Didn't know that; thanks. Also, didn't know that this: "Per Pete Thamel, the game flip was a key driver for Fox agreeing to terms with the Sooners and Longhorns leaving a year early. Starting in 2024, ESPN will own the rights to SEC games while Fox, along with NBC and CBS, will carry games from the Big Ten."
"Ohio State's best opportunities to impress the committee will be against Oregon, Iowa, Penn State and Michigan. If Ohio State loses to Oregon and Michigan and doesn't win the Big Ten, its résumé may not be strong enough in the new CFP to be included as a two-loss team that didn't win its conference."
I think you are underestimating how big that Penn State game was in 1997. It was called "Judgment Day" and we went there and destroyed them. Those three games were hyped all week. We obliterated Penn State in an away game. Happy Valley is a hard place to win in, and it was stunning how much we mauled them. We jumped from #4 to #1.
After that we were favored in the remaining games. I just remember it felt like a really, really big win.
Watch the introductions to the game. Among other things, it was called the "Big Ten Game of the Year."
Turning to the game tomorrow, my biggest concerns are if the O-line does hold up and JJ has to scramble or if our kicker James Turner gets nervous and misses another eggtra point. I mean, none of us are eggperts but it does seem like fundamentals are important in making Washington crack.
I don't recall high school players being followed as closely by the general fan base. I think that has to do with the internet in part and also the general reluctance to start players in their first year. Woodson was a big recruit because he was "Mr. Ohio" and there was glee in nabbing a player with that label.
One could look at USA Today or Parade magazine lists of high school players but it wasn't easy to find more than that without the internet taking off.
I also think that Maurice Clarett, in part, helped increase the focus after he started at Ohio State in his first season, rushed for 1,237 yards scored 18 touchdowns, which helped OSU to a 14–0 record and the 2002 BCS National Championship. The idea that an incoming player could be a difference started to ring true so there was more focus.
The only other player I remember getting really a lot of hype was Ron Powlus. "ESPN analyst Beano Cook famously predicted that Powlus would win the Heisman Trophy at least twice and that he would be the best quarterback in the history of Notre Dame." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Powlus
All the hype around Powlus and Notre Dame really annoyed me back then.
I wish I could delete. I searched for it, I promise. And it was in the NYTimes Weekender (and you know it is now the weekend, so I thought it was an old article -- not two days old).
I will say that it kind of does not bother me that it was already posted in the sense that I check MGoBlog pretty often so let's talk again. But that's just cognitive dissonance. I like cognitive dissonance sometimes. Makes me feel better.
Let's give it up for the Michigan Daily article five years ago though:
I actually searched (I swear) for this, but it was on the second page. Also, the Weekender comes out on the Weekend (hence I saw the front page of the New York Times today online) but the article came out two days ago (buried online).
Do you have an email (or an email set up for purposes of answering your question) that I could send my advice to? (gmail makes it easy to set up a new account)
The recounting of "Let's Go Zak!" and the crowd picking up the team was something I didn't know about and good to hear. It also helped put Blake scoring on the next play into some more context.
Edit: Here is a link to the podcast -- which has more description -- that Robbie Moore refers to below (where Joel Klatt talks about the stadium after Zak Zinter's injury: https://youtu.be/kYKnvx1quLc?si=D05IMAGuWx4-MyTi&t=1786
"Something happened that I've never experience before....I've tried to tell this story twice and I didn't get through it without crying." - Joel Klatt (on the podcast)
Edit 2: stephenrjking links to Cinematic Highlights (from the Big Ten). You can hear the crowd start to chat about 30 seconds after this link (4 minutes in)
Is this an overstatement? You write: "Chuch Schmidt had a chance to bring Joe Montana to Detroit and passed. Joe went to KC instead, brought his knowledge of the West Coast offense, and helped them win."
I'm fine with the position that the Lions made "countless other poor management decisions that sabotaged the Lions' chances of winning."
But passing on Joe Montana in 1992 was not, I think, necessarily a poor decision. Montana missed the 1991 season and most of the 1992 season with an elbow injury from the 1991 pre-season. Montana was a third-string QB behind Young and Steve Bono when the 49ers played Dallas in the playoffs.
Yes, he did have two come-from-behind wins in the 1993 playoffs and then suffered a concussion on the third play of the third quarter against Buffalo, which won.
But I just don't see it as a bad decision not to go with the quarterback who was injured for two years (and it was his elbow).
@evenyoubruts: What I don't get is how XM wrote these sentences: "It is my further understanding that Harbaugh did not agree to this. Remember too, he was technically not a named party to this litigation (AFAIK)." I genuinely don't understand how any lawyer could write that last sentence -- of course, Harbaugh was a named party to the litigation. He was one of the Plaintiffs (with the regents). Paragraph 2 of the complaint refers to him as "Plaintiff." (I linked to the complaint.)
It is such a baffling assertion that I am not sure that he is a lawyer because I don't know, and can't imagine, any lawyer ever writing that sentence (i.e., "he was technically not a named party to this litigation (AFAIK)").
Also, Harbaugh was required to agree to dismiss the complaint. He was a party and it had to be his agreement to dismiss it along with the Regents.
I think one counterargument would be that when he hired these parties, they were acting as an agent to act under his direction as thus formed a principal-agent relationship. The acts of an agent are imputed to the principal.
How do you know the judge last Friday (Carol Kuhnke) kinda hates the University? I assume you are telling us something you know from knowing her or people who know her. Is that true? I'm just curious
I'd argue that the commissioner is constrained by the rules but the enforcement comes from the Board of Directors (or whatever group acts on behalf of the corporation), rather than from a judge who would need to hold that a handbook formed a contract on which the schools and apparently the coaches of the teams can sue the corporation. I think that is one counterargument.
It seems to me that everyone is jumping all over the handbook without answering some preliminary questions:
Is the handbook part of a legally binding contract? What was the consideration that was given for this handbook to form a contract? Do changes to the handbook have to be supported by consideration to form the contract? Doyle v. Holy Cross Hosp., 186 Ill. 2d 104 (1999).
When was the initial contract formed?
Handbooks or manuals may create enforceable contractual rights if they are distributed to employees and have all of the traditional requirements of a valid contract. Duldulao v. St. Mary of Nazareth Hosp. Center, 115 Ill. 2d 482, 490 (1987). The language of the handbook must be written so clearly, and the handbook must be disseminated so broadly, that reasonable people would be aware that an offer to create an enforceable agreement is being made. Id.
Have Plaintiffs met their burden for a retraining order that shows this handbook is a contract or part of a contract?
I want Coach Harbaugh on the sidelines but I do think that this is a hard motion to win.
*I'm editing this to include a citation provided by one person: Mountain E. Conf. v. Franklin Univ., No. 1:21-CV-104, 2023 WL 2415277, at *4–5 (N.D.W. Va. Mar. 8, 2023). Here is a google scholar link.
This case stands for the proposition (and those cited therein) that: The formal bylaws of an organization are to be construed as a contractual agreement between the organization and its members.
I'm still curious as to the argument as to how the handbook becomes part of the contract. I'm not arguing either way, but just pointing out that is question I would expect the judge to have and if Plaintiffs' lawyer can't answer it well, then I'd expect him to say that they haven't met their high burden for a TRO or Preliminary Injunction.
To be honest, I can't tell who the judge is from the reporting. Originally, it was reported as Tim Connors, then it was Carol Kuhnke, and now I think it is back to Tim Connors. I don't know anything about how assignments in the court work, particularly with ex parte motions for a TRO.
Also, just to be clear, I'm not saying that W&C messed up on personal jurisdiction. The court does have personal jurisdiction under the U.S. Constitution and Michigan statutes. Plaintiffs also need to serve it on defendants.
Forum non conveniens is a judicially made doctrine that allows the court to elect to decline jurisdiction when the lawsuit can be filed somewhere else. I'm saying that the court can decline jurisdiction (even though it has jurisdiction) on the ground that there is a better forum is in Illinois where the Big Ten is located.
I agree. I'm overstating Maryland. I honestly don't think I am overstating that it was a possibility on Saturday in Penn State. If the AD said he wouldn't interfere, at least one newspaper reporter was thinking the same thing too. But, yeah, I agree I'm exaggerating the situation if I say that there is a possibility that Harbaugh could get arrested.
I agree -- and, after consideration, I think I overstated this point and am wrong that it could happen now.
I do think that I had the thought on Saturday -- and obviously so did other people if the AD of Penn State was asked the question. If that is accurate, then at least one newspaper reporter was wondering if it could happen.
And, even though I admit that I overstated the point, I stand by my thought that this situation feels insane (or did last Friday) and that a judge might well want this case out of his court in Ann Arbor where he is going to be under intense scrutiny and accused of being a hometown judge. If I were him, I'd kick it out and say go file in Illinois. But that's just me and, hey, I admitted I'm playing the fool.
I'm 100% willing to bet that the lawyers for the Big Ten will raise this argument for dismissal too. There will be a motion to dismiss coming down the pipeline if the court does not dismiss it sua sponte.
"The 21-year-old quarterback transferred to Illinois from Fullerton Junior College where he broke his arm on the first play of the first game of the 1977 season. Under Big Ten and NCAA rules, that one play used up one year of playing eligibility.
A conference eligibility committee originally agreed to waive its rules and let Wilson play football this fall. But a committee of faculty representatives overturned that decision and Wilson filed a lawsuit."
I agree -- part of me has perceived this litigation as also showing Harbaugh that the University will fight for him 100%. It seems like that is important as a way of convincing him to stay.
"Your honor: My clients did everything your order required. The Big Ten and Commissioner even told the University of Maryland that you had enjoined us from banning Coach Harbaugh. But the University of Maryland elected on their own volition to ban him and it was up to the state police to decide whether to arrest him after Harbaugh was clearly told he would be trespassing if he attempted to enter. That criminal case is still proceeding. But, regardless, my clients did exactly what your order said even though we still have not been properly served (or at least the Commissioner has not been served as the corporation can be served on Monday through the Secretary of State in Illinois) and have not waived our arguments over personal jurisdiction. Any motion to hold my clients in contempt would be frivolous."
Yeah, I thought of that too, and wondered if the counter move for the Big Ten would have been to immediately remove it to federal court.
What I was initially missing, and what I think that you are missing, is that University of Michigan is an "arm of the state" (i.e., the state) and states can't be citizens according to some case law. The federal statute (not the Constitution) requires complete diversity of the parties. Paragraph 13 of the Complaint says: "This case is not removable to federal court. The University is an arm of the state, and therefore not a “citizen” of the State of Michigan for purposes of federal diversity jurisdiction." The complaint then does the unusual thing of citing case law for the complaint. Interesting, they don't cite a Sixth Circuit case, so defendants could remove it and then argue that the University of Michigan is not an arm of the state. Defendants would probably lose but that alone would stretch this case past 3 weeks.
The temporary restraining order would *only* be against the Big Ten and the Commissioner. A stadium in another jurisdiction can tell anyone not to trespass on its property regardless of an order that applied to an Illinois corporation and one of its employees. The reason why stadiums don't randomly bar other coaches from their property is that the Big Ten would come down hard on them for acting like that
But that might not be the situation here, right? The Big Ten said the Coach can't be on the sidelines and then the Coach got a "hometown" court to issue an order? Why wouldn't the Big Ten just say that Penn State did the right thing? Or next week, Maryland? I just mean this whole thing is insane, that's all.
I'm sure they anticipated it. But there are really two things going on here (which I note in a reply to another person's comments). "Law is one arena and politics/PR are other."
There was good PR value if a court did issue a restraining order on the Big Ten and Commissioner right away and that was more likely to be received in a court located in Ann Arbor than a court located in the suburbs of Chicago. I have to imagine the lawyers talked it over and with the client and decided to roll the dice with Ann Arbor. I'm giving this prediction with the extra piece of information that the court decided not to immediately issue the TRO and issue a hearing a week after the complaint was filed.
I think the lawyers picked the right venue for what their client's goals were but I think there is still a good chance that the judge will dismiss the case (not a majority chance but a significant chance). Those are two positions I can take that would be consistent. As the lawyer wrote wrote the blog post copied by Harbaugh's lawyer, "Law is one arena and politics/PR are others . . . So a legal analysis is not a prediction about how people will actually behave." (link)
You also wrote: "If there were really a questionable jurisdictional issue, why wouldn't they file in both court's simultaneously."
My initial reaction is that would be sanctionable conduct. Courts can sanction a lawyer who "multiplies the proceedings." Williams & Conley would not want the sanctions motion for filing in two courts at the same time. That's my guess as to why they didn't do it.
For those who don't know what TeslaRedVictorBlue is talking about, here is the introduction to the Ohio State - Michigan game. Lloyd Carr gave the players ice picks (I think). Anyway, watch the introduction:
Interesting -- I didn't know that the team had three players who played at least a decade in the pro ranks (Steve Hutchinson, Jeff Backus, Jon Jansen) until I looked it up just now.
I've always thought that was the dividing line for diaries and the Board. Want to give a longform entry: make it a diary. But, hey, that's just my opinion.
Recent Comments
Link to video of Larry David talking with Rich Eisen about this and other ideas for football: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ypUU8Ydj5zw
Please no more talking about Warde -- I can't take it much longer
Didn't know that; thanks. Also, didn't know that this: "Per Pete Thamel, the game flip was a key driver for Fox agreeing to terms with the Sooners and Longhorns leaving a year early. Starting in 2024, ESPN will own the rights to SEC games while Fox, along with NBC and CBS, will carry games from the Big Ten."
https://www.si.com/college/texas/football/texas-longhorns-big-12-sec-michigan-wolverines-series-2024
"Ohio State's best opportunities to impress the committee will be against Oregon, Iowa, Penn State and Michigan. If Ohio State loses to Oregon and Michigan and doesn't win the Big Ten, its résumé may not be strong enough in the new CFP to be included as a two-loss team that didn't win its conference."
"Take That!" is the one cover etched in my mind.
Thanks!
I think you are underestimating how big that Penn State game was in 1997. It was called "Judgment Day" and we went there and destroyed them. Those three games were hyped all week. We obliterated Penn State in an away game. Happy Valley is a hard place to win in, and it was stunning how much we mauled them. We jumped from #4 to #1.
After that we were favored in the remaining games. I just remember it felt like a really, really big win.
Watch the introductions to the game. Among other things, it was called the "Big Ten Game of the Year."
https://youtu.be/MitFlHNpcbY?si=FBEkQc5laL4AotTD&t=1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3YFOcfwWgqc
"Herbstreit was the first player to commit to the Ohio State Buckeyes after the hiring of John Cooper as head coach in 1988."
Awesome.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirk_Herbstreit
Backyard chickens do strike me as a bit eggcentric but I'm not that eggsperienced with them.
Turning to the game tomorrow, my biggest concerns are if the O-line does hold up and JJ has to scramble or if our kicker James Turner gets nervous and misses another eggtra point. I mean, none of us are eggperts but it does seem like fundamentals are important in making Washington crack.
bluinohio: I can't tell if you are being sarcastic or not. Are you egging me on?
The posts about Jim and his chickens are eggsessive and eggstremely overdone.
It is eggasperating. This topic was already covered here: https://mgoblog.com/mgoboard/ot-chickens-no-longer-deemed-nervous-bird
Could we just eggnore this topic and focus on the game tomorrow?
I don't recall high school players being followed as closely by the general fan base. I think that has to do with the internet in part and also the general reluctance to start players in their first year. Woodson was a big recruit because he was "Mr. Ohio" and there was glee in nabbing a player with that label.
One could look at USA Today or Parade magazine lists of high school players but it wasn't easy to find more than that without the internet taking off.
I also think that Maurice Clarett, in part, helped increase the focus after he started at Ohio State in his first season, rushed for 1,237 yards scored 18 touchdowns, which helped OSU to a 14–0 record and the 2002 BCS National Championship. The idea that an incoming player could be a difference started to ring true so there was more focus.
The only other player I remember getting really a lot of hype was Ron Powlus. "ESPN analyst Beano Cook famously predicted that Powlus would win the Heisman Trophy at least twice and that he would be the best quarterback in the history of Notre Dame." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Powlus
All the hype around Powlus and Notre Dame really annoyed me back then.
Charles Woodson has said that if this team wins the next game, they are the greatest team in Michigan history.
https://youtu.be/TVZ2IVotqeE?si=oFED9IGlmXzvn9qI&t=720
And apparently not accurate. The statistic was for the last seven years. But Clemson Boards said: "WRONG!!! Bama led Clemson by a score of 7-0 on 1/9/17 and even led by 14-0 five minutes into the 2nd before our comeback." https://www.tigernet.com/clemson-forum/thread/rece-davis-just-said-according-to-their-crack-team-of-statisticians,-this-2322060
I'm not tired of you -- please keep going (I'm the OP). I'm genuinely interested
And that guy was nice enough to say SIAP.
