Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
If the P5 does secede from the NCAA a better question is
Author Message
chester Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 265
Joined: Feb 2018
Reputation: 44
I Root For: Alabama
Location:
Post: #21
RE: If the P5 does secede from the NCAA a better question is
(05-08-2020 07:27 AM)chester Wrote:  The ACC are WUSSIES. Pure and simple, they are WUSSIES. Like all other pathetic "Power" conferences, they don' t have the balls to shake any sh*t up. Flipping wussies...

Why don't you ACC flipheads throw your weight around for a change? Freaking wussies...
05-08-2020 07:50 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,919
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 519
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #22
RE: If the P5 does secede from the NCAA a better question is
(05-07-2020 07:14 PM)McKinney Wrote:  
(05-07-2020 02:35 PM)Statefan Wrote:  You have to overcome any anti-Trust action that may be spawned in the US Senate

Doesn't the federal government have bigger things to handle these days? Coronavirus? The recession that follows? Maybe even a supreme court confirmation? 07-coffee3

More to the point, as has been articulately explained elsewhere in this forum, there is no anti-trust action that could be brought in the event of a breakaway from what is already a monopolistic institution. That doesn't mean that someone won't initiate such a suit. Just that it would be quickly dismissed.

A far more likely cause for legal action, IMO, would result if conferences that break away try to "shed their deadweight" as has been suggested. Those conferences would most likely be violating their own bylaws, which are enforceable contractual obligations among all the members. The relevant question in that case would be what remedies would be available to the plaintiffs (the schools that are to be shed). Monetary damages? Injunctive relief?

Another possibility could be that individual state legislatures might try to prevent their state supported institutions from leaving little brothers behind by witholding financial support. That could lead the B1G to insist that the MAC be allowed to come along, which they may secretly want anyway because MAC teams are almost like FCS opponents for B1G teams in football.
05-08-2020 07:58 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,919
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 519
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #23
RE: If the P5 does secede from the NCAA a better question is
(05-07-2020 10:39 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  If the Mountain West, a league that's never sent a team past the Sweet 16, is brought along, then I imagine the MVC would be brought along to fill the midwest hole, considering it's performed definitively better than the MWC in the NCAA Tournament.

Since the Mountain West formed:

NCAA Sweet 16's
Current
MVC 6 MWC 4
+Former
MVC 9 MWC 6

NCAA wins
Current
MVC 18 MWC 15
+Former
MVC 34 MWC 22

NCAA W%
Current
MVC 45% MWC 30%
+Former
MVC 47% MWC 31%

I would ignore the "former" data in the above analysis as being irrelevant to a decision being made today. My question would be which Missouri Valley conference would we be talking about - the football conference or the all-sports one? They have different members.
05-08-2020 08:07 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,919
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 519
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #24
RE: If the P5 does secede from the NCAA a better question is
It would be interesting to see how the service academies would respond to a breakaway. If Army and Navy were to come along in order to join their sister institution the Air Force Academy, they would be largely uncompetitive in many sports besides football (and in Army's case probably football as well).

I could see Army and Navy staying together regardless, even if it meant being in a different association than Air Force. The latter would have the problem of placing their Olympic sports elsewhere if they chose not to go with the MWC, given the dearth of options in that part of the country. Their "rivalries" against Army and Navy aren't nearly as strong as the rivalry between those two.

For obvious political reasons, I can't imagine either a breakaway association or the NCAA denying a waiver allowing the academies to play each other in any sports in the future regardless how they each decide to go.
05-08-2020 08:18 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 34,176
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 920
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Post: #25
RE: If the P5 does secede from the NCAA a better question is
(05-08-2020 07:58 AM)ken d Wrote:  
(05-07-2020 07:14 PM)McKinney Wrote:  
(05-07-2020 02:35 PM)Statefan Wrote:  You have to overcome any anti-Trust action that may be spawned in the US Senate

Doesn't the federal government have bigger things to handle these days? Coronavirus? The recession that follows? Maybe even a supreme court confirmation? 07-coffee3

More to the point, as has been articulately explained elsewhere in this forum, there is no anti-trust action that could be brought in the event of a breakaway from what is already a monopolistic institution. That doesn't mean that someone won't initiate such a suit. Just that it would be quickly dismissed.

A far more likely cause for legal action, IMO, would result if conferences that break away try to "shed their deadweight" as has been suggested. Those conferences would most likely be violating their own bylaws, which are enforceable contractual obligations among all the members. The relevant question in that case would be what remedies would be available to the plaintiffs (the schools that are to be shed). Monetary damages? Injunctive relief?

Another possibility could be that individual state legislatures might try to prevent their state supported institutions from leaving little brothers behind by witholding financial support. That could lead the B1G to insist that the MAC be allowed to come along, which they may secretly want anyway because MAC teams are almost like FCS opponents for B1G teams in football.

1) Agree, there is zero anti-trust cause of action if P5 leaves G5.

2) Agree, conferences cannot shed members unless they follow their bylaws. But, they know this so won't try it, and the notion that conferences want to "shed" members is basically a fantasy of internet participants who think their school deserves a spot in a big conference that some other school doesn't deserve. E.g., many outsiders claim the Mississippi schools are "dead weight" in the SEC. Memphis fans or USF fans or Tulane fans might fantasize that the SEC would be stronger if the Mississippi schools were booted out and their schools let in, but nobody in the SEC thinks that.

