(06-11-2014 01:47 PM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  OK - what Federal laws are broken?

The Sherman Act, Clayton Act, and FTC Act of 1914.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Stat...itrust_law

"These Acts, first, restrict the formation of cartels and prohibit other collusive practices regarded as being in restraint of trade. Second, they restrict the mergers and acquisitions of organizations which could substantially lessen competition. Third, they prohibit the creation of a monopoly and the abuse of monopoly power."

See also Oligopoly and Tacit Collusion.

See also NCAA v. Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma, 468 U.S. 85 (1984) 7 to 2, held that the NCAA's restriction of television of games, to encourage live attendance, was restricting supply, and therefore unlawful.

(06-11-2014 01:47 PM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  OK - what Federal laws are broken?

From a business perspective, the P5 would be absolutely stupid to ostracize the G5. The P5 cannot get 7 or 8 home games if they are only playing each other. The math doesn't work. Completely separating from the G5 would undermine their system.

And, if they arbitrarily exclude the G5, see the legal links above.

(06-11-2014 03:25 PM)YNot Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 01:47 PM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  OK - what Federal laws are broken?

From a business perspective, the P5 would be absolutely stupid to ostracize the G5. The P5 cannot get 7 or 8 home games if they are only playing each other. The math doesn't work. Completely separating from the G5 would undermine their system.

And, if they arbitrarily exclude the G5, see the legal links above.

If BYU winds up with an arrangement with the AAC. Or, if a "western division" winds up in the AAC. . . I want an SMU-BYU matchup. SMU owes you one from that damn 82 Holiday Bowl. . . 30+ years later and my feelings are still the same: "Eff that punky QB, Jim McMahon, and that effing Hail Mary!"

(06-11-2014 12:52 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 12:35 PM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 12:21 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  Thanks. It sounds like there maybe some push back to the P5 autonomy request. I hope that the G5 makes the P5 actually break away.

The P5 doesn't need the G5 to make money in football and so they don't need to play them. Honestly, I think if the G5 pushes this issue we could see the P5 break away. It's that important o them. We (the G5) need the P5 much more than they will ever need us IMO--

Not really. Both need each other equally, for a variety of reasons. But even if the so called "p5" broke away, I feel the AAC could easily sue for inclusion, if necessary.How could the so called P5 legally bar entry into whatever organization it morphs into, if the AAC has the desire and resources to abide by whatever rules are needed for entry.

Using your logic, couldn't USF sue to join the SEC, on the grounds that we would agree to abide by whatever rules are necessary for entry?

(06-11-2014 03:50 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 12:52 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 12:35 PM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 12:21 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  Thanks. It sounds like there maybe some push back to the P5 autonomy request. I hope that the G5 makes the P5 actually break away.

The P5 doesn't need the G5 to make money in football and so they don't need to play them. Honestly, I think if the G5 pushes this issue we could see the P5 break away. It's that important o them. We (the G5) need the P5 much more than they will ever need us IMO--

Not really. Both need each other equally, for a variety of reasons. But even if the so called "p5" broke away, I feel the AAC could easily sue for inclusion, if necessary.How could the so called P5 legally bar entry into whatever organization it morphs into, if the AAC has the desire and resources to abide by whatever rules are needed for entry.

Using your logic, couldn't USF sue to join the SEC, on the grounds that we would agree to abide by whatever rules are necessary for entry?

Read the above link someone posted on antitrust law.

(06-11-2014 01:14 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 01:08 PM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 12:52 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 12:35 PM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 12:21 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  Thanks. It sounds like there maybe some push back to the P5 autonomy request. I hope that the G5 makes the P5 actually break away.

The P5 doesn't need the G5 to make money in football and so they don't need to play them. Honestly, I think if the G5 pushes this issue we could see the P5 break away. It's that important o them. We (the G5) need the P5 much more than they will ever need us IMO--

Not really. Both need each other equally, for a variety of reasons. But even if the so called "p5" broke away, I feel the AAC could easily sue for inclusion, if necessary. How could the so called P5 legally bar entry into whatever organization it morphs into, if the AAC has the desire and resources to abide by whatever rules are needed for entry.

Please. Ask yourself how P5 fan interest suffer if the P5s broke away? How would income - TV and otherwise? I'm sure P5 fans would be just fine with playing their conference games and three or four OOC games against other P5 teams. I doubt the same could be said for the G5 schools or their fans. Or the money and TV exposure that G5s will miss out on when all P5 games go totally off their schedules. --- So, with the union and player rights issues out there I seriously doubt the G5 schools have much, if any, leverage on the autonomy issue. It's going to happen and it's going to happen in a way that satisfies the P5 - or I really think they'll split to Division 4. And I think most of the G5 ADs / commissioners know it --

Thier bottom line would suffer GREATLY. Let me say that again GREATLY. With only 6 home games a year instead of 7 or eight. How much do you think an SEC or Big 10 school makes off a home game. That revenue for 1-2 games...gone. With no ability to schedule a "g5" school.

Why on earth would they need to schedule G5 schools? There are plenty of FCS schools around, if the G5 schools chose to boycott playing P5 schools, which of course they wouldn't.

The notion that the P5 and G5 need each other equally is koo-koo.

(06-11-2014 03:53 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 01:14 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 01:08 PM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 12:52 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 12:35 PM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  The P5 doesn't need the G5 to make money in football and so they don't need to play them. Honestly, I think if the G5 pushes this issue we could see the P5 break away. It's that important o them. We (the G5) need the P5 much more than they will ever need us IMO--

Not really. Both need each other equally, for a variety of reasons. But even if the so called "p5" broke away, I feel the AAC could easily sue for inclusion, if necessary. How could the so called P5 legally bar entry into whatever organization it morphs into, if the AAC has the desire and resources to abide by whatever rules are needed for entry.

Please. Ask yourself how P5 fan interest suffer if the P5s broke away? How would income - TV and otherwise? I'm sure P5 fans would be just fine with playing their conference games and three or four OOC games against other P5 teams. I doubt the same could be said for the G5 schools or their fans. Or the money and TV exposure that G5s will miss out on when all P5 games go totally off their schedules. --- So, with the union and player rights issues out there I seriously doubt the G5 schools have much, if any, leverage on the autonomy issue. It's going to happen and it's going to happen in a way that satisfies the P5 - or I really think they'll split to Division 4. And I think most of the G5 ADs / commissioners know it --

Thier bottom line would suffer GREATLY. Let me say that again GREATLY. With only 6 home games a year instead of 7 or eight. How much do you think an SEC or Big 10 school makes off a home game. That revenue for 1-2 games...gone. With no ability to schedule a "g5" school.

Why on earth would they need to schedule G5 schools? There are plenty of FCS schools around, if the G5 schools chose to boycott playing P5 schools, which of course they wouldn't.

The notion that the P5 and G5 need each other equally is koo-koo.

That's your opinion. I have a different one, and I feel I am correct. We disagree.

(06-11-2014 03:32 PM)The Real LHS81 Wrote:  If BYU winds up with an arrangement with the AAC. Or, if a "western division" winds up in the AAC. . . I want an SMU-BYU matchup. SMU owes you one from that damn 82 Holiday Bowl. . . 30+ years later and my feelings are still the same: "Eff that punky QB, Jim McMahon, and that effing Hail Mary!"

Who needs a formal arrangement? SMU and BYU seem to have room for a H-H series. In Provo in 2015 or 2016 and Dallas in 2017! Seriously.

Or, we could do a neutral-site game in San Diego!

(06-11-2014 01:37 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 01:35 PM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 01:22 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 01:13 PM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 01:02 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  If the AAC lawyers up initiates lawsuits if not initially included, they'll be included in this new organization...gauranteed. Take that to the bank. the P5 can't legally bar the AAC if the AAC is willing and able to abide by whatever rules are required for admission.

Really? Why can't they?

Because it would be an illegal, that's why. Can they bar a D3 team from becoming a D2 school. No...provided they meet all the criteria, they can move up. Life is full of this. If someone is willing/able to meet and does meet the criteria for any organization, they can't be barred from joining for no apparent reason. I could give hundreds of examples of this.

So they just create a rule that you're required to have a media deal worth $10 million per team.

They can...and it would likely be struck down as an anti-competitive clause. If they don't like lawsuits, a split will almost certainly draw a number of HUGE lawsuits. A spit would like destroy the G5 and leave them with FCS levels of income. That's a lot of potential liability.

OK, so why hasn't Houston sued the Big 12 for entry, on the grounds that whatever rules the Big 12 has that they've used not to admit Houston are "anti-competitive" or whatever?

You seem to have forgotten about the concept of "freedom of association". If you and I set up a club, we aren't obligated to publish entry rules and make it open to the public, we can make it just our club on the ground that that is just the way we prefer to have it.

There are a few very narrow exception: the courts have ruled that 'public' clubs like the Kiwanis can't violate civil rights laws, they can't engage in racial discrimination. But that obviously doesn't apply here.

(06-11-2014 02:13 PM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 02:04 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 01:58 PM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  On what basis do you win a lawsuit *IF* Division 4 is created? What duty does the Division 4 members owe the rest of us that has been breached?

Question for you: Why should the G5 cave to the P5? Why not just make the P5 leave the NCAA altogether? That way the G5 could force the NCAA to sponsor a real playoff? And in turn wouldn't that force the P5 to call their playoff something other than the NCAA Playoff?

That is the legitimacy that the P5 is seeking, all the while trying to exclude other NCAA members. The P5 would come back if the left, because they wouldn't have the legitimacy that they wanted. This whole thing is a big bluff, but the G5 needs to call the P5 on it; because it doesn't seem fair that a bunch of public universities in different States can band together to ban a bunch of other public universities from playing for a national championship.

All that has been addressed above IMO --- the P5 doesn't need the G5. The G5 will lose money, TV, exposure if P5s leave their schedules. As to the rest -- I really don't see why it's so hard to understand that if Division 4 is created THAT will be the real National Championship Game --- so it really doesn't matter how the G5 structures it's 'play-off' -it'll be the G5 Play offs - not the National Championship Game.

You are a Voice of Reason i this discussion.

(06-11-2014 03:56 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 01:37 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 01:35 PM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 01:22 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 01:13 PM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  Really? Why can't they?

Because it would be an illegal, that's why. Can they bar a D3 team from becoming a D2 school. No...provided they meet all the criteria, they can move up. Life is full of this. If someone is willing/able to meet and does meet the criteria for any organization, they can't be barred from joining for no apparent reason. I could give hundreds of examples of this.

So they just create a rule that you're required to have a media deal worth $10 million per team.

They can...and it would likely be struck down as an anti-competitive clause. If they don't like lawsuits, a split will almost certainly draw a number of HUGE lawsuits. A spit would like destroy the G5 and leave them with FCS levels of income. That's a lot of potential liability.

OK, so why hasn't Houston sued the Big 12 for entry, on the grounds that whatever rules the Big 12 has that they've used not to admit Houston are "anti-competitive" or whatever?

You seem to have forgotten about the concept of "freedom of association". If you and I set up a club, we aren't obligated to publish entry rules and make it open to the public, we can make it just our club on the ground that that is just the way we prefer to have it.

Try that and you will be sued. These types of lawsuits happen ALL the TIME, if you pay attention. Usually based on anti-discrimination laws, but other laws as well.

(06-11-2014 03:55 PM)YNot Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 03:32 PM)The Real LHS81 Wrote:  If BYU winds up with an arrangement with the AAC. Or, if a "western division" winds up in the AAC. . . I want an SMU-BYU matchup. SMU owes you one from that damn 82 Holiday Bowl. . . 30+ years later and my feelings are still the same: "Eff that punky QB, Jim McMahon, and that effing Hail Mary!"

Who needs a formal arrangement? SMU and BYU seem to have room for a H-H series. In Provo in 2015 or 2016 and Dallas in 2017! Seriously.

Or, we could do a neutral-site game in San Diego!

Works for me. Looking at the "Future Football Schedule" website. SMU has an opening for 2015. . . Unless there's a last minute cancellation that will more than likely be an FCS school. Looking at 2016 SMU already has 2 road games, and is probably looking for a 2nd home game. 2017 is pretty wide open for SMU. Could me mistaken, but SMU hosts UNT, and is on the road @TCU.

(06-11-2014 03:19 PM)YNot Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 01:47 PM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  OK - what Federal laws are broken?

