Not sure I necessarily agree with his analysis here - Baylor has a contract with the Big 12-2. Just because the Big 12-2 releases any claim against the SEC (assuming that's the only thing Beebe's letter did) doesn't mean Baylor does as well. I don't think Baylor would sue on a TI based on the contract between A&M and the Big 12-2 (as Travis suggests) but the contract between Baylor and the Big 12-2. And since it's valid, and the SEC is not a party to it, Baylor could claim TI against the SEC assuming Baylor can prove that the SEC induced or caused the Big 12-2 to breach its contract with Baylor (by ceasing to exist I suppose).

Maybe I'm missing something....

2 ...

Report Post

Posted by GerryDiNardo

Bringing Back The Magic!

Member since Mar 2004

5563 posts

Posted on 9/7/11 at 1:19 pm to OrangeBlood

quote:
Maybe I'm missing something....

In order for there to be TI there has to be some damages to Baylor. There are no damages as it's been stated repeatedly from multiple different places that the Big XII would stay together after A&M left. Now it has come out that OU is going to go somewhere else.. this is the school Baylor should be suing.

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by Quidam65

Q Continuum

Member since Jun 2010

19312 posts

Posted on 9/7/11 at 2:08 pm to OrangeBlood

quote:
Baylor could claim TI against the SEC assuming Baylor can prove that the SEC induced or caused the Big 12-2 to breach its contract with Baylor (by ceasing to exist I suppose).

You may have a point here. Baylor may try to argue that the A&M/SEC arrangement caused a "domino effect", whereby several of the other members (acting in their own interests) decided to look elsewhere, but would not have done so had A&M and the SEC not discussed a move.

1 ...

Report Post

Conference Expansion - Replies to Post

Return To Board

Page 1

Return To Board