Enjoyable Article - How Rutgers Crashed the Big Ten

[Scarlet Jerry]

I said it before and I’ll say it again - the RU Screw died the day we were accepted to the Big 10. This was a transformational moment for Rutgers, comparable to when Henry Rutgers donated money to keep the university operating in the early 1800’s and when we beat out Princeton for being designated as the state’s land grant university. It took a series of disparate but well-timed events, some luck, and most importantly, tremendous vision and effort from people like Pernetti, Schiano, and others to make this happen. The best is yet to come, and thanks for everyone, especially Tim, for making the magic happen.

Scarlet Jerry

 

[DJ Spanky]

Nice to see positive press for Tim Pernetti. The guy bled Scarlet as much as anyone you can name and it was so sad to see RU throw him under the bus when lawyers (not Tim) decided Mike Rice would not be fired.

The article is a bit of redemption for Tim Pernetti who worked tirelessly to get Rutgers into the Big Ten only to get fired for PR reasons due to tons of negative press by NJ.com for taking bad advise from a lawyer .

Barchi was such a spineless coward first by avoiding the situation entirely then scapegoating Pernetti.

And I bet some of it came from the author of this article.

Along with input from our favorite fools Josh and Ted.

 

[DJ Spanky]

I do think the article played up the drama a bit. It was less a question of IF Rutgers would be invited to the Big Ten, and more a question of WHEN. After Nebraska was invited, Rutgers was always seen as next man up.

Actually Rutgers was at the top of the list until, by a series of coincidences, Nebraska fell in their lap.

 

[kupuna133]

Am I the only one who finds the Rutgers lawyers to be the wimpiest, weakest, most scared, most quick to fold up and hide group you ever heard of?

In house counsel has always been cut from this cloth. But where were the outside advisors? I cannot imagine RU did not seek advice from outside counsel or banks to determine the future value of RU to the B1G. Fixed vs variable.

 

[Scarlet16E]

You installed the app long time ago? It provides free trial for new users. You may want to try another device.

I installed the app last year at the start of or during football season (when the app was new). All articles on the app are free to view for me. I've never paid anything.
These articles are on the Home page of the app.
Are you sure you have the same app? in the app store it's called Rutgers Football. The icon is red and says nj.com with a football underneath.

 

[Upstream]

In house counsel has always been cut from this cloth. But where were the outside advisors? I cannot imagine RU did not seek advice from outside counsel or banks to determine the future value of RU to the B1G. Fixed vs variable.

The narrative that Rutgers' lawyers told Pernetti that he couldn't fire Rice is as ridiculously absurd as the narrative that Pernetti did no more than answer the phone.

Pernetti always had the option to fire Rice for any reason, or no reason at all. Hobbs fired Ash mid-season for losing too many games. Rice could have been fired for losing to St Peters. What the lawyers told Pernetti is that he would have to pay Rice his buy-out, per his contract, if he were fired. Saying you have to abide by the contract if you fire him is very different than saying you can't fire him.

 

[Upstream]

Exactly. Did anyone really expect Delaney to say, “Rutgers Facilities sucked but we took them anyway”. There’s no point disparaging our facilities 10 years after the fact, so he gave a political answer by emphasizing the market.

The fact is stadium expansion strengthened our application and made the stadium Big Ten worthy. The article also states 1990 Rutgers wasn’t ready for the Big Ten. What changed? Tangible football success and facilities, At least football’s facilities got to competitive. Big Bob, McCormack and Greg pushed very hard for football stadium expansion, because they knew a better stadium would strengthen any conference application. And Big Bob wound up losing his job over it.

Delany didn't even know that Rutgers had recently expanded the stadium. During one of the press conferences Delany commented that as part of the Big Ten, Rutgers would need to expand the stadium. Someone responded that Rutgers had recently completed an expansion, and Delany said he didn't know that.

As far as what changed between 1990 and 2012: The Big Ten launched the Big Ten Network and had an easy way to monetize Rutgers' market.