The Sherman Act, Clayton Act, and FTC Act of 1914.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Stat...itrust_law

"These Acts, first, restrict the formation of cartels and prohibit other collusive practices regarded as being in restraint of trade. Second, they restrict the mergers and acquisitions of organizations which could substantially lessen competition. Third, they prohibit the creation of a monopoly and the abuse of monopoly power."

See also Oligopoly and Tacit Collusion.

See also NCAA v. Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma, 468 U.S. 85 (1984) 7 to 2, held that the NCAA's restriction of television of games, to encourage live attendance, was restricting supply, and therefore unlawful.

You realize that this decision allowed the CFA, an exclusive group of 64 or so college football powers, the right to negotiate their own TV contracts WITHOUT having to do so through the NCAA or to share that money or access to the contract with other schools, right?

Before then, the NCAA, representing ALL schools, negotiated the TV contracts and shared the money evenly, it was an egalitarian, socialistic model that treated Alabama the same as Utah State, and that regime was overturned by the courts.

(06-11-2014 02:13 PM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  All that has been addressed above IMO --- the P5 doesn't need the G5. The G5 will lose money, TV, exposure if P5s leave their schedules. As to the rest -- I really don't see why it's so hard to understand that if Division 4 is created THAT will be the real National Championship Game --- so it really doesn't matter how the G5 structures it's 'play-off' -it'll be the G5 Play offs - not the National Championship Game.

Maybe not. But if they get too obnoxious in their demands, I'd be willing to give it a shot, provided they leave in ALL sports and don't play non P5 in anything. See how they do being semi-pro football; and playing amongst themselves in everything else. See how Duke and Stanford like being official semi-pro schools.

(06-11-2014 03:56 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  You seem to have forgotten about the concept of "freedom of association". If you and I set up a club, we aren't obligated to publish entry rules and make it open to the public, we can make it just our club on the ground that that is just the way we prefer to have it.

That is true but you are forgetting the larger picture.

If your "club" prevented competition and/or created a monopoly you would be open to numerous lawsuits.

UH does not sue the B12 because "technically" we are all a part of the NCAA at the FBS level.

The NCAA has set the rules for FBS and not the B12. Within the NCAA there are conferences that choose to associate with other institutions of “higher" learning. They are not setting the standard of what constitutes FBS.

By default there is a glass ceiling but there are no “official” rules written down to be challenged.

Should the P5 break free of the NCAA all that changes and all that goes into writing that in turn could and would be challenged in court.

(06-11-2014 03:53 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 03:50 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 12:52 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 12:35 PM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 12:21 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  Thanks. It sounds like there maybe some push back to the P5 autonomy request. I hope that the G5 makes the P5 actually break away.

The P5 doesn't need the G5 to make money in football and so they don't need to play them. Honestly, I think if the G5 pushes this issue we could see the P5 break away. It's that important o them. We (the G5) need the P5 much more than they will ever need us IMO--

Not really. Both need each other equally, for a variety of reasons. But even if the so called "p5" broke away, I feel the AAC could easily sue for inclusion, if necessary.How could the so called P5 legally bar entry into whatever organization it morphs into, if the AAC has the desire and resources to abide by whatever rules are needed for entry.

Using your logic, couldn't USF sue to join the SEC, on the grounds that we would agree to abide by whatever rules are necessary for entry?

Read the above link someone posted on antitrust law.

How does anti-trust law distinguish USF wanting to join the SEC and the AAC wanting to join a P5 division? It doesn't.

Plus, the biggest court case ever in college athletics, the 1984 supreme court case cited above, actually LIBERATED the 60 or so CFA football schools from having to negotiate TV deals through the NCAA and share that money equally with other schools. That case is what has allowed all these separate P5 media deals, deals that exclude schools like USF, to be negotiated in the first place.

(06-11-2014 03:56 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  You seem to have forgotten about the concept of "freedom of association". If you and I set up a club, we aren't obligated to publish entry rules and make it open to the public, we can make it just our club on the ground that that is just the way we prefer to have it.

Nope
Private clubs can admit who they want as long as they play golf together, look at themselves in the mirror, or that sort of thing. If they open themselves up for business to the outside world, they come under the Commerce Clause, Anti-trust laws, Civil Rights Laws, etc.

(06-11-2014 04:00 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 03:56 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 01:37 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 01:35 PM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 01:22 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  Because it would be an illegal, that's why. Can they bar a D3 team from becoming a D2 school. No...provided they meet all the criteria, they can move up. Life is full of this. If someone is willing/able to meet and does meet the criteria for any organization, they can't be barred from joining for no apparent reason. I could give hundreds of examples of this.

So they just create a rule that you're required to have a media deal worth $10 million per team.

They can...and it would likely be struck down as an anti-competitive clause. If they don't like lawsuits, a split will almost certainly draw a number of HUGE lawsuits. A spit would like destroy the G5 and leave them with FCS levels of income. That's a lot of potential liability.

OK, so why hasn't Houston sued the Big 12 for entry, on the grounds that whatever rules the Big 12 has that they've used not to admit Houston are "anti-competitive" or whatever?

You seem to have forgotten about the concept of "freedom of association". If you and I set up a club, we aren't obligated to publish entry rules and make it open to the public, we can make it just our club on the ground that that is just the way we prefer to have it.

Try that and you will be sued. These types of lawsuits happen ALL the TIME, if you pay attention. Usually based on anti-discrimination laws, but other laws as well.

Discrimination is really the only basis, and even that has been narrowly tailored, like no racial or gender discrimination. That obviously doesn't apply to this situation.

If you were correct, USF should have lawyers suing the ACC, the SEC, any P5 to let us in. But we don't. I wonder why?

(06-11-2014 04:05 PM)GO Coogs GO!!! Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 03:56 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  You seem to have forgotten about the concept of "freedom of association". If you and I set up a club, we aren't obligated to publish entry rules and make it open to the public, we can make it just our club on the ground that that is just the way we prefer to have it.

That is true but you are forgetting the larger picture.

If your "club" prevented competition and/or created a monopoly you would be open to numerous lawsuits.

UH does not sue the B12 because "technically" we are all a part of the NCAA at the FBS level.

The NCAA has set the rules for FBS and not the B12. Within the NCAA there are conferences that choose to associate with other institutions of “higher" learning. They are not setting the standard of what constitutes FBS.

By default there is a glass ceiling but there are no “official” rules written down to be challenged.

Should the P5 break free of the NCAA all that changes and all that goes into writing that in turn could and would be challenged in court.

The reason that the SEC doesn't have "official written down entry rules" isn't because it is a part of the NCAA. It doesn't have them precisely because it wants control over its membership inclusion process. The SEC wants the freedom to include or exclude schools for no reason other than the private motivations of its members institutions.

And in that regard, the NCAA does not provide an "umbrella" protecting the SEC from federal lawsuits, as the NCAA is irrelevant from the POV of federal law.

There is absolutely no reason to think that federal law says it's OK for conferences within the NCAA to exclude other schools, but outside the NCAA they couldn't do that.

The reason there are no lawsuits by Houston against the Big 12 is because there is no federal issue in the Big 12 not wanting Houston as a member, quite the contrary, forcing the Big 12 to accept Houston would violate its freedom of association.

(06-11-2014 03:57 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 02:13 PM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 02:04 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 01:58 PM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  On what basis do you win a lawsuit *IF* Division 4 is created? What duty does the Division 4 members owe the rest of us that has been breached?

Question for you: Why should the G5 cave to the P5? Why not just make the P5 leave the NCAA altogether? That way the G5 could force the NCAA to sponsor a real playoff? And in turn wouldn't that force the P5 to call their playoff something other than the NCAA Playoff?

That is the legitimacy that the P5 is seeking, all the while trying to exclude other NCAA members. The P5 would come back if the left, because they wouldn't have the legitimacy that they wanted. This whole thing is a big bluff, but the G5 needs to call the P5 on it; because it doesn't seem fair that a bunch of public universities in different States can band together to ban a bunch of other public universities from playing for a national championship.

All that has been addressed above IMO --- the P5 doesn't need the G5. The G5 will lose money, TV, exposure if P5s leave their schedules. As to the rest -- I really don't see why it's so hard to understand that if Division 4 is created THAT will be the real National Championship Game --- so it really doesn't matter how the G5 structures it's 'play-off' -it'll be the G5 Play offs - not the National Championship Game.

You are a Voice of Reason i this discussion.

You are completely clueless. You need to be worrying about why Georgetown is being cut out rather than trolling around the AAC board and pretending to be a USF fan.