Saw this on the CUSAbbs

http://ncaabbs.com/showthread.php?tid=493213

Yeah there was never any question that it is a cartel, the question is whether it is a LEGAL cartel and if the answer is that it is not legal, then how will they address it. Courts cannot force a playoff under anti-trust law. If they choose to go back to the old system which is totally defensible we get hosed big time. We go from about $2 million from the BCS to $0.

"Twenty-one Experts Call BCS a "Cartel," Urge Investigation in Letter to DOJ "

Cartel? Duuuuuuuuuhh....ya think?

The system is designed to keep all of the money with the AQ conferences, as well as the access to the money games. The only reason money trickles down is to keep the hoarders from being sued under the old system due to monopoly and constraint of trade claims. Therefore, I wouldn't be affraid of going back to the old system. What needs to be done is the non-AQ's should band together and file a lawsuit against the NCAA and the BCS system, due to the unfair revenue disributions etc. The case will be settled for a huge chunk of cash, and parameters can be put in place with respect to fair and proper payouts, access to big games, etc. On the flip side, I am sure that measures will be put in place to place restrictions and qualifications on programs staying at the FBS level of football. This will be to lawfully limit access to the money.

(04-14-2011 05:24 AM)bluephi1914 Wrote:  The system is designed to keep all of the money with the AQ conferences, as well as the access to the money games. The only reason money trickles down is to keep the hoarders from being sued under the old system due to monopoly and constraint of trade claims. Therefore, I wouldn't be affraid of going back to the old system. What needs to be done is the non-AQ's should band together and file a lawsuit against the NCAA and the BCS system, due to the unfair revenue disributions etc. The case will be settled for a huge chunk of cash, and parameters can be put in place with respect to fair and proper payouts, access to big games, etc. On the flip side, I am sure that measures will be put in place to place restrictions and qualifications on programs staying at the FBS level of football. This will be to lawfully limit access to the money.

We would get our New Orleans Bowl, GoDaddy.com, Motor Pizza Bowl break even or lose a few dollar deals and give up around $2 million in BCS dollars. Just exactly how is the old system going to work out for us? What damages can we prove? Third teams from a conference can prove damages. Schools from the non-AQ invited to play and given the reduced share can prove damages but I'm missing where we benefit.

Silly question here but would the "units" used in the NCAA Basketball trournament system work for the BCS payouts on a playoff basis?

Or is that basically what we have now?

(04-14-2011 11:49 AM)OwlFamily Wrote:  Silly question here but would the "units" used in the NCAA Basketball trournament system work for the BCS payouts on a playoff basis?

Or is that basically what we have now?

I will gladly design an anti-trust proof BCS for them for four tickets to each game and airfare.

Step one. Eliminate the AQ system we currently have. It overpays the bad AQ leagues and underpays the good ones. The only guarantee should be a spot if you are a conference champ and meet a minimum standard (12, 14, or 15 all have merit and can be argued for reasonably, I like 12).

Step two. Change the payment structure. It is currently worse than the tax code. You have the AQ conference payment, the non-AQ conference payment (with a system to distribute within it), the Notre Dame payment, the non-AQ independent payment. Then you have the second team from a league or non-AQ payment. Simplify, simplify, simplify. One payment fund for every school in the plan. Right now would be about $200,000 per school. Tennessee gets the same base payment as Middle Tennessee. You take the fee you agree to send a team to the BCS if invited, that's all it is for. Second you have a pool for the invited. Whatever the number is, divide it by 10. Everyone selected gets the same number. Would be roughly $14.4 million per team.

Under the current system, last year SEC brought in $27.2 million last year they would get $31.2 this way. ACC received $21.2 they would get $16.8. MWC got roughly $12 million would have received around $16 million. Big East got $21.2 would have received $1.6 million

(04-14-2011 01:15 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(04-14-2011 11:49 AM)OwlFamily Wrote:  Silly question here but would the "units" used in the NCAA Basketball trournament system work for the BCS payouts on a playoff basis?

Or is that basically what we have now?

I will gladly design an anti-trust proof BCS for them for four tickets to each game and airfare.

Step one. Eliminate the AQ system we currently have. It overpays the bad AQ leagues and underpays the good ones. The only guarantee should be a spot if you are a conference champ and meet a minimum standard (12, 14, or 15 all have merit and can be argued for reasonably, I like 12).

Step two. Change the payment structure. It is currently worse than the tax code. You have the AQ conference payment, the non-AQ conference payment (with a system to distribute within it), the Notre Dame payment, the non-AQ independent payment. Then you have the second team from a league or non-AQ payment. Simplify, simplify, simplify. One payment fund for every school in the plan. Right now would be about $200,000 per school. Tennessee gets the same base payment as Middle Tennessee. You take the fee you agree to send a team to the BCS if invited, that's all it is for. Second you have a pool for the invited. Whatever the number is, divide it by 10. Everyone selected gets the same number. Would be roughly $14.4 million per team.

Under the current system, last year SEC brought in $27.2 million last year they would get $31.2 this way. ACC received $21.2 they would get $16.8. MWC got roughly $12 million would have received around $16 million. Big East got $21.2 would have received $1.6 million

What about the Big 10? What would been the Big 10 payment? Because we know that the NCAA seems to have a special interest in the Big 10 schools.

(04-14-2011 01:40 PM)SkullyMaroo Wrote:  

(04-14-2011 01:15 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(04-14-2011 11:49 AM)OwlFamily Wrote:  Silly question here but would the "units" used in the NCAA Basketball trournament system work for the BCS payouts on a playoff basis?

Or is that basically what we have now?