 

[Scarlet16E]

Delany didn't even know that Rutgers had recently expanded the stadium. During one of the press conferences Delany commented that as part of the Big Ten, Rutgers would need to expand the stadium. Someone responded that Rutgers had recently completed an expansion, and Delany said he didn't know that.

As far as what changed between 1990 and 2012: The Big Ten launched the Big Ten Network and had an easy way to monetize Rutgers' market.

Yes, but also what changed is Rutgers demonstrated a financial commitment toward athletics by completing the stadium expansion.
I remember Delany saying that and I never bought it. There is no way that he and the B1G presidents did not know about the recent stadium expansion. No idea why he would lie about that, but I think that he did.

 

[kupuna133]

The narrative that Rutgers' lawyers told Pernetti that he couldn't fire Rice is as ridiculously absurd as the narrative that Pernetti did no more than answer the phone.

Pernetti always had the option to fire Rice for any reason, or no reason at all. Hobbs fired Ash mid-season for losing too many games. Rice could have been fired for losing to St Peters. What the lawyers told Pernetti is that he would have to pay Rice his buy-out, per his contract, if he were fired. Saying you have to abide by the contract if you fire him is very different than saying you can't fire him.

I have given up on Rutgers counsel regarding employment issues. I was speaking about B1G negotiations. Don't get me wrong I am thrilled RU is in the B1G but there should have been hurdles or escalator clauses in the contract. Delaney and the B1G knew exactly to the penny what RU's net profit would be the B1G. BTN would not be the cash cow without RU.

 

[LeapinLou]

The narrative that Rutgers' lawyers told Pernetti that he couldn't fire Rice is as ridiculously absurd as the narrative that Pernetti did no more than answer the phone.

Pernetti always had the option to fire Rice for any reason, or no reason at all. Hobbs fired Ash mid-season for losing too many games. Rice could have been fired for losing to St Peters. What the lawyers told Pernetti is that he would have to pay Rice his buy-out, per his contract, if he were fired. Saying you have to abide by the contract if you fire him is very different than saying you can't fire him.

While you're technically correct, put yourself in his shoes. If everybody is telling you not to fire him, and every penny your department spends is scrutinized, it would have been a seriously rogue move to fire Rice. So instead he fined him, suspended him, made him go to counseling, etc. It was all perfectly reasonable until the video went public. Chris Christie could have stepped in and saved Tim's job, but he didn't have the guts to do anything other than join the lynch mob.

Last point - none of the players turned on Rice. While his old fashioned coaching methods were highly inappropriate, nobody said they felt humiliated or picked on. I'm sure that weighed on Tim's decision as well.

 

[Knight Shift]

I said it before and I’ll say it again - the RU Screw died the day we were accepted to the Big 10. This was a transformational moment for Rutgers, comparable to when Henry Rutgers donated money to keep the university operating in the early 1800’s and when we beat out Princeton for being designated as the state’s land grant university. It took a series of disparate but well-timed events, some luck, and most importantly, tremendous vision and effort from people like Pernetti, Schiano, and others to make this happen. The best is yet to come, and thanks for everyone, especially Tim, for making the magic happen.

Scarlet Jerry

@RUScrew85 --You OK?

 

[Knight Shift]

In house counsel has always been cut from this cloth. But where were the outside advisors? I cannot imagine RU did not seek advice from outside counsel or banks to determine the future value of RU to the B1G. Fixed vs variable.

I bailed on in-house life quickly for the Wild West of private practice.

 

[Knight Shift]

I installed the app last year at the start of or during football season (when the app was new). All articles on the app are free to view for me. I've never paid anything.
These articles are on the Home page of the app.
Are you sure you have the same app? in the app store it's called Rutgers Football. The icon is red and says nj.com with a football underneath.

Thanks for that. I'm a cheap bastid and won't send NJ.com a dime. It worked!

