Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Proposals requested for changing BCS without playoffs(More BS from the BCS)
espn ^ | 7/21/03 | AP

Posted on 07/24/2003 3:10:02 PM PDT by Diddle E. Squat

Forget about a college football playoff for now.

The committee overseeing changes to the Bowl Championship Series won't consider using a tournament to determine the national champion despite pleas to open up the postseason to more schools.

The BCS Presidential Oversight Committee on Monday directed the six conference commissioners to come up with proposals for changing the BCS without a playoff.

"I'm skeptical a national champion could be determined in a playoff without infringing on a student athlete's welfare," said Penn State president Graham Spanier, a member of the committee.

The panel also said it would meet with representatives from the other five Division I-A conferences Sept. 8 in Chicago to hear their concerns about the current system.

Tulane president Scott Cowen, who is holding a teleconference with 44 other university presidents from non-BCS schools on Tuesday, said the invitation was a positive step.

But he was disappointed that the committee refused to consider a playoff, which the NCAA has in all other divisions and sports and which would improve access for schools from non-power conferences.

"If we're going to have a dialogue, all options have to be open," Cowen said. "If they are eliminating options before the dialogue, then what are we talking about?

"No matter how good we are, we can't get into BCS bowls. The rankings are biased against non-BCS schools."

In 1998, Tulane went undefeated but could only play in the Liberty Bowl because it was ranked 11th in the BCS standings. Teams from non-BCS conferences are guaranteed a bid to one of the four bowl games if they are ranked in the top six.

But in the 20 years before the BCS started, only one school other than Notre Dame that is not currently in those six conferences played in one of the series' four bowls.

"The trend in the BCS is not very different than what existed in the decades before the BCS," Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany said. "The only thing that really has changed is we've created a 1 vs. 2 game."

Money is a major issue. The Rose, Fiesta, Sugar and Orange bowls generate more than $100 million a year for the BCS conferences. The BCS gives about $8 million a year to the schools from the other five conferences.

The BCS was formed in 1998 in an effort to match the top two teams in a national title game. The system takes the champions from the six major conferences -- Pac-10, Big 12, Big Ten, ACC, SEC and Big East -- and two at-large teams to play in the BCS bowls.

The system worked perfectly last season when it paired Ohio State against Miami in the Fiesta Bowl in a matchup of the only undefeated teams -- a matchup that couldn't have happened under the old system of conference tie-ins.

"Since we reorganized a little bit to allow for No. 1 vs. No. 2 game, there really has been no change in the schools that would have qualified before and that qualify now," Spanier said.

University of Nebraska-Lincoln chancellor Harvey Perlman said the commissioners could consider adding a championship game after the four BCS games, as well as adding another game to the system to give schools from smaller conferences a better chance to get into a major bowl game.

The committee also said the Big East would remain a member at least until the current contract ends after the January 2006 bowls despite losing powerhouses Miami and Virginia Tech to the ACC.

Delany said the Big East's chances of remaining in the BCS in the next contract depend on how attractive the reconstituted conference would be to television networks.

Also, the Big Ten is not looking to add a 12th team and wouldn't want to start a conference championship game even if an NCAA rule change allowed it for conferences with 10 or 11 teams.

While such a game could generate as much as $12 million for the conference, Delany said the drawbacks outweigh the extra money.

"It makes it much more difficult for your champion to run the table," Delany said. "Then, the loser of the game is 'less interesting' to bowls because it's coming off a loss. Also, fans who made a major trip from their homes to the venue may be less inclined to go to a bowl game. Lastly, it inevitably has a way of diminishing traditional rivalries in a conference."


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Extended News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: beautycontest; bitterandbrokenfans; bogaucity; boguschamps; clique; corruption; fraud; mythicalnc; nochamps; outrage; pagingtonybruno; popularitycontest; stinksoutloud; taxpayerfundedcartel; thefraudthatisthebcs; unearnedtrophy
"I'm skeptical a national champion could be determined in a playoff without infringing on a student athlete's welfare," said Penn State president Graham Spanier, a member of the committee. BSing fraud.

Yeah right. At most in a playoff 4 teams would compete after New Year's day, a real hardship. What a bunch of baloney. The BCS is no different than a union, fighting to prevent outside competition and preserve a rigged system.

Ya know, this is one instance where I would have no problem with Congress putting some pressure on this group. Simply pass a provision limiting the amount of taxpayer funded monies that can go to schools who participate in Div IA football but choose not to participate in a playoff. Then no school is forced to participate, but given a choice. Those non-BCS schools would be glad to set up a playoff system, and then the BCS schools/conferences have their choice of participating or not.

And screw the bowls. They've made their money, they would have a choice of participating or not in a playoff, but the fans are sick and tired of being screwed over by a few bowl executives. These schools are free to align with whomever and do what they choose, but why should taxpayers be forced to subsidize an oligarchy?

1 posted on 07/24/2003 3:10:03 PM PDT by Diddle E. Squat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Diddle E. Squat
What can I say but.....

How 'Bout Them Dogs!


2 posted on 07/24/2003 3:14:15 PM PDT by eddie willers (Freeping since before the turn of the century!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: eddie willers
Uga uga!
3 posted on 07/24/2003 3:18:19 PM PDT by Diddle E. Squat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Diddle E. Squat
You've got the Spanier = Fraud part right.

