Ask yourself

[Rogue52]

I'll pose this hypothetical question to all the CF lawyers out there:

A, B and C are all partners in a business deal where they form a corporation to represent the group. The original contract between the three of them states that any member of the partnership can leave at any time, but will have to pay a financial penalty to do so. If A gets an offer to join a tech firm on the West Coast at the same time that C gets an offer to manage a firm in Atlanta, can the two of them get together and vote to ignore their obligation to B laid out in the original contract?

I believe that B and the corporation would still be able to enforce the agreement to pay an exit fee. Yes, I said B AND the corporation. The exit of the majority of the members would not necessarily cause to corporation to cease to exist.

I believe a corporation can be dissolved without a unanimous vote.

 

[oldwiseman]

That's the way I'm reading it. I'm not negative at all. I think we are going to end up in good shape. However, that is just my belief based on logic.

Rebecacy on the other hand knows something about OU and I just want clarification on what it is that he knows.

Since Rebecacy's response reminds me of Floyd Mayweather acting like a candy *** calling out Larry Merchant. I'm going to assume much like Mayweather, he has no good answer for us.

I didn't see your response by the time I wrote this but your response is not based on any "inside information" from your rendezvous in the suite at the UNI game.

Credibility dropping.... sorry

 

[UNIGuy4Cy]

Every thing I have read today says OU has already said bye bye to the Big 12. The BOR is pushing for the PAC.

 

[Cyclonesrule91]

So, in the possibly stressful situation, we settle for devouring our own and getting snippy. Outstanding.

Agree 100%. He might very well know something and most in this thread are ready to throw him under the bus. I think his theory makes sense, but if he does have a source that is telling him stuff that he is hinting at, do you expect him to give all the details including his source???????

I'm sure there is a lot of behind the scenes stuff going on that will not hit the public until it needs to happen. All we are hearing now is a whole bunch of people throwing crap up in the air hoping it sticks to something.

 

[Yellow Snow]

Every thing I have read today says OU has already said bye bye to the Big 12. The BOR is pushing for the PAC.

Exactly...

Again Rebeca... IS DAVID BOREN STILL OUR "BEST FRIEND"?

 

[EZpickins]

Could it be that the OU & TX BOR are meeting to discuss possible equal revenue sharing and the addition of new programs?

 

[Senolcyc]

What I will do is go away and let you all decide we are dead, cremated and buried. Never seen a fan base so hell bent on the worse possible scenario happening. I'll be back when it's clear I was on the the right plan.

No matter what happens, you'll spin it and twist it and take credit for it. That's why everything you've posted so far has been cryptic ********. It's easy to claim you were right when no one knows what the **** you said in the first place.

 

[rebecacy]

That doesn't make OU ISU's best friend, that makes ISU OU's *****...

They are leading us to equal revenue and a conference network -- that sounds more like an equal partnership than us being a *****. They have the power we don't have and are willing to use it, again that is admirable of OU not demeaning of ISU. I'm done.

 

[goldmember]

he is, if we end up in the B1G.

 

[CycloneErik]

Agree 100%. He might very well know something and most in this thread are ready to throw him under the bus. I think his theory makes sense, but if he does have a source that is telling him stuff that he is hinting at, do you expect him to give all the details including his source???????

I'm sure there is a lot of behind the scenes stuff going on that will not hit the public until it needs to happen. All we are hearing now is a whole bunch of people throwing crap up in the air hoping it sticks to something.

I don't know whatever rebecacy knows or claims to know, but I'm pretty sure his sources are better than Twitter.

I'm also sure that it doesn't do any good to chase him around on this thing. If he knows something, he probably said all that he can. If he doesn't, we'll all figure it out in time, anyway.

 

[Boji]

Everyone keeps saying that 5 teams can "vote to dissolve the conference", but is it really that simple?

When all 10 teams signed the latest TV deal as the "new Big 12" after the Bugeaters and the *&#$aloes left, didn't they create an entity called "The Big 12"? And that entity needs to act in it's own interests AND in the interests of all it's members (as much as it can, considering that it needs to act in it's own interest first and foremost)? I have no knowledge of the contract binding the teams into the Big 12; however it seems that simply voting to dissolve the conference does not remove the conference's duty to represent all it's members.

Even if the conference CAN be dissolved by a simple majority vote, does that simply make the damages to the remaining conference members non-existent? The teams left out in the cold could sue the Big 12 as an entity, along with EVERY member of the conference for damages caused by the dissolution of the conference, right? Plus, every other conference receiving former members of the Big 12 AND all networks having TV deals with the Big 12 and conferences receiving former members of the Big 12 could be on the hook for damages caused by the assistance they provided in breaking up the Big 12.

I mean, you can't just get six members of the conference to say "Chuck You Farley" to the other four and expect for them to walk away unscathed. They can vote to dissolve the conference, but unless Texas Tech has invented a time machine that nobody knows about yet, they can't go back in time and undo the agreements all the members signed binding themselves together. We can't make them stay if they want to leave, but we can Make. Them. Pay. Through the nose.