 

[MrsScrew]

I have the app, and I can't read it. I am asked to pay.

You're also the guy that never gets the email from Rutgers correct?

It's the NJ.com:Rutgers football news app

 

[Knight Shift]

You're also the guy that never gets the email from Rutgers correct?

It's the NJ.com:Rutgers football news app

The e-mail thing was resolved a few years ago. But for a long time, I was like this guy on Halloween:

 

[yesrutgers01]

While you're technically correct, put yourself in his shoes. If everybody is telling you not to fire him, and every penny your department spends is scrutinized, it would have been a seriously rogue move to fire Rice. So instead he fined him, suspended him, made him go to counseling, etc. It was all perfectly reasonable until the video went public. Chris Christie could have stepped in and saved Tim's job, but he didn't have the guts to do anything other than join the lynch mob.

Last point - none of the players turned on Rice. While his old fashioned coaching methods were highly inappropriate, nobody said they felt humiliated or picked on. I'm sure that weighed on Tim's decision as well.

This is correct- while Tim could have fired Rice, his BOSS told him not to. And let's be honest, what Rice did was sort of boarder line and at any other school- a wrist slap at the most. All the real crap happened because in typical Rutgers fashion, we happened to have a disgruntled employee that had a copy of the tape.

 

[NickRU714]

Actually Rutgers was at the top of the list until, by a series of coincidences, Nebraska fell in their lap.

Additionally, Nebraska didn't need to provide the financial assurances.
Adding them provided access to Conference Championship Game.

Nebraska got to piggyback onto the CCG windfall.

 

[patk89]

Unless he moved, Tim is in Oakland, but close enough…

Member at Hackensack GC.

 

[NickRU714]

Delany didn't even know that Rutgers had recently expanded the stadium. During one of the press conferences Delany commented that as part of the Big Ten, Rutgers would need to expand the stadium. Someone responded that Rutgers had recently completed an expansion, and Delany said he didn't know that.

As far as what changed between 1990 and 2012: The Big Ten launched the Big

I'm not sure why everyone is taking this fact as some sort of shot at Pernetti.

Pointing out, correctly, that Rutgers was invited because they were the best availalbe option at the time isn't up for debate.

Did Pernetti do a lot of work keeping Rutgers visable to the Big Ten? Sure, I guess.
But the "we wouldn't be in the Big Ten without XXX or YY" isn't really true.
Yes, his weekly phone calls with Delaney sounds fun.
But the article literally says it wasn't until the Big Ten was ready to move after ND/ACC that they started looking.

The number one reason we were invited was for money.
It was a business decision by the Big Ten.
And our money came from our location and revenue expectations for the Big Ten Network - which then cascades to the members schools.
Unless some other AD was going to move Rutgers out of the NYC DMA, then likely we get invited regardless of who the AD was at the time.

 

[rutgersguy1]

I'm not sure why everyone is taking this fact as some sort of shot at Pernetti.

Pointing out, correctly, that Rutgers was invited because they were the best availalbe option at the time isn't up for debate.

Did Pernetti do a lot of work keeping Rutgers visable to the Big Ten? Sure, I guess.
But the "we wouldn't be in the Big Ten without XXX or YY" isn't really true.
Yes, his weekly phone calls with Delaney sounds fun.
But the article literally says it wasn't until the Big Ten was ready to move after ND/ACC that they started looking.

The number one reason we were invited was for money.
It was a business decision by the Big Ten.
And our money came from our location and revenue expectations for the Big Ten Network - which then cascades to the members schools.
Unless some other AD was going to move Rutgers out of the NYC DMA, then likely we get invited regardless of who the AD was at the time.

The ND move and Athletic articles in the past have mentioned (quotes from Silverman, Delany, ADs) the ACC adding Cuse/Pitt as well. It got them thinking about PSU being out on an island. Obviously, the existence of BTN to monetize our market being huge factor as well as mentioned above.

