In partnership with CBSSports.com
The Web's No. 1 forum for coverage and discussion of Terps sports
Visitor discussion of University of Maryland and college sports
A place for lively discussion for all other sports unrelated to Maryland athletics
Feedback for IMS and 247Sports
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
By that logic, the ACC could've voted for raising UMD's exit fee to a billion dollars, and UMD would be bound to it. Seems absurd to me.
edited to add: I'm not agreeing with DM, just stating that it seems ridiculous.
This post was edited by GhostOfEaston 20 months ago
I don't know what you mean, but it had the cadence of a joke.
This is the correct answer. Also, they didn't give us time to leave before the vote.
Why does it see, absurd. In our country, governments and business entities are run by democracy. You don't get out of higher taxes or Obamacare because you voted against them,
It would have to apply to everyone. (all schools of course). In fact, I think it was passed with FSU and Clemson in mind......not Maryland.
If it didn't apply to entities too, you would never, ever have things like capital calls in corporations.
Again, it may get struck down for some other legal reason (liquidated damages)......but the fact that Maryland voted against it will mean zero.
That's doesn't matter either......by laws don't have anything like a cure period or safe harbor provision. It's not relevant.
You very well may be correct, I don't see how this situation is analogous to the government and democracy. It's more like being a member of a club than it is being the citizen of a country
I'm guessing the ACC contracts with its member schools have a forum selection clause requiring cases to be tried in North Carolina state or federal courts. Although that might be giving too much credit to ACC lawyers.
So in other words, if such a clause is in the ACC contracts, even if Maryland filed in Maryland court, the very first filing by the ACC lawyers would be to move the case to North Carolina and to enforce the forum selection clause.
Just a thought. Otherwise there's really no logical reason to not already have the Maryland lawyers filing a declaratory judgment action up here.
How has no one found and posted the complaint yet? I would have assumed that the Carolina papers would be all over that. In any event, I have been incredibly impressed with Loh throughout this whole process. I have full confidence in his ability to help us navigate through these waters.
All this talk is fun but this will never get to trial nor will Maryland end up paying $50M. It doesn't surprise me that a group of conference officials so stupid as to think that such a fee would stop a member from leaving also think that litigating this is a good idea.
One argument I would make would be that exit fees should have some reasonable relation to the damages or loss a conference will experience on account of a team leaving. That's why a billion dollars would be laughed at and struck down by a court as excessive even if a mojority agreed to it.
To justify the 50 million, the ACC should have to show how the ACC will lose 50 million the moment or very soon after MD (and MD alone) leaves.
Put the ACC in the position of having to show why MD is so valuable to the conference that they will lose 50 million if they left.
This post was edited by esquire 20 months ago
This isnt about the $50 million or Maryland. Maryland doent want to pay anymore than it has to, but can pay the $50 million if forced to. Also, the $50 million doesnt matter to the ACC long term. Divded up thats what...about $4 million a school. Thats not changing anything.
The reason the ACC brings the lawsuit is to deter other schools. Its not enough to deter someone (Maryland or others, UNC? UVa? GT? ) to go to the Big 10 because the Big10s revenue delta is so much higher than the ACC's. However, it might be enough to stop schools (like FSU, Clemson) from going to the Big12. The revenue delta between the Big12 vs. ACC isnt nearly as large.
I think this may very well go the distance because the ACC may not be able to "risk" settling for 20 or 30 million. (assuming Maryland would pony up that much on its own).
But how long will litigation take? 2-3 years? Does this limbo period really keep a school from leaving? what are the chances another school doesn't take a leap during that period? Seems to me if the offer is right, a school with $$$ will make the leap regardless of the outcome of the case. For you legal folks, does another school leaving help or hurt either side, or does it not matter?
Filing suit is a sign of the ACC's weakness. Despite all the bluster they are obviously scared to death more schools will leave. I agree that this case will never go to trial. Whether the ACC survives will be determined long before this case will be ready for trial. At that point the MD exit fee, either from a financial or strategic perspective, will be moot. Maybe the ACC will meet in December and raise the exit fee to $200 million. That will work!
Tell them to come up to PG County and just try to collect.
Come on out and get your whoopin!
The Duke Chronicle...
probably my one chance at a legit scoop.
It's because the NC schools don't care. Skim their boards and you won't see much about this at all.
" A 2018 ESPN "30 for 30" Presentation
What if I told you…that a court case in North Carolina could destroy a six decade old institution…
What if I told you…a Turtle won the race over a Devil, Ram, Horseman, Hurricane, Eagle, Demon, Chicken, Wolf, Bee, and Warrior…
What if I told you…$50 million is not actually $50 million…
“30 for 30” Presents Gettin’ Loh: How Maryland took down the ACC
Isn't Maryland represented on the Council of Presidents (Loh?). If so, how could it have been unanimous?
Can the University of Maryland (or the University System) claim sovereign immunity? Apparently the University of Alabama successfully did that to prevent paying a contract to a fired assistant coach a few years ago.
Can the state legislature exercise eminent domain and essentially take over the athletic dept, making it part of the state and thus exempt from a lawsuit or at least enforcement by a NC state court? The state legislature was planning on taking ownership of the Colts, which ironically, prompted the midnight run to Indianapolis, and was talking about taking possession of the Woodlawn Vase to keep the Preakness in Baltimore.
Sun got it wrong. Duke Chronicle wasnt first to break the story....
Post reporting it with an AP story. You think the AP or Post would already have a copy of the lawsuit by now. doesnt take a couple minutes to scan it in.
I will make sure I bump this thread when it's all said and done. I Garuntee you the main point of emphasis when the suit is decided in our favor will be that we never agreed to the buyout and secondly will be the punitive aspect of the fee. I'll just leave it at that.
It wont as to the first thing. (Maryland didnt vote for it). Assuming the ACC voted in accordance with the by-laws, the fact that Maryland, in of itself, voted no is meaningless. Legally it doesnt matter. Now, If the didnt follow the by laws on the vote (Not enough advance notice of a vote for example) that is possible. Thats not the same thing as Maryland voting no.
President Loh said back then that he thought it was unfairly puntative. In short, he is arguing the exit fee is an uneforceable liquidated damages clause.
I said that position is arguable/debateable. If Maryland wins (or settles for something far less than $50 million) it will be because of that argument. It wont be that it didnt vote for it. Its legally not relevant.
more detailed news article from Greensboro paper. The end is the most interesting.
It is seeking a declaratory judgment from the court that Maryland should be made to pay the entire fee because Loh -- even if he did not vote for the provision -- took part in discussions and votes about the fee increase and his institution is subject to a provision voted for by the majority of the league's presidents.
The suit says the previous exit fee, set at one and one-quarter times the league's annual operating budget in 2011, was based on a proposal by Loh, but it felt the need to revisit the fee because "the potential harm to the ACC member institutions in the event of the withdrawal of one of more members of the conference substantially increased."
The suit says, since the announcement of Maryland's move to the Big Ten, that Loh has "distanced Maryland publicly from any commitment to pay the withdrawal payment as set forth in the Constitution."
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports