Question for Boneyard lawyers

[noeynox]

There is no academic reason whatsoever for the P5 to separate themselves. It is purely greed. All programs outside of the P5, including FCS, should threaten to drop football altogether. Reason being, it's a money pit. That would leave thousands of young men without scholarships and an education and would surely bring this to the forefront of national news. This ridiculous realignment business affecting so many people should not be left up to the likes of espn.

What they should do and they won't because of the money the money/peanuts they get from the P5, is tell them to go on their merry way. Go have your own March Mayhem tournament. Figure out how to have a hockey championship with 10 schools. Run all of your own tournaments, and we will stay right here doing our own thing with FBS. The schools left behind then create their own highest division of Ahtletic Departments with budgets of at least 40 million, do pay for play, provide some sort of revenue sharing. In other words, help each other out and grow, and let the hypocrites continue to tout an amateur model where top coaches in revenue sports make more than a lot of their professional counterparts.

The P5 is essentially saying we don't want to play anyone but ourselves in football, the other schools should say go ahead and do the same in hockey, in soccer and every other sport and see how that works for you.

It won't happen, because football revenue drives the bus, but it is the only little bit of leverage the rest of the NCAA has on the P5.

 

[upstater]

What they should do and they won't because of the money the money/peanuts they get from the P5, is tell them to go on their merry way. Go have your own March Mayhem tournament. Figure out how to have a hockey championship with 10 schools. Run all of your own tournaments, and we will stay right here doing our own thing with FBS. The schools left behind then create their own highest division of Ahtletic Departments with budgets of at least 40 million, do pay for play, provide some sort of revenue sharing. In other words, help each other out and grow, and let the hypocrites continue to tout an amateur model where top coaches in revenue sports make more than a lot of their professional counterparts.

The P5 is essentially saying we don't want to play anyone but ourselves in football, the other schools should say go ahead and do the same in hockey, in soccer and every other sport and see how that works for you.

It won't happen, because football revenue drives the bus, but it is the only little bit of leverage the rest of the NCAA has on the P5.

I would advocate this too. It's crazy, but the P5 are giving people very little to lose.

The Frozen Two: Michigan, Minnesota, Michigan St., Wisconsin, Penn State, Ohio State, BC. Wonderful.

 

[RioDog]

What they should do and they won't because of the money the money/peanuts they get from the P5, is tell them to go on their merry way. Go have your own March Mayhem tournament. Figure out how to have a hockey championship with 10 schools. Run all of your own tournaments, and we will stay right here doing our own thing with FBS. The schools left behind then create their own highest division of Ahtletic Departments with budgets of at least 40 million, do pay for play, provide some sort of revenue sharing. In other words, help each other out and grow, and let the hypocrites continue to tout an amateur model where top coaches in revenue sports make more than a lot of their professional counterparts.

The P5 is essentially saying we don't want to play anyone but ourselves in football, the other schools should say go ahead and do the same in hockey, in soccer and every other sport and see how that works for you.

It won't happen, because football revenue drives the bus, but it is the only little bit of leverage the rest of the NCAA has on the P5.

I've often thought this to privately, but never voiced it. Would love for "our" FBS to declare a national champion and watch the fur fly... could it evolve as did the pre-merger NFL-AFL?

 

[woomba]

Non-P5 conferences still get $90M annually for being part of the playoff system. Any breakaway discussions will have to return more in incremental revenue beyond that amount.

 

[pj]

I agree that the collusion angle would be very hard to prove. But to answer your question, I'd say sue the ACC and the B1G. Make the ACC prove in court in a civil jury trial why they took Cincinatti or whoever over UCONN for the 16th team. Same thing for the B1G with respect to Maryland, Rutgers, and the future 15th and 16th members.

Why would collusion be hard to prove? They're quite open about it. The P5 are publicly announcing their desire to dominate the football playoff and the revenue that goes with it, as well as most of the regular season revenue, and they are taking steps to give themselves an unrestricted ability to do it.

I think some people here are under the misimpression that cartel arrangements have to be secret in order to fall afoul of antitrust law. Not so.

 

[Fishy]

Non-P5 conferences still get $90M annually for being part of the playoff system. Any breakaway discussions will have to return more in incremental revenue beyond that amount.

The five conferences who are effectively locked out of the playoffs will split about $85M among 55 programs.

That's chump change and you have to think that the P5 will eventually come to think of themselves as put upon having to split those teams in.

 

[temery]

Hasn't UConn's past lawsuits been a reason at least one conference (ACC) hasn't wasn't us?

The legal system isn't a real option.

 

[pj]

Hasn't UConn's past lawsuits been a reason at least one conference (ACC) hasn't wasn't us?

