CSNbbs

New Pac-12 Commish isn't shy on what he wants.

This is good news for the AAC.

https://ph.news.yahoo.com/new-pac-12-com...09859.html

(05-13-2021 05:50 PM)KnightLight Wrote: [ -> ]New Pac-12 Commish isn't shy on what he wants.

This is good news for the AAC.

https://ph.news.yahoo.com/new-pac-12-com...09859.html

Well, at least, he and Mike Aresco can commiserate and strategize and get drunk together when the majority vote by the committee (2 votes each by the SEC, ACC, B10 and B12 conferences = 8 votes to 7 votes by the PAC, AAC, and G4 conferences) slaps them down repeatedly, as they most probably will.

Can you believe the gall of the SEC Commissioner, Greg Sankey, who made the ridiculously glib/smug statement that, as far as he's concerned, "the four-team format "has worked" and "is working?"

Of course it's working - - for the SEC. What a selfish and insensitive b@$t@rd this idiot is for having the temerity to state it so matter-of-factly when he knows d@mn well that it's not working for half of the nation's universities!

The SEC Commissioner, Mr. Skankey, might as well have just come out and said that, as far as he's concerned the whole damn lot of them, all 65 non-P5 FBS universities should just climb to the edge of the world's most active volcano and take a flying leap!

.

(05-13-2021 05:50 PM)KnightLight Wrote: [ -> ]New Pac-12 Commish isn't shy on what he wants.

This is good news for the AAC.

https://ph.news.yahoo.com/new-pac-12-com...09859.html

Dude hasn't been on the job for 12 minutes so I wouldn't put much stock into what he is saying right now.

and the p12 have publicly been pushing for expansion even under the old Commish

they even proposed a 1 year playoff expansion for this season.....the pac 12 almost never make the playoff, their opinion could have been easily predicted ... when the SEC and big 10 get on board will it mean anything

It means a lot. I do not like all the talking heads settling for a small expansion to 6 or 8 teams and auto bids for the p5 alone. It’s p6 mother *******!

(05-13-2021 06:05 PM)HiddenDragon Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-13-2021 05:50 PM)KnightLight Wrote: [ -> ]New Pac-12 Commish isn't shy on what he wants.

This is good news for the AAC.

https://ph.news.yahoo.com/new-pac-12-com...09859.html

Dude hasn't been on the job for 12 minutes so I wouldn't put much stock into what he is saying right now.

You don’t think he doesn’t have the blessing of every President in his league?

(05-13-2021 06:02 PM)jedclampett Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-13-2021 05:50 PM)KnightLight Wrote: [ -> ]New Pac-12 Commish isn't shy on what he wants.

This is good news for the AAC.

https://ph.news.yahoo.com/new-pac-12-com...09859.html

Well, at least, he and Mike Aresco can commiserate and strategize and get drunk together when the majority vote by the committee (2 votes each by the SEC, ACC, B10 and B12 conferences = 8 votes to 7 votes by the PAC, AAC, and G4 conferences) slaps them down repeatedly, as they most probably will.

Can you believe the gall of the SEC Commissioner, Greg Sankey, who made the ridiculously glib/smug statement that, as far as he's concerned, "the four-team format "has worked" and "is working?"

Of course it's working - - for the SEC. What a selfish and insensitive b@$t@rd this idiot is for having the temerity to state it so matter-of-factly when he knows d@mn well that it's not working for half of the nation's universities!

The SEC Commissioner, Mr. Skankey, might as well have just come out and said that, as far as he's concerned the whole damn lot of them, all 65 non-P5 FBS universities should just climb to the edge of the world's most active volcano and take a flying leap!

.

Why would the SEC commish care about anyone not in the SEC. He works for the SEC. He represents the SEC. He is accountable to the SEC schools. He's right. It has worked for the SEC. Extremely well. What else would you expect him to say, that it hasn't worked for the SEC? He doesn't represent the Sun Belt, Cusa, etc. He represents the SEC and obviously cares about whatever is best for the SEC.

