Eight Husker Football Players Sue the Big Ten

[Wistrom Disciple]

 Since we know they don’t like being questioned, it probably doesn’t matter if the players win or lose the suit, we’ll be getting screwed by the conference somehow. They make the schedules. They employ the referees (Texas A&M Big XII title game ring a bell.) At the end of the day this won’t get us a fall football season and will cause some hard feelings between the conference and Nebraska. I don’t think some people thought this through to it’s logical conclusion.

To be fair, we've been put through the gauntlet since we got into the conference in regards to scheduling. Heck look at what our crossover games are next fall: @Michigan State, vs. Ohio State & vs. Michigan. We've played Indiana twice in a decade and Ohio State six times already. Iowa has played Ohio State twice in the same time period. I don't mind playing the big games against good teams but I don't think it's a coincidence that Iowa has had their best ever decade (peaking at 12-2 btw) while playing the conference juggernaut only twice in 8-9 years. 

 

[bugeater17]

It is also noteworthy the allegations specifically state the damages do "not exceed $75,000." This is done to prevent removal of the matter to federal district court based on diversity jurisdiction. The two prongs for diversity jurisdiction are: 1. complete diversity of the parties (parties from different states) and 2. the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000. As such, the matter will stay in state court where the judges are elected rather than appointed (as in federal district courts). Important considerations as this matter progresses. 

 

[bugeater17]

Also, I would not be surprised if this was a coordinated effort and move with other parent groups and it was decided that players from other teams do not file suit because the chance of winning in those jurisdictions is not as high due to variety of factors, including laws of the state, political pressures, or allegiances. Similarly, if other players filed suit there is the possibility of split and different decisions (an Ohio court may find differently than a Nebraska court on this issue).

In the legal world this is known as forum shopping. 

 

[TGHusker]

To be fair, we've been put through the gauntlet since we got into the conference in regards to scheduling. Heck look at what our crossover games are next fall: @Michigan State, vs. Ohio State & vs. Michigan. We've played Indiana twice in a decade and Ohio State six times already. Iowa has played Ohio State twice in the same time period. I don't mind playing the big games against good teams but I don't think it's a coincidence that Iowa has had their best ever decade (peaking at 12-2 btw) while playing the conference juggernaut only twice in 8-9 years. 

Does anyone have a clue why this is?    Why in the name of balance do we get OSU so many times on our schedule?    And no coach speak about 'to be the best you got to play the best'.  That is good and fine and I'd say bring it on if we had our 1980-90s teams.  Who influences the scheduling - is our AD involved?

 

[C-4]

Something I'm wondering is why did the players cite the new Nebraska beneficiary law if the law doesn't take affect until 2023?

 

[Blackshirt316]

Does anyone have a clue why this is?    Why in the name of balance do we get OSU so many times on our schedule?    And no coach speak about 'to be the best you got to play the best'.  That is good and fine and I'd say bring it on if we had our 1980-90s teams.  Who influences the scheduling - is our AD involved?

Money. Nebraska's brand draws national attention and ratings so the Big Ten wanted to completely maximize the amount of drawing power they could put out in Nebraska's first 5-10 years in the conference. - especially considering doing so is one of the reasons the last TV contract was so lucrative.

 

[Wistrom Disciple]

Something I'm wondering is why did the players cite the new Nebraska beneficiary law if the law doesn't take affect until 2023?

Could argue that this change and the subsequent additional year as a Covid-redshirt for all players negatively impacts their futures. For example, I'll use Jackson Hannah. Redshirted last year, has two Seniors in front of him this year (Honas & Miller) would strongly compete to be starter next year presumably. Gives him three years as a potential starter culminating as a Senior in 2023. Give Miller & Honas another year and his window to gain experience and start has been trimmed. Obviously it's a bit of a stretch argument but it is the type of argument worth having when the NCAA or Big Ten make sweeping generalized changes that can significantly impact the future of players at each grade level. 

