Chris Berman interviews Barack Obama on Monday Night
Sunday, January 25, 2009
Thursday, January 15, 2009
Rep. Barton introduces Bill to Scrap BCS
Congressman Joe Barton (R-Arlington/Ennis) issued the following statement after introducing a bill to eliminate the Bowl Championship Series:
"The Energy and Commerce Committee is vested with the responsibility for overseeing sports, and that includes the current process for determining a national college football champion: the BCS system. College football is more than an exhilarating sport, it’s a billion-dollar business. I’m introducing legislation today because despite every effort to fix the problems of BCS, college seasons still end in sniping and controversy, rather than clear winners and losers determined on the field.
“The BCS system was created to identify a broadly accepted national champion, but 50 percent of the time it has failed to do so. Most coaches who lose half their games would also lose their jobs. Yet that's what we settle for in determining a champion today.
“The BCS system of determining America's top collegiate team was established in 1998 and has been plagued by controversy almost ever since. In some years the sport's national championship winner was left unsettled, and at least one school was left out of the many millions of dollars in revenue that accompany the title. Despite repeated efforts to improve the system, the controversy rages on.
“In the 2003 season, the University of Oklahoma and Louisiana State University were selected to play in the title game, even though the University of Southern California arguably had an equal claim. LSU beat Oklahoma and USC also won its bowl game, leaving both schools claiming be national champions and further chafing millions of college football fans, especially USC alumni. As a direct result of LSU's selection by BCS, the school's merchandise sales in both 2003 and 2004 were more than double previous levels, producing millions of dollars in additional revenue for the school.
“In the 2004 season, again three equally qualified and, in this case, undefeated teams -- Auburn, Oklahoma and USC -- fought for the two slots in the title game, which once again produced an uneven outcome as USC defeated Oklahoma handily. Auburn won its game, but had no opportunity to play for a national championship and the millions of dollars that accompany it.
“This year, we again have two teams with one loss each playing for the ‘championship’ while two undefeated teams and four additional teams with only one loss will play in bowl games, but none can become ‘champion.’
"The distinction of being the best brings millions of dollars in revenue, but the BCS method of determining who is number one consistently misfires. When we held our first hearing on BCS in 2005, I didn't have legislation in mind, and I hoped none would be necessary. Simply exposing the flaws and subjecting them to discussion, however, hasn’t led to improvement by those who run the system.”
“The legislation I am introducing along with Congressmen Bobby Rush and Michael McCaul recognizes the flaws of this system. Consumers, whether the millions who watch the game on TV or the lucky few who pay for a ticket to the computer-designated ‘championship’ game, are being deceived. The BCS championship game is not a championship game under any sensible interpretation of the manner in which sports champions are determined.
“The legislation we are introducing today will prohibit the marketing, promotion, and advertising of a post-season game as a ‘national championship’ football game, unless it is the result of a playoff system. Violations of the prohibition will be treated as violations of the Federal Trade Commission Act as an unfair or deceptive act or practice, and provides the FTC with civil penalty authority.
“The legislation does not specify the details of the playoff system, rather only that all Division I, Football Bowl Subdivision, teams should be initially eligible at the start of every season. The existing bowl structure could easily be incorporated into or as the basis for such a playoff system.
“We’re never going to abolish all controversy, and who’d really want to be rid of it, anyway? People will argue about who should be in and out of playoffs, too, but I am confident when more of the most deserving teams can compete, a true national champion is much likelier to emerge.”
"The Energy and Commerce Committee is vested with the responsibility for overseeing sports, and that includes the current process for determining a national college football champion: the BCS system. College football is more than an exhilarating sport, it’s a billion-dollar business. I’m introducing legislation today because despite every effort to fix the problems of BCS, college seasons still end in sniping and controversy, rather than clear winners and losers determined on the field.
“The BCS system was created to identify a broadly accepted national champion, but 50 percent of the time it has failed to do so. Most coaches who lose half their games would also lose their jobs. Yet that's what we settle for in determining a champion today.