That said, there is a big enough cry to push the playoff expansion through, regardless of what the SEC commish says. Right off the bat, you have the entire G5 Pac 12, and Big 12 that are for playoff expansion, that's 7 conferences right there. It's going to pass, and I believe it will go big (12-16 teams) rather than small (6-8). That's just my gut feeling.

(05-13-2021 11:04 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote: [ -> ]Why would the SEC commish care about anyone not in the SEC. He works for the SEC. He represents the SEC. He is accountable to the SEC schools. He's right. It has worked for the SEC. Extremely well. What else would you expect him to say, that it hasn't worked for the SEC? He doesn't represent the Sun Belt, Cusa, etc. He represents the SEC and obviously cares about whatever is best for the SEC.

That said, there is a big enough cry to push the playoff expansion through, regardless of what the SEC commish says. Right off the bat, you have the entire G5 Pac 12, and Big 12 that are for playoff expansion, that's 7 conferences right there. It's going to pass, and I believe it will go big (12-16 teams) rather than small (6-8). That's just my gut feeling.

there is podcast by the old sunbelt commish on how the playoff systems are decided in a different thread..
the voting is even equal amoung conference.. he noted the p5 amongs themselves vote on how the system will be.. and the g5 are basically bystanders watching ..

as far changing the system, acc/big 10/sec are the majority

(05-13-2021 11:22 PM)pesik Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-13-2021 11:04 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote: [ -> ]Why would the SEC commish care about anyone not in the SEC. He works for the SEC. He represents the SEC. He is accountable to the SEC schools. He's right. It has worked for the SEC. Extremely well. What else would you expect him to say, that it hasn't worked for the SEC? He doesn't represent the Sun Belt, Cusa, etc. He represents the SEC and obviously cares about whatever is best for the SEC.

That said, there is a big enough cry to push the playoff expansion through, regardless of what the SEC commish says. Right off the bat, you have the entire G5 Pac 12, and Big 12 that are for playoff expansion, that's 7 conferences right there. It's going to pass, and I believe it will go big (12-16 teams) rather than small (6-8). That's just my gut feeling.

there is podcast by the old sunbelt commish on how the playoff systems are decided in a different thread..
the voting is even equal amoung conference.. he noted the p5 amongs themselves vote on how the system will be.. and the g5 are basically bystanders watching ..

as far changing the system, acc/big 10/sec are the majority

Congress needs to get involved. Antitrust laws are being broken left and right.

(05-13-2021 11:04 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-13-2021 06:02 PM)jedclampett Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-13-2021 05:50 PM)KnightLight Wrote: [ -> ]New Pac-12 Commish isn't shy on what he wants.

This is good news for the AAC.

https://ph.news.yahoo.com/new-pac-12-com...09859.html

Well, at least, he and Mike Aresco can commiserate and strategize and get drunk together when the majority vote by the committee (2 votes each by the SEC, ACC, B10 and B12 conferences = 8 votes to 7 votes by the PAC, AAC, and G4 conferences) slaps them down repeatedly, as they most probably will.

Can you believe the gall of the SEC Commissioner, Greg Sankey, who made the ridiculously glib/smug statement that, as far as he's concerned, "the four-team format "has worked" and "is working?"

Of course it's working - - for the SEC. What a selfish and insensitive b@$t@rd this idiot is for having the temerity to state it so matter-of-factly when he knows d@mn well that it's not working for half of the nation's universities!

The SEC Commissioner, Mr. Skankey, might as well have just come out and said that, as far as he's concerned the whole damn lot of them, all 65 non-P5 FBS universities should just climb to the edge of the world's most active volcano and take a flying leap!

.

Why would the SEC commish care about anyone not in the SEC. He works for the SEC. He represents the SEC. He is accountable to the SEC schools. He's right. It has worked for the SEC. Extremely well. What else would you expect him to say, that it hasn't worked for the SEC? He doesn't represent the Sun Belt, Cusa, etc. He represents the SEC and obviously cares about whatever is best for the SEC.

That said, there is a big enough cry to push the playoff expansion through, regardless of what the SEC commish says. Right off the bat, you have the entire G5 Pac 12, and Big 12 that are for playoff expansion, that's 7 conferences right there. It's going to pass, and I believe it will go big (12-16 teams) rather than small (6-8). That's just my gut feeling.

