Apparently Neil Abercrombie of Hawai'i and his co-sponsors Lynn Westmoreland of Georgia, Mike Simpson of Idaho, and Jim Matheson of Utah are going to be reintroducing their bill in Congress that declares the BCS an illegal restriction of trade.
If you notice a pattern there, three of them represent the states of the three BCS busters and the fourth represents Georgia, who was unhappy about not making the title game last season.
Such a pattern combined with the fact that this is Congress we're talking about here should set off an alarm in your head. That is your "pandering and grandstanding" alarm, and there is a good reason why it is going off. Part of it is that they are piggybacking off of President-Elect Obama's recent pro-playoff arguments, and part is that they are trying to look good for their constituencies.
I covered this bill's original appearance back in April, and the likelihood of success for their particular arguments is not high. The very presence of Utah, Boise State, and Hawai'i in the BCS show that the system is not restricting non-BCS conference schools from getting a piece of a pie.
Since all BCS games have the same payout, from a strictly monetary point of view the BCS isn't locking the non-BCS schools out. They have access to the kitty now.
- B/R Ticket Guide
If you want to say the BCS locks non-BCS teams out of getting a championship, then you're getting warmer. However, once you bring up the "C" word, you open a Pandora's box of semantics and technicalities. That avenue I covered in April as well.
The biggest problem in the whole deal is Rep. Abercrombie. He appears to have no understanding whatsoever of the BCS process, yet he is running ahead full steam with this while saying nonsensical things.
A quote of his I grabbed in April from the Yahoo! Sports article on the topic (which has since expired from their servers) goes as such: "Who elected these NCAA people? Who are they to decide who competes for the championship?”
If the man doesn't know what the NCAA is, then he probably shouldn't be sticking his nose into its business. Besides, the NCAA does not choose the teams who play in the national title game—the BCS formula does.
On top of that, the NCAA is not even a signer of the BCS contracts. The 11 I-A conference commissioners, the A.D. of Notre Dame, and the BCS bowl committees make up the parties to those agreements, leaving the NCAA itself out of it.
But wait, there's more. This quote is from the CBSSports.com article I linked to above, which he also said back in April: "It's a racket. They've got a little cartel. It's La Cosa Nostra...and slavery."
I hope for their sake that Rep. Abercrombie's co-sponsors know a little more about the process than he does. It still doesn't answer the question of why they allowed him to speak on the topic though.
If this bill makes it beyond the emotional press conference stage, it will be discussed in January at the earliest when the new Congress convenes. I would love to see a college football playoff as much as anyone, perhaps even more, but now is not the time.
Congress has a lot bigger fish to fry than whether Boise State is unfairly being kept out of the national title game. A foundering auto industry, the continued cleanup of the disastrous derivatives mess in the world of finance, and foreign policy are all more pressing and worthy issues.
These guys are going to try, but I honestly don't think they'll get anywhere with the bill. We know that they will have a sympathetic ear in the White House, but hopefully the folks spearheading this effort will at least educate themselves on college football before they bring it up for discussion.
A spectacular crash and burn would probably hurt the playoff cause more than it would help it.
comments (21) write a comment »
write a new comment
about 1 month ago
thier is a problem with all these non bcs schools wanting a piece of national championship pie. think for a second if utah found a way into the title game against florida. the score would be 55-14 or something across those lines, it would be a snozzer. Now if Florida played texas tech or just one of the big 12 schools, then we would have a game. the title game wouldnt suck like the last 2 years. there is a reason why they arent in to bcs.
about 1 month ago
Dave, you might be interested in this excellent post from a buddy of mine over at TSN. The world from the point of view of a non-BCS conference team.
http://www.sportingnews.com/blog/wmsam04/126512/
about 1 month ago
Access to the BCS is of itslef meaningless. Until championsips are won legitimately, the BCS is useless and it has violated the Sherman Act since its inception in 1998. Therefore, there' s no question that it's illegal and it needs to meet a swift end.
from about 1 month ago
If you are going to make that argument, you must put a monetary value on a championship over and above simply appearing in a BCS bowl. A win in that game doesn't pay out any higher than a win in any of the others, so getting non-BCS teams in any BCS bowl yields the same money as getting them in the title game.
about 1 month ago
I'm a Gators fan but Iceman's argument is nonsensical. There's plenty of BCS teams which have performed poorly in NC games. You should be able to look past the conference affiliation when determining how good a team is.
