Archived Topic

Boise State files a lawsuit against the MWC

by Fido · 1/22/2020

Advertisement
F
Fido
https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/College-Football.pdf



Boise State is alleging breach of contract of its re-entry agreement with the MWC.



Its all a good read--but this part is just crazy:



Contrary to Mr. Thompson's recognition of Boise State's pivotal role in the MWC

securing the more lucrative CBS/Fox agreement and his statement that Mr. Jordan would

emphasize this role at the Board of Directors meeting in order to address Boise State's reasonable

demand for receipt of a proportionate share of that increased revenue, neither Mr. Jordan nor Mr.

Thompson did any such thing
. Instead, at the Board of Directors meeting, Mr. Jordan and Mr.

Thompson presented eight alternatives, none of which addressed an increase in the bonus to be

paid to Boise State. Instead, all eight alternatives addressed different methods for phasing out and

ultimately ending the already agreed to $ 1.8 million bonus to Boise State and entering into uniform

agreements with all member institutions under which every member institution, regardless of their

contribution to the television revenue, received equal distributions. Thus, contrary to Mr.

Thompson's assurances and representations that Boise State should receive its original bonus plus

a proportionate share of the increased revenue generated by the new CBS/fox agreement and that

such a bonus structure would be discussed with the MWC's Board of Directors, the MWC offered

only alternatives to decrease and end any bonus to Boise State.

...

33. Prior to voting on whether to accept or reject the CBS/Fox agreement, the MWC

provided Boise State with only minimal information as to the basic proposed terms of the

agreement. It did not, however, disclose many of the proposed agreement's material terms,

including material monetary terms, such as how the revenue from the agreement would be

distributed, how bonuses would be paid or the agreement's cancellation terms. Essentially, the

MWC refused to provide Boise State with vital information on the proposed agreement's material

terms, and thereby deprived Boise State of a meaningful opportunity to evaluate whether the

agreement was acceptable or not.

...

34. Because it lacked the required information on the CBS/Fox agreement's material

terms and because the MWC, based on the alternatives it presented during the Board of Directors

meeting, was not only trying to renege on its contractual obligation to pay Boise State the $1.8

million bonus, but also to deprive it of any proportionate share of the increased revenue generated

by the CBS/Fox agreement even though Boise State was admittedly the driving force behind that

agreement, Boise State (l) did not vote to approve or accept the CBS/Fox agreement; and (2)

opposed the termination of the Re-Entry Agreement Amendment's $1.8 million bonus.

...

37 . Upon information and belief, the MWC, its Commissioner, and individual directors

other than Dr. Tromp, agreed and conspired to negotiate terms of the CBS/Fox agreement, failed

to obtain Boise State's consent and, to its detriment, voted (1) in favor of the agreement, and (2)

in favor of terminating the Re-Entry Agreement Amendment's $1.8 million bonus, thereby

violating the MWC's contractual obligations to Boise State. ln fact, two directors voted against

any additional distribution to Boise State in the second vote, even for the six years of the CBS/fox

agreement.
G
Guest
Sounds like Boise is learning a tough lesson in get anything Craig Thompson says in writing, signed in triplicate, because his job is not to make the premier school in the league happy, it's to make the majority of the schools happy.
F
Fido
hawkwing wrote:

Sounds like Boise is learning a tough lesson in get anything Craig Thompson says in writing, signed in triplicate, because his job is not to make the premier school in the league happy, it's to make the majority of the schools happy.


And he is willing to skirt legal agreements to do so...Boise State is finally calling him on it where BYU opted to go independent rather than fight them through a lawsuit. Boise State obviously isn't in a position where independence would be a viable option--especially in the short term.
E
EM_Puma
Fido wrote:


Sounds like Boise is learning a tough lesson in get anything Craig Thompson says in writing, signed in triplicate, because his job is not to make the premier school in the league happy, it's to make the majority of the schools happy.


