Mountain West fires back at Pac-12, alleges breach of contract and fraud in court filing

And now, the counterpunch.

The Mountain West conference on Thursday, in its boldest, most detailed statement made in the ongoing litigation with the Pac-12 conference, filed an 86-page response and doled out some new, meaty counterclaims, including breach of contract and promissory fraud.

In a statement, the Mountain West said it is seeking to “enforce the contractual terms that the Pac-12 freely negotiated, executed, and now seeks to avoid. Our counterclaims seek a declaratory judgment that the Termination Fees at issue are valid, lawful, and enforceable. We also assert affirmative claims against the Pac-12 for breach of contract, promissory fraud, tortious interference with contract, and unjust enrichment.”

According to the court document, filed Thursday in U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, San Jose Division, the Mountain West responded line by line to a Pac-12 claim that a scheduling agreement the two leagues entered into isn’t enforceable. The Mountain West says not only is it enforceable, but now alleges the Pac-12, and some of the departing Mountain West members, entered into the agreement never intending to honor it. The MW further alleges the Pac-12 and departing schools actively made moves to try to break up the Mountain West while the deals were being made.

At the time, the 12-football member Mountain West allowed for the two members remaining in the Pac-12 — Washington State and Oregon State — to play their teams in football, allowing for Washington State and Oregon State to complete their season after every other team in the Pac-12 left for more stable leagues the year prior.

The court filing includes numerous instances that Mountain West lawyers believe prove athletic directors and school presidents from departing Mountain West schools — Boise State, Colorado State, Fresno State, San Diego State and Utah State — had plans to leave the Mountain West that were set in place long before they initially indicated, even negotiating some deals in bad faith knowing their departure was imminent.

The Mountain West says the Pac-12 entered into the deal with “eyes wide open” and the departing schools themselves were among the Mountain West members who approved the terms of the deal.

“The Pac-12 understood that the Pac-12’s potential selective recruitment of MWC members posed a foreseeable and material risk to the MWC and its members, including the conference’s competitive position and long-term enterprise value,” the Mountain West filing states. “So the Pac-12 eagerly agreed — as part of an integrated bargain — to narrow, time-limited safeguards designed to price that very risk.”

Among the new allegations in the Mountain West’s court filing:

• “Diana Sabau, then vice president and athletics director of Utah State, admitted that she knew that ‘the four schools who first departed for the Pac-12 would do so a month before the announcement was made,’ and suggested that she had been in discussions with the Pac-12, or its agents, well before the public timeline.

“Sabau further confirmed covert coordination, stating she ‘was really worried last summer in August [of 2024], when they started talking about the first four that were going to be invited to the [Pac-12]. And I was like, ‘Oh my God, I’ve done 18 presentations, I’ve talked to all these people.’ And then it started to fall into place. And people said, ‘Well, be patient. You’re not going to be part of the first group, but you’re going to be asked.’

“Her remarks demonstrate that the Pac-12’s discussions and strategy were in motion long before any public disclosure or the breakdown of negotiations to extend the Scheduling Agreement.”

• “Statements from San Diego State University’s athletic director JD Wicker confirmed that the Pac-12 never negotiated a definitive transaction in good faith. Wicker stated that adding San Diego State to the Pac-12 had been “an ongoing discussion for a while.”

“This summer we started having a few more conversations. In July, athletic directors really started having some conversations, and they picked up steam through August [2024].”