HDuck No. 1 Share Posted July 28 See last post in this thread.... -------------------------------------------------------- A small thing I suppose, but it appears the Pac12 logo is still on the field at Autzen. The four Pac12 schools officially join the B1G on August 2. And no, I still don't understand how Whitman County judge Libey could rule the four had departed the Pac12 when he issued his opinion last November. The new Matt Knight Arena floor does have the B1G logo. 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flyin Vee No. 2 Share Posted July 29 I don’t always go to court, but when I do the firm of Dewey, Cheatum and Howe will be beside me. 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
idontrollonshobbas No. 3 Share Posted July 29 On 7/28/2024 at 7:14 PM, Flyin Vee said: I don’t always go to court, but when I do the firm of Dewey, Cheatum and Howe will be beside me. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandpa Duck No. 4 Share Posted July 29 I am a really old lawyer, age 85, and13 years of my over 40 years of courtroom practice was with the office of the Attorney General of Oregon. My fading recollection is that Judge Libby based his ruling on a PAC12 bylaw that states, in essence, when a member announces it is departing from the conference it loses its power to vote on conference matters. Considering the amount of money involved, and the legal resources of the conference members, such as the attorney general’s offices of four states plus whatever private lawyers Stanford wanted to hire, had judge Libey’s decision been incorrect it would have been appealed and reversed. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Marsh No. 5 Share Posted July 29 As for the field needing an update... I'm sure that's coming. I don't foresee them doing a big renovation on the field but just updating the conference logos. Matt Knight Cout got a MAJOR overhaul that I think was probably planned ahead of the Ducks joining the B1G. They redid the surface and the design in a big way. I would be surprised if the court overhaul was either scheduled for this off season or was planned before last season started but was delayed because they might as well wait to do it all at once. I doubt Rich Brooks Field needs much besides those couple zones of turf. It'll be done before game one for sure. .... As for the court ruling. Basically it was based off how the Pac-12 basically took voting rights away from the LA schools when they announced their departure. Then Colorado announced they're going to the Big 12 and they lost voting rights. Then Oregon and Washington went to the B1G and Zona, ASU and Utah went to the Big 12 very shortly after. All lost voting rights. Then Cal and Stanford left. So based on the precedence of the LA schools losing their voting rights, which I think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who would have disagreed with that at the time, everyone who left lost their rights in the conference meetings. OSU and WSU had all the power and decided not to payout the money fairly. The original intent from all members.was to not payout the LA schools for leaving anyways. That's the logic behind it toy knowledge. Agree or disagree with it if you like I'm just presenting it the best way I understand it. But at this point the DUCKS will soon officially be in the B1G and they'll probably roll out a video of the field being updated because that's the Oregon way. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
HDuck Author No. 6 Share Posted July 29 Don't disagree that 10 teams who decided to leave effective August 1 should lose opportunity to vote on matters that would face the conference effective August 2, 2024, or later, but since they remained in the conference until August 1, 2024 and continued to compete for official conference championships, then financial matters should have also remained the same including distributions earned/accrued from NCAA Tournament, etc. prior to August 2. When a tenant gives 6 months notice he is moving out, the landlord usually doesn't view that as the tenant leaving immediately. The tenant expects to live there 6 more months, and the landlord expects 6 more months of rent. That is where I disagree with the Libbey decision. Otherwise if would lead to a situation where there would be rumors for months and the 10 escapees would have withheld notice until August 1. Waiting to August 1 would not have been good for the two remaining members. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Fischer Administrator No. 7 Share Posted July 30 Here you go... 1 Mr. FishDuck Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.d47a58b06587aa2c32d15f9d2cf29c87.jpg)