from about 1 month ago
vee, I agree that there have been PLENTY of teams that have performed poorly in NC games. But to your point about looking past conferences, I don't totally agree. Of course a conference should not limit you on whether your team is deemed "good" or "bad. However, you must agree that there are conferences that are better than others. The SEC is obviously one of these "better" conferences. I firmly believe that a one-loss team in the SEC deserves to play in a better bowl or the NC game over an undefeated, lets say...MAC team. No offense to the MAC students and fans out there; regardless of who you are, an undefeated season is absolutely NOTHING to be played down. You don't get there by sneaking through. However, there is a difference in an undefeated season in a conference who has 3 teams who have a comfortable chance at finishing with an above .500 record. My point is that although you can't predestine a team by their conference, you CAN deem a team good or bad by the competition they face during the year; and frankly a one-loss or undefeated team in the SEC is far more impressive than an undefeated team in the MAC. Take it for what its worth. Hope to see Florida continue to do well and am looking forward to that SEC championship game!
about 1 month ago
Only one problem... the BCS IS a cartel... and cartels are as illegal as bank robberies. The BCS is an embarrassment to amateur athletics. If Obama is serious about a playoff, he won't have to much more than make phone calls to a dozen powerful committee chairs who would jump at the chance to have a presidential "now he owes ME a favor" chip in their back pocket.
Like it or not, if Obama commits to a playoff, you can kiss the BCS goodbye.
from about 1 month ago
The BCS is a system of contracts, not a legal entity. Every Div. I-A school except the service academies has agreed to it either directly (Notre Dame) or through their conference (everyone else).
If the mid major schools are going to argue that the contracts as they currently stand are unfair, then they don't have much to stand on since they willingly signed them via their conferences. To nullify the contracts outright would require proof that they were signed under duress, something that would be a lie.
If you were going to claim a cartel was governing the BCS, then that cartel would be made of the BCS bowl committees, all 11 I-A conferences, and Notre Dame as they are the parties to the contracts. This is what the US Department of Justice has to say about cartels (1):
"The Sherman Act outlaws all contracts, combinations and conspiracies that unreasonably restrain interstate and foreign trade. This includes agreements among competitors to fix prices, rig bids and allocate customers. The Sherman Act also makes it a crime to monopolize any part of interstate commerce. An unlawful monopoly exists when only one firm controls the market for a product or service, and it has obtained that market power, not because its product or service is superior to others, but by suppressing competition with anticompetitive conduct."
The BCS neither fixes prices, rigs bids, nor allocates customers. You could argue a monopoly, but only in that it will not consider college football teams outside of I-A. I don't think anyone is looking to change that.
If you are arguing that the mid major teams do not have access to the championship game, then there is no issue unless you can attach a money value to being named "champion." If there is no definite money value associated with being "champion," then there is no trade being restricted. As I said before, the payout to all the BCS games is equal and that includes the title game.
1. http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/public/div_stats/211491.htm
from about 1 month ago
ALL cartels are a system of contracts (written or verbal), and the "have-not's" are commonly arm-twisted into accepting the crumbs from the cartel's bountiful table. ALL the BCS bowls clearly exclude the mid-majors AND ACTUALLY STIPULATE the conferences allowed as participants (except under highly exceptional ranking circumstances, when a non-BCS team is reluctantly admitted).
In all likelihood, nine BCS teams (and one "interloper") will each take $17,500,000 home to their conferences to divvy up. That's a whopping 157 million dollars! The non-BCS teams in bowls will struggle to break even on their expensive treks to underfunded bowls throughout the land.
As to a BCS Championship having "no monetary value"... accounting 101 will tell you that "good will" (Definition: Goodwill is a monetary value assigned to an intangible asset) does indeed have monetary value, and there can be no greater good-will in college football than a National Championship. The dollar amount of good-will involved would be something for a jury or congressional committee to determine.
Back to my original point. The office of the President of the United States is the most powerful office in the Free World. If Obama decides to throw his weight behind a playoff system, the BCS power mongers will fall in a skinny little minute, like so many tin soldiers.
about 1 month ago
The other problem I've had is the automatic BCS bids that the big 6 get. For instance, this year BYU, Boise St, Utah, and Ball St are all fighting for one spot while an ACC and Big East team will each walk into a BCS game and a guaranteed big payout while likely not finishing in the top 12 in the country before bowls start. I understand the level of play in some of the BCS conferences, but the sense of entitlement that the ACC (1-9 in BCS bowl games) has enjoyed seems not only unfair, but bad for the game in the long run.
about 1 month ago
FYI David, Abercrombie and colleagues will be re-introducing a Congressional Resolution (not a Bill) seeking investigation of the BCS by the Justice Department. (I realize your source Dodd had it wrong in his article)... much easier to get a resolution passed than a bill.
