Some of you may remember him....

May He Rest In Peace...





Go Pokes

Initial Thoughts on the PAC-12’s Lawsuit

The PAC-12's complaint is not just weak; it's utterly hypocritical. This hypocrisy severely undermines both its legal arguments and its standing in bringing its suit against the Mountain West.

1.Inherent Nature of Conferences: Athletic conferences, by their very nature, are closed systems of competition. Conferences exist to create exclusive groupings of schools for athletic competition and media rights negotiation. The PAC-12 – in its present diminutive iteration and former ones – has benefited from this closed system for decades.

2.Hypocritical Application of Antitrust Principles: The PAC-12 is essentially arguing against anticompetitive behavior while simultaneously engaging in it. It's not seeking to open up competition broadly, but merely to allow itself to poach schools from another closed system (the MWC) to bolster its own closed system. This is logically inconsistent and legally dubious.

3.Horizontal Antitrust: Believe it or not, this occasionally comes up in IP disputes. While the complaint attempts to paint the poaching penalty as a per se violation of antitrust law, it's more likely that a court would apply the “rule of reason.” Under this analysis, the pro-competitive benefits of conference stability and the ability to negotiate media rights effectively would likely outweigh any anticompetitive effects of the poaching penalty. Furthermore, the horizontal nature of the agreement is totally questionable. The PAC-12 and MWC, while both athletic conferences, were not direct competitors in the context of this scheduling agreement. Rather, this was a vertical agreement between two entities at different “levels of a supply chain,” further weakening the PAC-12's antitrust claims.

4.PAC-12’s Own Protective Measures of Its Own Closed System: Historically, the PAC-12 has likely engaged in similar practices to protect its membership. Even as the PAC-2, I guarantee you it has done something similar. Going forward, it's almost certain that the PAC-12's own bylaws and agreements contain provisions designed to discourage schools from leaving— the very type of provision it's now challenging when it suits its interests.

5.Equitable Principles and Defenses: Did someone say #FSU, #Clemson??? The PAC-12's position is further undermined by the fact that it is a sophisticated party that willingly entered into this agreement with the MWC and has already benefited from it. The conference, represented by experienced executives and undoubtedly advised by competent legal counsel, negotiated and accepted the terms of the agreement, including the poaching penalty. It has since enjoyed the benefits of the scheduling arrangement, which was crucial for its 2x remaining members. Obviously, this raises significant equitable concerns. Principles such as estoppel, waiver, and even "unclean hands" could well bar the PAC-12 from now challenging an agreement it voluntarily entered and from which it has profited. The timing of the lawsuit, coming only after the PAC-12 has received the benefits of the agreement but before it has had to pay any penalties, further undermines its equitable position.

6.True Motivations: This lawsuit reveals that the PAC-12's true motivation is not to promote open competition in college athletics, but to save itself at the expense of another conference. It's attempting to use antitrust law as a tool for its own benefit, not for the broader good of competition.

7.Dismissal under Tombly/Iqbal: Given that this lawsuit was filed in federal court, which strikes me as a potential fatal mistake (can anyone argue that the MWC is not subject to California jurisdiction?), it's worth noting that dismissal under Rule 12(b)(6) and the Twombly/Iqbal standard may well be warranted. While antitrust cases often receive more love or lenient treatment under 12(b)(6) – I think for good reason – the PAC-12's complaint is so fundamentally flawed and contradictory that it may fail to meet even this lower bar. The complaint's internal inconsistencies and its reliance on legal theories that are at odds with the PAC-12's own structure and history could lead a court to conclude that it fails to state a plausible claim for relief, even at this early stage of litigation. The PAC-12's selective application of antitrust principles and its failure to acknowledge the inherently closed nature of athletic conferences - including its own - may be so glaring that a court could find the complaint fails to "state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face," as required by Twombly and Iqbal.

The PAC-12's complaint appears simply seems opportunistic in addition to legally unsound. It's asking the court to ignore the fundamental nature of athletic conferences - a nature from which the PAC-12 has long benefited - solely because it now finds itself on the losing end of conference realignment.

