Bye-Bye to the BCS??

[Strouse]

Haven't seen this posted anywhere else, and if it has, sorry...

High-Ranking Dems To Hold Hearings On BCS

Rep. Edolphus Towns, D-N.Y., the incoming chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, said he will hold hearings and possibly subpoena NCAA officials, college presidents, players, coaches and athletics directors in an effort to force a playoff in Division 1-A football, USA Today reports.

"I think you really do not get a true No. 1 out of (the Bowl Championship Series)," Towns told the newspaper. "Nobody questions the Super Bowl. The team that wins is the best team that year. I think we can do the same thing at the college level where once it's over there is no questions about who is No. 1 and who is No. 2."

Questions were raised again this season about the legitimacy of the widely unpopular BCS format when unbeaten Utah didn't get a chance to play in the national title game. The 13-0 Utes finished second in the final AP top 25 poll and fourth in the final coaches' poll. The 13-1 Florida Gators, who beat Oklahoma in the BCS national championship game, were voted No. 1 in both polls. Oklahoma finished fifth in both polls.

Texas (12-1) and USC (12-1) also had complaints about the BCS system, each believing they should have had a chance to play for the national title.

"I really feel that you can't leave it as is," Towns said. "Right now, if you ask what the No. 1 team is, a lot of people would say USC. Others would say Texas and if you ask anybody in the state of Utah, they would say their team was best. I want to get a system that has credibility."

President-elect Barack Obama has expressed support for a playoff system in college football, and Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff is moving forward with an inquiry into whether the BCS system violates antitrust laws. The American Football Coaches Association also is reviewing the BCS system, specifically how the coaches' poll plays into the calculations.

'The presidents, bowl administrators, commissioners and others who are involved with postseason college football are pleased to work with Congress, as they have on several occasions in the past, and welcome any questions or ideas for improving the system," Dr. David Frohnmayer, University of Oregon president and chair of the BCS Presidential Oversight Committee, said in a statement.

Former house Majority Leader Dick Gephardt of Missouri said he thinks Congress won't have time to deal with this issue with so many issues, particularly the economy, facing lawmakers. "I think this is something that colleges will have to figure out together," Gephardt told USA Today. "I'm not sure this is what the public wants Congress to be spending their time on."

[transfer2BGSU]

I think Congress has more important things to work on rather than the silly BCS system.

[Strouse]

I think Congress has more important things to work on rather than the silly BCS system.

Ya, no kidding...the BCS crap should be the last thing on their mind right now

[footballguy51]

Quite honestly, Congress shouldn't have their nose in any sports business at all, in my opinion. They were elected to help run the government, not to make sure steroids aren't used in baseball, or that #1 in college football means anything. I hate the BCS system as much as anybody else, especially since the best team doesn't get a chance to be #1 traditionally, but Congress shouldn't even be involved in such things.

[Arthur_Seven_Vandalay]

Quite honestly, Congress shouldn't have their nose in any sports business at all, in my opinion. They were elected to help run the government, not to make sure steroids aren't used in baseball, or that #1 in college football means anything. I hate the BCS system as much as anybody else, especially since the best team doesn't get a chance to be #1 traditionally, but Congress shouldn't even be involved in such things.

Well, athletics is commerce. The Commerce Clause of Article I of the Constitution specifically says that Congress's job is the regulation of interstate commerce.

[CapitalFalcon]

Are you F'N KIDDING ME????

[CapitalFalcon]

Quite honestly, Congress shouldn't have their nose in any sports business at all, in my opinion. They were elected to help run the government, not to make sure steroids aren't used in baseball, or that #1 in college football means anything. I hate the BCS system as much as anybody else, especially since the best team doesn't get a chance to be #1 traditionally, but Congress shouldn't even be involved in such things.

Well, athletics is commerce. The Commerce Clause of Article I of the Constitution specifically says that Congress's job is the regulation of interstate commerce.

I do hope you are kidding...

[Falcon Commander]

good god, they'll find a way to TAX us for watching the games if those A-Holes get involved !!!

[Arthur_Seven_Vandalay]

Quite honestly, Congress shouldn't have their nose in any sports business at all, in my opinion. They were elected to help run the government, not to make sure steroids aren't used in baseball, or that #1 in college football means anything. I hate the BCS system as much as anybody else, especially since the best team doesn't get a chance to be #1 traditionally, but Congress shouldn't even be involved in such things.

Well, athletics is commerce. The Commerce Clause of Article I of the Constitution specifically says that Congress's job is the regulation of interstate commerce.

I do hope you are kidding...

Whether you agree with it or not, it is basic Constitutional law. The BCS is all about the business, the business is done across state lines, and therefore, Congress has the power to legislate. It's how congress was able to desegregate southern businesses in the 50's and 60's (yeah, that evil big government dipping its hands into places it doesn't belong...).

Now timing and politics is something entirely different. It would be political suicide to bring it up now.

Your view on a limited government does not change basic facts about congressional power.

****I guess "regulation" was not the word to use, though it's correct. They make laws in the area of interstate commerce.

[Zig]

I like the idea of deciding whether there should(n't) be a BCS system.

I don't like the idea of Congress deciding on it.

[Globetrotter]

Its an antitrust issue. Who should decide it then?

[Arthur_Seven_Vandalay]

Its an antitrust issue. Who should decide it then?

If it's an antitrust issue, federal courts would have the say. Antitrust law is largely federal common law.

I don't think the antitrust argument would stick. Antitrust is about the consumer, while the BCS is about the universities. Consumers have other options. They have many different choices of bowl games and other lower-division playoff games.

I think it's a simple fairness issue. And though antitrust law does deal with fairness, I don't think the BCS-issue falls into that realm of law. Therefore, if government is to act (which I think is pretty obvious that they shouldn't), it would be Congress taking the action.

(Now watch, a lawsuit will be filed and the whole deal will be decided according to antitrust law...)

[MACMAN]

The problem is this The large figures mentioned in this article all feel that a play off would be at best a 6 (the BCS conferences) +2 at large teams.
For any playoff system to be fair and equitable it has to include all conference champions. Then if they feel they must still utilize polls and include two others or something like that, then yea, but only if all Conference Champions make the playoffs.
BO's idea on the playoffs was to use the top four teams from the polls..and that is no different than what we have now...except to say that the chosen teams are playing off.
In the end its a bad idea to get the electators in on this.

[Globetrotter]

Its an antitrust issue. Who should decide it then?

If it's an antitrust issue, federal courts would have the say. Antitrust law is largely federal common law.

I don't think the antitrust argument would stick. Antitrust is about the consumer, while the BCS is about the universities. Consumers have other options. They have many different choices of bowl games and other lower-division playoff games.

I think it's a simple fairness issue. And though antitrust law does deal with fairness, I don't think the BCS-issue falls into that realm of law. Therefore, if government is to act (which I think is pretty obvious that they shouldn't), it would be Congress taking the action.

(Now watch, a lawsuit will be filed and the whole deal will be decided according to antitrust law...)

I get the feeling that the lawsuit will end up coming from Idaho or Utah. Boise State lost Millions because a bowl had to take Va Tech. The bowl payout difference was $750,000 compared to 17million.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=3814472

http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/n ... &type=lgns

http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/n ... &type=lgns

[BgWaRrIoR]

Laissez faire et laissez passer


Good Lord, government in football?? If only our fore-fathers could see this.....[/b]