You'd think the president of the school who has been screwed the most would WANT a playoff.

FWIW, since 1965, only 4 collegiate football teams have:
1) Won all the regular season games
2) Won a New Year's Day Bowl Game
3) NOT been given at least a share of the Mythical
National Championship

Of course, ALL 4 teams were Penn State teams: 1968, 1969, 1973, and 1994

Graham Spanier does a putrid job of representing his employer and their students and alums. From C*** Fest, to Sex Faire, to Giant Vaginas on Old Main Lawn, to drinking gestapos which caused riots, to this - the man's an outright embarrassment.

4 posted on 07/24/2003 3:49:19 PM PDT by FlJoePa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FlJoePa
But Nebraska deserved it in 94 cuz Osborne was such a nice guy who had never had national title, and Nebraska had such a clean program
5 posted on 07/24/2003 7:17:31 PM PDT by NickRails
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: FlJoePa
I think in two of those years, another school also went undefeated, Ohio State in 68 and Nebraska in 74 I think. So PSU only got screwed twice I think.
6 posted on 07/24/2003 7:19:48 PM PDT by staytrue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: staytrue
OSU won the Mythical National Championship in 1968. I didn't list 1974 as a year where PSU missed out.

Trust me, my facts are correct.

7 posted on 07/24/2003 7:50:33 PM PDT by FlJoePa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Diddle E. Squat
I've been watching with considerable amusement as football fans of every stripe beat their chests and rail against the BCS system. It seems that very few people were happy with the two poll system and fewer people are happy with the BCS. Whether due to the cold calculating Spockian analysis of the computers or the fallibility and inevitable prejudice inherent in human decision-making in the writers' and coaches' polls, the real problem is that we have to pretend to be uncomfortable with ambiguity.

We say we'd like to have a single champion to tout as the best of the best in any given year. Due to a kind of sports fundamentalism, we claim that a single national champion would make the universe a much tidier place. It's as if we believe that any coach or team that could establish itself with unparalleled, unbeaten, untarnished dominance could only do so because of near-divine wisdom, skill and virtue. Win a national championship and you just might be capable of solving other disputes over 'turf'—such as the Middle East or Northern Ireland. Small things really, compared with the Sugar Bowl.

But I want to argue that the whole reason we are having these disputes in the sports pages, on talk radio and on every television channel short of the Cartoon Network is because, secretly, we love the ambiguity. Let's face it, once we have moved past the days when we could participate in competitive sports (a point in time that came much earlier than most of us will admit) sport is no longer a competition played out on the court or the field. Real sport is played around the water-cooler, on talk radio, and on the sidelines of your kid's soccer game as you strike up conversations with the other parents.

The battles on Saturday or Sunday are only skirmishes preliminary to the real struggle—the endless arguments over who's the best, which call the coach should have made on 4th and short, or for cryin' out loud did you see that call? The truth is we are ecstatic when the outcome is in doubt, because at that point the teams have exhausted their ability for better or for worse and the coach has to look way down the bench until, at last seeing the only one who can save the day, we get sent into the game.
8 posted on 12/08/2003 9:09:52 PM PST by newheart (Ezekiel 36:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: newheart
Interesting analysis, but I respectfully disagree. Most I talk to are disgusted, not arguing with a twinkle in their eye.

The problem is that the BCS and polls are trying to pick just 2 from a universe with far too many near equal teams. Its impossible to do, given the layer of factors. The only solution is to expand to a playoff of 8, where at least then there is enough visibile differentiation to make more of an argument that the line of true eligibility falls somewhere within those included.
9 posted on 12/08/2003 9:32:09 PM PST by Diddle E. Squat (imagine there's no BCS, its easy if you try)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Diddle E. Squat
No, I really don't think most are arguing 'with a twinkle in their eye.' And if they were, they probably wouldn't argue with so much passion. But still, the debate is how most of us play the game.

Personally I agree with playoffs. But even that won't stop the second-guessing. We live for it.
10 posted on 12/09/2003 6:49:45 AM PST by newheart (Ezekiel 36:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Diddle E. Squat
Why do divisions 1-AA, 2, and 3 have playoffs but Division 1-A doesn't? What's up with that?
11 posted on 12/09/2003 6:52:25 AM PST by dfwgator (Are you blind with an IQ under 50? Then you too can be an ACC football referee.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: eddie willers
16-13. 0 and 2 against Ron Zook.
12 posted on 12/09/2003 6:53:10 AM PST by dfwgator (Are you blind with an IQ under 50? Then you too can be an ACC football referee.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: staytrue
So PSU only got screwed twice I think.

Twice was more than enough :)

13 posted on 12/09/2003 6:53:51 AM PST by mewzilla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator
16-13. 0 and 2 against Ron Zook.

Yep....and it drives me NUTS.

14 posted on 12/09/2003 7:41:36 AM PST by eddie willers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: eddie willers
Consider it payback for Lindsay Scott.
15 posted on 12/09/2003 7:43:48 AM PST by dfwgator (Are you blind with an IQ under 50? Then you too can be an ACC football referee.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Diddle E. Squat
the BCS sucks..plain and simple
16 posted on 01/01/2004 6:21:29 PM PST by MetalHeadConservative35 (The BCS where the title is as about meaningful as a raffle ticket)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson