From the motion to dismiss
“This makes it even more perplexing why Plaintiffs have directed the Complaint against the Conference and Commissioner Kliavkoff, and levied attacks on them and the dedicated team of persons who are instrumental in the day-to-day business of the Conference”
Not so long ago, When USC and UCLA notified the Pac 12 they were leaving the conference, and the Pac 12 staff told them they lost their board seats, USC accused the “dedicated staff” of lying, retaliation and pettiness.
“(N)either the Conference nor Commissioner Kliavkoff breached the bylaw at issue, which prohibits member conduct.
Discovery will show differently.
UCLA’s contract with the Big 10, and presumably USC’s, Oregon’s and Washington’s give tacit approval rights over new members. There is also the matter of a nonrefundable $15 million deposit each school gave the Big 10. These four schools are now actively participate in Big 10 conference business that conflicts with the interests of WSU and OSU. If they get a vote to dissolve the Pac 2, the Big 10 will gain additional revenues through the College Football playoffs and that will accrue in part to these four schools.
Brief by nine schools to intervene with Washington
Repeating above: The four schools leaving for the Big 10 are actively participating in the business of the Big 10 conference now - and they are motivated to serve the business objectives of the Big 10 by dissolving the Pac 12. Discovery will show this clearly, but any reasonable person understands you don’t give a vote to a member that effectively left the conference by 1) putting down a nonrefundable $15 million deposit to join another conference and agreeing to all the strings that entails, and 2) getting that conference to give them the right in the current year to block other colleges from joining. And you certainly don’t give them a vote to dissolve their current conference so that their future conference (and themselves) get a larger share of future playoff revenues.