“The BCS system of determining America's top collegiate team was established in 1998 and has been plagued by controversy almost ever since. In some years the sport's national championship winner was left unsettled, and at least one school was left out of the many millions of dollars in revenue that accompany the title. Despite repeated efforts to improve the system, the controversy rages on.
“In the 2003 season, the University of Oklahoma and Louisiana State University were selected to play in the title game, even though the University of Southern California arguably had an equal claim. LSU beat Oklahoma and USC also won its bowl game, leaving both schools claiming be national champions and further chafing millions of college football fans, especially USC alumni. As a direct result of LSU's selection by BCS, the school's merchandise sales in both 2003 and 2004 were more than double previous levels, producing millions of dollars in additional revenue for the school.
“In the 2004 season, again three equally qualified and, in this case, undefeated teams -- Auburn, Oklahoma and USC -- fought for the two slots in the title game, which once again produced an uneven outcome as USC defeated Oklahoma handily. Auburn won its game, but had no opportunity to play for a national championship and the millions of dollars that accompany it.
“This year, we again have two teams with one loss each playing for the ‘championship’ while two undefeated teams and four additional teams with only one loss will play in bowl games, but none can become ‘champion.’
"The distinction of being the best brings millions of dollars in revenue, but the BCS method of determining who is number one consistently misfires. When we held our first hearing on BCS in 2005, I didn't have legislation in mind, and I hoped none would be necessary. Simply exposing the flaws and subjecting them to discussion, however, hasn’t led to improvement by those who run the system.”
“The legislation I am introducing along with Congressmen Bobby Rush and Michael McCaul recognizes the flaws of this system. Consumers, whether the millions who watch the game on TV or the lucky few who pay for a ticket to the computer-designated ‘championship’ game, are being deceived. The BCS championship game is not a championship game under any sensible interpretation of the manner in which sports champions are determined.
“The legislation we are introducing today will prohibit the marketing, promotion, and advertising of a post-season game as a ‘national championship’ football game, unless it is the result of a playoff system. Violations of the prohibition will be treated as violations of the Federal Trade Commission Act as an unfair or deceptive act or practice, and provides the FTC with civil penalty authority.
“The legislation does not specify the details of the playoff system, rather only that all Division I, Football Bowl Subdivision, teams should be initially eligible at the start of every season. The existing bowl structure could easily be incorporated into or as the basis for such a playoff system.
“We’re never going to abolish all controversy, and who’d really want to be rid of it, anyway? People will argue about who should be in and out of playoffs, too, but I am confident when more of the most deserving teams can compete, a true national champion is much likelier to emerge.”
Sunday, January 11, 2009
Gators win BCS, but are they No. 1?
By Gene Wojciechowski
ESPN.com
MIAMI -- This is all your fault, USC. If you hadn't thrown up on your thigh pads at Oregon State on Sept. 25, the national championship debate wouldn't be tied up in square knots.
Instead, we're still stuck wondering whether we have the right team getting fitted for title rings.
Is it the University of Tebow, which beat Oklahoma on Thursday night to claim the BCS championship?
Is it Utah, the only undefeated team in the country?
Is it one-loss Texas, which still can't believe it got squeezed out of the BCS title game?
Or is it one-loss USC, which pile-drived Penn State in the Rose Bowl and probably stole the glasses off JoePa's statue, too? But -- sigh -- the Trojans couldn't beat Oregon State for the second time in three seasons.
And the answer is …
Who knows for sure?
I know who'd get my vote: Florida, but with an asterisk the size of Tebow's heart.
The Gators won a crystal trophy, but the victory over OU was as artistic as a finger painting. It isn't the first time a BCS Championship Game didn't live up to the hype. No shame there.
The difference is that there are three other teams that think they deserved a confetti shower -- or at least the chance to have played for a national title. So what would the Gators say to Utah, Texas and USC?
"Sorry you can't be here," said Florida defensive end Carlos Dunlap, who was named the defensive player of the game.
"Good luck next year," defensive tackle Lawrence Marsh said.
Controversy? The Gators didn't notice any controversy after the 24-14 win.