The legal system isn't a real option.

A futile lawsuit directed against named powerful individuals is sure to backfire.

A legally well supported lawsuit against wealthy non-profit institutions is likely to be lucrative.

 

[Fishy]

If we sue the P5 for not inviting us, does UMass sue the AAC for not inviting them?

 

[nelsonmuntz]

If we sue the P5 for not inviting us, does UMass sue the AAC for not inviting them?

That would not have anything to do with the eventual lawsuit.

There will be a lawsuit against the P5, and the plaintiffs will win. I expect uconn to be among the plaintiffs, unfortunately.

 

[huskyrob1]

If we sue the P5 for not inviting us, does UMass sue the AAC for not inviting them?

Only if UMASS dominated college basketball like UCONN does now. In that case, then yes, they would have a lot to lose. UCONN has invested so much more in athletics than UMASS could ever hope to. From facilities to coaches salaries, recruiting budgets, and last I checked UCONN's women's program makes money, and I'm sure WM does not want that to change.

 

[noeynox]

Only if UMASS dominated college basketball like UCONN does now. In that case, then yes, they would have a lot to lose. UCONN has invested so much more in athletics than UMASS could ever hope to. From facilities to coaches salaries, recruiting budgets, and last I checked UCONN's women's program makes money, and I'm sure WM does not want that to change.

We are not being excluded from participating in the NCAA tourney. We are simply outside the revenue circle jerk. You can't argue UConn is more deserving than UMass based on basketball success, since this is primarily a football issue.

 

[Kolumbo]

We are not being excluded from participating in the NCAA tourney. We are simply outside the revenue circle jerk. You can't argue UConn is more deserving than UMass based on basketball success, since this is primarily a football issue.

Correct. Plus we all need to remember "Division I FBS football is the only NCAA sport in which a yearly champion is not determined by an NCAA-sanctioned championship event." Is this technically still correct in 2014-2015?

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Only if UMASS dominated college basketball like UCONN does now. In that case, then yes, they would have a lot to lose. UCONN has invested so much more in athletics than UMASS could ever hope to. From facilities to coaches salaries, recruiting budgets, and last I checked UCONN's women's program makes money, and I'm sure WM does not want that to change.

This is not how the anti-trust laws work. No school has a right to be admitted to a conference just because they put a lot of money into their program.

Where the P5 are completely toast legally is the fact that they are colluding with each other to exclude non-P5 schools from participating at the highest level or getting access to revenue. You can compete as an individual business in any way you want, but you can't collude with your competitors to lock out others. There has been a lot of collusion cases in the food industry in the old days, and more recently, in the mobile device component industry.

The difference now is that the P5 is colluding publicly through the press. I am pretty confident that the P5 will lose in court. Most serious anti-trust cases in the sports industry result in wins for the plaintiffs. The BCS was formed as a result of a court win by Georgia and Oklahoma in an anti-trust case.

UConn has to decide how serious it is about winning, and has to be prepared to play very, very rough. If UConn isn't, we should save ourselves years of frustration with a slow decline of the athletic program, and join the NEC. If I was Herbst, I would have my counsel calling the FTC and demanding a criminal investigation. Schools may be politically popular, but no one will give a crap if school presidents start getting taken away in handcuffs, other than other schools' presidents.

 

[huskyrob1]

We are not being excluded from participating in the NCAA tourney. We are simply outside the revenue circle jerk. You can't argue UConn is more deserving than UMass based on basketball success, since this is primarily a football issue.

Tell Louisville and Rick Pitino that basketball doesn't matter. Their basketball program made quite a bit more last year than their football program did AND the football programs of a lot of the teams they play in football. Yes, they have a good football program, but IMO the ACC took them for their basketball program, the FB program was just gravy.

And UCONN's could be just as successful financially if not more so.

 

[IthacaMatt]

There is still no case there. You can't force them to expand more and you can't sue to say you were a more worthy candidate. Your only case there is if the conferences literally black balled UConn.

The potential case is for limiting opportunities for the non-power 5. I think the non-BCS schools could've had a claim against the BCS for that reason. The non-auto bids were given to make the non-auto qualifiers just happy enough not to sue. With a four team playoff and all the other crap going on regarding mandated games against other Power 5 to pump up everyone's SOS and RPI to the detriment of the non-Power 5, there is a case here. If the AAC try to go toe to toe with stipends and other stuff, it's an even better case.

My disclaimer is that I practice securities regulation and not antitrust. Antitrust law is heavy stuff. It's filled with arcane law, numerous exemptions and $1,000+ per hour attorneys. Anyone that says UConn's case is a slam dunk either way doesn't know antitrust law in my opinion.

