Playoff legislation on House docket

[eRichFalcon]

Regardless of your stance on the issue, does anyone else think that, perhaps, just maybe, our elected officials have more important things they should be worrying about....

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=4725887" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
--------------
Federal legislation that could lead to a college football playoff tournament will move a step closer to reality on Wednesday in a hearing before a subcommittee of the U.S. House of Representatives.

The Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection will consider a bill that would allow the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to prohibit any bowl game from calling itself a "national championship" unless the game is "the final game of a single elimination post-season playoff system." The subcommittee is expected to vote on the proposal on Wednesday after a line-by-line consideration of the bill.

"With everything going on in the country, I can't believe that Congress is wasting time and spending taxpayers' money on football," Bill Hancock, the BCS executive director, said in a phone interview with The Associated Press. "We feel strongly that managing of college sports is best left to the people in higher education."

Written and sponsored by Rep. Joe Barton (R-Texas), the bill is a direct attack on the BCS and, if enacted, would bring the long simmering controversy over the BCS to an end. In a legislative process that is long and can be tortuous, the hearing is a significant step. This is the furthest any bill on the BCS controversy has ever progressed on Capitol Hill.

At a hearing on the BCS issue in May, Barton demanded a playoff and warned BCS officials that if "they sit on their hands and yawn, this legislation could end up on the President's desk for his signature." This week's development, according to a spokesman for the committee, is Barton's response to the BCS's refusal to consider a playoff.

Wednesday's hearing is known as a "markup," a procedure that allows any committee member to propose amendments to the bill, followed by committee action on the amendments. The procedure is frequently used to iron out technical problems in the bill's language and to provide a forum for compromises among committee members on substantive issues.

Barton's bill is supported by Rep. Bobby Rush (D-Ill.), the chairman of the subcommittee. If the subcommittee approves the bill, it will move to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, where Barton enjoys some leverage as the ranking Republican. The next steps would be a vote on the floor of the House, passage by the Senate, and approval by President Barack Obama. Obama has said in numerous interviews on ESPN and on "60 Minutes" that he supports a playoff system.

The bill would give the FTC the authority to regulate the college football postseason with the power to obtain injunctions and to assess huge fines against any organization that promotes a "national championship game."

If enacted into law, the rule would become effective for the 2011 college football season and would affect bowl games played late in 2011 and in January of 2012.

"We're pleased that Congressman Barton's bill is moving forward because it will require the BCS to choose -- either make college football's championship a competitively earned honor or admit that it's currently the equivalent of being elected homecoming king," said Matthew Sanderson, a founder of Playoff PAC, a political action committee aimed at electing members of Congress who favor a playoff system.

Lester Munson is a senior writer for ESPN.com. Information from The Associated Press was used in this report.

[LowryFalcon]

I am definitly PRO-PLAYOFFS!! I feel that this is well over due. You may think that this is not an important topic but really I believe it is. This subject has to do a lot more than you think with business. This would end a monopoly thats been going on in college football for decades and would ensure a more fair system for both the sports side and buisness side of college football. Schools like Boise State and TCU would be ensured a spot to play for a national championship and even Bowling Green some day. In my opinion, this would change college football as we know it. It would help smaller conference teams pick up better athletes that would have once commited to BCS schools and would get rid of the non-BCS prejustice's. It would be many years I think before we would even begin to really see a difference but in about 10 years I think the whole of College Football would be changed dramatically and in all would be more exciting. Do you get excited to see cinderella teams win in the NCAA college basketball tourney? Dont you think that college basketball's postseason is just a wee bit more exciting than the FBS's? If this bill is passed than it will open the door to a heck of a lot more exciting finishes to the season! Im all aboard on this one. This would be huge for non-BCS schools as for once the playing field would be level and fair!

Go Falcons
Screw BCS
Go Playoffs!!!

[eRichFalcon]

I don't disagree with the upsides of a playoff system. Your points on a better, fairer business model and a more exciting product for fans are valid. I just have a hard time getting excited about the economics of sports when I'm concerned about the economics of putting a roof over my head, food on my table, and paying off loans when I graduate next December. Millions of others have similar concerns, and that is one of many areas that I feel should take precedence over this matter.