"I think our résumé speaks for itself," wide receiver David Nelson said. "In my opinion, we are national champions."
In Utah's opinion, Florida has one more loss than the Utes' tally, which was zero. Florida ran the table in October, November, December and January. Utah ran the season.
In Texas' opinion, Florida has the same number of losses as the Longhorns (one), the same number of wins against Oklahoma (one) and the same margin of victory against the Sooners (10). But Texas' victory came on a neutral field and the Gators essentially played a home game at Dolphin Stadium. Even UF coach Urban Meyer admitted as much afterward.
In USC's opinion, Florida has the same number of losses, but not the same momentum or same talent. After all, remember Pete Carroll's dis of Florida and Oklahoma after the Trojans' Rose Bowl win? Said Carroll: "With all due respect, those are two great programs, I don't think anybody can beat the Trojans."
Carroll isn't the only one who thinks so. The problem is that we'll never know whether USC would have beaten Florida or Oklahoma. Probably? Maybe? Maybe not?
"We saw the two best teams in America go after each other," said Meyer in the wee hours of Friday morning -- and he wasn't talking about USC as one of the two.
Meyer has a tendency to exaggerate. Then again, he has earned the right after winning two BCS championships in the past three years. Anyway, Meyer said this was "one of the greatest college football games that's occurred."
Not for the first 2½ quarters it wasn't. It was intensely played, that's for sure. But four interceptions -- two thrown by Tebow, two by Heisman Trophy winner Sam Bradford (they had a combined eight INTs for the entire regular season) -- isn't great. Eight Florida penalties (including three false starts by left tackle Phil Trautwein) isn't great. And let's not even talk about the ACC officiating crew.
Tebow is what we'll remember about the 2008 BCS championship. Tebow and, of course, Florida's defense, which held Oklahoma's record-breaking offense to a season-low 14 points (49 points below OU's 63-point average in the Sooners' previous five games).
The Gators made two crucial first-half red zone stands, a fourth-down stop at the UF 1-yard line and an interception at the UF 3-yard line. And, with 9:59 left in the fourth quarter and OU trailing by only a field goal, Florida safety Ahmad Black ensured he'll never have to buy a dinner in Gainesville in decades to come. He won a wrestling match for a Bradford pass meant for OU receiver Juaquin Iglesias.
"The play of the game," Meyer said.
Afterward, Gators offensive guard Carl Johnson cupped the BCS crystal football with his right hand and hammed it up for a semicircle of photographers.
"What pose you want?" he said.
They wanted Johnson to do a Heisman pose, so he made like his quarterback Tebow. Then somehow the crystal was handed to a man in a wheelchair. Just as the guy cradled the trophy, a University of Florida police officer snatched it away from him and gave it to Meyer.
Meyer would say later that the Gators are "one of the best football teams I've ever had the privilege to be around." But are they the true national champions?
"Absolutely," linebacker Brandon Spikes said.
"No doubt in my mind," Marsh said.
There's doubt at Utah, Texas and USC. Otherwise, after a weird game and an even weirder season, this Florida victory is going to have to do. Just what 2008 deserved.
Gene Wojciechowski is the senior national columnist for ESPN.com. You can contact him at gene.wojciechowski@espn3.com
ESPN.com
MIAMI -- This is all your fault, USC. If you hadn't thrown up on your thigh pads at Oregon State on Sept. 25, the national championship debate wouldn't be tied up in square knots.
Instead, we're still stuck wondering whether we have the right team getting fitted for title rings.
Is it the University of Tebow, which beat Oklahoma on Thursday night to claim the BCS championship?
Is it Utah, the only undefeated team in the country?
Is it one-loss Texas, which still can't believe it got squeezed out of the BCS title game?
Or is it one-loss USC, which pile-drived Penn State in the Rose Bowl and probably stole the glasses off JoePa's statue, too? But -- sigh -- the Trojans couldn't beat Oregon State for the second time in three seasons.
And the answer is …
Who knows for sure?
I know who'd get my vote: Florida, but with an asterisk the size of Tebow's heart.