3) State legislatures have some control but not a whole lot. Virginia did famously strong-arm VT in to the ACC, but that was a situation where they had leverage, because the state could pressure Virginia to advocate for that in ACC councils. But no state has control over what all the conferences decide to do. What can the state of Ohio do if the B1G votes anyway to leave the NCAA and the state wants Akron and Ohio to go too? Tell Ohio State they have to leave the B1G? Not happening.
(This post was last modified: 05-08-2020 08:47 AM by quo vadis.)
05-08-2020 08:45 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bill dazzle Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,634
Joined: Aug 2016
Reputation: 111
I Root For: VUMemIUDePaulNC
Location: Tower Crane Town
Post: #26
RE: If the P5 does secede from the NCAA a better question is
(05-08-2020 08:45 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(05-08-2020 07:58 AM)ken d Wrote:  
(05-07-2020 07:14 PM)McKinney Wrote:  
(05-07-2020 02:35 PM)Statefan Wrote:  You have to overcome any anti-Trust action that may be spawned in the US Senate

Doesn't the federal government have bigger things to handle these days? Coronavirus? The recession that follows? Maybe even a supreme court confirmation? 07-coffee3

More to the point, as has been articulately explained elsewhere in this forum, there is no anti-trust action that could be brought in the event of a breakaway from what is already a monopolistic institution. That doesn't mean that someone won't initiate such a suit. Just that it would be quickly dismissed.

A far more likely cause for legal action, IMO, would result if conferences that break away try to "shed their deadweight" as has been suggested. Those conferences would most likely be violating their own bylaws, which are enforceable contractual obligations among all the members. The relevant question in that case would be what remedies would be available to the plaintiffs (the schools that are to be shed). Monetary damages? Injunctive relief?

Another possibility could be that individual state legislatures might try to prevent their state supported institutions from leaving little brothers behind by witholding financial support. That could lead the B1G to insist that the MAC be allowed to come along, which they may secretly want anyway because MAC teams are almost like FCS opponents for B1G teams in football.

1) Agree, there is zero anti-trust cause of action if P5 leaves G5.

2) Agree, conferences cannot shed members unless they follow their bylaws. But, they know this so won't try it, and the notion that conferences want to "shed" members is basically a fantasy of internet participants who think their school deserves a spot in a big conference that some other school doesn't deserve. E.g., many outsiders claim the Mississippi schools are "dead weight" in the SEC. Memphis fans or USF fans or Tulane fans might fantasize that the SEC would be stronger if the Mississippi schools were booted out and their schools let in, but nobody in the SEC thinks that.

3) State legislatures have some control but not a whole lot. Virginia did famously strong-arm VT in to the ACC, but that was a situation where they had leverage, because the state could pressure Virginia to advocate for that in ACC councils. But no state has control over what all the conferences decide to do. What can the state of Ohio do if the B1G votes anyway to leave the NCAA and the state wants Akron and Ohio to go too? Tell Ohio State they have to leave the B1G? Not happening.


This is a strong and accurate point you make, Quo:

"Memphis fans or USF fans or Tulane fans might fantasize that the SEC would be stronger if the Mississippi schools were booted out and their schools let in, but nobody in the SEC thinks that."

I'm a huge Vanderbilt and Memphis fan (and have cousins who attended Tennessee — so I'm cool with the Vols) so I understand the dynamic. No SEC fan, myself included, thinks like that. You are correct. Mississippi State is vastly better suited for the SEC than (in this hypothetical) the UofMemphis, indeed.

However, I would add that there are Mississippi State fans who are as close-minded about Memphis as some of the Memphis fans you reference are as delusional about how MSU is not "good enough" for the SEC and how, on top of this, the UofM might even be better for the league (than MSU).

This close-mindedness is shown when a MSU fan (or any SEC homer, fanboy, fool, apologist, bombastic ass, etc.) fails to fully give credit to Memphis for the respectable progress it has made over the years in football, basketball and academics. (And that is not a shot against all MissSt fans as I've met some very fair-minded ones.)

So the idiocy works both ways. I have no stomach for either — and particularly from fans of the programs for which I root.
(This post was last modified: 05-08-2020 11:15 AM by bill dazzle.)
05-08-2020 09:01 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
georgia_tech_swagger Offline
Res publica non dominetur
*

Posts: 47,979
Joined: Feb 2002
Reputation: 1495
I Root For: GT, USCU, FU
Location: Upstate, SC

SkunkworksFolding@NCAAbbsNCAAbbs LUGCrappies
Post: #27
RE: If the P5 does secede from the NCAA a better question is
I look forward to chester's cross examination of chester on this matter.
05-08-2020 10:33 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Online
Legend
*

Posts: 40,576
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 1366
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #28
RE: If the P5 does secede from the NCAA a better question is
(05-08-2020 01:53 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  The last serious discussion of P5 breakaway by the P5 ahead of the adoption of autonomy legislation the break starting point was all FBS plus Big East, A10, WCC, Ivy and the Valley.

We tend to be football focused in our thinking but football is nothing in association revenue and highly unlikely any association comprised of more than the P5 would ever be permitted to run football postseason. Because of this the issue is not how many football schools but how many of the 350 in hoops get invited.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Serious discussion on this board? Or was there something else you heard?