I wish I could delete. I searched for it, I promise. And it was in the NYTimes Weekender (and you know it is now the weekend, so I thought it was an old article -- not two days old).
I will say that it kind of does not bother me that it was already posted in the sense that I check MGoBlog pretty often so let's talk again. But that's just cognitive dissonance. I like cognitive dissonance sometimes. Makes me feel better.
Let's give it up for the Michigan Daily article five years ago though:
https://mgoblog.com/mgoboard/how-killers-made-mr-brightside-one-most-enduring-rock-songs-all-time
And of course this was already posted here:
https://mgoblog.com/mgoboard/siap-nyt-mr-brightside
I actually searched (I swear) for this, but it was on the second page. Also, the Weekender comes out on the Weekend (hence I saw the front page of the New York Times today online) but the article came out two days ago (buried online).
Anyway, to quote Fletch: it takes a big man to admit when he is wrong, and I am not a big man.
P.S. I did find the archived version and links to the "Leave Harbaugh Alone" shirt.
Do you have an email (or an email set up for purposes of answering your question) that I could send my advice to? (gmail makes it easy to set up a new account)
The recounting of "Let's Go Zak!" and the crowd picking up the team was something I didn't know about and good to hear. It also helped put Blake scoring on the next play into some more context.
Edit: Here is a link to the podcast -- which has more description -- that Robbie Moore refers to below (where Joel Klatt talks about the stadium after Zak Zinter's injury: https://youtu.be/kYKnvx1quLc?si=D05IMAGuWx4-MyTi&t=1786
"Something happened that I've never experience before....I've tried to tell this story twice and I didn't get through it without crying." - Joel Klatt (on the podcast)
Edit 2: stephenrjking links to Cinematic Highlights (from the Big Ten). You can hear the crowd start to chat about 30 seconds after this link (4 minutes in)
https://youtu.be/TzOBN2Ef5D4?si=hV4ylDQRoTSSCHjT&t=265
I've gone on YouTube a few times this week looking for the new Luke D'Mello video for The Game.
Here is last year before The Game:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjEuPisF7Tw
&
Michigan Football Team144: Those Who Stay
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GGb8NIbllT4
Is this an overstatement? You write: "Chuch Schmidt had a chance to bring Joe Montana to Detroit and passed. Joe went to KC instead, brought his knowledge of the West Coast offense, and helped them win."
I'm fine with the position that the Lions made "countless other poor management decisions that sabotaged the Lions' chances of winning."
But passing on Joe Montana in 1992 was not, I think, necessarily a poor decision. Montana missed the 1991 season and most of the 1992 season with an elbow injury from the 1991 pre-season. Montana was a third-string QB behind Young and Steve Bono when the 49ers played Dallas in the playoffs.
Yes, he did have two come-from-behind wins in the 1993 playoffs and then suffered a concussion on the third play of the third quarter against Buffalo, which won.
But I just don't see it as a bad decision not to go with the quarterback who was injured for two years (and it was his elbow).
@evenyoubruts: What I don't get is how XM wrote these sentences: "It is my further understanding that Harbaugh did not agree to this. Remember too, he was technically not a named party to this litigation (AFAIK)." I genuinely don't understand how any lawyer could write that last sentence -- of course, Harbaugh was a named party to the litigation. He was one of the Plaintiffs (with the regents). Paragraph 2 of the complaint refers to him as "Plaintiff." (I linked to the complaint.)
It is such a baffling assertion that I am not sure that he is a lawyer because I don't know, and can't imagine, any lawyer ever writing that sentence (i.e., "he was technically not a named party to this litigation (AFAIK)").
Also, Harbaugh was required to agree to dismiss the complaint. He was a party and it had to be his agreement to dismiss it along with the Regents.
I think one counterargument would be that when he hired these parties, they were acting as an agent to act under his direction as thus formed a principal-agent relationship. The acts of an agent are imputed to the principal.
How do you know the judge last Friday (Carol Kuhnke) kinda hates the University? I assume you are telling us something you know from knowing her or people who know her. Is that true? I'm just curious
Thanks, Koop -- appreciate you pointing it out. I edited my comment accordingly
I'd argue that the commissioner is constrained by the rules but the enforcement comes from the Board of Directors (or whatever group acts on behalf of the corporation), rather than from a judge who would need to hold that a handbook formed a contract on which the schools and apparently the coaches of the teams can sue the corporation. I think that is one counterargument.