The Gators won a crystal trophy, but the victory over OU was as artistic as a finger painting. It isn't the first time a BCS Championship Game didn't live up to the hype. No shame there.
The difference is that there are three other teams that think they deserved a confetti shower -- or at least the chance to have played for a national title. So what would the Gators say to Utah, Texas and USC?
"Sorry you can't be here," said Florida defensive end Carlos Dunlap, who was named the defensive player of the game.
"Good luck next year," defensive tackle Lawrence Marsh said.
Controversy? The Gators didn't notice any controversy after the 24-14 win.
"I think our résumé speaks for itself," wide receiver David Nelson said. "In my opinion, we are national champions."
In Utah's opinion, Florida has one more loss than the Utes' tally, which was zero. Florida ran the table in October, November, December and January. Utah ran the season.
In Texas' opinion, Florida has the same number of losses as the Longhorns (one), the same number of wins against Oklahoma (one) and the same margin of victory against the Sooners (10). But Texas' victory came on a neutral field and the Gators essentially played a home game at Dolphin Stadium. Even UF coach Urban Meyer admitted as much afterward.
In USC's opinion, Florida has the same number of losses, but not the same momentum or same talent. After all, remember Pete Carroll's dis of Florida and Oklahoma after the Trojans' Rose Bowl win? Said Carroll: "With all due respect, those are two great programs, I don't think anybody can beat the Trojans."
Carroll isn't the only one who thinks so. The problem is that we'll never know whether USC would have beaten Florida or Oklahoma. Probably? Maybe? Maybe not?
"We saw the two best teams in America go after each other," said Meyer in the wee hours of Friday morning -- and he wasn't talking about USC as one of the two.
Meyer has a tendency to exaggerate. Then again, he has earned the right after winning two BCS championships in the past three years. Anyway, Meyer said this was "one of the greatest college football games that's occurred."
Not for the first 2½ quarters it wasn't. It was intensely played, that's for sure. But four interceptions -- two thrown by Tebow, two by Heisman Trophy winner Sam Bradford (they had a combined eight INTs for the entire regular season) -- isn't great. Eight Florida penalties (including three false starts by left tackle Phil Trautwein) isn't great. And let's not even talk about the ACC officiating crew.
Tebow is what we'll remember about the 2008 BCS championship. Tebow and, of course, Florida's defense, which held Oklahoma's record-breaking offense to a season-low 14 points (49 points below OU's 63-point average in the Sooners' previous five games).
The Gators made two crucial first-half red zone stands, a fourth-down stop at the UF 1-yard line and an interception at the UF 3-yard line. And, with 9:59 left in the fourth quarter and OU trailing by only a field goal, Florida safety Ahmad Black ensured he'll never have to buy a dinner in Gainesville in decades to come. He won a wrestling match for a Bradford pass meant for OU receiver Juaquin Iglesias.
"The play of the game," Meyer said.
Afterward, Gators offensive guard Carl Johnson cupped the BCS crystal football with his right hand and hammed it up for a semicircle of photographers.
"What pose you want?" he said.
They wanted Johnson to do a Heisman pose, so he made like his quarterback Tebow. Then somehow the crystal was handed to a man in a wheelchair. Just as the guy cradled the trophy, a University of Florida police officer snatched it away from him and gave it to Meyer.
Meyer would say later that the Gators are "one of the best football teams I've ever had the privilege to be around." But are they the true national champions?
"Absolutely," linebacker Brandon Spikes said.
"No doubt in my mind," Marsh said.
There's doubt at Utah, Texas and USC. Otherwise, after a weird game and an even weirder season, this Florida victory is going to have to do. Just what 2008 deserved.
Gene Wojciechowski is the senior national columnist for ESPN.com. You can contact him at gene.wojciechowski@espn3.com
Friday, January 9, 2009
BCS coordinator: System in compliance
Read this garbage
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/bowls08/news/story?id=3818921
So let me get this straight, the Commissioner from the weakest BCS conference is saying the BCS is legit? What a surpise! Who has the most to lose by going to a playoff system? The Big East and the ACC, because while they have plenty of decent teams, we all know they have absolutely no title contenders. So of course the ACC is going to say the BCS is fine, they get millions from their bowl game that is a joke every year. To me that's the evidence that the BCS is illegal, even though VT and Cincy are weaker teams, because they are in a BCS conference they have a better shot at getting to a BCS game and making millions.