You're saying that it was his job to say what he said. I disagree.

He was stupid to say that, and he made the SEC look bad when he said what he said.

He didn't represent the SEC well. He didn't represent them intelligently.

He presented himself as a selfish, narcissistic shill and a creep who didn't even have the decency to avoid embarrassing himself by making such an insensitive, boorish statement.

He can believe anything he wants to believe, and he can vote any way he wants to vote, but to stick his neck out and insult 65 of the nation's leading universities and all their students and alumni and families like that was simply asinine, pure and simple. What an idiot!

.

(05-13-2021 11:37 PM)Memphis Yankee Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-13-2021 11:22 PM)pesik Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-13-2021 11:04 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote: [ -> ]Why would the SEC commish care about anyone not in the SEC. He works for the SEC. He represents the SEC. He is accountable to the SEC schools. He's right. It has worked for the SEC. Extremely well. What else would you expect him to say, that it hasn't worked for the SEC? He doesn't represent the Sun Belt, Cusa, etc. He represents the SEC and obviously cares about whatever is best for the SEC.

That said, there is a big enough cry to push the playoff expansion through, regardless of what the SEC commish says. Right off the bat, you have the entire G5 Pac 12, and Big 12 that are for playoff expansion, that's 7 conferences right there. It's going to pass, and I believe it will go big (12-16 teams) rather than small (6-8). That's just my gut feeling.

there is podcast by the old sunbelt commish on how the playoff systems are decided in a different thread..
the voting is even equal amoung conference.. he noted the p5 amongs themselves vote on how the system will be.. and the g5 are basically bystanders watching ..

as far changing the system, acc/big 10/sec are the majority

Congress needs to get involved. Antitrust laws are being broken left and right.

this is incorrect anti-trust laws are not being broken at all

people simply do not understand what anti-trust is or how it works nor do they understand the bowl system and how the playoffs came to be

the major conferences owned the bowl games that were getting the big name teams (because each bowl had a tie in to a major conference) and they got together and decided to swap around teams to have a better match up

there is nothing at all "anti trust" about that........anti trust does not mean that suddenly those bowl games owe an opportunity to any D1-A team that feels they deserve to be in those bowls to actually be in those bowls

no one is stopping the other conferences from forming their own bowls and making their own match ups and using that to declare a champion....If there was something preventing that then it would be anti-trust

instead those other conferences were offered some concessions and a small amount of money if they wanted to participate provided certain criteria were met......and those conferences MADE A CHOICE to take that offer

people always want to compare the NFL or other pro leagues where "everyone gets a shot", but that means nothing in terms of anti-trust or why or why not any of those pro leagues do not need an exemption from congress in relation to "anti-trust"

those leagues can choose how to decide their playoff participants and championship rules as they see fit and the owners are free to have a vote on that

the ONLY thing that is "anti trust" about the NFL and other pro leagues is the draft system and the free agency system......but because all of the players in each league have chosen to have a union to bargain with the league those leagues and those leagues have chosen to accept those unions there is no need for a congressional anti-trust waiver to allow the draft and free agent rules

if those leagues decided they no longer wanted to deal with the union and then still have a draft and free agent restrictions then they would need that exemption

but other than that it has nothing to do with playoff formats or anything else.....because there is nothing preventing anyone else from trying to form other leagues to compete and nothing preventing them from trying to draw players to their league and have a union work with them

just like there is nothing stopping the G5 conferences from deciding they do not want to be a part of the BCS they will simply have their own bowls and invite who they wish based on their criteria.....but of course other conferences champions are going to say no because they are tied to their bowls and they like the BCS......but that is their right to do so

(05-13-2021 06:02 PM)jedclampett Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-13-2021 05:50 PM)KnightLight Wrote: [ -> ]New Pac-12 Commish isn't shy on what he wants.

