Started By
Message
locked post

Can the Feds file an anti-trust suit against the SEC?

Posted on 9/6/11 at 3:20 am
Posted by rickgrimes
Member since Jan 2011
4323 posts
Posted on 9/6/11 at 3:20 am
a la Microsoft....If SEC ends up being a super conference (when all is said and done with conference alignments) and there is danger that the SEC will dominate even more & shut everyone else out of a chance at winning the NC? Serious question.
Posted by loweralabamatrojan
Lower Alabama
Member since Oct 2006
13240 posts
Posted on 9/6/11 at 5:06 am to
Boise State, BYU and Utah State see no reason to protest "SEC Dominance". You might get some support from Oregon fans though.
Posted by MoreOrLes
Member since Nov 2008
19472 posts
Posted on 9/6/11 at 7:37 am to
No

I think the BCS could have an anti trust problem though.
Posted by Quidam65
Q Continuum
Member since Jun 2010
20484 posts
Posted on 9/6/11 at 9:23 am to
Individually the SEC is probably safe, they can argue that there are other similarly-situated conferences (PAC-xx, B1G, whatever comes out of the ACC/Big East).

quote:

I think the BCS could have an anti trust problem


This could be the problem, though, if MWC or C-USA were to complain (and probably get the support of MAC, WAC, and Sun Belt).
Posted by TigerWoody
btwn where I was & where I will be
Member since Dec 2007
11387 posts
Posted on 9/6/11 at 9:36 am to
quote:

and Utah State
love it.
Posted by Smoke Ring
Scenic Highway Crackhouse
Member since Dec 2010
4338 posts
Posted on 9/6/11 at 9:52 am to
Expansion is the essence of competition. But the BCS is not. SEC is okay.
Posted by lsu777
Lake Charles
Member since Jan 2004
36771 posts
Posted on 9/6/11 at 9:57 am to
Then you don't understand antitrust law at all then. Anybody that says the bcs is breaking antitrust law as its presently written is reaching big time and doesn't understand the law or how the bcs is setup.
Posted by Dr Drunkenstein
Washington DC
Member since May 2009
2918 posts
Posted on 9/6/11 at 10:01 am to
Unless the other conference are colluding with the SEC to make sure only SEC teams win the national championship, there is no grounds for a suit.

Do you really think that is happening?
Posted by Smoke Ring
Scenic Highway Crackhouse
Member since Dec 2010
4338 posts
Posted on 9/6/11 at 10:06 am to
BCS involves collusion among conferences to the exclusion of others.

Conference expansion is not collusion. There is an argument that the BCS does, hence the Utah Attorney General's posturing. I'm not saying it's legally correct, but it's there.
Posted by H-Town Tiger
Member since Nov 2003
60784 posts
Posted on 9/6/11 at 10:22 am to
quote:

there is danger that the SEC will dominate even more & shut everyone else out of a chance at winning the NC? Serious question.




wow, just wow
Posted by lsu777
Lake Charles
Member since Jan 2004
36771 posts
Posted on 9/6/11 at 10:24 am to
No its not. The bcs is a group of companies that gets together at the end of the year voluntarly to have their best teams play the other companies best teams in games hosted by outside companies. They do this to make the most money for their companies.

The bcs doesn't price fix any good our service. The bcs doesn't stop any smaller conference they can't create their own system. It doesn't stop any other conference from doing anything. the bcs just doesn't invite the smaller conferences to its event at the end of the year.thats not breaking antitrust law.


Think about it like this:

A group of large woodworking companies decide that every new years day they will hold a compitition pinning each companies best woodworker against another companies best, and the new orleans arena says they would like to host one of the compititions and sell tickets to the event and they will pay each company 1 million for the rights. At the end.the winner is named bcs national champion.


Should smaller companies that weren't invited be able to file antitrust lawsuits? Hell no, it would be laughed out of court. Well the bcs is the samething.

Think of conferences as companies and schools as divisions in the company. When you do this, an antitrust law suit seems ridiculous.


Sorry for the spelling, I'm typing on a phone.
Posted by H-Town Tiger
Member since Nov 2003
60784 posts
Posted on 9/6/11 at 10:29 am to
quote:

. There is an argument that the BCS does, hence the Utah Attorney General's posturing. I'm not saying it's legally correct, but it's there


I'm not a fan of anti-trust law, but that's a different topic. What would be awesome is if the Utah AG won and the current BCS Conferences and Bowls just went back to the old system. Not having a playoff is not a violation of anti-trust, there is no fricking way teams like Boise, TCU and Utah would have made Rose, Fiesta or Sugar bowls without the BCS
Posted by lsu777
Lake Charles
Member since Jan 2004
36771 posts
Posted on 9/6/11 at 10:33 am to
Yeah sfp has pointed this out multiple times. The current system is way better to the smaller schools then the old system. And the old system us what they would go back to, with maybe a plus one game afterwards at like, the cotton bowl and just call it the cotton bowl. Therefore fricking all small schools.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram