(01-28-2017 04:54 PM)LatahCounty Wrote:  

(01-28-2017 03:26 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(01-28-2017 01:23 PM)LatahCounty Wrote:  schools currently on the outside of FBS who want to meet the requirements and use the plain language of existing rules to do so would have a powerful case to make

This would be a very smug opinion to hold as the legal counsel for said schools. The letter of the law really doesn't mean much absent an understanding of the context in which it was ratified.

Again, you're a P5 conference. The current system is treating you very, very well. A bunch of schools that will never, ever threaten your position are trying to enter the tier beneath you and are planning a lawsuit. In court, a judge can look at your rulebook and make all sorts of unpredictable changes that could potentially upset your whole apple cart. Given that the effect to your bottom line of a new lower-tier FBS conference is almost zero and the risks of taking your shaky rulebook to court are relatively high, how hard are you going to fight over this?

Legal theorizing aside, the NCAA has not had much luck over the years when trying to defend exclusionary policies in court.

While the conference invite rule is terrible and near impossible to defend in my professional opinion. "Cleaning up" the rulebook to clarify the WAC situation isn't a bad thing since it appears to not apply to the similarly situated Valley, Southland and Southern.

If you track the actions of the power teams since the early 70's they have tended to support legislation that prevents others from coming up while permitting those already in to remain.

The basketball gold rush has not been well received. It diluted Division I so much that those cheap to buy early season opponents tend to play before mostly empty arenas at most P5 schools because there is no brand awareness.

Highly unlikely they repeat that mistake.