I think that congresspersons are happy to jump on this because the idea is overwhelmingly popular with most any constituency. There's just too much wrong with things right now for this to be a primary concern.

[Jacobs4Heisman]

I think it would be foolish to live under the assumption that this bill is the primary concern of any representative. I don't have a problem with it being on an agenda somewhere given the antitrust concerns that have been raised, regardless of my personal hatred of the BCS system.

Congressmen can be worried about multiple things at the same time. I'm sure there are thousands of pieces of legislation that seem equally unimportant that cross desks every year, but those don't get the media coverage this one gets.

[Globetrotter]

I just have a hard time getting excited about the economics of sports when I'm concerned about the economics of putting a roof over my head, food on my table, and paying off loans when I graduate next December. Millions of others have similar concerns, and that is one of many areas that I feel should take precedence over this matter.

I think that congresspersons are happy to jump on this because the idea is overwhelmingly popular with most any constituency. There's just too much wrong with things right now for this to be a primary concern.

Dont you see the connection in the least little bit? Boise State last year had a bowl payout of 750,000$ when it could have had nearly 17 million. Even after that is split up thats still millions being put into the economy of Idaho that was not put in.

The idea that the commerce committee should not look into a mutli billion dollar business that has a monopoly is absurd. Its there job to do that. It does not stop being their job because it happens to be college football and not computers.

These schools probably receive federal funding as well.

[Falconboy]

Normally I would agree that having congress get involved is not ideal and that they should have more important business to attend to. In this case , I think I'd rather have congress figuring out a more fair playoff system then trying to ram rod ObamaCare down our throats.

[bgsufalcon24]

Normally I would agree that having congress get involved is not ideal and that they should have more important business to attend to. In this case , I think I'd rather have congress figuring out a more fair playoff system then trying to ram rod ObamaCare down our throats.

Gee, they've only been debating Obamacare for 6 months, normally throat ramming would be a bit more instantaneous don't you think?

In all seriousness, it's too bad that Congress did have to intervene, but I think they've got every reason to break up a horrific monopoly over college football. As several others have mentioned, the BCS, by not giving bowl bids to certain teams has the possibility of causing problems with regards to interstate commerce and the economies of the cities and states where the teams reside. Congress has the right to regulate interstate commerce and bust trusts, thus putting this issue within it's grasp. The other part of it is that most of these schools are receiving federal funds. Congress has a say in pretty much any federal funds that are appropriated, and with this legislation I think they have the possibility to create real change in the college football landscape.

Notice how this bill has very broad public support, and that it has broad bi-partisan support as well, something that most legislation cannot say. You've got Republicans from Texas, Utah, and Idaho who are for it, just as you have Democrats from Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Minnesota for it. Therefore, Congress could easily push this through, maybe get a slight bump in their perennially terrible approval numbers, and do something positive without exerting a ton of energy.

That's not to say that this is more important than the economy, health care, wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, etc. But those issues are so divisive and take months/years to act properly on, so it's not realistic to put this aside and then get to it once the economy is fixed/Obamacare is passed, etc. A representative democracy does not function that way. You get something passed when you have the votes to do it. Who knows, a shift in public opinion or a failed election cycle later and you may lose your chance, possibly for good.

[LowryFalcon]

well put bgsufalcon24

In my opinion, it is about time they do something about this. Every school has a right to play for a championship and beside just playoff talk, the BCS is keeping almost all the money in the hands of BCS schools while smallers schools are having a hard time financially. This is most definitely more than just football were talking about here. Its educational establishments, its a business.

[AyZiggy97]

How much money is involved in college football? With institutions that receive federal funding and engage in interstate commerce it seems very appropriate that it be subject to oversight. Of course, some people have a problem with the existance of any government at all. That is an entirely different debate. As long as this is the system we have, oversight in this process is fine...and very much needed.

[Falconfreak90]

Considering these clowns are spending us into oblivion, it's about time they do something worthwhile.

LowryFalcon,
I thought your post was very well said.