- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Playoff Bill set to go to the House
Posted on 12/9/09 at 12:10 pm to Baloo
Posted on 12/9/09 at 12:10 pm to Baloo
quote:
I wasn'y aware the AP put on a bowl game which they sold tickets to and the rights to TV networks.
the AP poll is intellectual property, which is why the BCS is not allowed to use it anymore
they make money off the AP poll
quote:
The POLL is not a monopoly because there is no market.
the associated press has the market of the only viable poll to crown a champion
people pay for the right to use AP content, so there is money involved
1
Posted on 12/9/09 at 12:11 pm to etm512
quote:
Easy solution: have all the other conferences join up and have a game and call it the "Non-BCS National Championship".
i don't know why they don't do this
Posted on 12/9/09 at 12:11 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
it is not the NCAA title, however
Who cares?
It's NOT crowning a champ. That's not monopolistic. There's no revenue and no market. It's the GAME.
And of course the MWC wants to join. Would you rather compete or just slice up the pie? Only an idiot wants to compete. When you are outside the market, you rail against the monopoly. If you're inside, you redefine the market as much braoder (say, ALL of college football). the reason the BCS bowl games created a mechanism for the small conferences was precisely to short-circuit any claims of monopoly. I would've done the same. "See, we're not a monopoly, we gave the little guy a check. Sure, we rig the system and we're just throwing them a bone so they don't complain too loudly, but what's wrong with that?"
Like I said, I think the monopoly argument would lose, particularly due to the peculiar nature of sports. But your arguments against it absolutely suck. Letting someone have a slice of the profits as a result of your monopolistic practices won't get you too far as a defense against antitrust.
Posted on 12/9/09 at 12:14 pm to Baloo
quote:
the reason the BCS bowl games created a mechanism for the small conferences was precisely to short-circuit any claims of monopoly
to avoid wasteful and costly litigation that would almost assuredly end up the way it was from 2004 and before
and it wasn't impossible for non-BCS teams to make it before the "easy road" was given. 2004 Utah did just that
quote:
we rig the system
it's a collection of 6 conferences to crown the champ of those conferences. no system is rigged
quote:
Like I said, I think the monopoly argument would lose, particularly due to the peculiar nature of sports. But your arguments against it absolutely suck.
but it would win
quote:
Letting someone have a slice of the profits as a result of your monopolistic practices won't get you too far as a defense against antitrust.
if your argument is based solely on money, it will
Posted on 12/9/09 at 12:15 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
the AP poll is intellectual property, which is why the BCS is not allowed to use it anymore
they make money off the AP poll
If someone pays for the use of the AP poll number, which you don't have to do. Do you write the AP a check everytime you cite someone's rank? No? What a shock. Because the poll is advertising for the AP for other purposes. The poll itself is not profitable.
But let's assume it is. It's still NOWHERE NEAR a monopoly because there are hundreds of polls. TD.com has a poll. There's the computer polls, the Blogger poll, the Football Writers poll, polls specific to certain outlets. There is definite competition for the right to be the "most accurate poll". So even if there was revenue, there's no limitation of the market. Put out a poll. Nothing is stopping you.
It's the GAME that people are compleining about. check the language of the bill. They are talking about the mechanism to putting on this game. That is the market.
Posted on 12/9/09 at 12:18 pm to Baloo
quote:
because there are hundreds of polls.
but none carry the weight of the AP poll
the BCS is just another title given out every year
quote:
So even if there was revenue, there's no limitation of the market
ask your average joe if he knows about the AP poll, and they will
ask your average joe if he knows about the sagarin poll, and few will
the AP poll is THE poll
quote:
It's the GAME that people are compleining about. check the language of the bill. They are talking about the mechanism to putting on this game.
but your argument is based on the money involved, not the game/mechanism
Posted on 12/9/09 at 12:24 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
to avoid wasteful and costly litigation that would almost assuredly end up the way it was from 2004 and before
Well, litigation would be expensive and wasteful. But your assumption that it would revert to the previous 2004 system is completely erroneous. You can't replace a monopolistic system with one EVEN MORE monopolistic. That would be an absurd result.
quote:
and it wasn't impossible for non-BCS teams to make it before the "easy road" was given. 2004 Utah did just that
Once again, not the standard for antitrust. It's not that it is "impossible to compete" as no one could ever meet that standard. It is using market power to limit competition.
quote:
it's a collection of 6 conferences to crown the champ of those conferences. no system is rigged
That would be a dramatic re-imagining of the BCS. They could do that, but that's not what they purport the BCS does, and you have advocated: ONE CHAMP. But once again, the BCS does a lot more than crown a champ, IT PUTS ON GAMES. To ignore this is to ignore the entire complaint.
quote:
but it would win
Dude, you wouldn't get past summary judgment. Your arguments do not support anything codified in law except in SFP Land.
quote:
if your argument is based solely on money, it will
Once again, you know absolutely nothing about antitrust law. Stop pretending you do. You are talking 100% out of your arse.
Do I think they would lose an antitrust case? No. But to think they couldn't RAISE antitrust issues because SFP says it isn't a monopoly is not true. There are certainly issues raised when parties get together to try and corner a market and exclude others. The public institution issue is an interesting one though.
If the feds really wanted to do something, they should simply threaten to withhold federal funds from public univeristies which participate in the BCS. Until they do that, its all for show.
Posted on 12/9/09 at 12:28 pm to Baloo
quote:
But your assumption that it would revert to the previous 2004 system is completely erroneous.
even you said it would almost assuredly fail
quote:
You can't replace a monopolistic system with one EVEN MORE monopolistic
well i'm assuming the BCS drew its line, and they won, so the system would be less inclusive for the non-BCS
quote:
It is using market power to limit competition.
then, like you said, every sporting industry is a monopoly
quote:
They could do that, but that's not what they purport the BCS does, and you have advocated: ONE CHAMP. But once again, the BCS does a lot more than crown a champ, IT PUTS ON GAMES.
and?
playoffs would hurt non-BCS schools worse financially
Posted on 12/9/09 at 12:31 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
then, like you said, every sporting industry is a monopoly
Well, yes. Which is why we don't go there. Really, the NFL/NBA draft is so freakin' illegal it makes my head hurt. Talk about restraint of trade. But we have sort have made an exception to antitrust law for all sports to a limited degree due to their unique nature.
quote:
playoffs would hurt non-BCS schools worse financially
Depends on how they are set up. If they are set up by the NCAA, the non-BCS schools clearly would benefit, as they have more power in the NCAA.
Posted on 12/9/09 at 12:34 pm to Baloo
quote:
If they are set up by the NCAA
big college football funds the big conferences
they would tell the NCAA to go frick themselves if the NCAA wanted to frick them in the system
i don't think you understand that
the "BCS" has value because the SCHOOLS within these conferences have value
the "non-BCS" does not have value b/c the schools within these conferences don't have value, and don't bring shite to the table
the BCS makes money because its participants are money makers
Posted on 12/9/09 at 12:37 pm to TIGERSandFROGS
quote:
And this would simply be a law stating that something that excludes teams from having a shot at competing cannot be marketed as a national championship.
Anybody who thinks there should be a LAW regarding this needs to get the hell out of the country. Go resurrect the USSR somewhere else, a-hole.
Posted on 12/9/09 at 12:41 pm to uway
i'm still wondering what the bill would do to the AP poll
Posted on 12/9/09 at 12:59 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
big college football funds the big conferences
they would tell the NCAA to go frick themselves if the NCAA wanted to frick them in the system
i don't think you understand that
I do. But the NCAA is not some meek, powerless entity. Basketball and every other sport is ruled by the NCAA. Hell, so is football EXCEPT for crowning a champ. It's not a huge leap for the NCAA to come in and impose a championship, particularly if it will bring a profit.
You don't understand that the NCAA has power too. It's why I said "IF the NCAA". I don't make an assumption of what a football playoff would look like. I don't know how it would shake out.
And, for the millionth time, the AP poll is unaffected since it is not a monopoly and it is impossible to argue it is.
Posted on 12/9/09 at 1:00 pm to Baloo
quote:
But the NCAA is not some meek, powerless entity.
without CFB funding its members it isn't that powerful
quote:
It's not a huge leap for the NCAA to come in and impose a championship, particularly if it will bring a profit.
there is a reason they've never tried
CFB funds the athletic departments of just about every major university. it is the cash cow
Posted on 12/9/09 at 1:02 pm to uway
quote:
Anybody who thinks there should be a LAW regarding this needs to get the hell out of the country. Go resurrect the USSR somewhere else, a-hole.
Wow. Talk about overreacting to someone wanted truth in advertising. Which is already a law. The USSR line is just invoking Godwin's Law in reverse.
Posted on 12/9/09 at 1:02 pm to Baloo
quote:
Talk about overreacting to someone wanted truth in advertising
it's advertised as "the BCS National Championship"
Posted on 12/9/09 at 1:04 pm to SlowFlowPro
You honestly believe that college football is going to pull out of the NCAA if there is aplayoff system? Really? what planet do you live on? Who hates a playoff this much?
Other than you.
Other than you.
Posted on 12/9/09 at 1:05 pm to Giantkiller
quote:
The BCS has only been around for 10 years, and probably only been shown to be a huge mess more recently than not. But after Florida assrapes Cincy and nobody watches the Fiesta Bowl because they don't really give a shite about TCU or Boise, then let me know how much of a "success" the lot of the country thinks the BCS really is.
The Poinsettia Bowl last year was the number 1 rated non-BCS bowl. Somehow I doubt that nobody is going to watch the game considering it's the same teams but they are BOTH undefeated this time and it's on Monday Night after the regular season NFL wraps up---it'll be competing with House re-runs. Add to that the fact that it's the Fiesta Bowl and even more will tune in.
frick, 4 out of 5 people on this forum are complete dumbasses.
Posted on 12/9/09 at 1:06 pm to Baloo
i think the major college football runs the NCAA, more or less. NCAA CBB has some power too, but for far fewer teams
that's why the NCAA gives lip service to rules and regulations, namely recruiting violations/players getting $ under the table
that's why the NCAA gives lip service to rules and regulations, namely recruiting violations/players getting $ under the table
Posted on 12/9/09 at 1:07 pm to Baloo
quote:
Talk about overreacting to someone wanted truth in advertising. Which is already a law. The USSR line is just invoking Godwin's Law in reverse.
I don't care. Wanting the federal gov't to be involved in this is absolute lunacy.
Page 4 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News