This is good news for the AAC.

https://ph.news.yahoo.com/new-pac-12-com...09859.html

Well, at least, he and Mike Aresco can commiserate and strategize and get drunk together when the majority vote by the committee (2 votes each by the SEC, ACC, B10 and B12 conferences = 8 votes to 7 votes by the PAC, AAC, and G4 conferences) slaps them down repeatedly, as they most probably will.

Can you believe the gall of the SEC Commissioner, Greg Sankey, who made the ridiculously glib/smug statement that, as far as he's concerned, "the four-team format "has worked" and "is working?"

Of course it's working - - for the SEC.

One could argue that Sankey's comment was actually self-less, as the SEC has arguably been harmed by the four-team CFP than any other conference. No other conference has had as many teams ranked between #5 and #10 during the CFP era, meaning teams that "just missed out" on the playoffs, as has the SEC. For every #8 UCF or #9 Cincy that the AAC feels was snubbed, the SEC has had probably two similarly ranked teams most years, like this year's #5 Texas AM and #8 Florida. The B1G as well is in that boat.

Beyond that though, I don't see the PAC statement as very important, precisely because changing the CFP before it runs its course in 2025 requires unanimity among the 11 CFP entities, and unanimity is hard to achieve.

Longer term, meaning post-2025, I think expansion is very likely.

(05-13-2021 06:02 PM)jedclampett Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-13-2021 05:50 PM)KnightLight Wrote: [ -> ]New Pac-12 Commish isn't shy on what he wants.

This is good news for the AAC.

https://ph.news.yahoo.com/new-pac-12-com...09859.html

Well, at least, he and Mike Aresco can commiserate and strategize and get drunk together when the majority vote by the committee (2 votes each by the SEC, ACC, B10 and B12 conferences = 8 votes to 7 votes by the PAC, AAC, and G4 conferences) slaps them down repeatedly, as they most probably will.

Can you believe the gall of the SEC Commissioner, Greg Sankey, who made the ridiculously glib/smug statement that, as far as he's concerned, "the four-team format "has worked" and "is working?"

Of course it's working - - for the SEC. What a selfish and insensitive b@$t@rd this idiot is for having the temerity to state it so matter-of-factly when he knows d@mn well that it's not working for half of the nation's universities!

The SEC Commissioner, Mr. Skankey, might as well have just come out and said that, as far as he's concerned the whole damn lot of them, all 65 non-P5 FBS universities should just climb to the edge of the world's most active volcano and take a flying leap!

.

I thought you were going to say the "edge of the Earth", Mr. Skankey probably believes that the earth is flat as well.

(05-14-2021 08:09 AM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-13-2021 06:02 PM)jedclampett Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-13-2021 05:50 PM)KnightLight Wrote: [ -> ]New Pac-12 Commish isn't shy on what he wants.

This is good news for the AAC.

https://ph.news.yahoo.com/new-pac-12-com...09859.html

Well, at least, he and Mike Aresco can commiserate and strategize and get drunk together when the majority vote by the committee (2 votes each by the SEC, ACC, B10 and B12 conferences = 8 votes to 7 votes by the PAC, AAC, and G4 conferences) slaps them down repeatedly, as they most probably will.

Can you believe the gall of the SEC Commissioner, Greg Sankey, who made the ridiculously glib/smug statement that, as far as he's concerned, "the four-team format "has worked" and "is working?"

Of course it's working - - for the SEC.

One could argue that Sankey's comment was actually self-less, as the SEC has arguably been harmed by the four-team CFP than any other conference. No other conference has had as many teams ranked between #5 and #10 during the CFP era, meaning teams that "just missed out" on the playoffs, as has the SEC. For every #8 UCF or #9 Cincy that the AAC feels was snubbed, the SEC has had probably two similarly ranked teams most years, like this year's #5 Texas AM and #8 Florida. The B1G as well is in that boat.

Beyond that though, I don't see the PAC statement as very important, precisely because changing the CFP before it runs its course in 2025 requires unanimity among the 11 CFP entities, and unanimity is hard to achieve.

Longer term, meaning post-2025, I think expansion is very likely.

