(06-25-2014 10:38 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  I'm going to ignore your comment for the most part. But I will say I don't think you understand what a monopoly is. Large companies splitting into smaller ones is ANTI-monopolistic behavior.

On the surface, your argument is correct, this "should" be anti monopolistic; however, once the details are analyzed, the P5 control the major contracts, major markets and could be declared a monopoly if they left the NCAA umbrella. In reality, they would get a Congressional waiver like the pro sports leagues but would be under close governmental supervision, which is not really in the P5 interest any more than having to create a new organization or having to continue to pay the way for the lesser conferences.

If the P5 can work within the NCAA framework, this is the best option as well as the simplest, Occam's Razor strikes once again. IF the other NCAA schools out vote the P5 and refuse to work with them, then they move on. I still believe the lesser schools will want the association to continue and will work with the P5, they have too much to lose.

(06-26-2014 11:10 AM)HtownOrange Wrote:  In reality, they would get a Congressional waiver like the pro sports leagues but would be under close governmental supervision

I think that is a very iffy proposition right there. I personally doubt there is the political will to protect a college sports monopoly to the detriment of other colleges.

Any Senator from Idaho, Wyoming, Hawaii, North Dakota, South Dakota, Alaska, New Hampshire, Connecticut, etc. can throw monkey wrenches into any institutionalized monopoly legislation.

Protecting the P5 from competition from the little guys might be a bridge too far.

(06-26-2014 11:31 AM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(06-26-2014 11:10 AM)HtownOrange Wrote:  In reality, they would get a Congressional waiver like the pro sports leagues but would be under close governmental supervision

I think that is a very iffy proposition right there. I personally doubt there is the political will to protect a college sports monopoly to the detriment of other colleges.

Any Senator from Idaho, Wyoming, Hawaii, North Dakota, South Dakota, Alaska, New Hampshire, Connecticut, etc. can throw monkey wrenches into any institutionalized monopoly legislation.

Protecting the P5 from competition from the little guys might be a bridge too far.

NY
MA
NJ
PA
MD

WV
VA
NC
SC
GA

FL
OH
MI
IN
IL

KY
TN
AL
MS
LA

TX
OK
MO
AR
WI

MN
IA
NE
CO
WA

OR
CA
AZ
UT
KS

These 35 states represent states with P5 schools. I may have missed some. These states are not going stop a split and would protect the P5 if necessary. I still don't think that it comes to that point but if it does, the new P5 split would likely be protected. There are many political ways of providing protection.

(06-26-2014 11:31 AM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(06-26-2014 11:10 AM)HtownOrange Wrote:  In reality, they would get a Congressional waiver like the pro sports leagues but would be under close governmental supervision

I think that is a very iffy proposition right there. I personally doubt there is the political will to protect a college sports monopoly to the detriment of other colleges.

Any Senator from Idaho, Wyoming, Hawaii, North Dakota, South Dakota, Alaska, New Hampshire, Connecticut, etc. can throw monkey wrenches into any institutionalized monopoly legislation.

Protecting the P5 from competition from the little guys might be a bridge too far.

I think that is a very iffy proposition right there to state a Division 4 would face litigation under antitrust law.

But hey, you're an antitrust expert.