collapse

Resources

Stud of Seton Hall Game

No Stud when we lose.
2025-26 Season SoG Tally
Ross4
James Jr3
Parham1

'24-25 * '23-24 * '22-23
'21-22 * '20-21 * '19-20
'18-19 * '17-18 * '16-17
'15-16 * '14-15 * '13-14
'12-13 * '11-12 * '10-11

Big East Standings

Recent Posts

2026 Transfer Portal Wishlist by Vander Blue Man Group
[Today at 08:23:56 AM]


Radio show 2/5 by Billy Hoyle
[Today at 07:40:55 AM]


Senior shooting by MarquetteMike1977
[February 05, 2026, 11:35:23 PM]


Marquette NBA Thread by GoldenEagles03
[February 05, 2026, 11:28:02 PM]


Top 5 MU perimeter defenders ? by DoctorV
[February 05, 2026, 10:11:13 PM]


2025-26 Big East Conference TV Schedule by Mr. Nielsen
[February 05, 2026, 08:23:06 PM]


2025-26 College Hoops Thread by tower912
[February 05, 2026, 08:13:27 PM]

Please Register - It's FREE!

The absolute only thing required for this FREE registration is a valid e-mail address. We keep all your information confidential and will NEVER give or sell it to anyone else.
Login to get rid of this box (and ads) , or signup NOW!

Next up:  Butler (National Marquette Day)

Marquette
64
Marquette vs
Butler
Date/Time: Feb 7, 2026, 1:00pm
TV: FS1
Schedule for 2025-26
Seton Hall
69

T-Bone

I think this, if contested, would be thrown out.  One could argue that the relationship between the school-conference is similar to an employee-business relationship.  Under right-to-work law/Taft-Hartley, this would seem to be an ambiguous situation. 
It also has a bit of being similar to a non-compete agreement, but somewhat more draconian in taking future profits from the "employee." 
If the right lawyer makes the connection school-conference/employee-business to the right judge, this could be negated.

It'll be interesting to see when the first team leaves one of these conferences. 
I'm like a turtle, sometimes I get run over by a semi.

GGGG

Quote from: T-Bone on April 23, 2013, 01:55:13 PM
I think this, if contested, would be thrown out.  One could argue that the relationship between the school-conference is similar to an employee-business relationship. 


One could argue that...if they want to be laughed out of court.

T-Bone

Quote from: Terror Skink on April 23, 2013, 01:58:00 PM
One could argue that...if they want to be laughed out of court.

And.... Why not?  So, you can't see that could be a possibility?  Open your eyes to the litigious society we have.

Essentially, you have a union - conference.  You have a member of that union - the school.  It's a similar arrangement and one that has not been put on trial.  So what do you have?  
I'm like a turtle, sometimes I get run over by a semi.

GGGG

Quote from: T-Bone on April 23, 2013, 02:13:55 PM
And.... Why not?  So, you can't see that could be a possibility?  Open your eyes to the litigious society we have.

Essentially, you have a union - conference.  You have a member of that union - the school.  It's a similar arrangement and one that has not been put on trial.  So what do you have? 


Because employment law is very different than contract law.

T-Bone

Quote from: Terror Skink on April 23, 2013, 02:20:18 PM

Because employment law is very different than contract law.

I don't disagree that in certain areas they are very different.  But there are a lot of similarities, enough that I think it's entirely possible that something along the employee/union/business relationship could be argued a valid parallel. 
We'll see when a school leaves one of these conferences. 
I'm like a turtle, sometimes I get run over by a semi.


GOO

Quote from: T-Bone on April 23, 2013, 01:55:13 PM
I think this, if contested, would be thrown out.  One could argue that the relationship between the school-conference is similar to an employee-business relationship.  Under right-to-work law/Taft-Hartley, this would seem to be an ambiguous situation. 
It also has a bit of being similar to a non-compete agreement, but somewhat more draconian in taking future profits from the "employee." 
If the right lawyer makes the connection school-conference/employee-business to the right judge, this could be negated.

It'll be interesting to see when the first team leaves one of these conferences. 

Isn't this more like a partnership business arrangement?  I'd much rather be on the side of trying to uphold this agreement as it was unanimously entered into. 

Previous topic - Next topic