The bottom line is - you dont know whether team A can beat team B unless there's a playoff. Let's stop being like figure skating where people vote, and start settling on the field with a playoff!
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/bowls08/news/story?id=3818921
So let me get this straight, the Commissioner from the weakest BCS conference is saying the BCS is legit? What a surpise! Who has the most to lose by going to a playoff system? The Big East and the ACC, because while they have plenty of decent teams, we all know they have absolutely no title contenders. So of course the ACC is going to say the BCS is fine, they get millions from their bowl game that is a joke every year. To me that's the evidence that the BCS is illegal, even though VT and Cincy are weaker teams, because they are in a BCS conference they have a better shot at getting to a BCS game and making millions.
The bottom line is - you dont know whether team A can beat team B unless there's a playoff. Let's stop being like figure skating where people vote, and start settling on the field with a playoff!
Obama Calls For NCAA Playoffs
In a 60 Minutes interview with Steve Kroft, President-elect Barack Obama laid out his plan to have playoffs at the end of the college football season.
Thursday, January 8, 2009
BCS is a political football in 2009
Since its inception in 1998, the NCAA's Bowl Championship Series has weathered criticism from nearly all directions.
But entering 2009, the BCS may encounter a perfect storm: a unique, bipartisan legislative current and the imminent thunderhead of an Obama administration.
The BCS is the system that chooses the contenders for college football's most prominent postseason games: the Fiesta, Orange, Rose and Sugar bowls, as well the National Championship game, which this year pits Oklahoma against Florida on Thursday.
The BCS relies on a compilation of polls and rankings instead of, to the consternation of many, actual competition.
In a post-election "60 Minutes" interview, President-elect Barack Obama made clear his stance on the issue: "This is important. I'm going to throw my weight around a little bit. [If] you've got a bunch of teams who play throughout the season [and] there's no clear decisive winner ... we should be creating a playoff system."
Republicans and Democrats alike each year are angered by what they see as inherent unfairness in the arrangement. In 2008, legislators -- for one reason or another -- drafted legislation to invalidate the BCS on grounds that it misdirects commerce. Video Watch how a playoff system could change college football »
In an April resolution, the House of Representatives formally, if not forcibly, condemned the BCS as "an illegal restraint of trade that violates the Sherman Anti-Trust Act" and also urged the Justice Department's Antitrust Division to investigate. Since this resolution, though, no serious action has been pursued.
And so, on December 10, Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, took the next step, introducing the College Football Playoff Act of 2008.
Don't Miss
* Sports Illustrated
If passed, this bill would "prohibit, as an unfair and deceptive act or practice, the promotion, marketing, and advertising of any post-season NCAA Division I football game as a national championship game unless such game is the culmination of a fair and equitable playoff system."
If passed, this bill would apply to any game that occurs after January 31, 2011. It would be enforceable by the Federal Trade Commission.
The BCS, of course, would have things go differently. Made up of the commissioners from all NCAA Division I-A conferences; the athletics director from Notre Dame, which isn't affiliated with a conference; and representatives from each bowl organization, the BCS governing body announced in spring 2008 that the system would be used through at least the 2014 season.
Later, ESPN outbid Fox for a four-year television rights deal with the BCS. To begin in 2011, this contract rests on the understanding that the current system will remain in place.
On Thursday, second-ranked Oklahoma will battle top-ranked Florida in the National Championship. Third-ranked Texas was responsible for Oklahoma's only defeat. Texas didn't play Florida.
Barton, the ranking Republican in the Energy and Commerce Committee, represents the 6th District of Texas. Two of his co-sponsors, Republican Reps. Michael McCaul and Lamar Smith, represent districts 10 and 21, respectively -- two of the four districts that collectively represent Austin, home of the University of Texas.
