[Husker] buyout penalties

[Nick Chevance]

On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 1:13 AM, Joe Janecek <joejanecek at yahoo.com> wrote:
> http://sports.yahoo.com/top/news?slug=ap-big12lives
>
> What do you think Nebraska's penalty will be? Will donors be asked to chip in? Will the Big Ten help pay for the move as an advance on future earnings? Will our expected new earnings make up the difference?
>
> It's about money. It's ALWAYS about money.
>
> joe big red

I mentioned last week (or was it this week - its all melting together)
that Harvey Perlman said that any penalty or fine would be
"inappropriate."  He made some clarifying comments yesterday (I think)
on an interview on a Lincoln radio station.  Someone posted the link
yesterday.

The use of the word "inappropriate" wasn't thrown out there without
thought, not for a former law professor.  He didn't wrong, or bad
idea, or extortion.  Perlman mentioned that there are no fines or
penalties in the Big XII agreement, but there is provision for
liquidation of damages.  In order for there to be a payment for
damages, there has to be damages.  Beebe himself has said in several
news conferences in the last couple of days that with this proposed TV
deal, the remaining Big XII teams will be better off.  How can you
have damages if you're better off after a team leaves?  In addition,
fewer teams will share the same pot of money that remains on the
existing contract, meaning each team is likely to get more of a share.
 Seems to me this is an argument only a judge could love, with a
ruling in favor of Nebraska and Colorado.

I am not a lawyer, I don't play one on TV, and I didn't sleep in a
Holiday Inn or Holiday Inn Express last night.  But that makes perfect
sense to me.

Nick
-- 
"The computer allows you to make mistakes faster than any other
invention, with the possible exception of handguns and tequila."
      Mitch Ratcliffe