That does seem a logical split.
05-08-2020 12:08 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Kit-Cat Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,159
Joined: Jun 2002
Reputation: 32
I Root For: Championships
Location:

CrappiesCrappiesCrappiesCrappiesCrappies
Post: #29
RE: If the P5 does secede from the NCAA a better question is
(05-08-2020 08:45 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(05-08-2020 07:58 AM)ken d Wrote:  
(05-07-2020 07:14 PM)McKinney Wrote:  
(05-07-2020 02:35 PM)Statefan Wrote:  You have to overcome any anti-Trust action that may be spawned in the US Senate

Doesn't the federal government have bigger things to handle these days? Coronavirus? The recession that follows? Maybe even a supreme court confirmation? 07-coffee3

More to the point, as has been articulately explained elsewhere in this forum, there is no anti-trust action that could be brought in the event of a breakaway from what is already a monopolistic institution. That doesn't mean that someone won't initiate such a suit. Just that it would be quickly dismissed.

A far more likely cause for legal action, IMO, would result if conferences that break away try to "shed their deadweight" as has been suggested. Those conferences would most likely be violating their own bylaws, which are enforceable contractual obligations among all the members. The relevant question in that case would be what remedies would be available to the plaintiffs (the schools that are to be shed). Monetary damages? Injunctive relief?

Another possibility could be that individual state legislatures might try to prevent their state supported institutions from leaving little brothers behind by witholding financial support. That could lead the B1G to insist that the MAC be allowed to come along, which they may secretly want anyway because MAC teams are almost like FCS opponents for B1G teams in football.

1) Agree, there is zero anti-trust cause of action if P5 leaves G5.

2) Agree, conferences cannot shed members unless they follow their bylaws. But, they know this so won't try it, and the notion that conferences want to "shed" members is basically a fantasy of internet participants who think their school deserves a spot in a big conference that some other school doesn't deserve. E.g., many outsiders claim the Mississippi schools are "dead weight" in the SEC. Memphis fans or USF fans or Tulane fans might fantasize that the SEC would be stronger if the Mississippi schools were booted out and their schools let in, but nobody in the SEC thinks that.

3) State legislatures have some control but not a whole lot. Virginia did famously strong-arm VT in to the ACC, but that was a situation where they had leverage, because the state could pressure Virginia to advocate for that in ACC councils. But no state has control over what all the conferences decide to do. What can the state of Ohio do if the B1G votes anyway to leave the NCAA and the state wants Akron and Ohio to go too? Tell Ohio State they have to leave the B1G? Not happening.

Its not about OSU and the other schools athletically. That is like comparing the military might of the US with central american countries.

What it is about is backyard support and that is what MAC gives to the B1G as they do a lot cost sharing together and vote together on regional issues.

I would not under estimate either a different mood of cooperation between the P5 and those in the G5 out of the pandemic. Perhaps a more generous post season access for those in the G out of a sense of fairness.

Ohio State gave up trying to put distance on the MAC about 30 years ago when they scheduled in Bowling Green for a football game to keep the money in-state instead of blowing out SWC teams to open the season.

The only school OSU had viciously targeted up until the 1950's was Kent State who at the time to them was a competitor like UCF is UF with a larger regional market and potential to disrupt the state hierarchy. The state demographics then shifted with Columbus building up and Northeast Ohio in steady decline.
(This post was last modified: 05-08-2020 12:29 PM by Kit-Cat.)
05-08-2020 12:28 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
IWokeUpLikeThis Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,735
Joined: Jul 2014
Reputation: 295
I Root For: NIU, Chicago St
Location: South Side
Post: #30
RE: If the P5 does secede from the NCAA a better question is
(05-08-2020 12:28 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  
(05-08-2020 08:45 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(05-08-2020 07:58 AM)ken d Wrote:  
(05-07-2020 07:14 PM)McKinney Wrote:  
(05-07-2020 02:35 PM)Statefan Wrote:  You have to overcome any anti-Trust action that may be spawned in the US Senate

Doesn't the federal government have bigger things to handle these days? Coronavirus? The recession that follows? Maybe even a supreme court confirmation? 07-coffee3

More to the point, as has been articulately explained elsewhere in this forum, there is no anti-trust action that could be brought in the event of a breakaway from what is already a monopolistic institution. That doesn't mean that someone won't initiate such a suit. Just that it would be quickly dismissed.

A far more likely cause for legal action, IMO, would result if conferences that break away try to "shed their deadweight" as has been suggested. Those conferences would most likely be violating their own bylaws, which are enforceable contractual obligations among all the members. The relevant question in that case would be what remedies would be available to the plaintiffs (the schools that are to be shed). Monetary damages? Injunctive relief?

Another possibility could be that individual state legislatures might try to prevent their state supported institutions from leaving little brothers behind by witholding financial support. That could lead the B1G to insist that the MAC be allowed to come along, which they may secretly want anyway because MAC teams are almost like FCS opponents for B1G teams in football.

1) Agree, there is zero anti-trust cause of action if P5 leaves G5.