Regardless of lawmakers' personal affiliation with home teams, the official motivation for college football reform is the same as for any similar economic reform: to help the little guy compete.
The BCS is composed of eleven conferences. The six traditionally dominant conferences -- the Atlantic Coast, Big East, Big 12, Big Ten, Pacific 10 and Southeastern -- are guaranteed at least one berth in one of the BCS bowls. Each year, they are awarded $18 million, plus $4.5 million for each additional team that appears in a bowl game. Meanwhile, only one team from the smaller conferences -- Conference USA, Mid-American, Mountain West, Sun Belt and Western Athletic -- is given this opportunity.
For the 2006-07 postseason, an average of $25.5 million in revenue was awarded per large conference, while the small conferences averaged $5 million each.
As the argument goes, the larger postseason earnings provide an advantage -- in athletic recruiting, as well as for each university as a whole -- to the "power" conferences.
This is not the first time lawmakers have voiced their discontent.
In 2005, Barton summoned a BCS official before an Energy and Commerce subcommittee, but legislation did not result.
advertisement
And in 2003, both the House and Senate Judiciary committees held oversight hearings to examine the BCS system, though the combined result yielded not much more than a sound bite from current Vice President-elect Joe Biden:
"It looks un-American. ... It looks like a rigged deal."
But entering 2009, the BCS may encounter a perfect storm: a unique, bipartisan legislative current and the imminent thunderhead of an Obama administration.
The BCS is the system that chooses the contenders for college football's most prominent postseason games: the Fiesta, Orange, Rose and Sugar bowls, as well the National Championship game, which this year pits Oklahoma against Florida on Thursday.
The BCS relies on a compilation of polls and rankings instead of, to the consternation of many, actual competition.
In a post-election "60 Minutes" interview, President-elect Barack Obama made clear his stance on the issue: "This is important. I'm going to throw my weight around a little bit. [If] you've got a bunch of teams who play throughout the season [and] there's no clear decisive winner ... we should be creating a playoff system."
Republicans and Democrats alike each year are angered by what they see as inherent unfairness in the arrangement. In 2008, legislators -- for one reason or another -- drafted legislation to invalidate the BCS on grounds that it misdirects commerce. Video Watch how a playoff system could change college football »
In an April resolution, the House of Representatives formally, if not forcibly, condemned the BCS as "an illegal restraint of trade that violates the Sherman Anti-Trust Act" and also urged the Justice Department's Antitrust Division to investigate. Since this resolution, though, no serious action has been pursued.
And so, on December 10, Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, took the next step, introducing the College Football Playoff Act of 2008.
Don't Miss
* Sports Illustrated
If passed, this bill would "prohibit, as an unfair and deceptive act or practice, the promotion, marketing, and advertising of any post-season NCAA Division I football game as a national championship game unless such game is the culmination of a fair and equitable playoff system."
If passed, this bill would apply to any game that occurs after January 31, 2011. It would be enforceable by the Federal Trade Commission.
The BCS, of course, would have things go differently. Made up of the commissioners from all NCAA Division I-A conferences; the athletics director from Notre Dame, which isn't affiliated with a conference; and representatives from each bowl organization, the BCS governing body announced in spring 2008 that the system would be used through at least the 2014 season.
Later, ESPN outbid Fox for a four-year television rights deal with the BCS. To begin in 2011, this contract rests on the understanding that the current system will remain in place.
On Thursday, second-ranked Oklahoma will battle top-ranked Florida in the National Championship. Third-ranked Texas was responsible for Oklahoma's only defeat. Texas didn't play Florida.
Barton, the ranking Republican in the Energy and Commerce Committee, represents the 6th District of Texas. Two of his co-sponsors, Republican Reps. Michael McCaul and Lamar Smith, represent districts 10 and 21, respectively -- two of the four districts that collectively represent Austin, home of the University of Texas.
Regardless of lawmakers' personal affiliation with home teams, the official motivation for college football reform is the same as for any similar economic reform: to help the little guy compete.
