- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Just re-read Beebe's letter to Mike Slive
Posted on 9/7/11 at 4:51 pm
Posted on 9/7/11 at 4:51 pm
quote:
...the Big 12 and its members will not take part in any legal action for any possible claims against the SEC or its members relating to the departure of Texas A&M.
Unless this was sent without Baylor's authorization, they forfeited their right to sue right here. I think they're just trying to get a settlement to drop this nonsense.
This post was edited on 9/7/11 at 4:53 pm
3
Posted on 9/7/11 at 4:55 pm to daboman of Aggieland
quote:
Unless this was sent without Baylor's authorization, they forfeited their right to sue right here
thats what i said in another thread.
if Beebe didnt have permission to speak for Baylor, their beef is with him not the SEC or aTm
Posted on 9/7/11 at 5:07 pm to jcole4lsu
the SEC has all the tools to win the argument....however it is my belief that Slive doesn't want to deal with any case, even if it is just this simple matter - dismissing the case because the SEC already holds the letter.
Posted on 9/7/11 at 5:13 pm to elpechis
How much money are we talking about here?
Put a $ figure on what BU would ask for. Haven't seen anyone do it
Posted on 9/7/11 at 5:38 pm to Sao
Just a thought but... The Sept 8th deadline is curious. Assuming the SEC/aTm does happen by the 8th this gives UT/UO/OSU/TT the precedent to make thier exit announcement on the 9th (or shortly there after) without fear of the same type of lawsuit??
Posted on 9/7/11 at 5:59 pm to daboman of Aggieland
Iowa State could have a problem here.
According to the Big 12 website, their President is the Vice-Chair of the Big 12 Board of Directors. If he approved the issuance of the letter, he has legally bound Iowa State to its terms.
According to the Big 12 website, their President is the Vice-Chair of the Big 12 Board of Directors. If he approved the issuance of the letter, he has legally bound Iowa State to its terms.
Posted on 9/7/11 at 6:00 pm to daboman of Aggieland
The big question is who are the Big 12 Conference Board of Directors? Do they have the authority to speak for the member institutions with respect to waivers of legal rights? If not, then the Big 12 Conference may be liable to the SEC for any damages it may suffer in reliance upon the letter from Dan Beebe. The shite storm is just beginning.
Posted on 9/7/11 at 6:07 pm to Quidam65
Do you have a link to that Big 12 website?
Posted on 9/7/11 at 6:20 pm to RedHawk
Here is a link to the intro of the Big 12 handbook. Page 3 lists the Officers Board of Directors.
LINK
Actually its worse for Baylor, read p. 5 of the Bylaws:
LINK
In a nutshell, the President or Chancellor of each Big 12 member institution is automatically on the Board of Directors.
Which includes Ken Starr.
Which means that unless he mysteriously didn't show up for a meeting, and his designee did something against his wishes, he approved the letter that was sent.
LINK
Actually its worse for Baylor, read p. 5 of the Bylaws:
LINK
In a nutshell, the President or Chancellor of each Big 12 member institution is automatically on the Board of Directors.
Which includes Ken Starr.
Which means that unless he mysteriously didn't show up for a meeting, and his designee did something against his wishes, he approved the letter that was sent.
This post was edited on 9/7/11 at 6:25 pm
Posted on 9/7/11 at 7:27 pm to Quidam65
LINK
quote:
In a letter from Sept. 2 made public Wednesday, Big 12 commissioner Dan Beebe said the Big 12 "and its members" were waiving legal action toward Texas A&M and the SEC.
The SEC accepted Texas A&M in a vote on Tuesday night on the condition that the Big 12 schools waived legal action toward Texas A&M and the SEC, but Beebe later said in a statement that his letter "did not and could not bind the individual member institutions’ governing boards to waive institutional rights."
In a Sept. 6 email to Slive, obtained by The Associated Press, Beebe writes: "If you seek waivers by the individual institutions, you must receive them from those institutions directly. I regret any confusion on this issue."
Posted on 9/7/11 at 7:30 pm to Dr Drunkenstein
Texas A&M President R. Bowen Loftin - June 16, 2010
"As the weekend concluded and we entered into Monday, however, the TV networks stepped up and indicated they would invest significantly in the 10 remaining members of the Big 12. And the Big 12 made a significant financial commitment to keep Texas A&M, Oklahoma and Texas in the conference. At the end of the day, we kept our word, which as an Aggie, is extremely important."
"As the weekend concluded and we entered into Monday, however, the TV networks stepped up and indicated they would invest significantly in the 10 remaining members of the Big 12. And the Big 12 made a significant financial commitment to keep Texas A&M, Oklahoma and Texas in the conference. At the end of the day, we kept our word, which as an Aggie, is extremely important."
Posted on 9/7/11 at 7:40 pm to elpechis
Maybe Slive should be looking into taking action against the Big 12 for contacting AR and asking them to join the Big 12? A&M wanted out - made that clear to the Big 12 - applied to the SEC. The SEC asked the Big 12 for it's ok - to prevent an appearance of poaching. AR has not said it wants out of the SEC. The Big 12 didn't seek the SEC's ok to offer AR membership. Who is messing with who?
This post was edited on 9/7/11 at 7:45 pm
Posted on 9/7/11 at 8:47 pm to Dr Drunkenstein
Dr Drunk--Did you not read the section of the Big 12 Bylaws to which I posted the link?
It clearly says that the Board of Directors consists of the President or Chancellor of each of the member institutions.
The Board of Directors -- that being the Presidents and Chancellors of the Big 12 members -- clearly stated that they unanimously voted to waive, on behalf of the conference and their respective institutions, any lawsuit against the SEC involving A&M's entry into the SEC. The ONLY condition placed on the waiver was that the SEC had to accept A&M's application by 9/8/11.
Remembering my contract law, the President of a company has both actual and apparent authority to bind said company. Similarly, the President of a university has the authority to bind that institution. Nobody would ever agree to become President or Chancellor of a university if s/he didn't have the power to shape its direction.
It clearly says that the Board of Directors consists of the President or Chancellor of each of the member institutions.
The Board of Directors -- that being the Presidents and Chancellors of the Big 12 members -- clearly stated that they unanimously voted to waive, on behalf of the conference and their respective institutions, any lawsuit against the SEC involving A&M's entry into the SEC. The ONLY condition placed on the waiver was that the SEC had to accept A&M's application by 9/8/11.
Remembering my contract law, the President of a company has both actual and apparent authority to bind said company. Similarly, the President of a university has the authority to bind that institution. Nobody would ever agree to become President or Chancellor of a university if s/he didn't have the power to shape its direction.
Posted on 9/7/11 at 9:03 pm to Dr Drunkenstein
Dr. Drunk - if aTm is not FUTEXAS' rival, then why such concern???
Posted on 9/7/11 at 9:22 pm to LSU1860
quote:
Dr. Drunk - if aTm is not FUTEXAS' rival, then why such concern???
My guess is that they just like seeing A&M being DENIED something they want so desperately.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News