2) Agree, conferences cannot shed members unless they follow their bylaws. But, they know this so won't try it, and the notion that conferences want to "shed" members is basically a fantasy of internet participants who think their school deserves a spot in a big conference that some other school doesn't deserve. E.g., many outsiders claim the Mississippi schools are "dead weight" in the SEC. Memphis fans or USF fans or Tulane fans might fantasize that the SEC would be stronger if the Mississippi schools were booted out and their schools let in, but nobody in the SEC thinks that.

3) State legislatures have some control but not a whole lot. Virginia did famously strong-arm VT in to the ACC, but that was a situation where they had leverage, because the state could pressure Virginia to advocate for that in ACC councils. But no state has control over what all the conferences decide to do. What can the state of Ohio do if the B1G votes anyway to leave the NCAA and the state wants Akron and Ohio to go too? Tell Ohio State they have to leave the B1G? Not happening.

Its not about OSU and the other schools athletically. That is like comparing the military might of the US with central american countries.

What it is about is backyard support and that is what MAC gives to the B1G as they do a lot cost sharing together and vote together on regional issues.

I would not under estimate either a different mood of cooperation between the P5 and those in the G5 out of the pandemic. Perhaps a more generous post season access for those in the G out of a sense of fairness.

Ohio State gave up trying to put distance on the MAC about 30 years ago when they scheduled in Bowling Green for a football game to keep the money in-state instead of blowing out SWC teams to open the season.

The only school OSU had viciously targeted up until the 1950's was Kent State who at the time to them was a competitor like UCF is UF with a larger regional market and potential to disrupt the state hierarchy. The state demographics then shifted with Columbus building up and Northeast Ohio in steady decline.

I wonder how people would've viewed Kent St if realignment boards existed in the 1950s.
05-08-2020 12:33 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MidknightWhiskey Online
2nd String
*

Posts: 292
Joined: Oct 2019
Reputation: 24
I Root For: UCF
Location:
Post: #31
RE: If the P5 does secede from the NCAA a better question is
(05-08-2020 07:58 AM)ken d Wrote:  
(05-07-2020 07:14 PM)McKinney Wrote:  
(05-07-2020 02:35 PM)Statefan Wrote:  You have to overcome any anti-Trust action that may be spawned in the US Senate

Doesn't the federal government have bigger things to handle these days? Coronavirus? The recession that follows? Maybe even a supreme court confirmation? 07-coffee3

More to the point, as has been articulately explained elsewhere in this forum, there is no anti-trust action that could be brought in the event of a breakaway from what is already a monopolistic institution. That doesn't mean that someone won't initiate such a suit. Just that it would be quickly dismissed.

A far more likely cause for legal action, IMO, would result if conferences that break away try to "shed their deadweight" as has been suggested. Those conferences would most likely be violating their own bylaws, which are enforceable contractual obligations among all the members. The relevant question in that case would be what remedies would be available to the plaintiffs (the schools that are to be shed). Monetary damages? Injunctive relief?

Another possibility could be that individual state legislatures might try to prevent their state supported institutions from leaving little brothers behind by witholding financial support. That could lead the B1G to insist that the MAC be allowed to come along, which they may secretly want anyway because MAC teams are almost like FCS opponents for B1G teams in football.

Just vote to dissolve the conference and create a new one without the members you don't want, just like the old SWC.
If that's not an option the members can just leave and form a new conference. Probably tie the exit fee's up in court for a few years as well.
An entirely new league would be a fresh start and likely involve complete restructuring of conferences to an even number of teams as well as a real playoff system.
05-08-2020 01:29 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Tigersmoke4 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,791
Joined: Oct 2017
Reputation: 72
I Root For: Memphis
Location:
Post: #32
RE: If the P5 does secede from the NCAA a better question is
(05-07-2020 07:28 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  If the P5 pull away I think they base their invites on a school by school basis—potentially leveraging the likes of the AAC, MWC, and Big East to take on other invitees such as Gonzaga, BYU, etc.

I'm in agreement with you. I think that the a beefed up AAC that'll take in BYU,BOISE ,SDSU and Gonzaga would give a breakaway top tier the rest of anything of value left and just the right amount of teams that would be able to only play each other. On the basketball side I'm not so sure that it'll be important enough for them to want to add more mouths to feed by inviting the NBE, but basketball is a sport that could absorb them in easily for the sake of having a breakaway bball tournament. 04-cheers
05-08-2020 01:54 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wedge Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 16,569
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 720
I Root For: California
Location: TROS
Post: #33
RE: If the P5 does secede from the NCAA a better question is
(05-08-2020 01:29 PM)MidknightWhiskey Wrote:  
(05-08-2020 07:58 AM)ken d Wrote:  
(05-07-2020 07:14 PM)McKinney Wrote:  
(05-07-2020 02:35 PM)Statefan Wrote:  You have to overcome any anti-Trust action that may be spawned in the US Senate

Doesn't the federal government have bigger things to handle these days? Coronavirus? The recession that follows? Maybe even a supreme court confirmation? 07-coffee3

More to the point, as has been articulately explained elsewhere in this forum, there is no anti-trust action that could be brought in the event of a breakaway from what is already a monopolistic institution. That doesn't mean that someone won't initiate such a suit. Just that it would be quickly dismissed.

