Aren't these contracts reviewed by the University's legal advisers? Are they saying that they knowingly signed an unenforceable contract? Does that show intent to deceive?

Maybe they should deduct the entrance fee that is charged to the new member that replaces MD from the 52 million and call it a compromise.

Interesting note...Dr Loh of Maryland was the one that proposed the Expense Multiplier exit fee in the first place. It was adopted at 1.25x and was subsequently raised later. Dr Loh voted NO on the last increase to 3x but then announced UM was leaving the ACC just 2 months later. After he announced he stated that UM, not the State, would be responsible for the $52 million dollar exit fee. He then stated that UM had no intention of paying the exit fee.

BTW it's been reported his negotiations with the B10 took about a year so there may be a reason to stomp his wee-wee for that alone.

The biggest mistake Maryland has made thus far was allowing the ACC to sue first and get an upper hand in jurisdiction. For being the rubes that we are, WVU was smart enough to launch first and did so in WV courts. BE finally countersued, but much like how the NC judge rules yesterday, we were moving toward home field advantage and the settlement talks heated up and got worked out.

One would think with that precedent out there, Maryland would have announced it was leaving on Tuesday and suing that evening. Especially since they knew they were leaving longer, they could have started the legal work in earnest. ACC did well in acting like they did: get a suitable replacement and file suit in NC.

I would not give $52MM for the assets of Maryland's athletic department if I had to assume their debt!

---------------------------------------------
--- UNCsince53 wrote:

Interesting note...Dr Loh of Maryland was the one that proposed the Expense Multiplier exit fee in the first place. It was adopted at 1.25x and was subsequently raised later. Dr Loh voted NO on the last increase to 3x but then announced UM was leaving the ACC just 2 months later. After he announced he stated that UM, not the State, would be responsible for the $52 million dollar exit fee. He then stated that UM had no intention of paying the exit fee.

BTW it's been reported his negotiations with the B10 took about a year so there may be a reason to stomp his wee-wee for that alone.

---------------------------------------------

John Swofford and the ACC were accused of 'operating in the dark' by the BE's idiot commissioner at the time, Mike Tranghese, during the ACC's first expansion. Did Swoffy demand any of the schools being looked at sign non-disclosure agreements, like Delany did with the Twerps?

If not, why haven't Delany and the B10 been accused of the same thing? Because it sure as Hades seems like they were working behind the ACC's back to lure the Twerps to his league.

---------------------------------------------
--- Reality1330 wrote:

If the ACC prevails in a North Carolina state court the how would they still have the power and authority to force Maryland to pay since Maryland is a SOVEREIGN entity from North Carolina. Let's be honest in that ultimately it would take an order from a FEDERAL court to enforce the judgment if Maryland does claim sovereign immunity.

---------------------------------------------

I have mixed emotions. IF MD wins, then we can bolt to another conference when the money is right, without having to pay $52 Million. ON the other hand, our share of $52 Million is not a bad day's work.

when someone is nicknamed Trained Goose, it's easy to assume they lack any validity to start with. :)

---------------------------------------------
--- WesternStormer wrote:


---------------------------------------------
--- UNCsince53 wrote:

Interesting note...Dr Loh of Maryland was the one that proposed the Expense Multiplier exit fee in the first place. It was adopted at 1.25x and was subsequently raised later. Dr Loh voted NO on the last increase to 3x but then announced UM was leaving the ACC just 2 months later. After he announced he stated that UM, not the State, would be responsible for the $52 million dollar exit fee. He then stated that UM had no intention of paying the exit fee.

BTW it's been reported his negotiations with the B10 took about a year so there may be a reason to stomp his wee-wee for that alone.

---------------------------------------------

John Swofford and the ACC were accused of 'operating in the dark' by the BE's idiot commissioner at the time, Mike Tranghese, during the ACC's first expansion. Did Swoffy demand any of the schools being looked at sign non-disclosure agreements, like Delany did with the Twerps?

If not, why haven't Delany and the B10 been accused of the same thing? Because it sure as Hades seems like they were working behind the ACC's back to lure the Twerps to his league.

---------------------------------------------

This case is not really very complicated. Absent legal stupidity on a grand scale by the ACC Maryland is going to loose and will have to pay 52 milion plus fees and expenses. The non lawyer "opinions" and wishful thinking by the MD supporters are just stupid. Terrapin toast is on the menu.

Nothing's more exciting than a good choice-of-law thread.