 

[kupuna133]

I'm not sure why everyone is taking this fact as some sort of shot at Pernetti.

Pointing out, correctly, that Rutgers was invited because they were the best availalbe option at the time isn't up for debate.

Did Pernetti do a lot of work keeping Rutgers visable to the Big Ten? Sure, I guess.
But the "we wouldn't be in the Big Ten without XXX or YY" isn't really true.
Yes, his weekly phone calls with Delaney sounds fun.
But the article literally says it wasn't until the Big Ten was ready to move after ND/ACC that they started looking.

The number one reason we were invited was for money.
It was a business decision by the Big Ten.
And our money came from our location and revenue expectations for the Big Ten Network - which then cascades to the members schools.
Unless some other AD was going to move Rutgers out of the NYC DMA, then likely we get invited regardless of who the AD was at the time.

Delany is not having a weekly call at 7:00 AM on a Monday as a courtesy to a young AD. He was having those calls because Ru was a priority to Delany's eastward expansion. Delany wanted to make sure Tim was ready once the call was made and have a direct line in case the ACC came knocking. The call could have been arranged by Sun Tzu, damn thing is a blue print.

Delany kew exactly what the infrastructure and didn't care. He wanted RU for BTN contracts and visibility in NYC. RU didn't have to have beautiful facilities or success for his invite.

 

[kupuna133]

I bailed on in-house life quickly for the Wild West of private practice.

Some of the worst advice in finance has come from the in house counsel of many of the firms I have worked.

 

[Knight Shift]

Some of the worst advice in finance has come from the in house counsel of many of the firms I have worked.

Generally speaking (not always), the most risk averse attorneys go in house. Like many positions within large companies/entities, promotions are often based on the buddy system and not necessarily accomplishments. Exceptions exist, however. Have worked with and for many outstanding in-house counsel who run counter to that description.

 

[kupuna133]

Generally speaking (not always), the most risk averse attorneys go in house. Like many positions within large companies/entities, promotions are often based on the buddy system and not necessarily accomplishments. Exceptions exist, however. Have worked with and for many outstanding in-house counsel who run counter to that description.

As you said risk averse. Counsel and compliance would dream up ways why we couldn't do something versus finding solutions on how we could do something. We just called that part of the building the DOT. All they did was throw up road blocks.

 

[Knight Shift]

As you said risk averse. Counsel and compliance would dream up ways why we couldn't do something versus finding solutions on how we could do something. We just called that part of the building the DOT. All they did was throw up road blocks.

Just had a similar conversation with a client. I had said that if I was your in-house counsel, I would have put a stop to your planned meeting this week until we could fence the perimeter on this and be sure we are squared away. The answer back was - yeah, never on an in house counsel!

 

[yesrutgers01]

Just had a similar conversation with a client. I had said that if I was your in-house counsel, I would have put a stop to your planned meeting this week until we could fence the perimeter on this and be sure we are squared away. The answer back was - yeah, never on an in house counsel!

I house counsel is always hired to mitigate risk...You have to push back super hard on almost everything.
And when you have two companies where both Counsel's are just trying to measure dicks- it is a nightmare. And apologies up front for any female attorneys on here. lol

 

[Upstream]

I have given up on Rutgers counsel regarding employment issues. I was speaking about B1G negotiations. Don't get me wrong I am thrilled RU is in the B1G but there should have been hurdles or escalator clauses in the contract. Delaney and the B1G knew exactly to the penny what RU's net profit would be the B1G. BTN would not be the cash cow without RU.

Sorry. Your post was clear. Others in this thread were advancing the false "lawyers told Tim he couldn't fire Rice" narrative. I should have directed my previous response toward one of them.



As far as the financial terms of the agreement, that's a business decision, not a legal decision. The job of the lawyers is to make sure the contract reflects the business decisions. If the lawyers were trying to dictate the financial terms, then Pernetti or Purcaro should have overruled them. In my job, one of the corporate attorneys I regularly deal with is constantly trying to dictate strategy. And I am constantly reminding him that if there are no legal risks, that is not his decision. I understand that is hard to do if you're a mid-level employee. But Pernetti and Purcaro were senior executives.