Agree they will talk about it but the easiest path is to kick the can down the road and come up with an expanded playoff that would start after current contract runs out. They will have to clear how much more money it would make, how money would be split, how it will operate with bowls and all of that would have to be known before ESPN or others could bid on it.
So I’m thinking they will announce expansion for after 2025 and work on details in next few years

(05-13-2021 11:22 PM)pesik Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-13-2021 11:04 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote: [ -> ]Why would the SEC commish care about anyone not in the SEC. He works for the SEC. He represents the SEC. He is accountable to the SEC schools. He's right. It has worked for the SEC. Extremely well. What else would you expect him to say, that it hasn't worked for the SEC? He doesn't represent the Sun Belt, Cusa, etc. He represents the SEC and obviously cares about whatever is best for the SEC.

That said, there is a big enough cry to push the playoff expansion through, regardless of what the SEC commish says. Right off the bat, you have the entire G5 Pac 12, and Big 12 that are for playoff expansion, that's 7 conferences right there. It's going to pass, and I believe it will go big (12-16 teams) rather than small (6-8). That's just my gut feeling.

there is podcast by the old sunbelt commish on how the playoff systems are decided in a different thread..
the voting is even equal amoung conference.. he noted the p5 amongs themselves vote on how the system will be.. and the g5 are basically bystanders watching ..

as far changing the system, acc/big 10/sec are the majority

Antitrust!!!

Voice of UCF Marc Daniels and Sentinel Writer Mike Bianchi talk about the new Pac-12 Commish and what would expanded playoffs mean to the AAC/G5.

His impersonation of CFP Commish Bill Hancock is dead on as you know that is exactly what he would say.

Discussion starts at the 23:38 mark.
https://www.iheart.com/podcast/470-the-b...-82536019/

(05-14-2021 02:36 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-13-2021 11:37 PM)Memphis Yankee Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-13-2021 11:22 PM)pesik Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-13-2021 11:04 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote: [ -> ]Why would the SEC commish care about anyone not in the SEC. He works for the SEC. He represents the SEC. He is accountable to the SEC schools. He's right. It has worked for the SEC. Extremely well. What else would you expect him to say, that it hasn't worked for the SEC? He doesn't represent the Sun Belt, Cusa, etc. He represents the SEC and obviously cares about whatever is best for the SEC.

That said, there is a big enough cry to push the playoff expansion through, regardless of what the SEC commish says. Right off the bat, you have the entire G5 Pac 12, and Big 12 that are for playoff expansion, that's 7 conferences right there. It's going to pass, and I believe it will go big (12-16 teams) rather than small (6-8). That's just my gut feeling.

there is podcast by the old sunbelt commish on how the playoff systems are decided in a different thread..
the voting is even equal amoung conference.. he noted the p5 amongs themselves vote on how the system will be.. and the g5 are basically bystanders watching ..

as far changing the system, acc/big 10/sec are the majority

Congress needs to get involved. Antitrust laws are being broken left and right.

this is incorrect anti-trust laws are not being broken at all

people simply do not understand what anti-trust is or how it works nor do they understand the bowl system and how the playoffs came to be

the major conferences owned the bowl games that were getting the big name teams (because each bowl had a tie in to a major conference) and they got together and decided to swap around teams to have a better match up

there is nothing at all "anti trust" about that........anti trust does not mean that suddenly those bowl games owe an opportunity to any D1-A team that feels they deserve to be in those bowls to actually be in those bowls

no one is stopping the other conferences from forming their own bowls and making their own match ups and using that to declare a champion....If there was something preventing that then it would be anti-trust

instead those other conferences were offered some concessions and a small amount of money if they wanted to participate provided certain criteria were met......and those conferences MADE A CHOICE to take that offer

people always want to compare the NFL or other pro leagues where "everyone gets a shot", but that means nothing in terms of anti-trust or why or why not any of those pro leagues do not need an exemption from congress in relation to "anti-trust"

those leagues can choose how to decide their playoff participants and championship rules as they see fit and the owners are free to have a vote on that

the ONLY thing that is "anti trust" about the NFL and other pro leagues is the draft system and the free agency system......but because all of the players in each league have chosen to have a union to bargain with the league those leagues and those leagues have chosen to accept those unions there is no need for a congressional anti-trust waiver to allow the draft and free agent rules

if those leagues decided they no longer wanted to deal with the union and then still have a draft and free agent restrictions then they would need that exemption

but other than that it has nothing to do with playoff formats or anything else.....because there is nothing preventing anyone else from trying to form other leagues to compete and nothing preventing them from trying to draw players to their league and have a union work with them

just like there is nothing stopping the G5 conferences from deciding they do not want to be a part of the BCS they will simply have their own bowls and invite who they wish based on their criteria.....but of course other conferences champions are going to say no because they are tied to their bowls and they like the BCS......but that is their right to do so