Here's Rep. Neil Abercrombie's take on the BCS matter:
"Congress has been told many times to mind its own business. Yet few issues have generated more rapid and rabid reaction than a resolution introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives recently by Lynn Westmoreland of Georgia, Mike Simpson of Idaho and myself to end what many people agree is a significant disparity in college sports.
The resolution declares the Bowl Championship Series - the way our college football "national champion" is determined - constitutes an illegal restraint of trade, and calls for the U.S. Department of Justice to investigate. The resolution also encourages the National Collegiate Athletic Association to establish a true football playoff system to determine the national collegiate football champion in the interest of parity and sportsmanship.
It's interesting that many of the same writers and reporters who are sniffing that Congress should have more important things to do than intrude into college sports totally ignored the Iraq troop redeployment bill I sponsored, which passed the House 377-46, or my legislation to criminalize contract fraud and waste involving hundreds of millions of dollars in Iraq. Congress does have better things to do and many of them are getting done.
But the impact of the BCS system on a lot of colleges and universities also is substantial. It isn't just about which teams get to play for the national championship. Non-BCS schools - those in the five conferences not automatically qualified for the BCS bowls - are at a competitive and financial disadvantage prior to the first kickoff of the season; a disadvantage that goes far beyond their limited access to the national championship competition. The BCS generates hundreds of millions of dollars annually, and this money is disproportionately awarded to the six BCS athletic conferences. Sixty-six schools, just more than half of Division I-A, shared 85 percent of the $217 million generated by the 2006-07 bowls.
Money generated by the post-season games helps schools cover costs for their athletic departments, facilities, equipment, recruitment, and other sports programs. Non-BCS schools must use their general funds to cover costs of their athletic departments, which takes funding from academic and administrative needs.
The lopsided distribution of BCS revenue results in two tiers within the NCAA Football Bowl Subdivision (formerly Division I-A): those with access to the BCS, and those without. Those without are unable to change their situation as the money and prestige associated with the BCS makes it highly unlikely that a non-BCS school will be able to compete for the same recruits, coaches, sponsorships, national television exposure and the revenue it generates.
The second reason for our resolution is fundamental fairness: The NCAA Football Bowl Subdivision is the only college team sport without a playoff to determine a national champion.
In basketball, all Division I schools start with an equal chance of making it to the big dance. The championship is decided on the court by the players and their talent, not rankings and schedule determined before the tournament. The basketball tournament almost always includes a "Cinderella story," an underrated team that defies expectations, upsets traditionally strong opponents and competes deep into the tournament. This year it was Davidson College from the Southern Conference. Davidson was seeded 10th in its region and made it to the Elite Eight, beating former champion Georgetown, Wisconsin and Gonzaga along the way.
College football is a multimillion-dollar enterprise, and its impact is far more substantial and tangible than state pride and school spirit. Something must be done to ensure that money and opportunity are more evenly distributed among college football programs. If the current structure insists on protecting parochial interests, then Congress should act in the interest of all colleges and universities, athletes, coaches, staff and supporters to guarantee financial opportunity, parity and true competition."
Op-Ed written by Neil Abercrombie, Honolulu Advertiser
about 1 month ago
Rep. Abercrombie's letter spells it out perfectly. There are two classes in the FBS level. All teams DO NOT have the same chance season to season to make it to a championship. Trey's argument above that some team's are simply better because of competition. How do we know?
There are deep biases in this country regarding college football programs and conferences. And those biases play into the current system and the subjective polls that keep it afloat. Polls rank teams before a game has even been played. The teams in five conferences play to win their conference, for what? Winning their conference, unlike any other sport in college, does not then allow you to take your regional success to the national stage. It's patently unfair.
All I ask is that every FBS team is given an OBJECTIVE path to play for the championship. To me, the only way to do this that makes sense is to give conference winners an automatic birth to a playoff. That would mean the playoff would have a MINIMUM of 11 teams.
Trey, I agree with you that some teams, conferences and programs in all logical likelyhood are simply better. But if you give all teams the same chance to play for a championship, the resources, money, talented players will start feeding into all schools and over time, you'd see all the conferences playing good ball. But that's what the elite "big 6" are afraid of. They lose money they think they've earned but have not. They think they'll lose access to talented players and coaches if this system is torn down - yes, that is true, just as it should be. This current system is a sham.
I hate to trivialize the BCS by comparing it to our horrible practice of slavery, so please, please understand my meaning when I do so knowing that they really are not comparable as to the cost of humanity and pure evil. That said, they're similar in that one party is getting rich on the work of others that they're not paying for. And they're afraid that if this system goes away, their lifestyle will become harder and they'll have to earn everything they get instead of taking it from others. Why do we support a system like that today? Even the playing field THEN let the competition begin and see which schools, players, conferences and coaches rise to the top.
We all might be looking up at the Sun Belt conference if they were given that chance. And if they earned it, I'd have no problem with that.
from about 1 month ago
Alan, your whole argument is a load. How can a 119 team league allow each team a path to the championship?
FBS isn't a real league. Real leagues that have playoffs have 32 teams divided into symmetrical divsions. They also have reverse record order draft systems to maintain a balance of power.
The only way to give everyone in FBS a chance is to let half the league into a giant tournament at the end of the season. That's what NCAA basketball does. But you can't do that in football because it's not practical.
The biggest playoff you can practically play is a 32 team, which is what you guys are going to end up with if you try to scam everyone with a 4 or 8 team playoff, which has to expand.
You're going to have show trials and hang the Big 6 commissioners, all so you can give the fans at Middle Tennessee and Toledo the false hope of running the table some day against Ohio State, USC and Georgia.
In the meantime you've turned the only exciting regular season in sports into another long dull slog to determine home field advantage and seedings.
Thanks alot. What sport are you planning to ruin next?
from about 1 month ago
Lou, Lou, Lou... Where did we go s-o-o-o wrong (we anti-BCS'ers, I mean). Yes Lou, let' s KEEP the BCS, and let's "fix" the other sports, too. I vote that we start your beloved sport of golf, Lou. We'll re-do the Master's right away. Why go through those boring days of T-h-u-r-s-d-a-y, and F-r-i-d-a-y and S-a-t-u-r-d-a-y..... and why should a bunch of old-fogey Augusta country clubber's decide who plays?
Let's have the sporstwriters, the PGA pro's teachers, and the Jeff Sagarin computer nerd patrol decide who plays in April. 8 golfers are more than enough, provided we take projected Nielson ratings into account first and foremost. Some say we only need 4 or even maybe 2, but let's be fair and take 8.
And let's get pretty-much the same golfers every year. (I think some people want to allow FOREIGNERS into the tourney... my wife has never heard of ANY OF 'EM, and she plays golf IN A LEAGUE!!! FOREIGNERS! Geez! ). And for Pete's sake, none of these NEW golfers that nobody's ever heard of.
OK, Lou. I'm getting tired, and I need a beer... the pin-head TV network executives can finish the rest of this Augusta thing... They came up with Survivor and Dancing With the Stars, didn't they?
from about 1 month ago
Nice attempt at humor with the golf bit, Joe. Unfortunately, you are off base again.
Golf is already almost exactly like the BCS. There are no playoffs. Golf matches are settled on the field, just like regular season football games (this may come as a surprise to you, but the BCS actually let college teams play the games. They won't show up before the Tech Oklahoma game and declare a winner before they've played).
Golf is like college football used to be. At the end of the year, the players vote and select the PGA Tour Player of the Year. There's no phony two man playoff like the two team playoff we have in college football.
The same childish pressures which forced football to create the BCS NC game caused the PGA Tour to start the phony Fedex Cup playoffs, which have been a total failure.
about 1 month ago
@ Lou,
"How can a 119 team league allow each team a path to the championship?"
I'm not sure you understood what I posted. You make a good point that professional leagues have fewer teams to account for in playoffs.
That's why I propose all conference winners get to a playoff for college football. That's only 11 teams that are guaranteed in. Why is that so unmanageable? That allows for a neat and tidy 12- or 16-team playoff. I personally favor a 16-team system. That allows for five at-large bids (which most years would go to the "Big 6" which I have absolutely no problem with. In my system, here are the teams that would make a playoff if the season ended today (for ease, I'll assume the highest rated in the conference will be the winner except for Oregon State):
11 Conf winners:
Alabama
Texas Tech
Oregon State
Utah
Ball State
Cincinnati
Ohio State
Boise State
North Carolina
Tulsa
Troy
5 at-large (based on BCS formula filling in from the top down until we reach five):
Texas
Florida
Oklahoma
USC
Penn State
My suggestion would be to seed the teams based on BCS rankings. From there, I don't care how/where the tournament plays out - that's another post for another day. But you'll have four weeks of games. All 119 teams had a chance to get into this tournament by winning their conference, and five teams who did not win their conference, but had extraordinary seasons will still get a chance to play.
I'm not sure why you think my plan is a "load." Based on the teams I included above, who's being left out? As it is, only two from that list will get to play for it this year. Who do you leave off? Who's not good enough to be the best team in the nation this year? I think half of those teams, at least, have a shot a winning that tournament.
