perspective and personally I don't think there is anything wrong with taking that perspective especially on a message boards. Even though my primary focus at VT was political science, I am no lawyer so my answer to your question regarding SOS may be missing some key elements. However, here is my best shot so hopefully it makes sense to you. The G5 schools/non-power conference schools may not have much of a case to challenge the current system as violating antitrust laws even if they challenged the SOS formula and here is potentially why.

1. Remember all 10 FBS conferences and Notre Dame are co-owners of the College Football Playoffs and I am assuming any changes to the playoff structure would require at least a majority of some kind, but maybe an unanimous vote in some cases. If there is not enough support to the proposed change, then it becomes a moot point.

2. Given all 4 playoff bids are at-large, the College Football Playoffs could argue in court that all 10 FBS conferences and Independents have an equal shot at the beginning of every season to potentially earn at least 1 bid in that season's Playoffs. Since each team's SOS is not determined until at the end of the regular season, it would be difficult to prove collusion by 1 of the groups because there is always the possibility that all 5 G5 conferences could end up with the strongest SOS. I know it is probably unlikely to happen, but at the same time the G5s can't support any percentage claims to the court on how likely a G5 team has a shot to earn 1 of the bids in any future Playoffs. At least the courts don't always support the "Past performance is no guarantee of future results" argument.

3. This is somewhat connected to 2. Since the 4 bids are at-large bids, the G5s would have difficulty supporting the claim that the current structure is a "constraint on trade" which is the other main component to most antitrust laws. In theory, there is nothing preventing a G5 from scheduling all the OOC games against a P5 opponent or becoming an Independent and scheduling 12 games against a P5 opponent with or without a 13th regular season game @Hawai'i. It is a toss up whether that 13th regular season game against Hawai'i would help or hurt their SOS. So there are ways for a G5 to game the system in its favor.

4. I don't think there is anything illegal if a system shows any bias towards 1 particularly group (i.e. the power conferences) unless that bias somehow results in collusion and/or constraint of trade. I bring this up because perceptually speaking most people think that the current structure shows a bias towards the power conferences. Some people feel the bias is justified given they generate the most money and most interest from people. While others think it is just another example of how "unfair" the system is to the little guys.