A far more likely cause for legal action, IMO, would result if conferences that break away try to "shed their deadweight" as has been suggested. Those conferences would most likely be violating their own bylaws, which are enforceable contractual obligations among all the members. The relevant question in that case would be what remedies would be available to the plaintiffs (the schools that are to be shed). Monetary damages? Injunctive relief?

Another possibility could be that individual state legislatures might try to prevent their state supported institutions from leaving little brothers behind by witholding financial support. That could lead the B1G to insist that the MAC be allowed to come along, which they may secretly want anyway because MAC teams are almost like FCS opponents for B1G teams in football.

Just vote to dissolve the conference and create a new one without the members you don't want, just like the old SWC.
If that's not an option the members can just leave and form a new conference.

I remember reading that before the MWC formed, BYU had lawyers look into different possibilities regarding the WAC. They apparently decided that kicking a few schools out of the 16-school WAC wouldn't work, and that the safest thing legally was for no more than half of the conference to leave together, and that's what they did.

The implication is this: If, for example, 9 of the 12 schools in the MAC left the MAC together and started a new conference, the other 3 would have a decent argument that what the 9 were really doing was kicking the other 3 out of the MAC in violation of the MAC bylaws.
05-08-2020 02:58 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 34,176
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 920
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Post: #34
RE: If the P5 does secede from the NCAA a better question is
(05-08-2020 12:28 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  
(05-08-2020 08:45 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(05-08-2020 07:58 AM)ken d Wrote:  
(05-07-2020 07:14 PM)McKinney Wrote:  
(05-07-2020 02:35 PM)Statefan Wrote:  You have to overcome any anti-Trust action that may be spawned in the US Senate

Doesn't the federal government have bigger things to handle these days? Coronavirus? The recession that follows? Maybe even a supreme court confirmation? 07-coffee3

More to the point, as has been articulately explained elsewhere in this forum, there is no anti-trust action that could be brought in the event of a breakaway from what is already a monopolistic institution. That doesn't mean that someone won't initiate such a suit. Just that it would be quickly dismissed.

A far more likely cause for legal action, IMO, would result if conferences that break away try to "shed their deadweight" as has been suggested. Those conferences would most likely be violating their own bylaws, which are enforceable contractual obligations among all the members. The relevant question in that case would be what remedies would be available to the plaintiffs (the schools that are to be shed). Monetary damages? Injunctive relief?

Another possibility could be that individual state legislatures might try to prevent their state supported institutions from leaving little brothers behind by witholding financial support. That could lead the B1G to insist that the MAC be allowed to come along, which they may secretly want anyway because MAC teams are almost like FCS opponents for B1G teams in football.

1) Agree, there is zero anti-trust cause of action if P5 leaves G5.

2) Agree, conferences cannot shed members unless they follow their bylaws. But, they know this so won't try it, and the notion that conferences want to "shed" members is basically a fantasy of internet participants who think their school deserves a spot in a big conference that some other school doesn't deserve. E.g., many outsiders claim the Mississippi schools are "dead weight" in the SEC. Memphis fans or USF fans or Tulane fans might fantasize that the SEC would be stronger if the Mississippi schools were booted out and their schools let in, but nobody in the SEC thinks that.

3) State legislatures have some control but not a whole lot. Virginia did famously strong-arm VT in to the ACC, but that was a situation where they had leverage, because the state could pressure Virginia to advocate for that in ACC councils. But no state has control over what all the conferences decide to do. What can the state of Ohio do if the B1G votes anyway to leave the NCAA and the state wants Akron and Ohio to go too? Tell Ohio State they have to leave the B1G? Not happening.

Its not about OSU and the other schools athletically. That is like comparing the military might of the US with central american countries.

What it is about is backyard support and that is what MAC gives to the B1G as they do a lot cost sharing together and vote together on regional issues.

I would not under estimate either a different mood of cooperation between the P5 and those in the G5 out of the pandemic

Remember, I do *not* think the P5 is leaving the NCAA and G5 and one reason is what you mention here - the P5 sees benefits in having G5 schools in the same division/organization with them, so have no desire to break away.

I was just talking "what if" the P5 do decide to leave, what could be done to stop them. IMO, not much.
05-08-2020 04:38 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
esayem Online
Hark The Sound!
*

Posts: 6,537
Joined: Feb 2007
Reputation: 235
I Root For: The Heels
Location: Tobacco Road
Post: #35
RE: If the P5 does secede from the NCAA a better question is
(05-08-2020 12:33 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  
(05-08-2020 12:28 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  
(05-08-2020 08:45 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(05-08-2020 07:58 AM)ken d Wrote:  
(05-07-2020 07:14 PM)McKinney Wrote:  Doesn't the federal government have bigger things to handle these days? Coronavirus? The recession that follows? Maybe even a supreme court confirmation? 07-coffee3

More to the point, as has been articulately explained elsewhere in this forum, there is no anti-trust action that could be brought in the event of a breakaway from what is already a monopolistic institution. That doesn't mean that someone won't initiate such a suit. Just that it would be quickly dismissed.

A far more likely cause for legal action, IMO, would result if conferences that break away try to "shed their deadweight" as has been suggested. Those conferences would most likely be violating their own bylaws, which are enforceable contractual obligations among all the members. The relevant question in that case would be what remedies would be available to the plaintiffs (the schools that are to be shed). Monetary damages? Injunctive relief?

