Knee-jerk reaction - are we finished?

[JasonB]

Question: if SMU publically commits to paying the allowed stipend, and the rest of the AAC makes the same level of commitment, could continued exclusion of the AAC from the P5 be ruled as some sort of collusion?

[Stallion]

Any time separate competing business entities (in this case Universities) agree to exclude competition or control prices there are serious anti-trust issues. The law uses the word "contract, combination or conspiracy". The word conspiracy has sinister connotations which laymen are reluctant to accept. But a true violation is really just a definite written or oral agreement that excludes competition or controls prices. This is why the NCAA and soon the P5 lose all these cases. When they collectively make rules under their Bylaws or Rulebook that exclude competition or control prices, they have "conspired" under the Sherman Anti-Trust Act. Its like if Walmart, Target, JC Penny, Sears and the other 65 biggest retailers got together every year and made rules on competition and prices that each competitor in the retail market had to abide by. So yes SMU has a lawsuit, the AAC has a lawsuit and the entire remaining members of the NCAA have a lawsuit. NCAA and P5 will remain vulnerable to lawsuits until or unless Congress passes an exemption to the Sherman anti-Trust Act which would outline a legal defense.

[Stallion]

With regard to the advertising stipend the Court held as follows:

In a partial victory for the NCAA, though, Wilken said the body that governs college athletics could set a cap on the money paid to athletes, as long as it allows at least $5,000 per athlete per year of competition. Individual schools could offer less money, she said, but only if they don't unlawfully conspire among themselves to set those amounts.

That means FBS football players and Division I basketball players who are on rosters for four years could potentially get around $20,000 when they leave school. Wilken said she set the $5,000 annual threshold to balance the NCAA's fears about huge payments to players

http://abcnews.go.com/Sports/wireStory/ ... e-24909075

Note the words "at least". To me that means that the amount could be more. So, if they set the bar at $5,000 is that not a conspiracy? Further, there is another case brought against the NCAA under anti-trust grounds stating that the rules restricting pay are anti-competitive in another district. And then there's the Northwestern NLRB case which allows players to unionize. I believe that if a school goes rogue and the NCAA attempts to slap them, there may be an anti-trust suit in there on the part of the school. You might read for fun the case of Goldfarb v. Virginia State Bar. The Supreme Court of Virginia had a price schedule for certain legal fees. It was held that even though it was a state regulation it was price fixing. The best thing that could happen is for a union to come into the picture because that would give schools the cover they need to fix prices all they want.

The judge in the O'Bannon case considered this issue and determined that the interest of the NCAA in fair and reasonable rules of competition to achieve an even playing field was a partial defense to the Court which therefore mandated a cap of at least $5,000. In essence the Court partially ruled in favor of the NCAA by holding that there were less restrictive means to achieve the NCAA's goal of an even fair, playing field (ie a cap or maximum limit). Which is why I keep pointing out that under this ruling there will be no unfettered recruiting inducements by P5 schools that will be legal under the NCAA rulebook.

[smusportspage]

That rulebook hasn't stopped the big state schools before. What makes you think it will stop now? Life for them will continue to be a beach party while the "little sisters of the poor" will get slapped around by the NCAA for providing water for a carwash.

[Stallion]

Oh Boo Hoo !!!
These new autonomy changes don't have a thing to do with whether teams are cheating
Just typical SMU victimization syndrome
"Everybody is cheating but SMU....." Whah!
So go ahead and have your irrelevant, meaningless pity session

Actually right now the following P5 schools are on football probation:

Miami
Ohio St
Penn St
Oregon
North Carolina
Georgia Tech
USC
South Carolina

[smusportspage]

I don't think I am the one that is in denial here. I did not say that everyone is cheating but SMU. You can not deny the fact the NCAA has become irrelevant when it comes to curtailing cheating in college athletics. The horse has left the barn on that and this so called Automomy crap is not going to do anything but make cheating worse. Just my opinion. I don't think the big state schools have done a good job of self governing themeselves in this regard. Again, just my opinion. Do you think they have?

