Eight Husker Football Players Sue the Big Ten



So if thats the response, I am going to expect a motion to compel and if not for contempt of court finding against the Big Ten.  The minutes plus the recorded votes are expected. 

This is not satisfactory.  

 


11 President's are not going to want to check their email pretty soon. This will probably ratchet the pressure up and it removes deniability.

 
Why was this such a secret? 
 

and who were the two medical experts consulted and what was their advice?  I’m assuming the groups of experts were medical experts. It doesn’t explicitly say that. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
So OWH says they think it was NU, IA and OSU to vote to play, rest to cancel.   Interesting but Big Ten may still have to provide docs and names and details on the medical experts etc.  There is no justification for concealment nor was any irreparable harm given which they insisted last week.  

Assuming the vote IDs are confirmed by Big Ten officially, the questions need to be addressed to the remaining 3 desirables to get 6 to play now.  A veto proof minority is needed.  Wiscy. ?   Purdue?  Illinois?  maybe possibles?   The AD knows who to talk with.  Thats 5 games or ten if they play twice.  Find a couple Dakota non-cons ?   

Start 9-12 or 9-19 to start.  

 
If such a schedule can be done quickly, 12 games might get an unbeaten team in the playoff.  OSU and Wiscy have a shot at something atleast.  NU has a bowl game in reach.  Especially without the teams not playing, there could be openings for 5 win teams.  We might get 7 or 8 with luck.  seven at home!   Have 30,000 fans and TV for all.  

 
84HuskerLaw said:
So OWH says they think it was NU, IA and OSU to vote to play, rest to cancel.   Interesting but Big Ten may still have to provide docs and names and details on the medical experts etc.  There is no justification for concealment nor was any irreparable harm given which they insisted last week.  

Assuming the vote IDs are confirmed by Big Ten officially, the questions need to be addressed to the remaining 3 desirables to get 6 to play now.  A veto proof minority is needed.  Wiscy. ?   Purdue?  Illinois?  maybe possibles?   The AD knows who to talk with.  Thats 5 games or ten if they play twice.  Find a couple Dakota non-cons ?   

Start 9-12 or 9-19 to start.  
Click to expand...
just because they voted not to have conference football doesn't mean the 3 shouldn't get to play.  It doesn't say that anywhere in the bylaws that I know of.  That was just Warren publicly putting us in our place.  That is what they should retract.  

 
krc1995 said:
just because they voted not to have conference football doesn't mean the 3 shouldn't get to play.  It doesn't say that anywhere in the bylaws that I know of.  That was just Warren publicly putting us in our place.  That is what they should retract.  
Click to expand...
Well I guess if you feel the other 11 wont do anything just ‘cause.  U need 6 to simply tell the 8 to go to hello!   Thats my point.  I tend to agree the three are pretty strong and a real penalty vs them would ruffle enough feathers but???   There is a plenty of ire and embarrassment among the 11 quitters theyd do something out of spite.  And you need games too.  I am not sure many opponents can be had for Ohio State and even IA may be tricky.  

 
84HuskerLaw said:
Well I guess if you feel the other 11 wont do anything just ‘cause.  U need 6 to simply tell the 8 to go to hello!   Thats my point.  I tend to agree the three are pretty strong and a real penalty vs them would ruffle enough feathers but???   There is a plenty of ire and embarrassment among the 11 quitters theyd do something out of spite.  And you need games too.  I am not sure many opponents can be had for Ohio State and even IA may be tricky.  
Click to expand...
But to try to explain my point  better- sources say the vote was 11-3 to cancel the BIG season, right?  Did they also vote to cancel the seasons for OSU, Iowa, and Nebraska? Who says we can’t pursue a season if the conference doesn’t play? Is there an all for one, one for all clause?  

 
84HuskerLaw said:
So if thats the response, I am going to expect a motion to compel and if not for contempt of court finding against the Big Ten.  The minutes plus the recorded votes are expected. 

This is not satisfactory.  
Click to expand...


It seems odd to me that they could do discovery and force the conference to provide information before ruling on the case.  If the players don't have standing to sue the conference then the evidence wouldn't have mattered. 

 
Not so much discovery as such.  There is very little factual dispute at this point.   It is mostly a matter of the court saying to Big Ten - follow the law which is clear here.  

Standing is interesting but as public officials (univ presidents are), I would suspect any member of the public as standing to demand they follow the law, not just players.  

Some nosy district attorney might get curious as well and go over to the Big Ten offices to see for himself.  

 
krc1995 said:
But to try to explain my point  better- sources say the vote was 11-3 to cancel the BIG season, right?  Did they also vote to cancel the seasons for OSU, Iowa, and Nebraska? Who says we can’t pursue a season if the conference doesn’t play? Is there an all for one, one for all clause?  
Click to expand...
My point is that the 11 quitters can vote to fine or punish the 3 rebels who go outside the pack.  Its not what they have already voted (although without meeting minutes and records we dont know what they have actually done), we must be concerned about what the 11 will do.  Now , presumably NU knows but I guess even that is not certain if they have been meeting like the little rascals boys club or mostly over the phone in informal ways etc. Special K did specifically threaten NU if we dared stray we would get the boot - about the only thing he has said publicly at all.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
flatwaterfan said:
Fine cancel the B1G games but why cancel non-conference games then?  What do the networks say about this loss of content?
Click to expand...
The Big Ten didn’t have TV control over the big non-conference games this year. Most of those big non-conference games had Big Ten teams as visitors, so the other conference had the TV rights/contract to that game. 

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top