It seems to me that everyone is jumping all over the handbook without answering some preliminary questions:
Is the handbook part of a legally binding contract? What was the consideration that was given for this handbook to form a contract? Do changes to the handbook have to be supported by consideration to form the contract? Doyle v. Holy Cross Hosp., 186 Ill. 2d 104 (1999).
When was the initial contract formed?
Handbooks or manuals may create enforceable contractual rights if they are distributed to employees and have all of the traditional requirements of a valid contract. Duldulao v. St. Mary of Nazareth Hosp. Center, 115 Ill. 2d 482, 490 (1987). The language of the handbook must be written so clearly, and the handbook must be disseminated so broadly, that reasonable people would be aware that an offer to create an enforceable agreement is being made. Id.
Have Plaintiffs met their burden for a retraining order that shows this handbook is a contract or part of a contract?
I want Coach Harbaugh on the sidelines but I do think that this is a hard motion to win.
*I'm editing this to include a citation provided by one person: Mountain E. Conf. v. Franklin Univ., No. 1:21-CV-104, 2023 WL 2415277, at *4–5 (N.D.W. Va. Mar. 8, 2023). Here is a google scholar link.
This case stands for the proposition (and those cited therein) that: The formal bylaws of an organization are to be construed as a contractual agreement between the organization and its members.
I'm still curious as to the argument as to how the handbook becomes part of the contract. I'm not arguing either way, but just pointing out that is question I would expect the judge to have and if Plaintiffs' lawyer can't answer it well, then I'd expect him to say that they haven't met their high burden for a TRO or Preliminary Injunction.
To be honest, I can't tell who the judge is from the reporting. Originally, it was reported as Tim Connors, then it was Carol Kuhnke, and now I think it is back to Tim Connors. I don't know anything about how assignments in the court work, particularly with ex parte motions for a TRO.
Also, just to be clear, I'm not saying that W&C messed up on personal jurisdiction. The court does have personal jurisdiction under the U.S. Constitution and Michigan statutes. Plaintiffs also need to serve it on defendants.
Forum non conveniens is a judicially made doctrine that allows the court to elect to decline jurisdiction when the lawsuit can be filed somewhere else. I'm saying that the court can decline jurisdiction (even though it has jurisdiction) on the ground that there is a better forum is in Illinois where the Big Ten is located.
I agree. I'm overstating Maryland. I honestly don't think I am overstating that it was a possibility on Saturday in Penn State. If the AD said he wouldn't interfere, at least one newspaper reporter was thinking the same thing too. But, yeah, I agree I'm exaggerating the situation if I say that there is a possibility that Harbaugh could get arrested.
I agree -- and, after consideration, I think I overstated this point and am wrong that it could happen now.
I do think that I had the thought on Saturday -- and obviously so did other people if the AD of Penn State was asked the question. If that is accurate, then at least one newspaper reporter was wondering if it could happen.
And, even though I admit that I overstated the point, I stand by my thought that this situation feels insane (or did last Friday) and that a judge might well want this case out of his court in Ann Arbor where he is going to be under intense scrutiny and accused of being a hometown judge. If I were him, I'd kick it out and say go file in Illinois. But that's just me and, hey, I admitted I'm playing the fool.
I'm 100% willing to bet that the lawyers for the Big Ten will raise this argument for dismissal too. There will be a motion to dismiss coming down the pipeline if the court does not dismiss it sua sponte.
Interesting -- I didn't know that
I did not know about David Wilson -- I'll look it up.
Edit: I looked it up: https://www.upi.com/Archives/1980/10/03/University-of-Illinois-quarterback-Dave-Wilson-can-continue-playing/2301339393600/
"The 21-year-old quarterback transferred to Illinois from Fullerton Junior College where he broke his arm on the first play of the first game of the 1977 season. Under Big Ten and NCAA rules, that one play used up one year of playing eligibility.
A conference eligibility committee originally agreed to waive its rules and let Wilson play football this fall. But a committee of faculty representatives overturned that decision and Wilson filed a lawsuit."
I agree -- part of me has perceived this litigation as also showing Harbaugh that the University will fight for him 100%. It seems like that is important as a way of convincing him to stay.