This hypocrisy not only weakens the PAC-12's legal arguments but also raises serious questions about the good faith nature of its complaint. A court would likely view this inconsistency as a significant factor in evaluating both the legal merits of the case and any equitable considerations.

In short, the PAC-12's attempt to use antitrust law to escape a contractual obligation while simultaneously benefiting from anticompetitive conference structures is not just legally flawed - it's a glaring example of trying to have one's cake and eat it too in the realm of college athletics.

How bad did running back Sam Scott want to play college football? During the pandemic, his family sold their house and relocated so he could play his senior season of high school football, thereby earning a scholarship offer from Wyoming. That drive and competitiveness hasn't stopped.

https://www.pokesnews.com/post/sam-scott-on-competing-contributing-and-always-wanting-to-win

It basically says what we have been talking about, except they put it in terms that the MWC "has opted not to extend its scheduling partnership with Oregon State and Washington State for the 2025 season. The decision creates uncertainty for the remaining Pac-12 schools as both sit without a long-term conference home." It kind of sounded to me that maybe the two Pac-12 schools were willing to do it on their side even though it wasn't put exactly in those terms, and it was the MW that said, no thank you.

It also says, "the MWC said in a statement to the Associated Press."..... "For the 2025 season, the Mountain West and its member institutions are moving forward with their conference and nonconference schedules. Our focus remains on the current season and our exceptional teams."

I liked what the Pac-12 commissioner Teresa Gould said in July, "I don't know if the Mountain West thinks they need these two schools, honestly....." The two schools have basically treated the MW with distain, and it shouldn't be any shock to the schools especially after media people said that the two schools don't bring a lot to the table as far as TV media deals is concerned. There isn't any agreement for the schools to even get together with the MW to discuss things. The MW is heading on as if OSU and WSU are not even on the radar. Oregon State has six nonconference games scheduled for the 2025 season, and Washington State has five. Per the report, "Still, pulling together a 12-game FBS schedule on short notice will be a monumental task for two teams that will, for all intents and purposes, compete as FBS independents in 2025."

I wouldn't be surprised if these two schools approach some MW schools independently to try and schedule games. I don't know how the MW would handle this scenario. But when the two schools parked all of their other sports (excluding baseball) and especially including men's and women's basketball with the WCC that was a huge slap in the face to the MW. I would imagine that the MW scheduled the 2024 football season with the thought, and maybe understanding in some people's minds that the two schools would bring their other sports and especially talking about men's and women's basketball to the MW. The two schools, OSU and WSU appear to be further away than ever to an agreement with the MWC......but you can't ever say never.

Will RS to save a season of eligibility. Claims the Rebels didn’t hold up their end of a deal. Most likely NIL related!

Was it taken down? I can't find it.

Jay Sawvel Expects a ‘Well-Coached’ Air Force Team Saturday​

https://www.pokesnews.com/post/jay-sawvel-expects-a-well-coached-air-force-team-saturday

Pokes in the Pros: Week 3​

https://www.pokesnews.com/post/pokes-in-the-pros-week-3-1

Gloria Nevarez Defends Mountain West in Response to Pac-12's Alleged Breach​

https://www.pokesnews.com/post/brea...n-west-in-response-to-pac-12-s-alleged-breach

Someone texted me saying that they report AF is staying with the MW. Has anyone else heard this?

That's why it is so difficult to predict. Everyone is acting in their own self-interest, which is expected, but behaving in ways that can only be described as retarded.

It is very clear that what the PAC2 really wanted was a reverse merger without Wyoming and Hawaii for sure, and probably without Nevada and New Mexico if they could get away with it. But they screwed it all up by making their first move with the Traitor 4. They must have never read the MW bylaws, because as soon as they executed it, those 4 schools lost their voting power to dissolve the league. They went with the original Traitor 4 because they were easy, and then thought they could grab AFA and UNLV in the next wave. The problem was that grabbing UNLV without NEV would have brought public scrutiny they didn't want. Once they went, it would have been a race between USU and SJSU to vote to dissolve and get an invite. That would have given them the votes to dissolve the MW and avoid any exit fees, with a 9 team league that would have made football scheduling easy.