I agree with you that there should have been some sort of different financial arrangement, such as the escalator clauses you suggest. The article implies that Pernetti felt Rutgers had no leverage, unlike Maryland. And the article implies that Pernetti believed that if Rutgers pushed back too hard, the Big Ten might skip Rutgers and move on to their next choice.

With 20/20 hindsight, I disagree. We are in the number one media market in the country, and poised to bring a lot of money to the Big Ten. Pernetti/Purcaro could have leveraged the fact that a competitive Rutgers can generate even more money than a non-competitive Rutgers. And keeping Rutgers at Big East revenues while other Big Ten schools are getting increased revenue due to us, puts us at a huge competitive disadvantage, reducing the earning potential for the league. But 20/20 hindsight is easy when you weren't in the room.

 

[slyker]

I met Pernetti at a Lacrosse tournament in Pennylvania that our kids were both participating in.... was either during, or right after the Rice saga. Was wearing my Block "R" gear as I always do, and approached him as I saw him walking towards me on my way to another field. Talked to him briefly.. Congratulated him on the Big 10 and mentioned something about how he was getting the "shaft" over the Rice situation..... from his expression you could certainly tell it pained him and he said something to the effect of " if you only knew" ! Glad I was able to give him some positive fan feedback

 

[Knight Shift]

I house counsel is always hired to mitigate risk...You have to push back super hard on almost everything.
And when you have two companies where both Counsel's are just trying to measure dicks- it is a nightmare. And apologies up front for any female attorneys on here. lol

I have worked with many female attorneys in house who had more guts and better gunslingers than most of the male attorneys in the department.

 

[e5fdny]

Sorry. Your post was clear. Others in this thread were advancing the false "lawyers told Tim he couldn't fire Rice" narrative. I should have directed my previous response toward one of them.



As far as the financial terms of the agreement, that's a business decision, not a legal decision. The job of the lawyers is to make sure the contract reflects the business decisions. If the lawyers were trying to dictate the financial terms, then Pernetti or Purcaro should have overruled them. In my job, one of the corporate attorneys I regularly deal with is constantly trying to dictate strategy. And I am constantly reminding him that if there are no legal risks, that is not his decision. I understand that is hard to do if you're a mid-level employee. But Pernetti and Purcaro were senior executives.

I agree with you that there should have been some sort of different financial arrangement, such as the escalator clauses you suggest. The article implies that Pernetti felt Rutgers had no leverage, unlike Maryland. And the article implies that Pernetti believed that if Rutgers pushed back too hard, the Big Ten might skip Rutgers and move on to their next choice.

With 20/20 hindsight, I disagree. We are in the number one media market in the country, and poised to bring a lot of money to the Big Ten. Pernetti/Purcaro could have leveraged the fact that a competitive Rutgers can generate even more money than a non-competitive Rutgers. And keeping Rutgers at Big East revenues while other Big Ten schools are getting increased revenue due to us, puts us at a huge competitive disadvantage, reducing the earning potential for the league. But 20/20 hindsight is easy when you weren't in the room.

As always…👍

 

[kupuna133]

Sorry. Your post was clear. Others in this thread were advancing the false "lawyers told Tim he couldn't fire Rice" narrative. I should have directed my previous response toward one of them.



As far as the financial terms of the agreement, that's a business decision, not a legal decision. The job of the lawyers is to make sure the contract reflects the business decisions. If the lawyers were trying to dictate the financial terms, then Pernetti or Purcaro should have overruled them. In my job, one of the corporate attorneys I regularly deal with is constantly trying to dictate strategy. And I am constantly reminding him that if there are no legal risks, that is not his decision. I understand that is hard to do if you're a mid-level employee. But Pernetti and Purcaro were senior executives.

