I'm still amazed that a conference can come together and blackball a particular school. I'm curious as to what criteria is being used to exclude a school that has been playing at a level as high as, or higher than, the average P5 school. ND is an independent, so it can't be that. . .
Well, the real answer is that it is a cartel that is working hard to limit its membership and maximize its payoffs. I don't think that there is any objective criteria other than they want the moolah split to be limited to 65 schools.
I am a bit confused by the legal justification for these announcements. If two competitors in any other industry got together and announced they were going to lock out a third, the CEO's of the two competitors would be facing jail time in addition to a civil suit (See ADM). Yet the commissioners of these leagues make these announcements with seeming impunity.
TerryD said:Well, the real answer is that it is a cartel that is working hard to limit its membership and maximize its payoffs. I don't think that there is any objective criteria other than they want the moolah split to be limited to 65 schools.
Two scheduling announcements within two weeks indicate that the majors consider the Big East a major but not the AAC. Interesting.
Two scheduling announcements within two weeks indicate that the majors consider the Big East a major but not the AAC. Interesting.
While not defending Swofford, can this not be viewed as a good thing for BYU? The P5 have said you need 1 Power game in addition to conf schedule (which fills up 9 or 10 in the case of PAC games). Add in a 1AA/local and/or historical rival and most need yet another game (or 2). If they want to increase odds of playoff, they are not going to overdo it w/P5 games and Cuse, Wake and Kansas cant play a 20 game schedule, so why would P5 schools not schedule BYU? They just said its not the 1 power game - which is code for everyone of the 65 has to play another of the 65 in terms of counting the 1 power game.
Regardless, guys like Swofford are going to kill the goose that laid the golden eggs, eventually.
I guess their intent is to create the illusion that a loss to Wake Forest isn't as detrimental as a loss to BYU or UCF. Big media will surely play along.
They're not locking out anyone. They're saying, however, that scheduling Colorado or Kansas is preferable to scheduling BYU.
That's not collusion, but it's pretty stupid.
I wouldn't be so sure it's 65 schools. The next evolution is clearly to cut out the BC's Wake Forests, Vanderbilts and Northwesterns of the work.
The number might be 36. 37 only if ND keeps its branding power.
As to SOS, by playing each other, they insulate themselves from losses against lower tier conferences and the SOS hit.
How can you tell how good a conference is if they only play themselves. The SEC has lived this for years. Send the good teams out for one good OOC game to build up SOS and everyone else plays south alabama.
Waylon do you see how ridiculous your independent scheme is when you read these BYU articles?