Another possibility could be that individual state legislatures might try to prevent their state supported institutions from leaving little brothers behind by witholding financial support. That could lead the B1G to insist that the MAC be allowed to come along, which they may secretly want anyway because MAC teams are almost like FCS opponents for B1G teams in football.

1) Agree, there is zero anti-trust cause of action if P5 leaves G5.

2) Agree, conferences cannot shed members unless they follow their bylaws. But, they know this so won't try it, and the notion that conferences want to "shed" members is basically a fantasy of internet participants who think their school deserves a spot in a big conference that some other school doesn't deserve. E.g., many outsiders claim the Mississippi schools are "dead weight" in the SEC. Memphis fans or USF fans or Tulane fans might fantasize that the SEC would be stronger if the Mississippi schools were booted out and their schools let in, but nobody in the SEC thinks that.

3) State legislatures have some control but not a whole lot. Virginia did famously strong-arm VT in to the ACC, but that was a situation where they had leverage, because the state could pressure Virginia to advocate for that in ACC councils. But no state has control over what all the conferences decide to do. What can the state of Ohio do if the B1G votes anyway to leave the NCAA and the state wants Akron and Ohio to go too? Tell Ohio State they have to leave the B1G? Not happening.

Its not about OSU and the other schools athletically. That is like comparing the military might of the US with central american countries.

What it is about is backyard support and that is what MAC gives to the B1G as they do a lot cost sharing together and vote together on regional issues.

I would not under estimate either a different mood of cooperation between the P5 and those in the G5 out of the pandemic. Perhaps a more generous post season access for those in the G out of a sense of fairness.

Ohio State gave up trying to put distance on the MAC about 30 years ago when they scheduled in Bowling Green for a football game to keep the money in-state instead of blowing out SWC teams to open the season.

The only school OSU had viciously targeted up until the 1950's was Kent State who at the time to them was a competitor like UCF is UF with a larger regional market and potential to disrupt the state hierarchy. The state demographics then shifted with Columbus building up and Northeast Ohio in steady decline.

I wonder how people would've viewed Kent St if realignment boards existed in the 1950s.

Probably like the other Mid-Am teams at the time: Ohio, Butler, Miami, Toledo, etc.
05-09-2020 04:29 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DavidSt Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 14,161
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 208
I Root For: ATU, P7
Location:
Post: #36
RE: If the P5 does secede from the NCAA a better question is
Would Eastern Washington, Northern Arizona and Northern Iowa go with them since they play big brothers of the P5 every year?

I would grab the Montana and the _Dakota State twins.
05-09-2020 06:23 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,919
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 519
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #37
RE: If the P5 does secede from the NCAA a better question is
(05-08-2020 02:58 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
(05-08-2020 01:29 PM)MidknightWhiskey Wrote:  
(05-08-2020 07:58 AM)ken d Wrote:  
(05-07-2020 07:14 PM)McKinney Wrote:  
(05-07-2020 02:35 PM)Statefan Wrote:  You have to overcome any anti-Trust action that may be spawned in the US Senate

Doesn't the federal government have bigger things to handle these days? Coronavirus? The recession that follows? Maybe even a supreme court confirmation? 07-coffee3

More to the point, as has been articulately explained elsewhere in this forum, there is no anti-trust action that could be brought in the event of a breakaway from what is already a monopolistic institution. That doesn't mean that someone won't initiate such a suit. Just that it would be quickly dismissed.

A far more likely cause for legal action, IMO, would result if conferences that break away try to "shed their deadweight" as has been suggested. Those conferences would most likely be violating their own bylaws, which are enforceable contractual obligations among all the members. The relevant question in that case would be what remedies would be available to the plaintiffs (the schools that are to be shed). Monetary damages? Injunctive relief?

Another possibility could be that individual state legislatures might try to prevent their state supported institutions from leaving little brothers behind by witholding financial support. That could lead the B1G to insist that the MAC be allowed to come along, which they may secretly want anyway because MAC teams are almost like FCS opponents for B1G teams in football.

Just vote to dissolve the conference and create a new one without the members you don't want, just like the old SWC.
If that's not an option the members can just leave and form a new conference.

I remember reading that before the MWC formed, BYU had lawyers look into different possibilities regarding the WAC. They apparently decided that kicking a few schools out of the 16-school WAC wouldn't work, and that the safest thing legally was for no more than half of the conference to leave together, and that's what they did.

The implication is this: If, for example, 9 of the 12 schools in the MAC left the MAC together and started a new conference, the other 3 would have a decent argument that what the 9 were really doing was kicking the other 3 out of the MAC in violation of the MAC bylaws.

As a practical matter, voting to dissolve a conference in order to shed weaker schools is harder than it sounds, and more difficult now than it was in the days before media contracts ballooned exponentially.

For one thing, weakness is a continuum. Some schools who might be on the good side of the cutline today might realize that after the initial cut, they become the weak sisters vulnerable to a similar fate in the future. For that reason, they may be reluctant to vote to dissolve, making a supermajority required by most conference bylaws (usually around 75%) very difficult to achieve.