Pay the exit penalties. Pay a penalty for loss of future earnings. Pay ALL legal fees for the remaining schools (in fact, even though I'm not a lawyer I would advise ISU to ask the Conference commissioner to cover the costs of all legal fees related to conference realignment for ISU. They won't do it, but it will give us something else to sue Beebe and his merry band of misfits in that office over when it all shakes out).

This realignment is all about money. Nobody can dispute that. Since this is about money, I think a reasonable judge would decide that a proper settlement for the remaining schools would involve an amount of money that would make T. Boone Pickens say "Dude? WTF? Who am I, Bill Gates?"

Basically, instead of an "Alamo Plan", I would call this one "Mutually Assured Destruction". Especially since (just in case you didn't pay attention in history class), the Alamo wasn't exactly a winning campaign. You want to chase the paychecks? Fine. Pay us first......or we'll burn ALL your houses down in the process.

Yup, that attitude will make ISU attractive to a new conference.

 

[CYlent Bob]

I agree it is not right what they are doing but I dont know how you can enforce the fine if the change the rules before they leave. Every team in this conference is looking for a new conference, so does that mean the last team left gets all the money?

If they change the rule before they leave, that would clearly be a self-serving choice that is strictly being made to save themselves money. I believe that this sort of change to the rules would be looked at by a reasonable court as trying to void the original contract and weasel out of their obligations. Now, if the Big 12 HAS a clause that allows the majority of the members to vote to dissolve the conference with no ramifications to the parties that initiated the breakup, then I'm wrong. But if the rules are not clear that simply breaking up the conference by majority vote voids any and all contracts entered into by the conference in the past, then I think we've got a case.

Here's how I think the teams that want to leave could avoid ANY penalties: Vote to dissolve the conference, and then prove to the remaining teams that NONE of the teams that voted to dissolve the conference had made agreements with other conferences to join upon leaving the Big 12. Without any prior agreements, their votes to dissolve the conference would probably absolve them of any responsibility; HOWEVER, having backup plans already negotiated would be evidence that their vote to dissolve the conference was made in bad faith and was intended to deprive the remaining teams of their right to demand exit penalties from the teams that are leaving.

Now that all of the teams that are supposed to be leaving are on record as having made plans to join other conferences, I think that loophole has already closed.

 

[oldwiseman]

They are leading us to equal revenue and a conference network -- that sounds more like an equal partnership than us being a *****. They have the power we don't have and are willing to use it, again that is admirable of OU not demeaning of ISU. I'm done.

If this is correct, and this is what happens, then I stand corrected. I've said over and over that I think the Big XII survives, if not, we go B1G. That's my call so either way I'm happy.

 

[rebecacy]

No matter what happens, you'll spin it and twist it and take credit for it. That's why everything you've posted so far has been cryptic ********. It's easy to claim you were right when no one knows what the **** you said in the first place.

I've laid this out in detail so many times, nearly anyone could explain it to you in detail. I suggest they use crayons and a coloring book. I'm not doing it again.

 

[jdoggivjc]

They are leading us to equal revenue and a conference network -- that sounds more like an equal partnership than us being a *****. They have the power we don't have and are willing to use it, again that is admirable of OU not demeaning of ISU. I'm done.

Where's the proof? Oh, that's right - it's your word. Which historically doesn't have a very good track record. But because you claim to have the most $$$ of all posters on CF, that must mean you know everything...

 

[justcynn]

Please accept my apologies for questioning the credibility of the info provided, there - if you are right, I get to align with the who was right crowd, if not - no one will remember and it won't matter. Best of both worlds. Seriously though, I hope you are right, I hope OU pulls it out of the ashses and the Cardinal and Gold rise again, but its hard to see and all of the momentum appears to be against it - BUT all of the momentum was against it last time too, so its never over until its actually over

 

[acgclone]

My only question, which you've ignored, is whether you have new information, or you're still basing your theory on what you learned in the box at the UNI game???

I don't know what to believe, but the answer to that question will give me clues as to how credible your statement is.

 

[00clone]

All we are hearing now is a whole bunch of people throwing crap up in the air hoping it sticks to something.

The internet is full of monkeys throwing poop.

 

[isuno1fan]

Where's the proof? Oh, that's right - it's your word. Which historically doesn't have a very good track record. But because you claim to have the most $$$ of all posters on CF, that must mean you know everything...

I will say this...I'm not convinced RebecaCy has any more money than I do and I readily admit I have no clue what is happening behind the scenes. Common sense would seem to dictate UT and OU stay in the B12, but common sense may have flown out the window weeks ago with A&M starting this mess.

 

[Rogue52]

Anyone remember the flight from A&M to Mizzou to OU? It was after A&M had already requested to leave the conference. It was probably meltdown #6 around Page 300 of the massive thread.

Could there really be a massive conspiracy by the other 9 schools against Texas?