Per ESPN, UM has retained Williams & Connolly

Most firms will milk a cow as long as the cow wants to be milked.  I agree that having a good-faith basis for bringing a case is a low bar and the vast majority of cases brought by any credible firm or lawyer can survive summary judgment. My point was that high profile firms don't become high profile by taking cases with very low rates of positive outcomes.  Once you become a high profile firm that anaylsis may change a little, but winning and results is what keeps these firms at the top of the food chain. 

If it goes down that road, keep Harbaugh for the OSU game, but have him use the B1G Championship Game to suspend him on, since we would go against an ugly B1G West Champ. Otherwise, the conference can just suck it up and leave Harbaugh alone.

Source?  LOL. It makes sense but really, source?

Buried in another thread is this quote:

I do know some of what Michigan is tracking and let's just say it involves certain programs who are given a different set of rulebooks to follow by the Big 10 as it relates to TV, scheduling, etc. 

And I'm trying to figure out what that could mean. So the Big Ten gives OSU favorable TV slots and scheduling? For what purpose?

You don't fuck with your cash cow. 

And just how do we have an advantage when everyone knows this happened, and can make whatever arrangements they need to counter it—like MSU did, having the QB go to the sidelines.  For the first couple of series.  For performance art.

Many of the same coaches at OSU and Rutgers are still in place - how do we know they haven't been doing similar shit to/for other programs? What about their competitive advantage. No one is digging into what the other programs are doing/have done. AND if this is something everyone already knows is going on it seems logical to suggest that the big ten teams we have played adjusted accordingly prior to playing us. If they did not, they should be relegated to the MAC for sheer stupidity, or in Walter's case, hypocrisy. No offense to the MAC.

I can't believe people are still trying to press the competitive advantage angle. Based on what we know now, OSU changed their signs last year (so we didn't have them) and they had a bunch of our signs courtesy of Rutgers, others, and as yet unknown sign stealing methods

OSU lost by 3 scores.

If it was such an advantage then how could Michigan have possibly won? Were we 5-6 touchdowns better than Ohio State? Is that what OSU fans are arguing right now?

The "competitive advantage" argument has always been a red herring meant to stir up public outrage (and it worked). If any of the coaches/schools believed it was a competitive advantage for Michigan, or that many of them weren't doing something similar, they would have immediately brought it to the ncaa or big 10 for investigation/action. Instead they waited until October of this year. 

There are Michigan law alums at W&C.  I suspect outrage at the attempted railroading may have played a role in the decision to take the case.  Plus, getting a TRO if the league or NCAA violates its own procedures in rushing to a verdict seems like a very good bet. Irreparable harm to Michigan is a given, and in view of the fairly ambiguous nature of the rules, Michigan has a good chance of winning on the merits.  The “damage” from the “sign stealing” is contained, so the equities favor Michigan, no opponent going forward will be harmed.  Not sure what the precise TRO test is in Michigan, but these factors are typically considered.  Moreover, there is a colorable “clean hands” argument in that the people raising this issue have conducted themselves in questionable ways, although the league presumably has not.  All these issues and others are surely being researched at this very moment.