Bowl $ from 2014

[PSU1991]

So we're getting the bowl money from 2014. Should get it from 2012 and 2013 too.

http://news.psu.edu/story/359862/2015/06/07/big-ten-agrees-reinstate-penn-state’s-share-bowl-revenue

 

[kgilbert78]

That's good news. And I will agree that while they never should have taken the bowl money from the seasons before that, it's also not worth going after. The money has already been spent on charitable causes. There are more important issues to go after. Going after those moneys makes us look petty.

 

[BobPSU92]

Message from delany to barron and barbour:

 

[Raffycorn]

Hard to call this anything other than excellent news. This should go quite a way towards helping plug the sanctions-induced budget hole the AD is in, both for this year and going forward.

 

[PSU65]

Awesome!

 

[PSU-Knocker]

And I will agree that while they never should have taken the bowl money from the seasons before that, it's also not worth going after.

So justice is not worth pursuing? Rather than groveling and thanking the presidents, we should taking every action possible to get previous years money and public apology from this Conference. If they don't pay the price of wrongful actions, they will do it again. These people need to pay a price for their getting involved in this situation.

Yeah, yeah, I know. It was our Board of Distrust who is to blame. Yes, they too need to pay a price for their actions, but that does not give forgiveness to the Conference; they should not have gotten involved in what was a civil matter where investigation and proof would have determined guilt and punishment.

 

[psute]

From the conference's perspective, seems reasonable. If you are ineligible to contribute to bowl revenues, you should not be eligible to gain from them. Leave out the fact that PSU would have been in a bowl game both years, thus denying the conference of that income...

 

[PSU1991]

Just saw some comments suggesting the B1G did this because if they had kept the 2014 funds that would have put the amount withheld over $10M and the Endowment Act would kick in, making this illegal. All funds would have to come to PA. Suggestion is that they gave us the 2014 funds to avoid having to give up all the funds, not out of the goodness of their hearts.

 

[PSU1991]

From the conference's perspective, seems reasonable. If you are ineligible to contribute to bowl revenues, you should not be eligible to gain from them. Leave out the fact that PSU would have been in a bowl game both years, thus denying the conference of that income...

Correct me if I'm wrong but don't all conference schools get a share of the revenue whether they go to a bowl or not?

 

[BobPSU92]

Just saw some comments suggesting the B1G did this because if they had kept the 2014 funds that would have put the amount withheld over $10M and the Endowment Act would kick in, making this illegal. All funds would have to come to PA. Suggestion is that they gave us the 2014 funds to avoid having to give up all the funds, not out of the goodness of their hearts.

Shocking. And here I thought delany was sincere in sending hugs.

 

[lionlurker]

Eh, the only reason they are doing this, and that we are finding out about it on a Sunday afternoon, is that they are covering their asses for something. Who wants to bet that our alumni BOT reps had something to do with this?

 

[kgilbert78]

Correct me if I'm wrong but don't all conference schools get a share of the revenue whether they go to a bowl or not?

Yes.

 

[kgilbert78]

So justice is not worth pursuing?

Behind the scenes, yes. Publicly, no. On this issue alone, because of where the money went. It's a no win for PSU to attack this specific point in public at this time. If we find out that the conference colluded (and I am talking about "in a court of law"), that might be different.

 

[psu1969a]

Correct me if I'm wrong but don't all conference schools get a share of the revenue whether they go to a bowl or not?

not eligible to go to bowl; no money

 

[mbahses]

Wow, was I psychic or what? These are stolen revenues. I wonder what made Delaney change his mind? I know it wasn't the dozen or so emails I 've been tormenting him with.

 

[bxle]

All other schools get their share of bowl money, and we should get ours.

 

[anon_xdc8rmuek44eq]

not eligible to go to bowl; no money

This isn't true; the Big Ten splits it's bowl revenue equally amongst members whether they go to a bowl or not (noting newer members aren't typically entitled to the same share as everyone else for a short period of time). I do believe 'participating' institutions have their travel and other related bowl expenses covered before the payout is shared though.

 

[PSU-Knocker]

Behind the scenes, yes. Publicly, no. On this issue alone, because of where the money went.

Where the money went has no bearing on the issue. The Conference had no business getting involved in a civil issue! What you're implying is that it is okay to do wrong as long as your intentions are good. No, wrong is wrong and should be punished when it happens. The Conference can donate the money with other funds or from taking equal shares from all members except Maryland and Rutgers.