The problem with antitrust law is that it is a product of the politics of the current occupant of the White House. The Justice Dept. has been less and less inclined to pursue antitrust violations for about the last 20 years. What was the last really big case, Microsoft?

 

[IthacaMatt]

This is not how the anti-trust laws work. No school has a right to be admitted to a conference just because they put a lot of money into their program.

Where the P5 are completely toast legally is the fact that they are colluding with each other to exclude non-P5 schools from participating at the highest level or getting access to revenue. You can compete as an individual business in any way you want, but you can't collude with your competitors to lock out others. .

I think that the P5 schools have stated minimum "requirements" in terms of how many teams a school supports, how many scholarships it gives out, stadium size, etc. So it's not just that they decided not to invite certain teams, they have a stated "performance standard" that schools have to meet which is not arbitrary or targeted at certain other schools. That's another defense they could offer to collusion claims.

 

[itgoeslike]

The problem with antitrust law is that it is a product of the politics of the current occupant of the White House. The Justice Dept. has been less and less inclined to pursue antitrust violations for about the last 20 years. What was the last really big case, Microsoft?

As crazy as it sounds, it wouldn't surprise me if this issue get its legal footing in the State of California.

 

[itgoeslike]

I think that the P5 schools have stated minimum "requirements" in terms of how many teams a school supports, how many scholarships it gives out, stadium size, etc. So it's not just that they decided not to invite certain teams, they have a stated "performance standard" that schools have to meet which is not arbitrary or targeted at certain other schools. That's another defense they could offer to collusion claims.

If you could provide a link to these "guidelines" that would be great. . .although I don't have much faith that you'll find any such document.

 

[itgoeslike]

UConn is not going to sue anyone anytime soon (and of course avoiding the need to do so is everyone's preference). But, I'm sure there are plenty of universities and law firms that will be documenting what transpires in the coming 12-36 months.

 

[noeynox]

Tell Louisville and Rick Pitino that basketball doesn't matter. Their basketball program made quite a bit more last year than their football program did AND the football programs of a lot of the teams they play in football. Yes, they have a good football program, but IMO the ACC took them for their basketball program, the FB program was just gravy.

And UCONN's could be just as successful financially if not more so.

The opposite of your post is actually accurate. We offer just as good basketball and much better academics. It was about football, and keeping Florida state and Clemson happy on the football side.

 

[Marty Jackson]

Businesslawyer has a legal concept in mind under which a suit might fall. He called it "illegal tiering" but it was all based on the new rules coming down the pike, not on what's happened in the past with the exclusion of UConn.

One thing I imagine that COULD temporarily help UConn is that a gaggle of G5 schools decides to compete with the P5 as independents, with scheduling agreements.

So, I'm not convinced that schools such as Tulsa and Tulane or, heck, even Houston for that matter, are all in on what it might take to pour mney into sports at the highest level.

But if the filter between the P5 and G5 is somewhat porous, I can imagine BYU, UConn, Cincy, USF, UCF, SMU, San Diego St., Memphis FedX, and Boise St. federating somehow at the top level. Schools like Houston and Tulane are right there with New Mexico and UNLV. Questionable commitment.

The 9 schools might decide to give it a go. BYU's TV model might be a good model for the entire federation, and especially UConn. This isn't something that could have been foreseen as viable or desirable two years ago, but look at where things are now. The P5 are creating fences. I am not at all convinced that the bottom of the MW and AAC want to go all in this universe.

I am not all convinced the bottom of the P5 want to go all in this universe...

 

[Marty Jackson]

I'd call Sen. Hatch and see if I could get my hands on his files and/or information. He probably had the goods on something or someone.
When it seemed like he was getting some momentum against the NCAA, Utah to Pac12 was announced.

 

[Marty Jackson]

What they should do and they won't because of the money the money/peanuts they get from the P5, is tell them to go on their merry way. Go have your own March Mayhem tournament. Figure out how to have a hockey championship with 10 schools. Run all of your own tournaments, and we will stay right here doing our own thing with FBS. The schools left behind then create their own highest division of Ahtletic Departments with budgets of at least 40 million, do pay for play, provide some sort of revenue sharing. In other words, help each other out and grow, and let the hypocrites continue to tout an amateur model where top coaches in revenue sports make more than a lot of their professional counterparts.

The P5 is essentially saying we don't want to play anyone but ourselves in football, the other schools should say go ahead and do the same in hockey, in soccer and every other sport and see how that works for you.

It won't happen, because football revenue drives the bus, but it is the only little bit of leverage the rest of the NCAA has on the P5.