I agree that W&C will be ready to go
It takes a big man to admit when he is wrong. I am not a big man. -- Fletch
"Your honor: My clients did everything your order required. The Big Ten and Commissioner even told the University of Maryland that you had enjoined us from banning Coach Harbaugh. But the University of Maryland elected on their own volition to ban him and it was up to the state police to decide whether to arrest him after Harbaugh was clearly told he would be trespassing if he attempted to enter. That criminal case is still proceeding. But, regardless, my clients did exactly what your order said even though we still have not been properly served (or at least the Commissioner has not been served as the corporation can be served on Monday through the Secretary of State in Illinois) and have not waived our arguments over personal jurisdiction. Any motion to hold my clients in contempt would be frivolous."
Yeah, I thought of that too, and wondered if the counter move for the Big Ten would have been to immediately remove it to federal court.
What I was initially missing, and what I think that you are missing, is that University of Michigan is an "arm of the state" (i.e., the state) and states can't be citizens according to some case law. The federal statute (not the Constitution) requires complete diversity of the parties. Paragraph 13 of the Complaint says: "This case is not removable to federal court. The University is an arm of the state, and therefore not a “citizen” of the State of Michigan for purposes of federal diversity jurisdiction." The complaint then does the unusual thing of citing case law for the complaint. Interesting, they don't cite a Sixth Circuit case, so defendants could remove it and then argue that the University of Michigan is not an arm of the state. Defendants would probably lose but that alone would stretch this case past 3 weeks.
The temporary restraining order would *only* be against the Big Ten and the Commissioner. A stadium in another jurisdiction can tell anyone not to trespass on its property regardless of an order that applied to an Illinois corporation and one of its employees. The reason why stadiums don't randomly bar other coaches from their property is that the Big Ten would come down hard on them for acting like that
But that might not be the situation here, right? The Big Ten said the Coach can't be on the sidelines and then the Coach got a "hometown" court to issue an order? Why wouldn't the Big Ten just say that Penn State did the right thing? Or next week, Maryland? I just mean this whole thing is insane, that's all.
I'm sure they anticipated it. But there are really two things going on here (which I note in a reply to another person's comments). "Law is one arena and politics/PR are other."
There was good PR value if a court did issue a restraining order on the Big Ten and Commissioner right away and that was more likely to be received in a court located in Ann Arbor than a court located in the suburbs of Chicago. I have to imagine the lawyers talked it over and with the client and decided to roll the dice with Ann Arbor. I'm giving this prediction with the extra piece of information that the court decided not to immediately issue the TRO and issue a hearing a week after the complaint was filed.
Well, I agree I have no credibility.
I think the lawyers picked the right venue for what their client's goals were but I think there is still a good chance that the judge will dismiss the case (not a majority chance but a significant chance). Those are two positions I can take that would be consistent. As the lawyer wrote wrote the blog post copied by Harbaugh's lawyer, "Law is one arena and politics/PR are others . . . So a legal analysis is not a prediction about how people will actually behave." (link)
You also wrote: "If there were really a questionable jurisdictional issue, why wouldn't they file in both court's simultaneously."
My initial reaction is that would be sanctionable conduct. Courts can sanction a lawyer who "multiplies the proceedings." Williams & Conley would not want the sanctions motion for filing in two courts at the same time. That's my guess as to why they didn't do it.
Thanks, Yooper! I appreciate the kind words
For those who don't know what TeslaRedVictorBlue is talking about, here is the introduction to the Ohio State - Michigan game. Lloyd Carr gave the players ice picks (I think). Anyway, watch the introduction:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1akqcU1aszM
Interesting -- I didn't know that the team had three players who played at least a decade in the pro ranks (Steve Hutchinson, Jeff Backus, Jon Jansen) until I looked it up just now.
I clicked too quickly to have the link to the articles on his death, so here are two:
https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/33953255/long-new-yorker-writer-editor-roger-angell-dies-101
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/20/sports/roger-angell-dead.html
and a link to the list of baseball books:
https://mgoblog.com/diaries/list-baseball-books
Also, I guess I should have written descendants, not dependents, of Thomas Angell. Oh well, I ain't a writer.
The original story on the NYPD helping him is here: https://newyork.cbslocal.com/2019/11/03/nypd-help-homeless-man/
I've always thought that was the dividing line for diaries and the Board. Want to give a longform entry: make it a diary. But, hey, that's just my opinion.
Yes, this game is nuts. Lame ending. Also, next season is very interesting now with KD out and the Golden State era of dominance over.