We are talking releasing them with 8 month notice instead of 14 so 6 months early.

(02-02-2022 09:09 PM)GaSoEagle Wrote:  We are talking releasing them with 8 month notice instead of 14 so 6 months early.

How about they just live up to the contractual obligation that they signed and agreed to instead? Yeah, that would work.

I'd say 4 new tires and topping off the battery charge on Judy's jeep should do the trick.

In a courtroom the party breaking the written contract is responsible for treble (triple) damages, plus court costs and attorney fees for both parties. So if they could afford 3X the contracted amount plus expenses, that is their other option. I'll bet their attorney has already told them "Do yourself a favor and just live up to the contract. Oh, and I'll need you to refresh my retainer today."

I’d say an additional 1 million paid each to the remaining 5.

One way to look at this is that there are 9 teams leaving CUSA that could part as friends and perhaps there are future scheduling opportunities there, or CUSA could really stick it to them and CUSA's OOC games will be against the SWAC.

(02-02-2022 09:09 PM)GaSoEagle Wrote:  We are talking releasing them with 8 month notice instead of 14 so 6 months early.

$3 Trillion dollars...and your first born.

(02-02-2022 09:18 PM)DogsWin1 Wrote:  

(02-02-2022 09:09 PM)GaSoEagle Wrote:  We are talking releasing them with 8 month notice instead of 14 so 6 months early.

How about they just live up to the contractual obligation that they signed and agreed to instead? Yeah, that would work.

Serious question. Has CUSA benefited from any other premature defector? Has it been consistent throughout? If CUSA has gotten everything from those members, then the three should do their due diligence. If not, why did CUSA not follow through then? I'm not knowledgeable of the history on previous departing teams. I'd have an issue abiding by any written contracts too, if they haven't been enforced consistently historically.

(02-02-2022 11:44 PM)Nugget49er Wrote:  One way to look at this is that there are 9 teams leaving CUSA that could part as friends and perhaps there are future scheduling opportunities there, or CUSA could really stick it to them and CUSA's OOC games will be against the SWAC.

Well... STICK IT TO THEM!!!

















P.S.-- The OC games against the SWAC comment is RIDICULOUS. There are plenty of OC choices.

(02-02-2022 11:44 PM)Nugget49er Wrote:  One way to look at this is that there are 9 teams leaving CUSA that could part as friends and perhaps there are future scheduling opportunities there, or CUSA could really stick it to them and CUSA's OOC games will be against the SWAC.

Stick it to them. We have no interest in playing them ooc. Hell we hardly ever played Marshall and we've been in the same conference for almost 20 years.

(02-02-2022 09:30 PM)DogsWin1 Wrote:  In a courtroom the party breaking the written contract is responsible for treble (triple) damages, plus court costs and attorney fees for both parties. So if they could afford 3X the contracted amount plus expenses, that is their other option. I'll bet their attorney has already told them "Do yourself a favor and just live up to the contract. Oh, and I'll need you to refresh my retainer today."

Uh…bull****. Typically state laws don’t allow for punitive damages awarded in breach of contract cases.

The contracted amount for exit fees seems to be two years of conference distributions which we will forfeit whether we’re here or not. So what are the damages caused to the conference for leaving early? The CFP pool money shouldn’t be any different except possibly in the part related to performance but that would be difficult to prove that the three teams leaving will push CUSA down a ring on the G5 latter in 2022 final standings. Should be plenty of content to provide TV partners with 11 teams. The amount received from TV is pretty paltry in the first place and won’t go to zero so if there is a reduction in 2022 it’s minimal. Basketball credits won’t change. Increased travel expenses? It seems that historically CUSA hasn’t sought damages for schools leaving early so that’s not in the conferences favor.

They’ll negotiate a settlement, a million? Maybe a little less maybe a little more. And we’ll be gone in September

You must follow the bylaws.

What does the bylaws say?

I dunno.

(02-03-2022 08:45 AM)gdunn Wrote:  You must follow the bylaws.

What does the bylaws say?

I dunno.

I think that's the rub. Nothing really concrete in the by laws about what the penalty should be for 8 instead of 14 notice and there's some dispute I guess.

I think we settle in the nimble like mturn said.

(02-02-2022 09:09 PM)GaSoEagle Wrote:  We are talking releasing them with 8 month notice instead of 14 so 6 months early.

I don’t think Judy should be fair. Her fiduciary responsibility is to C-USA, and not the teams departing to the Sunbelt or AAC. She should position for every dollar she can extract from any program wanting out early.

(02-03-2022 08:42 AM)mturn017 Wrote:  

(02-02-2022 09:30 PM)DogsWin1 Wrote:  In a courtroom the party breaking the written contract is responsible for treble (triple) damages, plus court costs and attorney fees for both parties. So if they could afford 3X the contracted amount plus expenses, that is their other option. I'll bet their attorney has already told them "Do yourself a favor and just live up to the contract. Oh, and I'll need you to refresh my retainer today."

Uh…bull****. Typically state laws don’t allow for punitive damages awarded in breach of contract cases.

A company I have done business with for over twenty years is located in Indiana. When I dealt with that sort of thing I saw that they were awarded treble damages on a regular basis for breach of contract cases.

(02-03-2022 09:09 AM)ESE84 Wrote:  

(02-02-2022 09:09 PM)GaSoEagle Wrote:  We are talking releasing them with 8 month notice instead of 14 so 6 months early.

I don’t think Judy should be fair. Her fiduciary responsibility is to C-USA, and not the teams departing to the Sunbelt or AAC. She should position for every dollar she can extract from any program wanting out early.

And that's fair. But the issue is there's a statement in the bylaws that say that there should be monetary consideration for it. But what is fair. Is it the same amount that's being with held from conference distribution? In my mind that's fair. That would be $1.5 million in hand from each school plus the 2 years.

You can't demand an exuberant amount when the distribution amount isn't that high.

(02-03-2022 09:09 AM)ESE84 Wrote:  

(02-02-2022 09:09 PM)GaSoEagle Wrote:  We are talking releasing them with 8 month notice instead of 14 so 6 months early.

I don’t think Judy should be fair. Her fiduciary responsibility is to C-USA, and not the teams departing to the Sunbelt or AAC. She should position for every dollar she can extract from any program wanting out early.

If only she had been so eager to perform in this manner since inception.

a flat $1M seems fair to me.

paid out in $100 monthly payments- paid up by the year 2855.

Steady, recurring cash flow baby!

(02-03-2022 09:22 AM)UAB Schnauzer Wrote:  

(02-03-2022 08:42 AM)mturn017 Wrote:  

(02-02-2022 09:30 PM)DogsWin1 Wrote:  In a courtroom the party breaking the written contract is responsible for treble (triple) damages, plus court costs and attorney fees for both parties. So if they could afford 3X the contracted amount plus expenses, that is their other option. I'll bet their attorney has already told them "Do yourself a favor and just live up to the contract. Oh, and I'll need you to refresh my retainer today."

Uh…bull****. Typically state laws don’t allow for punitive damages awarded in breach of contract cases.

A company I have done business with for over twenty years is located in Indiana. When I dealt with that sort of thing I saw that they were awarded treble damages on a regular basis for breach of contract cases.

My understanding is it’s rare but I’m not an attorney. In my experience you’re typically looking at compensatory damages and legal fees. Basically you should be made whole, nothing more. Maybe an Indiana statute allows for it, not sure I see the civic interest in allowing punitive damages, especially to that degree, for disagreements in private party contracts.