I agree with you that there should have been some sort of different financial arrangement, such as the escalator clauses you suggest. The article implies that Pernetti felt Rutgers had no leverage, unlike Maryland. And the article implies that Pernetti believed that if Rutgers pushed back too hard, the Big Ten might skip Rutgers and move on to their next choice.

With 20/20 hindsight, I disagree. We are in the number one media market in the country, and poised to bring a lot of money to the Big Ten. Pernetti/Purcaro could have leveraged the fact that a competitive Rutgers can generate even more money than a non-competitive Rutgers. And keeping Rutgers at Big East revenues while other Big Ten schools are getting increased revenue due to us, puts us at a huge competitive disadvantage, reducing the earning potential for the league. But 20/20 hindsight is easy when you weren't in the room.

Agreed only reason I said in house counsel is because they have been the only people mentioned as being part of the process.

But I disagree with lawyers not getting involved in negotiations or business decisions. Been involved in many M/A negotiations where legal counsel were more involved in negotiating and valuations than the bank. But at the end of the day RU sits in a great place and the paydays are just beginning.

 

[Upstream]

While you're technically correct, put yourself in his shoes. If everybody is telling you not to fire him, and every penny your department spends is scrutinized, it would have been a seriously rogue move to fire Rice.

That's perfectly understandable if Pernetti were a junior assistant manager. But he was a senior executive.




Pernetti did some things exceptionally well, like keeping in touch with Delany and making sure Rutgers was ready to move when the Big Ten was ready.

He was a mixed bag on some things, like the transition from Schiano after Schiano decided to go to Tampa.

And he did some things really poorly, like hiring Mike Rice, a known hothead, and failing to keep monitors on him, culminating in the fiasco that cost both of them their jobs.

 

[rutgersguy1]

With 20/20 hindsight, I disagree. We are in the number one media market in the country, and poised to bring a lot of money to the Big Ten. Pernetti/Purcaro could have leveraged the fact that a competitive Rutgers can generate even more money than a non-competitive Rutgers. And keeping Rutgers at Big East revenues while other Big Ten schools are getting increased revenue due to us, puts us at a huge competitive disadvantage, reducing the earning potential for the league. But 20/20 hindsight is easy when you weren't in the room.

I see a lot of people have issues with the deal but I don't really. It is what it is and beggars can't be choosers. If you see throughout the article, Delany was fairly non committal about RU most of the way. To what degree that's just tough bargaining talk who knows. Yea sure we're the number 1 market and would help further monetize the BTN and give geographic partners to PSU but how can you know just how much you can push? Or how far is too far. Plus how do we know TP and crew didn't ask for better terms but were rebuffed. We needed a lifeline, they didn't. If you're drowning in the sea and some luxury liner (not a dingey) fishes you out, you don't ask many questions and stay grateful.

Delany is the guy who wouldn't be pushed around by ESPN, the big behemoth in sports, at a time where they were at their zenith. They thought they were gonna call his bluff and instead unleashed a pandora's box of conference networks. If ESPN isn't going to push him in negotiations, it's unlikely we can. One can say, well yea the B10 wants the #1 market in the country but just how far you can push them and how much they want it is unknown and if you think they're bluffing, well you could end up regretting it like ESPN. It's a long term lifetime decision so if you have to put up with some less than ideal circumstances for a short period, you deal with it for the much greater good down the line.

 

[e5fdny]

That's perfectly understandable if Pernetti were a junior assistant manager. But he was a senior executive.




Pernetti did some things exceptionally well, like keeping in touch with Delany and making sure Rutgers was ready to move when the Big Ten was ready.

He was a mixed bag on some things, like the transition from Schiano after Schiano decided to go to Tampa.

And he did some things really poorly, like hiring Mike Rice, a known hothead, and failing to keep monitors on him, culminating in the fiasco that cost both of them their jobs.