The "poison pills" many conferences have adopted, such as punitive exit fees and Grants of Media Rights, are further protections for the schools that might be perceived as "deadweight". The reality is that nearly every conference has more weak and mediocre football programs than Big Dogs like Ohio State, Michigan, Southern Cal, Oklahoma, Texas et al. That reality is the glue that holds conferences together.
05-09-2020 07:43 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
XLance Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 9,067
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 251
I Root For: Carolina
Location:
Post: #38
RE: If the P5 does secede from the NCAA a better question is
(05-07-2020 10:32 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  ... who else is coming along for the ride in basketball? There will for sure be additional conferences for hoops. Will there be others for football? Will there be a system of relegation to call up the best of the rest and send down those who can't hack it?

Coming along in hoops:
- American
- Atlantic 10
- Big East
- Mountain West
- West Coast

Coming along in football too:
- American
- Mountain West



Regarding whether the premise is the P5 leaving the NCAA is plausible, ask yourself this: Will the ACC be tempted to kill the NCAA to get its hands on the tournament money which will almost certainly disproportionately enhance the revenue of the ACC relative to its competition? Well we have five ACC members with in state SEC rivals who would love to do that. Pitt can look east and come to a similar conclusion. As a private in an area of declining wealth and population Syracuse is probably on board as well. Just pissing off UCONN makes BC another yes. You're at 7 pretty easy yes votes right there. The question becomes can you whittle away enough outside of the Triangle to get enough votes. I'm not sure if the Triangle would be on board. Chapel Hill loves those Title IX sport titles and the Capital One Cup. So does Duke. The act of taking basketball away from the NCAA means some of those sports may not make the jump since the NCAA greatly inflates sport requirements in Division 1.

It shouldn't ever happen.
As badly as it has been interpreted, the worst thing that we could ever do in this country is hold a Constitutional Convention to either re-write or reform what we have. If that ever happens individual rights and freedoms will be out the window and the power entities that wanted it called will end up with total control.
The same is true with the P5 schools leaving the NCAA.
As bad as the NCAA is, what will follow will be worse and controlled by an elite few, with everyone other than those elite, ceding what ever rights and privileges they had with no due process to to ever get them back.
05-09-2020 07:46 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 32,086
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 1516
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #39
RE: If the P5 does secede from the NCAA a better question is
(05-08-2020 08:45 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(05-08-2020 07:58 AM)ken d Wrote:  
(05-07-2020 07:14 PM)McKinney Wrote:  
(05-07-2020 02:35 PM)Statefan Wrote:  You have to overcome any anti-Trust action that may be spawned in the US Senate

Doesn't the federal government have bigger things to handle these days? Coronavirus? The recession that follows? Maybe even a supreme court confirmation? 07-coffee3

More to the point, as has been articulately explained elsewhere in this forum, there is no anti-trust action that could be brought in the event of a breakaway from what is already a monopolistic institution. That doesn't mean that someone won't initiate such a suit. Just that it would be quickly dismissed.

A far more likely cause for legal action, IMO, would result if conferences that break away try to "shed their deadweight" as has been suggested. Those conferences would most likely be violating their own bylaws, which are enforceable contractual obligations among all the members. The relevant question in that case would be what remedies would be available to the plaintiffs (the schools that are to be shed). Monetary damages? Injunctive relief?

Another possibility could be that individual state legislatures might try to prevent their state supported institutions from leaving little brothers behind by witholding financial support. That could lead the B1G to insist that the MAC be allowed to come along, which they may secretly want anyway because MAC teams are almost like FCS opponents for B1G teams in football.

1) Agree, there is zero anti-trust cause of action if P5 leaves G5.

2) Agree, conferences cannot shed members unless they follow their bylaws. But, they know this so won't try it, and the notion that conferences want to "shed" members is basically a fantasy of internet participants who think their school deserves a spot in a big conference that some other school doesn't deserve. E.g., many outsiders claim the Mississippi schools are "dead weight" in the SEC. Memphis fans or USF fans or Tulane fans might fantasize that the SEC would be stronger if the Mississippi schools were booted out and their schools let in, but nobody in the SEC thinks that.

3) State legislatures have some control but not a whole lot. Virginia did famously strong-arm VT in to the ACC, but that was a situation where they had leverage, because the state could pressure Virginia to advocate for that in ACC councils. But no state has control over what all the conferences decide to do. What can the state of Ohio do if the B1G votes anyway to leave the NCAA and the state wants Akron and Ohio to go too? Tell Ohio State they have to leave the B1G? Not happening.

Would they have a good case---probably not. Im not a lwayer, but from what I can gather, anti-trust law seems pretty open to interpretation. It seems to depend a lot on "fairness" and a it seemingly often depends on how one defines "the market" in any given instance. I mean---having a browser built into your computer operating system just sounds like a neat feature---yet it was considered to be an anti-trust violation. "Refusal to deal" is a concept where one group uses market dominance to limit the competitions ability to compete in a marketplace sounds like an area where an exclusive P5 break away might potentially be vulnerable.