You talk about me ruining the regular season? BS! It's ruined for teams from five conferences before the first kickoff! In my plan, all teams that still have a shot to win their conference have something to play for list late in the season.
I hate that argument "a playoff makes the reg season meaningless." It's meaningless now, dude! All teams from the MWC, WAC, CUSA, MAC and Sun Belt knew before their first game that they would never get to play for the championship. That's messed up. What if the NBA told the East Conference, "well, the West is clearly better, so go ahead and play the regular season, but only the Western Conference will be playing to determine the champion." That's exactly what's happening in college football. It's WRONG.
from about 1 month ago
You don't have enough wild cards. Do you seriously think that Georgia and Missouri's fans are going to allow Tulsa and Troy to take their place in the playoffs????? What about Michigan State, LSU and Pittsburgh? They would all be favored by two touchdowns over Tulsa and Troy. Besides, who says Texas, Florida, Oklahoma, USC and Penn State are better than them, the same pollsters and computers you despise now?
And please don't reply that this is at least better than the current system. Once you have established a real playoff, nobody is going to remember the old system, just like now they don't appreciate now how the BCS resolves the old split national championship problem. They are all going to want to be in the playoffs, no matter what.
A playoff will work in college football, but only if it has 24 teams, with 13 wild cards.
If the non-BCS conference teams want to be champions so bad, they should form their own division where all their lousy football teams can play against each other and stop trying to ruin 1-A football.
And the NBA has a reverse record order draft system, so if you're conference is lousy you have an automatic avenue to improve over time.
The non-BCS conferences are a permanent underclass.
[edit] [delete] [flag as offensive]
from about 1 month ago
Alan, the more I read guys like you, the more I think 24 teams won't be enough. It doesn't matter how many teams you let in, there's always going to be a group of teams on the outside of the playoff claiming the whole process is a fraud and the championship isn't being "settled on the field" and that the process is fraudulent and controlled by elitists. That's why basketball ended up having to invite 65 and it still hasn't shut everyone up.
about 1 month ago
You don't have enough wild cards. Do you seriously think that Georgia and Missouri's fans are going to allow Tulsa and Troy to take their place in the playoffs????? What about Michigan State, LSU and Pittsburgh? They would all be favored by two touchdowns over Tulsa and Troy. Besides, who says Texas, Florida, Oklahoma, USC and Penn State are better than them, the same pollsters and computers you despise now?
And please don't reply that this is at least better than the current system. Once you have established a real playoff, nobody is going to remember the old system, just like now they don't appreciate now how the BCS resolves the old split national championship problem. They are all going to want to be in the playoffs, no matter what.
A playoff will work in college football, but only if it has 24 teams, with 13 wild cards.
If the non-BCS conference teams want to be champions so bad, they should form their own division where all their lousy football teams can play against each other and stop trying to ruin 1-A football.
And the NBA has a reverse record order draft system, so if you're conference is lousy you have an automatic avenue to improve over time.
The non-BCS conferences are a permanent underclass.
from about 1 month ago
Seriously, your only arguments are based on the farce of keeping the power. You're afraid of what would happen if the playing field were evened. Whatever...
What's ruining 1-A football is the fact that its the only sport that becomes less significant as the season wears on. Which is a travesty because it doesn't have to be that way. Big, tough blue blood schools are scheduling more FCS teams and never going on the road because they know their championship chances are shot with a loss to a good team. So these teams all avoid each other making the overall product on the field suffer. The cross-conference biggies would play each other more often before conference play if they knew one road loss wouldn't kill them.
The draft comparison doesn't work. All schools recruit. Very, very lame example.
I don't care what Michigan State's fans think. If you can't win your conference, don't bitch. If you're worth a tinker's dam, you'll make it into a 16-team playoff. If you can't make that field, you probably don't belong there. As it is only two make the field these days, and you're complaining about a future opportunity of 16? That makes no sense.
Honestly, we'll never agree on this. You seem to think that BCS teams have this automatic elite status, when the facts are against you. There are elite programs and dogs in all conferences. But if you choke off $$$ from half the school, yes, they'll eventually become second class. If that happens, that is highway robery.
Of course there is disparity when half the conferences get gobs of money they've horded for themselves and the rest have to share the crumbs. What's awesome is that in spite of your corrupt system, teams have risen above it on a fraction of the resources. If only Duke, Vanderbilt, the Washington schools, Baylor, Indiana, and a host of other stinkers could figure out how do do what Utah, BYU, Boise State, TCU, and others are doing on shoestring budgets and work ethic.
from about 1 month ago
Save your breath, Alan. This guy is a BCS shill.
write a new comment