9 schools have three options as I see it:
  • get into the XII
  • merge w/ ACC
  • expand with the best G5 schools they can get
it sure seems the ACC merger could be the best option at this point
Click to expand...
Where is the money for an ACC merger coming from with ESPN hemorrhaging cash and Disney tightening down on spending? It really does look like what Klatt stated in his podcast, the traditional networks only had the cash for four decent deals with the SEC and B1G eating the lion share of that money, and the B12 beat the P12 to the punch and they had already irritated the networks by trying to fully retain their rights, so the networks are going save some money by carving out the brands and markets they need from the West and call it a day.

The population disparity really does make a difference. It looks like they’ve figured USC / UCLA will carry football for California, then all they really need is a team for Colorado/Denver, Arizona/Phoenix, Washington/Seattle, and Oregon for their brand power. Everyone else is potentially redundant. We as hardcore football fans may not see it that way, but network execs looking for maximum eyeballs per dollar to sell ads don’t have the same perspective.
 
SuperD said:
Where is the money for an ACC merger coming from with ESPN hemorrhaging cash and Disney tightening down on spending? It really does look like what Klatt stated in his podcast, the traditional networks only had the cash for four decent deals with the SEC and B1G eating the lion share of that money, and the B12 beat the P12 to the punch and they had already irritated the networks by trying to fully retain their rights, so networks are going save some money by carving out the brands and markets they need from the West and call it a day. The population disparity really does make a difference. It looks like they’ve figured USC / UCLA will carry football for California, then all they really need is a team for Colorado/Denver, Arizona/Phoenix, Washington/Seattle, and Oregon for their brand power. Everyone else is potentially redundant. We as hardcore football fans may not see it that way, but network execs looking for Maximum eyeballs to sell ads don’t have the same perspective.
Click to expand...
The new math, I believe, is who drives national, regional and time slot ratings and who has engaged fans who will buy app subscriptions. It's not about how many cable homes a school will add at in-market rates.
 
PAC MAN said:
Click to expand...

Thank goodness there is only one frog or lizard or whatever.

Looking deeper the b 12 is mostly predators 5 (6 if AZ joins) or
Armed humans 5 (knights, cowboys, etc).
With texas leaving we are the only hoofed animal and the lizard and weather phenomena round out the list.
 
Last edited:
Buffnik said:
ESPN might want it if it means FSU & Clemson become part of their SEC content & Fox is not a threat to add them to the B1G.
Click to expand...
Maybe. I do agree they have a better shot of going sec because of ESPN having their eggs in those baskets, but why would ESPN want to pay more for them than they already do. And there is still no incentive for the rest of the acc to want it.

Imo, they are stuck, but this would be their only out....well, besides trying to claim fraud and win that fight in court. Lol
 
Heywood said:
Thank goodness there is only one frog or lizard or whatever.

Looking deeper the b 12 is mostly predators 5 (6 if AZ joins) or
Armed humans 5 (knights, cowboys, etc).
With texas leaving we are the only hoofed animal and the lizard and weather phenomena round out the list.
Click to expand...
Did you count Jayhawks as a predator or mythical creature or lizard?
 
I’m going to miss the PAC. Not looking forward to the Stillwater, Ames, and Manhattan road trips becoming a reality again. However, if this moves move keeps the program in the clear for a few years, maybe it will be worth it. I’m hoping a Big Ten invite in a few years is the end-goal here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top