Again, Im not a lawyer and Ive never thought the G5 had a great case on anti-trust issues. That said---the anti-trust option is not negligible, otherwise the P5 wouldnt be sending 90 million a year to the G5 so the G5 has enough to lose that they wont rock the boat. All Ive said is if G5 ends up being frozen out---they have nothing to lose by throwing the anti-trust hand grenade with what ever argument their lawyers can come up with. At that point, the G5 left behinds will be officially frozen out of the national championship of college football (and possibly basketball as well) and likely will see a greatly reduced interest in thier product (basically becoming FCS)---so, they would be pretty desperate and have nothing to lose.
(This post was last modified: 05-09-2020 12:08 PM by Attackcoog.)
05-09-2020 11:17 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 34,176
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 920
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Post: #40
RE: If the P5 does secede from the NCAA a better question is
(05-09-2020 11:17 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(05-08-2020 08:45 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(05-08-2020 07:58 AM)ken d Wrote:  
(05-07-2020 07:14 PM)McKinney Wrote:  
(05-07-2020 02:35 PM)Statefan Wrote:  You have to overcome any anti-Trust action that may be spawned in the US Senate

Doesn't the federal government have bigger things to handle these days? Coronavirus? The recession that follows? Maybe even a supreme court confirmation? 07-coffee3

More to the point, as has been articulately explained elsewhere in this forum, there is no anti-trust action that could be brought in the event of a breakaway from what is already a monopolistic institution. That doesn't mean that someone won't initiate such a suit. Just that it would be quickly dismissed.

A far more likely cause for legal action, IMO, would result if conferences that break away try to "shed their deadweight" as has been suggested. Those conferences would most likely be violating their own bylaws, which are enforceable contractual obligations among all the members. The relevant question in that case would be what remedies would be available to the plaintiffs (the schools that are to be shed). Monetary damages? Injunctive relief?

Another possibility could be that individual state legislatures might try to prevent their state supported institutions from leaving little brothers behind by witholding financial support. That could lead the B1G to insist that the MAC be allowed to come along, which they may secretly want anyway because MAC teams are almost like FCS opponents for B1G teams in football.

1) Agree, there is zero anti-trust cause of action if P5 leaves G5.

2) Agree, conferences cannot shed members unless they follow their bylaws. But, they know this so won't try it, and the notion that conferences want to "shed" members is basically a fantasy of internet participants who think their school deserves a spot in a big conference that some other school doesn't deserve. E.g., many outsiders claim the Mississippi schools are "dead weight" in the SEC. Memphis fans or USF fans or Tulane fans might fantasize that the SEC would be stronger if the Mississippi schools were booted out and their schools let in, but nobody in the SEC thinks that.

3) State legislatures have some control but not a whole lot. Virginia did famously strong-arm VT in to the ACC, but that was a situation where they had leverage, because the state could pressure Virginia to advocate for that in ACC councils. But no state has control over what all the conferences decide to do. What can the state of Ohio do if the B1G votes anyway to leave the NCAA and the state wants Akron and Ohio to go too? Tell Ohio State they have to leave the B1G? Not happening.

Would they have a good case---probably not. Im not a lwayer, but from what I can gather, anti-trust law seems pretty open to interpretation. It seems to depend a lot on "fairness" and a it seemingly often depends on how one defines "the market" in any given instance. I mean---having a browser built into your computer operating system just sounds like a neat feature---yet it was considered to be an anti-trust violation. "Refusal to deal" is a concept where one group uses market dominance to limit the competitions ability to compete in a marketplace sounds like an area where an exclusive P5 break away might potentially be vulnerable.

Again, Im not a lawyer and Ive never thought the G5 had a great case on anti-trust issues. That said---the anti-trust option is not negligible, otherwise the P5 wouldnt be sending 90 million a year to the G5 so the G5 has enough to lose that they wont rock the boat.

First, I don't think the P5 throws the G5 anything to not rock the boat. The G5 gets $90 million because partially it is worth something, and also because despite the musings of forum posters, the P5 actually *wants* the G5 around and involved. They want to bill the CFP playoff champion as the "Champion of FBS" football, and to do that they have to include all FBS conferences. And a big reason the P5 wants that, is because as many of us have discussed, the P5 actually likes having the G5 around. The G5 provides 60 more teams for schools to compete against OOC, including mostly "winnable" games that help keep coaches and athletic admins in their jobs.

So the $90m isn't hostage money to keep the G5 from filing a frivolous lawsuit, it's the price the P5 is *willing* to pay to have the G5 involved in the same division.

Second, with the same caveat you made about not being a lawyer, I don't think anti-trust is about some squishy liberal notion of fairness. Especially with regards to college athletics, I think the 1984 case is again instructive, because in a lot of ways, the TV case was very similar to what a P5 breakaway would be: In 1984 a "cream" of about 60 football schools, the CFA, was seeking to "break away" from the other NCAA football schools to negotiate its own TV. One of the arguments the NCAA made was basically what you voiced above - if the big brands like Oklahoma and Georgia and USC and Michigan break away, there will be little TV interest in the remnant left-behinds, so the current NCAA model was "fair" in that it spread exposure and TV money to a lot of schools that otherwise would be SOL in a free market.

That argument was rejected by the courts of course. There's no law that says that a low-brand school has the right to ride on the coattails of high-brand schools, or that conversely high-brand schools have to affiliate with low-brand schools to help the latter stay economically viable. So I don't think that argument would get very far. Anti-Trust law is about preventing groups from keeping members "in" not preventing them from leaving. Just MO.

07-coffee3
(This post was last modified: 05-09-2020 12:53 PM by quo vadis.)
05-09-2020 12:50 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2020 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2020 MyBB Group.