The BCS is composed of eleven conferences. The six traditionally dominant conferences -- the Atlantic Coast, Big East, Big 12, Big Ten, Pacific 10 and Southeastern -- are guaranteed at least one berth in one of the BCS bowls. Each year, they are awarded $18 million, plus $4.5 million for each additional team that appears in a bowl game. Meanwhile, only one team from the smaller conferences -- Conference USA, Mid-American, Mountain West, Sun Belt and Western Athletic -- is given this opportunity.
For the 2006-07 postseason, an average of $25.5 million in revenue was awarded per large conference, while the small conferences averaged $5 million each.
As the argument goes, the larger postseason earnings provide an advantage -- in athletic recruiting, as well as for each university as a whole -- to the "power" conferences.
This is not the first time lawmakers have voiced their discontent.
In 2005, Barton summoned a BCS official before an Energy and Commerce subcommittee, but legislation did not result.
advertisement
And in 2003, both the House and Senate Judiciary committees held oversight hearings to examine the BCS system, though the combined result yielded not much more than a sound bite from current Vice President-elect Joe Biden:
"It looks un-American. ... It looks like a rigged deal."
Wednesday, January 7, 2009
Utah AG: BCS may violate antitrust laws
Associated Press
January 6, 2009, 7:07 PM ET
SALT LAKE CITY -- Utah's attorney general is investigating the Bowl Championship Series for a possible violation of federal antitrust laws after an undefeated Utes team was left out of the national title game for the second time in five years.
Attorney General Mark Shurtleff contends the BCS unfairly puts schools like Utah, which is a member of a conference without an automatic bid to the lucrative bowl games, at a competitive and financial disadvantage.
"We've established that from the very first day, from the very first kickoff in the college season, more than half of the schools are put on an unlevel playing field," Shurtleff said Tuesday. "They will never be allowed to play for a national championship."
BCS administrator Bill Hancock said he couldn't comment on the investigation until he had seen something in writing from the Utah attorney general's office.
"We just don't think it's appropriate to comment until we've seen something to comment on," Hancock said.
The BCS is designed to pit the top two teams against each other in a national championship game each year. It uses a complicated formula based on human polls and computer rankings to determine who plays in that game, which Shurtleff contends is biased.
No. 1 Florida and No. 2 Oklahoma have one loss each but will play for the BCS national championship Thursday night in Miami.
The Associated Press crowns its own national champion based on a poll of sports writers who are not bound to vote for the winner of the BCS title game. Many fans are clamoring for voters to put Utah -- the nation's only undefeated team -- in the No. 1 spot in the final poll.
On Friday, Utah became the first team from a non-BCS conference to win two BCS bowls after it upset No. 4 Alabama 31-17 in the Sugar Bowl. Utah also beat Pittsburgh in the 2004 Fiesta Bowl to complete an undefeated season.
Shurtleff said his office is still in the initial stages of reviewing the Sherman Antitrust Act to see if a lawsuit can be filed. To succeed in a lawsuit, he would have to prove a conspiracy exists that creates a monopoly.
Shurtleff said he prefers that BCS officials and university presidents solve the problem of excluding some schools from a national title game by creating a playoff system, but added he's committed to doing whatever it takes to produce change.
If a lawsuit is filed against the BCS, though, Shurtleff could end up suing the state he represents. Utah is a member of the Mountain West Conference and Utah State belongs to the Western Athletic Conference; both leagues are members of the BCS.
"We have to determine the answer to those questions," said Shurtleff, whose planned investigation was reported by the Deseret News on Tuesday. "You determine who it is you're bringing action against."
The BCS is comprised of the 11 Football Championship Subdivision conferences, the director of athletics at the University of Notre Dame, and representatives of the bowl organizations.
Under the BCS, about $9.5 million is distributed among Conference USA, the Mid-American, Mountain West, Sun Belt and Western Athletic conferences for making their teams available to play in BCS games.
If a school from any of those conferences receives an at-large invitation to play in a BCS bowl or championship game, those conferences get an additional 9 percent of BCS revenues among them, which come from television rights and the bowls themselves.
