Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="topdecktiger" data-source="post: 129307827" data-attributes="member: 1459051">You are using theoretical examples. I'm using the real world situation as it actually exists. Your George Bush analogy has nothing to do with this actual situation.Like I told the other poster, ESPN and Fox had a reason to tell Neinas other teams wouldn't add value. ESPN and Fox put that clause into the contract for a reason. You have to show an actual change in circumstances. You can't just say, &quot;Well, since one day things might change, that means the contract will be renegotiated.&quot; You have to show actual concrete evidence of some change in circumstances, and you have none.I've explained this to you before. The Big 12 already get paid for 12 teams. That's why the clause was put into the contract, because adding teams would just get the Big 12 back to real market value, which is why the payouts would just stay the same.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="topdecktiger, post: 129307827, member: 1459051"] You are using theoretical examples. I'm using the real world situation as it actually exists. Your George Bush analogy has nothing to do with this actual situation. Like I told the other poster, ESPN and Fox had a reason to tell Neinas other teams wouldn't add value. ESPN and Fox put that clause into the contract for a reason. You have to show an [B][I][U]actual[/U][/I][/B] change in circumstances. You can't just say, "Well, since one day things might change, that means the contract will be renegotiated." You have to show actual concrete evidence of some change in circumstances, and you have none. I've explained this to you before. The Big 12 already get paid for 12 teams. That's why the clause was put into the contract, because adding teams would just get the Big 12 back to real market value, which is why the payouts would just stay the same. [/QUOTE]

Name