And he is willing to skirt legal agreements to do so...Boise State is finally calling him on it where BYU opted to go independent rather than fight them through a lawsuit. Boise State obviously isn't in a position where independence would be a viable option--especially in the short term.


I haven't read the re-entry contract Boise State negotiated, but unlike the situation with BYU, I believe they are saying they are relying on a written and signed document. BYU never had anything in writing and I don't know that it was as much Hair Thompson that was at fault at that time, but it was whomever had the contract with The Mtn network (Comcast or someone before it was bought out by CBS). BYU relied on a "gentleman's agreement". BSU is not. They have a contract and are claiming breech of said contract.



Thompson really has a pair to try to circumvent that contract and try an end-around. I'm a bit surprised he'd try that. Not very business savvy and my hats off to BSU for sticking up for what they negotiated and not just being pushed out of the way.
G
Guest
The part that I'm highlighting from the initial post is this:


Thus, contrary to Mr. Thompson's assurances and representations that Boise State should receive its original bonus plus a proportionate share of the increased revenue generated by the new CBS/fox agreement and that such a bonus structure would be discussed with the MWC's Board of Directors, the MWC offered only alternatives to decrease and end any bonus to Boise State.


The question is were those assurances and representations done in a legally binding contract or where they just words in the wind?
Advertisement
E
EM_Puma
I was trying to find out how old Craig Thompson is and I'm surprised I'm having difficulties finding that info. He was offered a scholie in 1974, meaning that's probably the year he graduated from high school, so I'm guessing that he's 64--at least. Retire already dude. I just don't like the way he's carried out his responsibilities as commissioner of the MWC.
A
ABYUFAN
The best part may be paragraph 29 where it clearly alleges that the Hair was scheming to avoid being the bearer of truth to the other schools. If this is confirmed every other school should question everything Hair tells them in the future
S
snoscythe
Reading the complaint, it's not as cut-and-dried as BSU wants you to think.



Essentially they are complaining that Thompson, based on verbal assurances, was expected to try and persuade the other member institutions to increase BSU's $1.8MM bonus, and then on the conference call, he didn't do that.



Their complaint about not being told the terms of the new TV deal isn't that they weren't told the terms, but they are claiming that they weren't told enough "material" terms, which is a bit of a gray area. Specifically BSU lists three things they thought were material: " how the revenue from the agreement would be distributed, how bonuses would be paid or the agreement's cancellation term". It could very well be that the agreement doesn't address those items, and even if included, the MWC will argue that they aren't material terms.



BSU is mad that they thought they would be getting more $$, but instead the call focused on cutting them down to size, but it's not a slam dunk argument IMHO. I think they are just waving a bully stick here.
A
ABYUFAN
bYu ShOuLd ReJoiN thE MwC!
B
BoiseBYU
ABYUFAN wrote:

bYu ShOuLd ReJoiN thE MwC!


I think this is in code? Haha. I am sure a jury of Boise residents can give the MWC fair consideration! :)
Advertisement
A
ABYUFAN
BoiseBYU wrote:

I am sure a jury of Boise residents can give the MWC fair consideration! :)


I was thinking the same thing. If there is a city that is more behind their team than Boise is with BSU I haven't seen it yet!
E
EM_Puma
Well, it will be interesting to see how this all falls out. As everyone knows, these cases usually never end up in court, but are settled. It will be tough to settle this because BSU believes they are carrying the MWC and the other teams apparently want everything on an equal basis. Where does this end? Can BSU go indy? Probably in football, but they would struggle mightily in all the other sports, BB included. BYU not only had a national base (international actually), but they had and have their own top-notch, state-of-the-art network. There's a huge difference there.
B
blue42
I can't wait for all the other schools to pile on BSU and call them hard to work with, and who do they think they are, and how they think they are better than the rest of the conference, and how it will be a cold day in Hades before they consider scheduling them... I am pretty sure we will hear nothing.
E
EM_Puma
blue42 wrote:

I am pretty sure we will hear nothing.


