Potential Advocates

[Stallion]

....this BCS controversy always seems to revolve around which side of the fence you're on, but you know I'm a little surprised there is not more comment made by the College Football Coaches Association. Major League Baseball ran into a brick-wall ehen the tried to get rid of only two franchises because it would constrict the number of major league player. The BCS threatens 55 or so head coaches and numerous assistants. These 55 schools pay pretty darn good money and offer opportunities to many others. Certainly, if continued exclusion occurs and a de facto inferior Division of schools is created, schools may not only question dropping from Division 1 but also might consider downsizing coaches aalaries as well. Just interesting that the BB Union was so forceful in its opposition but there is barely a peep from coaches to what downsizing Division 1 could mean to their livlihood.

[91Stang]

How about the lack of involvement from NCAA higher-ups? I haven't heard Word One from the NCAA on this. And on the Neuheisel issue, Miles Brand (NCAA head honcho) said "we're not going to get involved - if UW wants our help, then we'll be available." Lot of spine being showed in the NCAA office.

[gostangs]

Great comment - No division 1, no big salary - that is a guarantee.

Stallion - what is your view of the potential Tulane actions vs the BCS - are there any down sids to schoools like TCU and SMU joining this effort - seems like litigation could force the BCS to at least get bigger.

[Stallion]

you ain't going to ever get the BCS to voluntarily give in. It will unquestionably require litigation or at least the threat of litigation to get a seat at the BCS table. I think a workable settlement would be to allow at least one non-BCS school a place in at least 1 BCS bowl. Go strictly by the higest rated team. There will be a meeting of non-BCS conference leaders in the next few weeks where hopefully concerted joint action will gain momentum. Create a warchest with each non-BCS school donating $500,000.

[This message has been edited by Stallion (edited 06-12-2003).]

[gostangs]

It will need to be driven by the chairmen of each board fo every school in the Mountain, WAC and CUSA conferences - Presidents and AD's will be too scared of being labeled as rebels by the BCS schools, becasue they all don't know ehen they will have theri resume's out - therefore they will be spineless until their bosses tell them to sue or else.

[bhop]

The problem with litigation is that it really poisons the atmosphere. That's why it should always be a last resort. Look at the Big East now. Even if Miami is thwarted from joining the ACC by the lawsuit, its relationship with the other Big East football schools will never be the same. It's not like Miami will capitulate, the Big East will drop the suit, and then everyone will be just hunky-dory. On the contrary, I think the lawsuit ensures that the Big East is done as it currently exists. It's just a matter of timing now.

Same with the non-BCS schools suing the big boys. If we go that route, we better damn-well hope we win a RESOUNDING victory in the courts. Otherwise, you can bet that every non-BCS school involved will be blackballed by the BCS conferences. I could see it affecting scheduling, efforts to join a BCS conference, etc. Its the law of unintented consequences.

[Stallion]

....just exactly what benefits do non-BCS schools have with their relationships with BCS schools today. We are getting our noses shoved in the sand like a 98 pound weakling. We are just rearranging the chairs on the Titanic. If you don't stand up for your rights in this situation nobody else will.

[This message has been edited by Stallion (edited 06-12-2003).]

[EastStang]

I agree, sometimes the threat or actual filing of litigation helps where as in the BCS/non-BCS scenario things are getting worse and worse. If you sleep on your rights too long there is a theory in law called laches or waiver, which means that your right to a remedy is waived. Tulane has an argument for antitrust because they went 11-0 and were not invited to a BCS bowl because they were 7th ranked, not 6th ranked. A playoff system would be even fairer. You could even make it so it was a six team tournament. Two byes and three BCS champs and one non-BCS champ. That would create lots of interest. Or you could make it 8 team and have some additional non-BCS or BCS or have the 1-AA champion get to play in this tournament to strengthen 1-AA. Either way, it make take litigation or the threat of it to get the BCS teams to the table.

[Southland]

Anti-trust doesn't hold water in this situation, because the BCS put in the exception rules for finishing in the Top 6 of the BCS poll...

...all a legal battle is going to do is add a BCS game and lower the ranking requirement to Top 7.

Best case scenerio, the BCS guarantees a spot to the highest ranked non-BCS conference school; however, the BCS can get around this by including Notre Dame in this pool.

[PK]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Stallion:
<B> We are just rearranging the chairs on the Titanic.</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I love it...that's a great line Stallion!! Unfortunately it is true.


[This message has been edited by PK (edited 06-12-2003).]

[EastStang]

How does a non-BCS school get into the top six places? Look at the computer model for the BCS rankings. It is virtually impossible for that to happen. This year if Fresno State managed to run the table and go undefeated, they might have a chance of breaking into the top three, but look at how they have to do it. Beating Tennessee and Oregon State on the road, and Colorado State at home and going undefeated in the WAC. If they lose one game forget it. On the other hand any SEC, ACC, Pac-10, Big 10, Big East or Big XII team can lose one game and still be in the top 2 and lose two games and still be in the top 6. You can say there is a spot, but if it is impossible to attain that spot, you've got an anti-trust violation. No way Tulane should have been denied a BCS spot when they were 11-0.