Twitter rumors of anti trust litigation from Aresco

(Ben B) #21

The ACC doesn’t have the same motivations as the AAC. If the Money 5 don’t want the P6 conference rocking the boat…

(Dan) #22

Yep and the P5s are just fine as long as someone like UCF isn’t rocking the boat. So the new standard for a P5 invite will be win 25 games and 2 ny6 in a row, which is basically impossible. Good on UCF for making noise they are making.

(Nick K) #23

They best possible place for a suit to come from would not be the league it would be from our city and should be pushed by our UH grad mayor turner.
There needs to be a plaintiff that can claim damages from the collusion of the P5. without getting into real legal terms, P5 can argue G5 product for fans is still college football and access to the playoff won’t considerably change the product on the field …they would even use our own success against us.
But the city can show actual damages from lack of tourism dollars and taxes that the city and city businesses miss out on by not having a P5 team.
they can use the texas bowl and texas kick off to show how these games draw bigger crowds and increase revenue all around…I believe that is how to bust the P5 on anti-trust.

(Trent) #24

I don’t see any standing to sue. The NCAA and the conferences are composed of the schools and run by the school presidents. The CFP is an LLC constituted by the conferences. Every game, conference affiliation, tv deal, and bowl tie in is based on a contract negotiated in good faith. If a school or group of schools chose to leave the NCAA and run their own association, like the AFL or USFL, they could sue just like those leagues did, but guess what the precedent is.

I think UCF is more likely to be invited to the Big 12. Not a Texas school, big enough stadium, new area, makes Fox happy.

(zx504) #25

All you need for “standing” is to be an affected party or party of the contract where some breach is alleged.

(Trent) #26

That’s what I mean, everything is under contract and they’re all performing as advertised. We knew what was advertised and still signed on the line.

Some have mentioned suing the NCAA for failing to serve the student athlete as in their mission statement, but that’s not a contract being breached, and in fact fits in with the rationale behind the “student athlete” label.


We are in the process of bargaining with ESPN …

Foregoing future litigation is often a chip …

(Dan) #28

I disagree on the G5s “knew what they were getting into.” When I originally read the agreement it seemed that the G5s would have a decent shot at the playoff. Nope! Both the AP and BCS era emphasized undefeated teams. If you were undefeated it trumped SOS, the stupid subjective “eye test”, and all this other nonsense the CFP has brought. When the CFP started I reasoned an undefeated G5 would never get in over an undefeated P5. However, a 1-loss P5 vs undefeated G5 would be a hard decision. Now it’s not. And an undefeated G5 would definitely beat out a 2-loss P5. Nope. They have moved the needle on us yet again and we have a case.

(John m Bevil) #29

Granted, the CFP wants an undefeated ND in the playoffs, but if winning 25 games straight and a beat down
of Auburn who beat Bama, is not enough, what is? If Michigan loses to Ohio St., it should be Bama, Clemson, ND and UCF. Let the undefeateds play it out. If Michigan’s only loss is to ND, they are in. If Georgia beats Bama, they are in, so everything still has to go right. I am sure the CFP hopes UCF loses, so they do not have to confront and angry AAC and Aresco.


that is what he said and based on the officiating at the UH games this year I can almost guarantee it. I have been able to correctly predict the outcome of every reviewed play involving Houston this year. the process is what was called on the field? What review outcome will harm UH the most? The outcome that will harm us the most is the one that will result.


A win from last year shouldn’t factor in to this season. Their win over Auburn is history.


Since when is Congress looking for equality for all?

(Dustin K) #33

I agree that it shouldn’t in theory. However in practice, history is part of what plays in to “strength of schedule” and other reasoning in the rankings for putting some teams over others, and keeping the non-P5 down. So, let it count.


I didn’t say they were.

(Chris) #35

Let’s wait until this happens. We do not know if this is even true. What matters most is the Marco Rubio angle. We can’t compare Utah with UCF. Utah has never been a recruiting hotbed. Utah was never a threat to USC or even UA or ASU. UCF is a major hindrance to ACC & SEC schools. UCF mirrors U of H for the same reasons. Recruiting it is about recruiting. That is why it would make perfect sense for the small12 to invite UCF along with another Eastern School. Some point out tv ratings. We have had solid to very good ratings. That plays in our favor to the SEC, BIG10, PAC12 & ACC.

(John m Bevil) #36

Past wins very much play into rankings. UCF was undefeated last year and only got to #11. This year, with a weaker schedule and a past win over Auburn, and they are #9. The CFP is giving them some love, but I for one would like to see them in the playoffs. IF nothing else, see how they compare to Bama. Teams have been blown out in the playoffs before, ie OU. They come back.


That statement is true. The legislation and Obama voiced their opinions on the BCS saying college football needed a playoff system. This was a bipartisan effort pushed by the government. The same efforts can happen to expand the playoffs especially if UCF goes undefeated for the second straight year and is left out of the playoffs. Those P5 conferences and school presidents do not want the government involved. The feds could probably find many federal violations of the CFP.

Weich made note of the fact that President Barack Obama, before he was sworn in, had stated his preference for a playoff system. In 2008, Obama said he was going to “to throw my weight around a little bit” to nudge college football toward a playoff system, a point that Hatch stressed when he urged Obama last fall to ask the department to investigate the BCS.

Obama didn’t make demands to power conferences to have a playoff, but I think if Trump pushes for a 8 team playoff that’s fair to G5s, P5 conferences will make the change. Maybe Trump could threaten to reduce federal funds to those P5 schools in Trump tweeting fashion of course.

It would be great if this happened but I don’t think the legislation or the president will get involved.

(Dan) #38

8 teams with 1 G5 isn’t going far enough in a lawsuit. We can settle for that but the initial suit should be a real level playing field. Power conference relegation like European soccer would work perfectly in college football. Half the P5 just wet their diapers. Any suit should also include buzz words like segregation, discrimination, and old boys club. Make this as relevant politically as possible.

(Jimmy Morris) #39

The goal should go for getting G5 a realistic shot. 8 team playoff with top G5 champ is the one that will get the least push back. Any push to say all FBS champs should be treated equal regardless of record or who they played starts to sound like something only Bernie Sanders would back.

(Cristian) #40

So is this A.T.L going to happen or what?