What drove all this was simple greed. The PAC2's media consultant said they could expect something in the neighborhood of $11 million/year per school in a new media deal. That was based on an 8-team league. Adding schools like Utah State or Nevada doesn't materially impact media rights. Adding a school like Utah State doesn't push the full value of the deal much, it just creates another mouth to feed. In an 8-team PAC, schools get about $11 million/year, but in a 12-team PAC each school gets MAYBE $7 million to $8 million. Long story short, in the interest of chasing another $3 million or so in media rights fees, the PAC2 ****ed up their whole merger. The PAC2 should have done a full reverse merger, even if it meant a lighter media rights deal. This would have allowed OSU and WSU to keep much of that $255 million war chest for themselves, and given themselves a competitive advantage in reaching the CFP. Now they're chasing schools like Sacramento State to make their deal work. As such, they are RETARDED.

The MW office has not covered itself in glory, either. Gloria has certainly done better than Thompson would have, but goddamn did they overplay their hand in trying to renew the scheduling agreement. It's now obvious that what should have been pursued is a soft merger over time. The PAC2 wanted to wait and see if the ACC would dissolve through litigation brought by FSU and Clemson. For the life of me, I don't understand why we decided to push the PAC2's backs against the wall by demanding an increase in fees for a renewed scheduling agreement. The Grant of Rights in the ACC is well-known as iron clad. It's studied in law schools! The ACC process was always very likely going to end in a settlement that got FSU and Clemson some weighted tv dollars. How do I know this? Because complicated litigation like that almost never goes all the way to trial, and that likelihood goes down even more when public institutions are involved. The ACC mess was headed for a settlement from Day 1. Gloria and the MW should have been the PAC2's best friend and positioned ourselves as their next best option - or even executed a provisional merger set for 2026 contingent on certain conditions like Stanford and Cal not becoming available again. Instead, we tried to jam the PAC2 into a merger on our timeline instead of theirs with a hardball scheduling agreement. As such, the MW office is (as usual) RETARDED.

The bozos in Old Main, the AD and the Trustees are not immune. Reportedly, a key driver for the PAC2 to extend an invite is a commitment from the incoming school to spend at least $60 million annually on athletics. There is a 2-year grace period for schools to get their budgets to that level. The elephant driving all of this is the new College Football Playoff because an invite to that brings in, at minimum, about $7 million for the conference. After all this merging and covering some portion of exit fees, the PAC absolutely MUST be in the driver's seat to get that fifth CFP invite every year to make their numbers work. And for that to be the case, they need to be playing with schools who play big boy sports (i.e. Gonzaga in basketball, who can be reasonably assured of securing significant NCAA units each year). The Traitor 4 are all willing to make the jump to get to $60 million per year. Some of them are already there. Wyoming has had multiple opportunities to increase its overall athletics spend to a competitive level. Our annual spend is already at about $48 million! Significant investment in athletics beginning back in about 2005 or 2010 would have radically changed our fortunes. Instead, as has been discussed ad nauseum, the powers that be (Old Main, AD, Trustees, Legislature, Governors) decided to invest in one-time things like facilities. Now we see the consequences of investing in bricks instead of people. We are about to have the nicest facilities that schools like South Alabama and New Mexico State play in every year. As such, Wyoming has been and remains RETARDED.

How does this all shake out? Who knows. When greed and fear are driving decision making things tend to go sideways. No bolt of lightning is coming that will save Wyoming, I know that much.

We had our chances and didn't take them. It's a goddamn shame.

Damn I miss JA. I hope the current 17 gets some inspiration. He and his teammates need a lot.

LARAMIE, Wyoming (9/24/24) – Josh Allen possessed the spotlight Monday night against Jacksonville, and he did not disappoint. He and the Bills rolled past Jacksonville, 47-10, behind another strong game from the former University of Wyoming Cowboy.

