Drama!
You may not know it given Syracuse University's performance on the gridiron the last two seasons, but the Orange have bigger fish to fry than the Wyoming Cowboys.
As Donnie Webb of the Syracuse Post-Standard reports, Syracuse backed out of its 2009 trip to Laramie, Wyoming. The contest constituted the final leg of a home-and-home series which began last season in the Carrier Dome.
Joe Glenn, head coach of the Cowboys, is not particularly pleased with the $200,000 check that Syracuse mailed to Laramie:
"It's just horrible, and it shows no class (by Syracuse)," Glenn told the Wyoming Tribune-Eagle of Cheyenne. "We signed the contract, and we went out there last year to play them. It doesn't show much character on their part."Glenn, however, did not stop there. Instead of simply realizing that a home game featuring Syracuse is only marginally more exciting than a colonoscopy, Glenn has begun channeling the spirit of Pedro Cerrano:
"I've got a new favorite team this season," Glenn quipped. "Anybody who beats Syracuse."
"They leave a hole in our 2009 schedule, so if you want to wish bad luck on somebody this year, wish bad luck on Syracuse," Glenn said. "They signed a contract to come to Laramie and play, and they didn't honor it so I'm putting all kinds of voodoo on them."
Methinks that Glenn is going to have to buy a lot of hats and t-shirts this season in order to support his new love of everything that manages to topple the mighty Orange.
Outside of Glenn moving into Randle Patrick McMurphy territory, the real issue here lies with the poor construction of the arrangement. The buy-out clause governing the agreement only required either side to pay a fee of $200,000. Poison pill provisions are designed to make contracting parties adhere to the duration of the contract; in effect, such provisions are to provide strong incentive to maintain the status quo rather than upset it.
Why, then, did Wyoming not increase the poison pill clause to an amount that would remove alternatives to completing the series? The Cowboys obviously wanted Syracuse to visit Laramie. To not ensure -- through contract -- such circumstances occur puts the onus on Wyoming for not carrying out its responsibilities. Fingering Syracuse as the villain merely obfuscates the fact that Wyoming shoveled just as much dirt out of the grave as the Orange did.
To assume otherwise is to absolve Wyoming of its responsibility to protect its interests.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
8-05-2007 @ 8:55PM
jeff said...
Hell yeah i agree
Reply
8-08-2007 @ 11:27AM
Gary Allen said...
Pleaaasssssse, typical comment from a so called sports writer. Why don't ewe consider the fact that if a mid major college gets to greedy on the buy out clause a bigger college as Syracuse wouldn't sign the contract. It's just an easy out for you boys and after reading your column I would of been in your corner, but you failed to write both sides of the stories as usual. Oh well we'll schedule an NAIA team and get a better product.
Reply
8-08-2007 @ 11:53AM
Matt Glaude said...
Gary Allen:
A) The issue with your argument is that Syracuse was in no position to withhold from signing the agreement. Syracuse was in a desparate position to ink a home opponent for 2006. Without Wyoming, it would have had to look for a very low 1-A participant or, even worse, a 1-AA opponent. The Syracuse administration could not undertake either option without a huge backlash from the Orange community.
It is for this fact that I believe Wyoming was in a position of leverage. It probably could have raised the poison pill provision to a more reasonable level. Wyoming either a) did not realize its positional leverage (an unforgivable circumstance), or b) chose to ignore its positional leverage in order to guarantee at least one game against a BCS Conference affiliate (a decision that is forgivable).
B) At this point, I would not disagree that a game against an NAIA institution would better suit Wyoming's needs. Syracuse is not particularly good, and losing to the Orange yet again would not do much to raise the Cowboys' profile.
C) If I were a sports writer, I'd be poor and hate my very existence. I much prefer my current status of "Prolific Context Contributor," a designation that ensures my financial state and allows others to detest my very existence.
Reply