I'm 100% correct if collusion is involved.

"The Sherman Act outlaws "every contract, combination, or conspiracy in restraint of trade," and any "monopolization, attempted monopolization, or conspiracy or combination to monopolize." Long ago, the Supreme Court decided that the Sherman Act does not prohibit every restraint of trade, only those that are unreasonable. For instance, in some sense, an agreement between two individuals to form a partnership restrains trade, but may not do so unreasonably, and thus may be lawful under the antitrust laws. On the other hand, certain acts are considered so harmful to competition that they are almost always illegal. These include plain arrangements among competing individuals or businesses to fix prices, divide markets, or rig bids. These acts are "per se" violations of the Sherman Act; in other words, no defense or justification is allowed."

Anti-trust laws

competition and monopoly See 'E' paragraph 3

Espn article in 2011 on BCS anti-trust.
Anti-trust for collusion

(05-13-2021 06:02 PM)jedclampett Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-13-2021 05:50 PM)KnightLight Wrote: [ -> ]New Pac-12 Commish isn't shy on what he wants.

This is good news for the AAC.

https://ph.news.yahoo.com/new-pac-12-com...09859.html

Well, at least, he and Mike Aresco can commiserate and strategize and get drunk together when the majority vote by the committee (2 votes each by the SEC, ACC, B10 and B12 conferences = 8 votes to 7 votes by the PAC, AAC, and G4 conferences) slaps them down repeatedly, as they most probably will.

Can you believe the gall of the SEC Commissioner, Greg Sankey, who made the ridiculously glib/smug statement that, as far as he's concerned, "the four-team format "has worked" and "is working?"

Of course it's working - - for the SEC. What a selfish and insensitive b@$t@rd this idiot is for having the temerity to state it so matter-of-factly when he knows d@mn well that it's not working for half of the nation's universities!

The SEC Commissioner, Mr. Skankey, might as well have just come out and said that, as far as he's concerned the whole damn lot of them, all 65 non-P5 FBS universities should just climb to the edge of the world's most active volcano and take a flying leap!

.

Chill, man. CFP expansion prior to the end of the current contract actually seems very likely for one reason: no one (whether P5 or G5) can afford to not maximize every single possible dollar in the wake of this pandemic. CFP expansion is one of the simplest slam dunk revenue generators out there.

Now, how that playoff looks (e.g. if there’s a G5 slot) is a different matter.

(05-14-2021 06:14 PM)Memphis Yankee Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-14-2021 02:36 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-13-2021 11:37 PM)Memphis Yankee Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-13-2021 11:22 PM)pesik Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-13-2021 11:04 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote: [ -> ]Why would the SEC commish care about anyone not in the SEC. He works for the SEC. He represents the SEC. He is accountable to the SEC schools. He's right. It has worked for the SEC. Extremely well. What else would you expect him to say, that it hasn't worked for the SEC? He doesn't represent the Sun Belt, Cusa, etc. He represents the SEC and obviously cares about whatever is best for the SEC.

