More muddled thinking on the Bagwell situation

JeffBagwell10.jpgThe Chronicle’s Richard Justice — who ignited a remarkable amount of muddled thinking regarding the Stros’ claim under the club’s disability insurance policy on its star firstbaseman, Jeff Bagwell (related post here) — continues with the nonsense in his column today.
Justice proposes that the Stros waive making a claim for $15.6 million under the disability insurance policy and allow Bags to try and play this season in return for Bagwell’s promise that he would pay the club $7.8 million — i.e., half of the disability insurance claim — if it turns out that Bags really is disabled and can’t play effectively this coming season.
Uh, I don’t think Richard ran that proposed “solution” by Bags and his agent. Bags, the greatest player in Stros history, negotiated a five-year, $85 million contract from a position of strength six years ago under which the Stros agreed that he would receive a guaranteed amount (now down to $24 million) regardless of whether Bags is physically capable of playing major league baseball throughout the term of the contract. And now Justice proposes that Bags place $7.8 million of that $24 million at substantial risk for the opportunity to prove that he is physically capable of playing major league baseball?
Why on earth would Bags do that? Even if the Stros release Bags and collect the entire claim under the disability insurance contract, Bags could still attempt to play major league baseball with another club without risking a dime. Romantic considerations aside, does Justice really think for a moment that Bags would or should be willing to risk $7.8 million for the opportunity of trying to prove that he is capable of playing one final season with the Stros?
Richard Justice should stick to reporting on baseball, not contracts and risk evaluation.

Stealing the 12th Man?

aggieland.jpgIt’s demoralizing enough for followers of the Texas A&M University football program that the Aggie football team has fallen on hard times, but now they have to deal with the theft of their sacred 12th Man tradition:

The Seattle Seahawks are facing the Pittsburgh Steelers in the Super Bowl, but they have an off-the-field battle brewing with Texas A&M.
School officials are upset with the Seahawks’ use of the “12th Man” theme to recognize their fan support. A&M has legal claims to the “12th Man” moniker, a school tradition that dates to the 1920s.
Texas A&M contends the 12th man lives at Kyle Field, not in Seattle.
The Seahawks have celebrated their fans as a “12th Man” since the 1980s, when they used to turn the now-demolished Kingdome into one of the NFL’s loudest venues. . . .
A&M has twice registered trademarks for “The 12th Man” label — in 1990 and 1996 — that include entertainment services, “namely organizing and conducting intercollegiate sporting events,” and products, such as caps, T-shirts, novelty buttons and jewelry. . . .
[A&M Athletics Director] Bill Byrne said A&M has contacted the Seahawks about the issue. He said he wrote the Chicago Bears and Buffalo Bills in the past about halting their 12th man themes once the university made them aware of the trademark registrations. Byrne said Seattle, though, “has been slow-rolling us.”

The Aggies reduced to a post-season lawsuit rather than a post-season bowl game? Well, at least some folks are smiling.
Update: A&M filed a lawsuit in Brazos County on Monday to enjoin the Seahawks from infringing on the university’s 12th Man trademark. Home field advantage — Aggies.

The schedule for the trial of the Enron legacy case

LaySkilling2B.jpg9 a.m. today: Jury selection, Ceremonial Courtroom, 11th floor, Bob Casey Federal Courthouse, 515 Rusk. The NY Times’ Alexei Barrionuevo and Simon Romero report on the all-important jury selection process, which U.S. District Judge Sim Lake will handle himself and will complete today.
9 a.m., Tuesday, January 31: Opening arguments, Courtroom 9B, ninth floor. Prosecution gets two hours and each defendant gets two hours.
Late Tuesday afternoon or 8:30 a.m. Wednesday, Feb. 1: The prosecution puts on its first witness, which I am betting is former Enron investor relations chief, Mark Koenig. Given Judge Lake’s desire to move things along, it would not surprise me if he requires the prosecution to put its first witness on the stand on Tuesday afternoon, even after six hours of opening arguments.
The trial will run four days a week with each Friday generally being an off day. The prosecution currently estimates that its case-in-chief will take 36 days of court-time to present. There are about 60-65 spaces available on a first come basis for the general public in courtroom 9B, but a closed circuit telecast of the proceedings is available for overflow spectators on the fourth floor of the courthouse in one of the old Bankruptcy Court courtrooms.
By the way, Chronicle Enron reporter Mary Flood and Chronicle business columnist Loren Steffy are live-blogging the trial, and my old friend Joel Androphy is blogging the trial as KTRK-13’s legal analyst.