[ideal]

the interest of the NCAA in fair and reasonable rules of competition to achieve an even playing field

[Stallion]

Would you have rather that the NCAA take the position that there is no need to maintain competitive playing field? Because SMU's athletic program would be DOA in that situation. We could close the program down tomorrow if there was open bidding for advertising rights. The enemy is he P5 not the NCAA. When you figure that out you might understand the issue. The NCAA position is just about SMUs last desperate hope

[East Coast Mustang]

If the Title IX morons insist the women's volleyball teams get paid just like football players, hopefully they'll be laughed out of any legitimate conversation -- but I doubt it.

If they do, programs like SMU will just keep their revenue men's teams (football and hoops) and just enough women's teams to balance it all out for Title IX purposes- women's bball, tennis, equestrian, golf, etc. The result: a heckuva lot of boys and girls will lose the opportunity to play a D1 sport and get a free education. Yay!

[AusTxPony]

If we can keep pace with the Big schools with stipends, then we are in a not so horrible position. What we need now is to win our conference regularly and make the Access Bowl occasionally (much like Boise several years ago). This will take us scheduling OOC properly. I would argue we are more likely to get a Big 6 Bowl game than programs like Iowa State, Rutgers, Wake, WaState, etc. That at least will keep us in the loop albeit for much less money. I agree College Football needs the NCAA in some form or else we are toast. Why, Stallion, does the G5 not attempt a lawsuit?

[ideal]

The enemy is he P5 not the NCAA. When you figure that out you might understand the issue. The NCAA position is just about SMUs last desperate hope

wow, just wow

The simple way to ensure competition is to limit budgets. Compensation comes in many forms, not simply cash transfers to athletes. The ncaa pretends to be the protector of morals when in fact, it seeks only to ensure that athletes are controlled and can't have a life. Limit budgets, let the programs spend it how they wish. We're all adults here.
The ncaa, p5 and espn are complicit, they all are the enemy.
At best the ncaa is a corrupt group of politically manipulated, petty-minded bureaucrats.
Their enforcement is selective, abusive of power and criminal.
Their punishments are arbitrary. They have an agenda, but not to protect the sanctity of athletics, or the welfare of athletes. It's to cash up the club.
We will do o.k. in the free market. We are the standard of entrepreneurialism, creativity, compassion, independence, goodness, and we care about kids.

[Stallion]

Are you seriously under the impression that SMU with its 9,000 season tickets can compete with P5 schools in an unregulated market? Really? Its over-the football program and basketball program in an unregulated market. For example, let's talk basketball because right now that's our best nationally competitive program. If Mudiay or any great recruit can go to any school and receive whatever the market could bear then UT or A&M could offer:

-an unprecedented signing bonus (think what UT offered Saban $100 Million over 10 years)
-3% share of advertising/license revenue from uniform sales, autographs, merchandise, commercials from an alumni base 15 times bigger than SMU and with a state wide market

in a regulated market TCU has been to 2 BCS Bowls in 5 years and Baylor has gone to another

an unregulated market would simply lead to a national Super conference of about 25-30 teams including UT, ND, Alabama, Ohio St, Penn St, USC, Oklahoma, UCLA, Florida, Georgia, Michigan, Florida St, LSU, Oregon,

The myth that SMU has the financial strength to compete in this new unregulated or less regulated era is complete nonsense. In fact SMU would have trouble competing with minor secondary state schools who could fund their programs like they do now with student/license fees and have fanbases that are multiple times bigger than SMU. I doubt SMU produces advertising/licensing fees among the Top 150-200 schools in the NCAA including many that don't even have Division 1A Football programs

I won't even bring up the fact that SMU receives Bowl/TV revenues of at minimum 1/6th of the F5 programs-a deficit of at least $20 million every single year

[ideal]

well, then we're dead now. If your only hope is this mega fraud, might as well shoot us, better than a death by a thousand cuts.
This thing is a superstructure to enshrine the ones in control now, and forgive all their sins forever.
Let them go and pursue their fraud then, without our attachment.
These obscene salaries are the surest sign of corruption,and it's just out of control.
But that's not inspiring, and i don't buy it.
We can think harder, and do better

[Stallion]

timely release of Top 75 College Licensing sellers:

http://www.clc.com/News/Annual-Rankings-2013-14.aspx

[smupony94]

timely release of Top 75 College Licensing sellers:

http://www.clc.com/News/Annual-Rankings-2013-14.aspx

Clc only licenses a portion of the schools