That said, there is a big enough cry to push the playoff expansion through, regardless of what the SEC commish says. Right off the bat, you have the entire G5 Pac 12, and Big 12 that are for playoff expansion, that's 7 conferences right there. It's going to pass, and I believe it will go big (12-16 teams) rather than small (6-8). That's just my gut feeling.

there is podcast by the old sunbelt commish on how the playoff systems are decided in a different thread..
the voting is even equal amoung conference.. he noted the p5 amongs themselves vote on how the system will be.. and the g5 are basically bystanders watching ..

as far changing the system, acc/big 10/sec are the majority

Congress needs to get involved. Antitrust laws are being broken left and right.

this is incorrect anti-trust laws are not being broken at all

people simply do not understand what anti-trust is or how it works nor do they understand the bowl system and how the playoffs came to be

the major conferences owned the bowl games that were getting the big name teams (because each bowl had a tie in to a major conference) and they got together and decided to swap around teams to have a better match up

there is nothing at all "anti trust" about that........anti trust does not mean that suddenly those bowl games owe an opportunity to any D1-A team that feels they deserve to be in those bowls to actually be in those bowls

no one is stopping the other conferences from forming their own bowls and making their own match ups and using that to declare a champion....If there was something preventing that then it would be anti-trust

instead those other conferences were offered some concessions and a small amount of money if they wanted to participate provided certain criteria were met......and those conferences MADE A CHOICE to take that offer

people always want to compare the NFL or other pro leagues where "everyone gets a shot", but that means nothing in terms of anti-trust or why or why not any of those pro leagues do not need an exemption from congress in relation to "anti-trust"

those leagues can choose how to decide their playoff participants and championship rules as they see fit and the owners are free to have a vote on that

the ONLY thing that is "anti trust" about the NFL and other pro leagues is the draft system and the free agency system......but because all of the players in each league have chosen to have a union to bargain with the league those leagues and those leagues have chosen to accept those unions there is no need for a congressional anti-trust waiver to allow the draft and free agent rules

if those leagues decided they no longer wanted to deal with the union and then still have a draft and free agent restrictions then they would need that exemption

but other than that it has nothing to do with playoff formats or anything else.....because there is nothing preventing anyone else from trying to form other leagues to compete and nothing preventing them from trying to draw players to their league and have a union work with them

just like there is nothing stopping the G5 conferences from deciding they do not want to be a part of the BCS they will simply have their own bowls and invite who they wish based on their criteria.....but of course other conferences champions are going to say no because they are tied to their bowls and they like the BCS......but that is their right to do so

I'm 100% correct if collusion is involved.

"The Sherman Act outlaws "every contract, combination, or conspiracy in restraint of trade," and any "monopolization, attempted monopolization, or conspiracy or combination to monopolize." Long ago, the Supreme Court decided that the Sherman Act does not prohibit every restraint of trade, only those that are unreasonable. For instance, in some sense, an agreement between two individuals to form a partnership restrains trade, but may not do so unreasonably, and thus may be lawful under the antitrust laws. On the other hand, certain acts are considered so harmful to competition that they are almost always illegal. These include plain arrangements among competing individuals or businesses to fix prices, divide markets, or rig bids. These acts are "per se" violations of the Sherman Act; in other words, no defense or justification is allowed."

Anti-trust laws

competition and monopoly

Espn article in 2011 on BCS anti-trust.
Anti-trust for collusion

Your references to the overarching law are correct, but that doesn’t mean its application to the P5/G5 split is correct (as TodgeRodge noted). The P5 aren’t preventing the AAC or other G5 leagues to enter into agreements with contract bowls, which is really the basis of the P5/G5 split. Any G5 league could get that type of deal if the contract bowls reciprocated in the free market. The fact that the G5 can’t find those deals in the free market is not the fault of the P5.

Now, if the P5 told the contract bowls that they straight up couldn’t enter into agreements with the G5, then *that’s* an illegal restraint of trade. We just need to be clear that’s not happening, though. If the Fiesta, Cotton and Peach Bowls would rather take 3rd/4th place SEC/B1G teams or other P5 at-larges instead of G5 teams and they made those decisions on their own, then that’s perfectly legal.