From the conference's perspective, seems reasonable. If you are ineligible to contribute to bowl revenues, you should not be eligible to gain from them. Leave out the fact that PSU would have been in a bowl game both years, thus denying the conference of that income...

Bulldump, wasn't OSU not eligible for bowls two years but they weren't deprived of bowl revenue!

 

[mbahses]

So we're getting the bowl money from 2014. Should get it from 2012 and 2013 too.

http://news.psu.edu/story/359862/2015/06/07/big-ten-agrees-reinstate-penn-state’s-share-bowl-revenue

I must have scared Barron & Delaney to death with my earlier thread, LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I think some type of legal action was brewing, and this was a partial way around it. They need to kick up the rest of the stolen loot.

 

[PSU-Knocker]

I must have scared Barron & Delaney to death with my earlier thread, LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I think some type of legal action was brewing, and this was a partial way around it. They need to kick up the rest of the stolen loot.

Absof------lutely!

 

[mbahses]

Here's the sham....if they kept this $$$ the Endowment Act kicked in, and all of it had to be returned. Which it should regardless. I say start aggravating Kane's office and "demand" (like a "victim") that "charges be filed" for the rest of the stolen jack.

 

[nits74]

not eligible to go to bowl; no money

I'm not all that familiar with your posting history, but you're batting a thousand of late. You've been wrong about everything. For instance, when Ohio State was recently ineligible to participate in a bowl, it received its share of the conference proceeds. Never to my knowledge has The Big Ten done what they did to Penn State.

 

[mbahses]

I'm not all that familiar with your posting history, but you're batting a thousand of late. You've been wrong about everything. For instance, when Ohio State was recently ineligible to participate in a bowl, it received its share of the conference proceeds. Never to my knowledge has The Big Ten done what they did to Penn State.

Not only has the BigTen never done anything like the screw job they laid on us, NO CONFERENCE has ever done anything like this.

 

[Bushwood CC]

So we're getting the bowl money from 2014. Should get it from 2012 and 2013 too.

http://news.psu.edu/story/359862/2015/06/07/big-ten-agrees-reinstate-penn-state’s-share-bowl-revenue

Too funny, the very fact that these corrupt scum-buckets are paying the 2014 Bowl Revenue PSU is due as a Member in good-standing is DE FACTO EVIDENCE that the conference understands they have no legal standing to withhold it. Then for them to turn around and act like they are doing us a favor while clearly withholding millions of dollars of PSU's money that was ILLEGALLY EXTORTED FROM PSU AND PAID TO THE CORRUPT B1G TURD CONFERENCE is just beyond pathetic but pretty much par for the course for these arrogant, corrupt douchebags.

Given the tuition increases, cuts in funding and budgetary problems at PSU, it is unconscionable that Political Representatives of the citizens of Pennsylvania do not immediately demand that these sums, illegally taken and still being withheld from a Pennsylvania Publicly-Owned Entity, be returned immediately and demand that the Pennsylvania OAG take action if necessary.

Laughable notion that this POS corrupt conference is giving PSU it's own money back out of the "goodness of their heart" and the fact that they paid the 2014 share, despite their illegal bowl money annexation being in place, is strong evidence that they know they do not have a legal leg to stand on and that they monies they have withheld were held illegally (e.g., not in the best interests of the BENEFICIARIES of PSU, a publicly-owned NPO!) -- the FIDUCIARIES of PSU are not permitted to give money to other NPO organizations, let alone non-Pennsylvania NPOs, when it deprives the BENEFICIARIES of PSU from the use of the funds and is the diametric OPPOSITE of "in the best interests of PSU's beneficiaries" and the Commonwealth Court of Pennysylvania made this quite clear in their multiple rulings of Corman and McCord vs the NCAA.

 

[ChiTownLion]

 

[bxle]

Not only has the BigTen never done anything like the screw job they laid on us, NO CONFERENCE has ever done anything like this.

I can't remember any conference piling on like this. On the contrary, they usually support their member schools.

 

[michnittlion]

This should have been done a LONG time ago ..... but I'd guess various schools had already earmarked this $$$ to various places and that "money pullback process" (for lack of a better phrase) had to be managed.

 

[FLY]

Behind the scenes, yes. Publicly, no. On this issue alone, because of where the money went. It's a no win for PSU to attack this specific point in public at this time. If we find out that the conference colluded (and I am talking about "in a court of law"), that might be different.

Behind the scenes, yes. Publicly, no. On this issue alone, because of where the money went. It's a no win for PSU to attack this specific point in public at this time. If we find out that the conference colluded (and I am talking about "in a court of law"), that might be different.

Red herring !

The money given to the charities were in the "name" of the BIG not PSU.
None of this even mattered,because the BIG should simply write a check to PSU. They had absolutely no "authority" to withhold our share of conference revenue. They don't have to ask anyone for the money back,except for Emmerts buddy big"D".

 

[BobPSU92]

I can't remember any conference piling on like this. On the contrary, they usually support their member schools.

Of course, we blame the B1G because they have screwed Penn State. However, I would not assume that another conference (read: ACC) would have treated Penn State any better. As I mentioned in the B1G 25th anniversary thread yesterday, I can't think of another school where the outrage (though misplaced) was so severe as with Penn State. Even Duke Lacrosse wasn't as intense as the beating Penn State took in 2012. It obviously wasn't just the B1G that put the beatdown on Penn State. Looking at how the bot reacted in 2011, the media coverage, and the hiring of freeh, I don't know that the ACC would have jumped to Penn State's defense.

 

[psengr82]

This should have been done a LONG time ago ..... but I'd guess various schools had already earmarked this $$$ to various places and that "money pullback process" (for lack of a better phrase) had to be managed.

That's their (each school that accepted the money plus the B1G conference) problem, not Penn State's. They stole the money so they should now pay. I'd propose that they not only pay back PSU with interest but also continue to pay any money they had promised the charities out of their portion of the bowl money.

 

[UncleLar]

Leave out the fact that PSU would have been in a bowl game both years, thus denying the conference of that income...

Actually, if you go through the math, it really doesn't make much difference to the conference. The fact that PSU wasn't in a bowl game simply meant that their spot was filled by some other Big Ten team. What did happen was that the bottom tiered bowl had to go outside the Big Ten to get a team, so the Big Ten didn't get that revenue. But the bottom tier bowl revenues basically just cover team expenses so it becomes revenue neutral to the conference whether they have teams go to those bowls or not.

 

[PSUMATT85]

not eligible to go to bowl; no money

Not Buckeyes in 2011

 

[Evan Ceg]

Unsurprisingly, some of you folks can't tell when you've won.

 

[lionlurker]

That is because the Big Ten will never allow it to be presented that way. Instead, they will paint it as an act of magnanimous generosity on their part.

 

[MichaelJackSchmidt]

Eh, the only reason they are doing this, and that we are finding out about it on a Sunday afternoon, is that they are covering their asses for something. Who wants to bet that our alumni BOT reps had something to do with this?

WHAT? I thought CR66's "connections" were the catalyst behind this.....

 

[SUPERTODD]

Unsurprisingly, some of you folks can't tell when you've won.

Yeah!!! Somebody stole money from us, but graciously agreed to give some of it back. What a "win".

 

[PSU-Knocker]

Unsurprisingly, some of you folks can't tell when you've won.

Oh God, I'm speechless.

 

[Art]

Unsurprisingly, some of you folks can't tell when you've won.

Not hardly, pilgrim. The Big Ten simply didn't want to cough up $6.5mm and pay it to the Commonwealth.

 

[psute]

I'm not all that familiar with your posting history, but you're batting a thousand of late. You've been wrong about everything. For instance, when Ohio State was recently ineligible to participate in a bowl, it received its share of the conference proceeds. Never to my knowledge has The Big Ten done what they did to Penn State.

I did not know that tOSU kept theirs. Not to wish anything bad upon any institution, but it will be interesting to see if this becomes the new standard going forward. I suspect that it will be untenable for the B1G to not continue this policy. Time will tell...

 

[bjf1984]

Unsurprisingly, some of you folks can't tell when you've won.

Wrong. Simply wrong.

This is akin to being forced to play an entire football game with 9 players on the field. Getting beat 63-0 in the fourth quarter. Then, the other team scores a late TD, on a play were the runner clearly stepped out at the 2 yard line.....and the officials use replay to determine that yes - indeed - the runner was out....and they rightfully mark the play at the 2.
That would be a "win"?