[Husker] The fed bringing the hear on the BCS

[Nick Chevance]

On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 9:14 PM, Steve Reichenbach <reich at inetnebr.com> wrote:
>> If it isn't a violation of antitrust laws, then fine.
>
> It is interesting to have some folks seeking to have the BCS overturned
> on antitrust issues.  One wonders where the antitrust issues would
> leave off.  Do the recruiting and compensation limits constitute
> collusion that prevents athletes from receiving fair compensation?  I'm
> not a lawyer, but those who are pressing these legal issues wrt to the
> BCS could end up with larger problems they don't want.

Good comment, Steve.  And I'm not a lawyer, either.  However, as I
understand the concern expressed by Mr. Hatch of Utah and the response
from the Justice Dept., Hatch believes, based on his hearings this
last summer, the BCS may be in violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act
(what...ever).  Those issues you bring up (recruiting, fair
compensation, status of student athletes, etc.) are governed by the
NCAA, and not the BCS.  The BCS was formed to provide for a
championship football game, only.  In doing so, they selected certain
conferences to participate and thus, get the lion's share of the
revenue.  Despite having three undefeated teams in two years that are
not from those conferences, none have made it to the championship
game, complete with this year's travesty of pitting those top two
teams against each other (and I don't mean Texas-Alabama).

I don't think anyone outside of former state senator Ernie Chambers
wants to explore antitrust issues of the NCAA.

Nick
-- 
"Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake."
     Napoleon Bonaparte (1769-1821)