Allen was 23-for-30 for 263 yards and four touchdowns. It was the second time this season he’s accounted for four scores in one game.

For the season, Allen is 54-for-72 for 634 yards and seven touchdowns without a single interception. Through three weeks, he’s likely the MVP favorite for the 3-0 Bills. Buffalo travels to Baltimore for Sunday Night Football in Week 4.

Below is a list of the other former Wyoming student-athletes and how they did in Week 3.

Carl Granderson, New Orleans Saints
Granderson had another very productive day in the Saints’ 15-12 home loss to Philadelphia. He racked up five tackles, two tackles for loss, 1.5 sacks and two quarterback hits.
For the season, Granderson owns 13 tackles, three sacks, one forced fumble and four quarterback hits for 2-1 New Orleans. His three sacks are tied for eighth in the league.
The Saints travel to Atlanta in Week 4.

Logan Wilson, Cincinnati Bengals
Wilson keeps producing at a high level in the Bengals’ 38-33 loss to Washington. He led the team with nine tackles.
For the season, Wilson has accumulated 33 tackles and has one forced fumble for 0-3 Cincinnati. His 33 tackles ties him for fourth in the league.
The Bengals travel to Carolina in Week 4.

Marcus Epps, Las Vegas Raiders
Epps enjoyed a very good game in the Raiders’ 36-22 loss to Carolina, however, he tore his ACL and will be lost for the season. He made 10 tackles and one tackle for loss.
For the season, Epps made 19 tackles and one tackle for loss.
The Raiders host Cleveland in Week 4.

Chad Muma, Jacksonville Jaguars
Muma boasted a strong game in the Jaguars’ 47-10 loss at Buffalo on Monday night. He registered a team-best seven tackles.
For the season, Muma owns 10 tackles for 0-3 Jacksonville.
The Jaguars travel to Buffalo for Monday Night Football.

Frank Crum, Denver Broncos
Crum was active for the first time in his career in Denver’s 26-7 victory at Tampa Bay.

Andrew Wingard, Jacksonville Jaguars
Wingard did not play due to an injury in Jacksonville’s 47-10 loss at Buffalo on Monday night. He has yet to play this season.

Tashaun Gipson, Jacksonville Jaguars
Gipson did not play due to a suspension in Jacksonville’s 47-10 loss at Buffalo on Monday night. He has yet to play this season.

Treyton Welch, New Orleans Saints
Welch is currently participating on the Saints’ practice squad. He has yet to be elevated this season.

Has he graduated from law school and if so where is he practicing?

dang it!

The PAC 6 is in panic mode. Rest of MWC schools supposedly have until 5pm MST to sign commitments!

Which 4 games will it be?

I don’t blame the players. They are not being put in the position to succeed.

I fear the loss to the transfer portal this year…..

Just in case you’re monitoring this, I want you to sleep on that

Hate to be this down but I don’t see a winnable game this season. The coaching is beyond awful and the conference is coming apart and it doesn’t appear that there is anyone in some leadership capacity at UW with an inclination to advocate for the program going forward. It’s almost like this was the plan all along…

Burman said no way Wyoming drops down to FCS. I’m starting to think that we’ll start hearing statements that chip away and talk us down to a soft landing point, “We gave it a good fight but the conference realignment and the FBS arms race has made UW reassess its ability to compete at this level but we’re excited about UWs potential to compete in the Big Sky conference which is regionally and culturally aligned with Wyoming tough Football.”

I will be shocked that two years from now that Wyoming is still playing FBS football.

Of course the sports guy asked some really vanilla questions, you wouldn't know we got stomped again by the sports guys questions.

But to Sawvel's credit he did say that he needed to redefine himself and change things to make the Pokes successful. Whether he really means that or is just giving lip service it is anyone's guess. Sawvel did talk about Svoboda and how he passed well in the first half. Too bad there were 2 halves tonight.