Also, the 2023 is a state decision I believe. The NCAA is working to get a federal ruling that may supercede the 2023. Source

 

[TGHusker]

Money. Nebraska's brand draws national attention and ratings so the Big Ten wanted to completely maximize the amount of drawing power they could put out in Nebraska's first 5-10 years in the conference. - especially considering doing so is one of the reasons the last TV contract was so lucrative.

Well we could draw that same attention against Rutgers, or Indiana or up it to MSU -   of course it didn't help that we came into the conference thinking we were going to teach them how to play football. 

 

[GamingGlen]

It’s hyperbole 

We're gonna play in the Hyper Bowl? 

 

[WyoHusker56]

Something I'm wondering is why did the players cite the new Nebraska beneficiary law if the law doesn't take affect until 2023?

The law is worded such that it can be implemented by a school at anytime up until 2023 at which point it has to comply. NU could technically put this law into effect today.

 

[Blackshirt316]

Well we could draw that same attention against Rutgers, or Indiana or up it to MSU -   of course it didn't help that we came into the conference thinking we were going to teach them how to play football. 

No. The draw was Nebraska, Ohio State, Penn State and Michigan against each other. They put those 4 teams against each other as often as possible to maximize ther tv contract negotiation.

For example, Michigan was in our division and they played @ Ohio State and @Penn State in 2013 as cross division games and had Nebraska at home. They would have had the inverse the next year if the divisions didn't change in 2014.

 

[zeWilbur]

Does anyone have a clue why this is?    Why in the name of balance do we get OSU so many times on our schedule?    And no coach speak about 'to be the best you got to play the best'.  That is good and fine and I'd say bring it on if we had our 1980-90s teams.  Who influences the scheduling - is our AD involved?

@Bl@¢kShirt16 is correct it is all about the money. But we can't forget that Nebraska has gotten screwed as well. The schedule should have rotated through to the weaker competition by now but they set the schedules when Nebraska joined, and reset them when they realigned the conference for "competitive balance", and again when Maryland and Rutgers joined. If they just left everything alone for a while this wouldn't be so damned lopsided.

 

[Tom Brokejaw]

Also, I would not be surprised if this was a coordinated effort and move with other parent groups and it was decided that players from other teams do not file suit because the chance of winning in those jurisdictions is not as high due to variety of factors, including laws of the state, political pressures, or allegiances. Similarly, if other players filed suit there is the possibility of split and different decisions (an Ohio court may find differently than a Nebraska court on this issue).

In the legal world this is known as forum shopping. 

Thanks for the great insight Mr Bugeater.  Good info!

 

[Notre Dame Joe]

Did the Big Ten secretly vote on something with regard to Penn State.  If so I don't recall.   If so, then public meetings laws would likely apply as well.  Public officials do not have the right to hide their public actions from public view, scrutiny, and or criticism.   That is a part of the job description.   In fact, there is a possibility that the Board members, or some of them, may have conspired to violate and evade the 'sunshine' aspects of public meetings and records laws.   The reason for such laws, which are practically universal across the country, is to expressly prohibit public officials from doing what it appears they may have done.  Such conspiracy and actions in furtherance of it is criminal.   

Incredible harm. What if the information shows there was a vote and it was 8-6. 8 voted to play and 6 voted to shut down the fall and Warren sided with the 6? That would be incredible harm 

I think the sunshine law aspect of it is a much stronger case than the breach of contract.  I don't see how the conference has a contractual obligation to play football during a pandemic.  But for a group of government institutions to make a major decision and claim their reasons and procedures are top secret, well it sounds like it violates the letter and spirit of many laws. 

 

[UniversalMartin]

To be fair, we've been put through the gauntlet since we got into the conference in regards to scheduling. Heck look at what our crossover games are next fall: @Michigan State, vs. Ohio State & vs. Michigan. We've played Indiana twice in a decade and Ohio State six times already. Iowa has played Ohio State twice in the same time period. I don't mind playing the big games against good teams but I don't think it's a coincidence that Iowa has had their best ever decade (peaking at 12-2 btw) while playing the conference juggernaut only twice in 8-9 years. 

Just win....belly aching about who we had/have to play seems puss footing...we got into the BIG and haven't proved jack...we came in as a "BIG" name team and have not done s#!te, asking for a warmup is not us