I really think this is where the whole concept of a seperate division falls apart. Sure, you can define that for football, but what about basketball. are you telling me that Washington State or Wake Forest is more committed to competing in BB or Soccer than Uconn. Is BC going to pay it's hockey players in a league where none of the other schools can do so.

Makes no sense. And the lines aren't nearly as clear outside of football as the P5 would like them to appear. Even if football, the top G5 programs can easily compete with the middle of the pack P5 schools (namely Uconn and Cincy)...

 

[Kolumbo]

Makes no sense. And the lines aren't nearly as clear outside of football as the P5 would like them to appear. Even if football, the top G5 programs can easily compete with the middle of the pack P5 schools (namely Uconn and Cincy)...

In football, many G5 programs can easily compete with the middle of the pack P5 schools. Some G5 can compete with the top P5 programs. Which school in NC finished with the highest RPI? ECU.

 

[Pudge]

Did something happen in the last 100 hours?

I can't get too worked up week after week about this stuff. We know where this is going. What ... I think ... is the twist in this, as football drives the top 65, is how it works to eliminate Women's sports and competition at that level. Title IX has been a powerful thing.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

I think that the P5 schools have stated minimum "requirements" in terms of how many teams a school supports, how many scholarships it gives out, stadium size, etc. So it's not just that they decided not to invite certain teams, they have a stated "performance standard" that schools have to meet which is not arbitrary or targeted at certain other schools. That's another defense they could offer to collusion claims.

The conferences are issuing press releases that they won't play schools outside the P5. This falls squarely within the definition of collusion. I am at a loss to find a corollary for making a press release advertising a company's anti-competitive behavior in any other industry. When airlines collude to split up a market or when Coke and Pepsi used to collude to split promotions at supermarkets, they were more subtle about it.

 

[06029]

The conferences are issuing press releases that they won't play schools outside the P5. This falls squarely within the definition of collusion. I am at a loss to find a corollary for making a press release advertising a company's anti-competitive behavior in any other industry. When airlines collude to split up a market or when Coke and Pepsi used to collude to split promotions at supermarkets, they were more subtle about it.

Since you seem to lack a dictionary, here are definitions of collusion -
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/collusion
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/collusion
Note the key word is secret. If they have press releases, it is not in secret. The things you referenced as collusion were that because it was a secret. It is not collusion, it is a business decision by these conferences.

The exclusion of other FBS teams from the FB championship, operating outside of the NCAA for FB champion and all the FB money (they are just making what has happened for years look more official) are the real issues. The P5 FB have always had more money from TV. How they are cornering the market now may be the way to attack if it violates any of the exemptions they have from certain laws, or violates certain laws like Title IX, as (cough, cough) educational institutions. Of course, given that things like this will make it to the Supreme Court, they will probably decide that as long as schools have the same number of men's and women's teams, they are equal, no matter the # of scholarships. And things are just so much different today than when Title IX was enacted. And women don't play football, so it should be exempt from Title IX anyway. They should just stand on the sideline and shale their pom poms.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Since you seem to lack a dictionary, here are definitions of collusion -
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/collusion
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/collusion
Note the key word is secret. If they have press releases, it is not in secret. The things you referenced as collusion were that because it was a secret. It is not collusion, it is a business decision by these conferences.

The exclusion of other FBS teams from the FB championship, operating outside of the NCAA for FB champion and all the FB money (they are just making what has happened for years look more official) are the real issues. The P5 FB have always had more money from TV. How they are cornering the market now may be the way to attack if it violates any of the exemptions they have from certain laws, or violates certain laws like Title IX, as (cough, cough) educational institutions. Of course, given that things like this will make it to the Supreme Court, they will probably decide that as long as schools have the same number of men's and women's teams, they are equal, no matter the # of scholarships. And things are just so much different today than when Title IX was enacted. And women don't play football, so it should be exempt from Title IX anyway. They should just stand on the sideline and shale their pom poms.

Wrong. I am tired of arguing with people about anti-trust law who have no idea what they are talking about and just want to be ACC cheerleaders.

 

[bobbyinaz]

Wrong. I am tired of arguing with people about anti-trust law who have no idea what they are talking about and just want to be ACC cheerleaders.

I'm certainly no ACC cheerleader but, I have not read anywhere where these conferences have said "they will not play BYU or G5 schools".

Instead they have said that playing them does not meet the criteria they have set as a conference in regards to every school being required to schedule a minimum of 1 P5 school per yr. Schools can still play them they just won't count as a P5 game.

IMO, this is a big difference. All of the P5 conferences have very well paid attorneys working for them & in no way do I believe that all the attorneys for all the P5 have turned their backs & allowed their clients to collude with one another in a public manner the way people here are describing it