I can hear the crickets now. :skeptic:
F
Fido
https://themw.com/news/2020/1/22/general-boise-state-and-mountain-west-joint-statement.aspx



“Last week Boise State filed a complaint regarding media rights against the Mountain West Conference, however, that action alone does not formally begin a lawsuit. The University and the Mountain West are currently in discussions in hopes of bringing this matter to a resolution without litigation.”



This really feels like we are "defining" terms here. i.e. its a "complaint", not a "lawsuit". Now wonder all these legal documents spend pages at the beginning defining the terms that will be used in the document. Of course they will try and settle this before it was to end up in a court room--but the paper was filed with the court requesting a jury trial.
Advertisement
A
ABYUFAN
Fido wrote:

https://themw.com/news/2020/1/22/general-boise-state-and-mountain-west-joint-statement.aspx



“Last week Boise State filed a complaint regarding media rights against the Mountain West Conference, however, that action alone does not formally begin a lawsuit."


This statement is disingenuous at best. The filing of a complaint alone does not constitute a lawsuit, because a lawsuit is a legal action between the parties, and it comprises all of the steps through conclusion of a trial and any appeals. But I believe that the overwhelming consensus in the legal community is that the filing of a Complaint does exactly what the joint statement says it does not do. A Complaint filed in court formally begins a lawsuit.



All of this is now yet another exhibit in the case against BYU ever returning to the MWC. The MWC is still the same wretched hive of scum and villainy as it was before BYU left.
S
snoscythe
ABYUFAN wrote:


https://themw.com/news/2020/1/22/general-boise-state-and-mountain-west-joint-statement.aspx



“Last week Boise State filed a complaint regarding media rights against the Mountain West Conference, however, that action alone does not formally begin a lawsuit."


This statement is disingenuous at best. The filing of a complaint alone does not constitute a lawsuit, because a lawsuit is a legal action between the parties, and it comprises all of the steps through conclusion of a trial and any appeals. But I believe that the overwhelming consensus in the legal community is that the filing of a Complaint does exactly what the joint statement says it does not do. A Complaint filed in court formally begins a lawsuit.



All of this is now yet another exhibit in the case against BYU ever returning to the MWC. The MWC is still the same wretched hive of scum and villainy as it was before BYU left.


The only way I can make sense of the statement that filing a complaint "alone does not formally begin a lawsuit" is if they are talking about serving the complaint on the defendants.



IMHO, filing has started a lawsuit, you just don't really have a defendant until you serve them.
M
mtnradio
snoscythe wrote:


Fido wrote:

https://themw.com/news/2020/1/22/general-boise-state-and-mountain-west-joint-statement.aspx



“Last week Boise State filed a complaint regarding media rights against the Mountain West Conference, however, that action alone does not formally begin a lawsuit."


This statement is disingenuous at best. The filing of a complaint alone does not constitute a lawsuit, because a lawsuit is a legal action between the parties, and it comprises all of the steps through conclusion of a trial and any appeals. But I believe that the overwhelming consensus in the legal community is that the filing of a Complaint does exactly what the joint statement says it does not do. A Complaint filed in court formally begins a lawsuit.



All of this is now yet another exhibit in the case against BYU ever returning to the MWC. The MWC is still the same wretched hive of scum and villainy as it was before BYU left.


The only way I can make sense of the statement that filing a complaint "alone does not formally begin a lawsuit" is if they are talking about serving the complaint on the defendants.



IMHO, filing has started a lawsuit, you just don't really have a defendant until you serve them.


Agreed ... technically and "formally" a lawsuit must be timely served before it has begun (meaning before the named defendant must respond and join the battle or lose) ... but that is a mighty fine legal point. (It would take some fancy argument to convince my old Civil Procedure professor that I was right if I put that on my final exam! LOL!)
Page 1 of 2
This is an archived topic from the original CougarCorner forum. New replies are not accepted.