I’m friendly with a former college teammate of his and when he heard about the hire this was basically his response…

 

[e5fdny]

I see a lot of people have issues with the deal but I don't really. It is what it is and beggars can't be choosers. If you see throughout the article, Delany was fairly non committal about RU most of the way. To what degree that's just tough bargaining talk who knows. Yea sure we're the number 1 market and would help further monetize the BTN and give geographic partners to PSU but how can you know just how much you can push? Or how far is too far. Plus how do we know TP and crew didn't ask for better terms but were rebuffed. We needed a lifeline, they didn't. If you're drowning in the sea and some luxury liner (not a dingey) fishes you out, you don't ask many questions and stay grateful.

Delany is the guy who wouldn't be pushed around by ESPN, the big behemoth in sports, at a time where they were at their zenith. They thought they were gonna call his bluff and instead unleashed a pandora's box of conference networks. If ESPN isn't going to push him in negotiations, it's unlikely we can. One can say, well yea the B10 wants the #1 market in the country but just how far you can push them and how much they want it is unknown and if you think they're bluffing, well you could end up regretting it like ESPN. It's a long term lifetime decision so if you have to put up with some less than ideal circumstances for a short period, you deal with it for the much greater good down the line.

Then who was the B1G other #14?

 

[rutgersguy1]

Then who was the B1G other #14?

Don't know. Maybe they don't do it then. If Maryland wasn't going to come along they might not have done it either. Maybe they try another ACC school, GT has often been mentioned. Maybe they go to Mizzou again. I have no idea. Just because I don't know for sure doesn't mean they didn't have an alternative or they may not have done the move at all or at least for some time longer. We would've been in purgatory that much longer as well.

Again just like ESPN, basically saying what are you gonna do if it's not us. They were essentially a monopoly too on CFB but yet there was an alternative people weren't thinking about.

 

[RUScrew85]

@RUScrew85 --You OK?

I am alive and well.

 

[Knight Shift]

I am alive and well.

Phew. No RIP RUScrew was a dead giveaway, I guess, but some people get triggered by RIP threads. See you Saturday, maybe, or at least your cutout.

 

[Upstream]

Agreed only reason I said in house counsel is because they have been the only people mentioned as being part of the process.

But I disagree with lawyers not getting involved in negotiations or business decisions. Been involved in many M/A negotiations where legal counsel were more involved in negotiating and valuations than the bank. But at the end of the day RU sits in a great place and the paydays are just beginning.

I don't have any real experience in M/A negotiations, so maybe it is different with lawyers who specialize in M&A. But I would assume that ultimately it is a business executive that makes the decision (unless you are in an organization that is essentially run by lawyers).

And I oversimplified for the sake of the message board, pointing out one example of an attorney in my organization that strays from his lane. Most of my corporate attorneys provide a lot of great insight and suggestions. Certainly one of Rutgers' attorneys could have suggested escalator clauses or some sort of margin calculation to provide Rutgers with more revenue in the early days. But it is ultimately up to the business executives to dictate the business terms. That was Delany for the Big Ten and Pernetti/Purcaro/Barchi for Rutgers.

Maybe the terms we got were the best we could do. Maybe they left money on the table. Maybe they decided it was worth leaving money on the table for a couple of years to ultimately end up with the paydays we are starting to see. And certainly I agree that it was not worth the risk to instead end up like UConn.

 

[e5fdny]

Don't know. Maybe they don't do it then. If Maryland wasn't going to come along they might not have done it either. Maybe they try another ACC school, GT has often been mentioned. Maybe they go to Mizzou again. I have no idea. Just because I don't know for sure doesn't mean they didn't have an alternative or they may not have done the move at all or at least for some time longer. We would've been in purgatory that much longer as well.

Again just like ESPN, basically saying what are you gonna do if it's not us. They were essentially a monopoly too on CFB but yet there was an alternative people weren't thinking about.

From the article it seemed Delany wasn’t so keen on going south.

It is what it is but some of us would have a liked a little better.