(05-14-2021 06:27 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-14-2021 06:14 PM)Memphis Yankee Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-14-2021 02:36 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-13-2021 11:37 PM)Memphis Yankee Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-13-2021 11:22 PM)pesik Wrote: [ -> ]there is podcast by the old sunbelt commish on how the playoff systems are decided in a different thread..
the voting is even equal amoung conference.. he noted the p5 amongs themselves vote on how the system will be.. and the g5 are basically bystanders watching ..

as far changing the system, acc/big 10/sec are the majority

Congress needs to get involved. Antitrust laws are being broken left and right.

this is incorrect anti-trust laws are not being broken at all

people simply do not understand what anti-trust is or how it works nor do they understand the bowl system and how the playoffs came to be

the major conferences owned the bowl games that were getting the big name teams (because each bowl had a tie in to a major conference) and they got together and decided to swap around teams to have a better match up

there is nothing at all "anti trust" about that........anti trust does not mean that suddenly those bowl games owe an opportunity to any D1-A team that feels they deserve to be in those bowls to actually be in those bowls

no one is stopping the other conferences from forming their own bowls and making their own match ups and using that to declare a champion....If there was something preventing that then it would be anti-trust

instead those other conferences were offered some concessions and a small amount of money if they wanted to participate provided certain criteria were met......and those conferences MADE A CHOICE to take that offer

people always want to compare the NFL or other pro leagues where "everyone gets a shot", but that means nothing in terms of anti-trust or why or why not any of those pro leagues do not need an exemption from congress in relation to "anti-trust"

those leagues can choose how to decide their playoff participants and championship rules as they see fit and the owners are free to have a vote on that

the ONLY thing that is "anti trust" about the NFL and other pro leagues is the draft system and the free agency system......but because all of the players in each league have chosen to have a union to bargain with the league those leagues and those leagues have chosen to accept those unions there is no need for a congressional anti-trust waiver to allow the draft and free agent rules

if those leagues decided they no longer wanted to deal with the union and then still have a draft and free agent restrictions then they would need that exemption

but other than that it has nothing to do with playoff formats or anything else.....because there is nothing preventing anyone else from trying to form other leagues to compete and nothing preventing them from trying to draw players to their league and have a union work with them

just like there is nothing stopping the G5 conferences from deciding they do not want to be a part of the BCS they will simply have their own bowls and invite who they wish based on their criteria.....but of course other conferences champions are going to say no because they are tied to their bowls and they like the BCS......but that is their right to do so

I'm 100% correct if collusion is involved.

"The Sherman Act outlaws "every contract, combination, or conspiracy in restraint of trade," and any "monopolization, attempted monopolization, or conspiracy or combination to monopolize." Long ago, the Supreme Court decided that the Sherman Act does not prohibit every restraint of trade, only those that are unreasonable. For instance, in some sense, an agreement between two individuals to form a partnership restrains trade, but may not do so unreasonably, and thus may be lawful under the antitrust laws. On the other hand, certain acts are considered so harmful to competition that they are almost always illegal. These include plain arrangements among competing individuals or businesses to fix prices, divide markets, or rig bids. These acts are "per se" violations of the Sherman Act; in other words, no defense or justification is allowed."

Anti-trust laws

competition and monopoly

Espn article in 2011 on BCS anti-trust.
Anti-trust for collusion

Your references to the overarching law are correct, but that doesn’t mean its application to the P5/G5 split is correct (as TodgeRodge noted). The P5 aren’t preventing the AAC or other G5 leagues to enter into agreements with contract bowls, which is really the basis of the P5/G5 split. Any G5 league could get that type of deal if the contract bowls reciprocated in the free market. The fact that the G5 can’t find those deals in the free market is not the fault of the P5.

Now, if the P5 told the contract bowls that they straight up couldn’t enter into agreements with the G5, then *that’s* an illegal restraint of trade. We just need to be clear that’s not happening, though. If the Fiesta, Cotton and Peach Bowls would rather take 3rd/4th place SEC/B1G teams or other P5 at-larges instead of G5 teams and they made those decisions on their own, then that’s perfectly legal.

Saying that the G5 can start their own gig if they don't like being excluded, is completely wrong.

It clearly states that if one competitor keeps another competitor from entering the market, It's a violation of antitrust.

That's like apple excluding Parlor from having an app at their apple store so they can't compete with Facebook. Facebook, Google, Amazon, and Apple are colluding with each other sharing user information to pick winners and losers. They're going through Congressional hearings and investigations for Antitrust monopolization right now.