(03-22-2024 06:19 PM)Garrettabc Wrote: At this point I'm sure you know him. He was present during the hearing, he gives us his thoughts.
Judge Bledsole is a Morehead Scholar who went to Harvard from UNC and then clerked for Sam Ervin III. He's a blue bloods blue blood so to speak so I'm sure FSU will get a fair trial before they are pronounced guilty.
I have heard this attorney on several YT channels talking about the subject. He is a FSU guy but that doesn't mean he can't be objective. What are the opinions here. Are we hearing a non-bias viewpoint from this guy or is he clouded by his fandom?
(03-22-2024 10:01 PM)dawgitall Wrote: I have heard this attorney on several YT channels talking about the subject. He is a FSU guy but that doesn't mean he can't be objective. What are the opinions here. Are we hearing a non-bias viewpoint from this guy or is he clouded by his fandom?
Well, I had lunch with an attorney that specializes in sports media law, and he laughs at the clowns that Florida State hired
He also said that Clemson‘s lawsuit is deeply flawed, but was handled night and day from Florida State
(This post was last modified: 03-22-2024 10:47 PM by Pony94.)
(03-22-2024 06:19 PM)Garrettabc Wrote: At this point I'm sure you know him. He was present during the hearing, he gives us his thoughts.
Judge Bledsole is a Morehead Scholar who went to Harvard from UNC and then clerked for Sam Ervin III. He's a blue bloods blue blood so to speak so I'm sure FSU will get a fair trial before they are pronounced guilty.
(03-22-2024 06:19 PM)Garrettabc Wrote: At this point I'm sure you know him. He was present during the hearing, he gives us his thoughts.
As we see, Doug Rohan was pleased with the hearing and describes the judge's approach as fair.
Mr Rohan has a rooting interest (he's a former Marching Chief) but above all he's a connoisseur of the legal game. He's quick to remark on stronger and weaker plays by either side. Non-specialists can learn a lot from him.
He does advise people that he has a family, so don't expect him to follow the Clemson case as closely as he does his alma mater's. It would be interesting to hear from some attorneys closer to that case.
(03-22-2024 10:43 PM)Pony94 Wrote: Well, I had lunch with an attorney that specializes in sports media law, and he laughs at the clowns that Florida State hired
He also said that Clemson‘s lawsuit is deeply flawed, but was handled night and day from Florida State
Sounds like both diners enjoyed their lunch.
Florida State's strategy is wide-ranging and aimed at leveraging the state's sunshine laws to encourage negotiation. Clemson's is a focused strategy aimed at winning on points if in fact the complaint goes to court.
UNC's we don't know (yet)—but its trustees did choose a timely moment to drive a conspicuous wedge between the interests of UNC and those of the conference.
Nothing precludes one school from amending and adapting its case to make use of promising approaches by another. And nothing says ESPN and the ACC share all of the same goals. ESPN stood on the conference side in the hearing yesterday, but it's entirely possible that the media company would prefer to settle sooner than the conference is eager to.
We'll see how things go. We can all expect settlement. The schools with P2 opportunities will get to take them; the haggling is over the price and pace of exit.
My take so far:
- none of FSU's claims will result in a "slam-dunk" victory
- the ACC's position, otoh, is not nearly as strong as some here think
- the outcome of this case is far from certain
(03-22-2024 06:19 PM)Garrettabc Wrote: At this point I'm sure you know him. He was present during the hearing, he gives us his thoughts.
As we see, Doug Rohan was pleased with the hearing and describes the judge's approach as fair.
Mr Rohan has a rooting interest (he's a former Marching Chief) but above all he's a connoisseur of the legal game. He's quick to remark on stronger and weaker plays by either side. Non-specialists can learn a lot from him.
He does advise people that he has a family, so don't expect him to follow the Clemson case as closely as he does his alma mater's. It would be interesting to hear from some attorneys closer to that case.
Correct me if I'm wrong but he is a personal injury attorney, not a business law or intellectual property attorney. I mean I was a history teacher. I can evaluate a social studies lesson with a good deal of expertise, but a biology lesson only in very general terms.
No one has been mentioning the success formula for the payment of bonuses. I suspect that is in play as well. Any system that actual takes into account anything over the past decade will wildly reward Clemson and negatively hit Georgia Tech, Syracuse, BC, and Wake Forest. GT and Syracuse would take a heavy hit. No one talks about the "sick men" of the ACC. Back when we had just 6-7 other members to worry about, schools could be more generous. Stanford and Cal solidify the egg head's control of the ACC. That means a league run not by Duke, UVa, and UNC striking a backroom deal with Clemson or NC State, but Duke and UVa striking a deal with GT, Stanford, BC, and ND.
(03-22-2024 06:19 PM)Garrettabc Wrote: At this point I'm sure you know him. He was present during the hearing, he gives us his thoughts.
As we see, Doug Rohan was pleased with the hearing and describes the judge's approach as fair.
Mr Rohan has a rooting interest (he's a former Marching Chief) but above all he's a connoisseur of the legal game. He's quick to remark on stronger and weaker plays by either side. Non-specialists can learn a lot from him.
He does advise people that he has a family, so don't expect him to follow the Clemson case as closely as he does his alma mater's. It would be interesting to hear from some attorneys closer to that case.
Correct me if I'm wrong but he is a personal injury attorney, not a business law or intellectual property attorney. I mean I was a history teacher. I can evaluate a social studies lesson with a good deal of expertise, but a biology lesson only in very general terms.
I understand that he handles cases that involve contract law as well. And he's on top of this story. At first he tended to drop a few details now and then that weren't law-related—the kinds of things that realignment nuts catch, such as the dates when certain teams joined certain leagues. He brushed up on the details quickly to become a solid commenter, and he's up front about why he's so easy to find.
Your point is of course valid. Absolutely. People who are very interested in following this story's legal particulars do well to find the accounts of people who are contract lawyers and sports attorneys as a matter of professional specialisation. And diverse rooting interests are all to the good, too, of course. Attorneys who track these cases closely and comment on them for free will be those who feel some personal investment, in the form of an alma mater or at least a conference that stands to gain.
/
Doug Rohan speaks on the hearing in Charlotte
