I agree with you that in 4A there is a large disparity between the biggest and smallest. Much of this (unlike 2A this is by definintion because every school above a certain threshold is lumped together). However, in your 4A comparison you took one of the largest schools and compared it to one of the smallest. In your 2A example you took the new Mercer and compared it to other schools at the top of the class. Why don't you compare Mercer to CAL or one of the other small 2A schools and then argue your point.