If more than one school from those conferences make the BCS bowls or championship game, those conferences get an extra $4.5 million for each additional team.
By comparison, the share to each conference with an automatic berth in the BCS -- the ACC, Big East, Big 12, Big Ten, Pac-10 and SEC -- is about $18 million each. When a second team from one of those conferences qualifies to play in a BCS game, as the SEC accomplished this year with Alabama and Florida, that conference gets an additional $4.5 million.
"It's not about bragging rights. It's a multimillion dollar -- hundreds of millions -- business where the BCS schools get richer and non-BCS get poorer," Shurtleff said.
Copyright 2009 by The Associated Press
January 6, 2009, 7:07 PM ET
SALT LAKE CITY -- Utah's attorney general is investigating the Bowl Championship Series for a possible violation of federal antitrust laws after an undefeated Utes team was left out of the national title game for the second time in five years.
Attorney General Mark Shurtleff contends the BCS unfairly puts schools like Utah, which is a member of a conference without an automatic bid to the lucrative bowl games, at a competitive and financial disadvantage.
"We've established that from the very first day, from the very first kickoff in the college season, more than half of the schools are put on an unlevel playing field," Shurtleff said Tuesday. "They will never be allowed to play for a national championship."
BCS administrator Bill Hancock said he couldn't comment on the investigation until he had seen something in writing from the Utah attorney general's office.
"We just don't think it's appropriate to comment until we've seen something to comment on," Hancock said.
The BCS is designed to pit the top two teams against each other in a national championship game each year. It uses a complicated formula based on human polls and computer rankings to determine who plays in that game, which Shurtleff contends is biased.
No. 1 Florida and No. 2 Oklahoma have one loss each but will play for the BCS national championship Thursday night in Miami.
The Associated Press crowns its own national champion based on a poll of sports writers who are not bound to vote for the winner of the BCS title game. Many fans are clamoring for voters to put Utah -- the nation's only undefeated team -- in the No. 1 spot in the final poll.
On Friday, Utah became the first team from a non-BCS conference to win two BCS bowls after it upset No. 4 Alabama 31-17 in the Sugar Bowl. Utah also beat Pittsburgh in the 2004 Fiesta Bowl to complete an undefeated season.
Shurtleff said his office is still in the initial stages of reviewing the Sherman Antitrust Act to see if a lawsuit can be filed. To succeed in a lawsuit, he would have to prove a conspiracy exists that creates a monopoly.
Shurtleff said he prefers that BCS officials and university presidents solve the problem of excluding some schools from a national title game by creating a playoff system, but added he's committed to doing whatever it takes to produce change.
If a lawsuit is filed against the BCS, though, Shurtleff could end up suing the state he represents. Utah is a member of the Mountain West Conference and Utah State belongs to the Western Athletic Conference; both leagues are members of the BCS.
"We have to determine the answer to those questions," said Shurtleff, whose planned investigation was reported by the Deseret News on Tuesday. "You determine who it is you're bringing action against."
The BCS is comprised of the 11 Football Championship Subdivision conferences, the director of athletics at the University of Notre Dame, and representatives of the bowl organizations.
Under the BCS, about $9.5 million is distributed among Conference USA, the Mid-American, Mountain West, Sun Belt and Western Athletic conferences for making their teams available to play in BCS games.
If a school from any of those conferences receives an at-large invitation to play in a BCS bowl or championship game, those conferences get an additional 9 percent of BCS revenues among them, which come from television rights and the bowls themselves.
If more than one school from those conferences make the BCS bowls or championship game, those conferences get an extra $4.5 million for each additional team.
By comparison, the share to each conference with an automatic berth in the BCS -- the ACC, Big East, Big 12, Big Ten, Pac-10 and SEC -- is about $18 million each. When a second team from one of those conferences qualifies to play in a BCS game, as the SEC accomplished this year with Alabama and Florida, that conference gets an additional $4.5 million.
"It's not about bragging rights. It's a multimillion dollar -- hundreds of millions -- business where the BCS schools get richer and non-BCS get poorer," Shurtleff said.
Copyright 2009 by The Associated Press
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