I will gladly design an anti-trust proof BCS for them for four tickets to each game and airfare.

Step one. Eliminate the AQ system we currently have. It overpays the bad AQ leagues and underpays the good ones. The only guarantee should be a spot if you are a conference champ and meet a minimum standard (12, 14, or 15 all have merit and can be argued for reasonably, I like 12).

Step two. Change the payment structure. It is currently worse than the tax code. You have the AQ conference payment, the non-AQ conference payment (with a system to distribute within it), the Notre Dame payment, the non-AQ independent payment. Then you have the second team from a league or non-AQ payment. Simplify, simplify, simplify. One payment fund for every school in the plan. Right now would be about $200,000 per school. Tennessee gets the same base payment as Middle Tennessee. You take the fee you agree to send a team to the BCS if invited, that's all it is for. Second you have a pool for the invited. Whatever the number is, divide it by 10. Everyone selected gets the same number. Would be roughly $14.4 million per team.

Under the current system, last year SEC brought in $27.2 million last year they would get $31.2 this way. ACC received $21.2 they would get $16.8. MWC got roughly $12 million would have received around $16 million. Big East got $21.2 would have received $1.6 million

What about the Big 10? What would been the Big 10 payment? Because we know that the NCAA seems to have a special interest in the Big 10 schools.

I do not see the advantage of the Non AQ schools participating in the BCS. The non AQ should ban together to promote a unified front to get more money. For leverage, they should promote a playoff amongst themeselves. This would force the NCAA to act.

(04-14-2011 02:08 PM)FloridaJag Wrote:  I do not see the advantage of the Non AQ schools participating in the BCS. The non AQ should ban together to promote a unified front to get more money. For leverage, they should promote a playoff amongst themeselves. This would force the NCAA to act.

If money is the primary motivation, then this idea does not work as I cannot see ESPN or any of the networks getting behind it.

In all honesty who among the general sports fan would want to watch the winners of the MAC/WAC/'Belt/MWC/CUSA duke it out for a Little League championship?

The FCS championship gets a lil air time, for its championship game but thats about it.

(04-14-2011 02:44 PM)OwlFamily Wrote:  

(04-14-2011 02:08 PM)FloridaJag Wrote:  I do not see the advantage of the Non AQ schools participating in the BCS. The non AQ should ban together to promote a unified front to get more money. For leverage, they should promote a playoff amongst themeselves. This would force the NCAA to act.

If money is the primary motivation, then this idea does not work as I cannot see ESPN or any of the networks getting behind it.

In all honesty who among the general sports fan would want to watch the winners of the MAC/WAC/'Belt/MWC/CUSA duke it out for a Little League championship?

The FCS championship gets a lil air time, for its championship game but thats about it.

You solve that by filling the stands at your home football games. If you do not support your teams why should others be interested.

(04-14-2011 03:03 PM)FloridaJag Wrote:  

(04-14-2011 02:44 PM)OwlFamily Wrote:  

(04-14-2011 02:08 PM)FloridaJag Wrote:  I do not see the advantage of the Non AQ schools participating in the BCS. The non AQ should ban together to promote a unified front to get more money. For leverage, they should promote a playoff amongst themeselves. This would force the NCAA to act.

If money is the primary motivation, then this idea does not work as I cannot see ESPN or any of the networks getting behind it.

In all honesty who among the general sports fan would want to watch the winners of the MAC/WAC/'Belt/MWC/CUSA duke it out for a Little League championship?

The FCS championship gets a lil air time, for its championship game but thats about it.

You solve that by filling the stands at your home football games. If you do not support your teams why should others be interested.

Not necessarily. Soccer stadiums across the world are filled to the brim but it doesn't make the average American want to watch it.

(04-14-2011 03:06 PM)SkullyMaroo Wrote:  

(04-14-2011 03:03 PM)FloridaJag Wrote:  

(04-14-2011 02:44 PM)OwlFamily Wrote:  

(04-14-2011 02:08 PM)FloridaJag Wrote:  I do not see the advantage of the Non AQ schools participating in the BCS. The non AQ should ban together to promote a unified front to get more money. For leverage, they should promote a playoff amongst themeselves. This would force the NCAA to act.

If money is the primary motivation, then this idea does not work as I cannot see ESPN or any of the networks getting behind it.

In all honesty who among the general sports fan would want to watch the winners of the MAC/WAC/'Belt/MWC/CUSA duke it out for a Little League championship?

The FCS championship gets a lil air time, for its championship game but thats about it.

You solve that by filling the stands at your home football games. If you do not support your teams why should others be interested.

Not necessarily. Soccer stadiums across the world are filled to the brim but it doesn't make the average American want to watch it.

True. However, must support our teams before we can find out if others are willing to watch it. I live in the South and we do not get to see the Oregon vs. Washington games or Stanford vs UCLA games or Northwestern vs Illinois. You have to support your teams in order magnify the exposure of your team to a larger viewership.

(04-14-2011 02:08 PM)FloridaJag Wrote:  I do not see the advantage of the Non AQ schools participating in the BCS. The non AQ should ban together to promote a unified front to get more money. For leverage, they should promote a playoff amongst themeselves. This would force the NCAA to act.

No one wants to watch the non-AQ. We would be restricting our access to large amounts of money by creating a FBS-A and FBS-AA. The NCAA wouldn't be forced by anyone to do anything, and I doubt we could get these BCS crashers on board anyways. There is more money to be had by them taking a chance at the BCS invites.

People would care more about the non AQ if there was a 16 team playoff with conf champs getting auto bids. Until then, it won't happen.