I am in favor of a playoff as much as anyone, but why in the hell does Congress think it should have anything to do with it?

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_BCS_CONGRESS?SITE=OHFIN&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2009-12-09-06-32-28

"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.

I couldn't agree more!

Good. Something needs to happen. It definitely isn't going to happen on the colleges side of things. The current system sucks and it isn't fair.

What a surprise though, the BCS exec director isn't in favor of it haha

This would not force a playoff in any way. All this does is tell the BCS that they cannot call the NC game an NC game. Most likely they would go back to the old bowl structure.

Amazes me that there is nothing more important for Congress to discuss.

jordo212000 wrote: Good. Something needs to happen. It definitely isn't going to happen on the colleges side of things. The current system sucks and it isn't fair.

What a surprise though, the BCS exec director isn't in favor of it haha

Every D1 school chooses to be part of this, so I really don't think it is an issue for Congress. I would like to see a playoff, but I don't think we are close to that. All of the non-BCS teams could leave the NCAA and start their own organization with a playoff system, but when it comes down to it, they don't want to lose out on the big money generated from the current system. They all receive huge amounts of money from playing at BCS schools in non-conference games.

Al Bundy wrote:
Every D1 school chooses to be part of this, so I really don't think it is an issue for Congress. I would like to see a playoff, but I don't think we are close to that. All of the non-BCS teams could leave the NCAA and start their own organization with a playoff system, but when it comes down to it, they don't want to lose out on the big money generated from the current system. They all receive huge amounts of money from playing at BCS schools in non-conference games.

What "real" choice do any of them have? Do you really think any of the non-BCS schools would have the nuts to do something like that?

"Part of it is because BCS is in the news," Barton said. He said he hasn't lobbied subcommittee members much but doesn't think there is much resistance to the idea that there should be a playoff in college football.

Really? Over half the institutions in bigboy football is represented by the BCS member schools. Do they really think a firestorm wouldn't begin should this ball get rolling? Obama wants a play-off, fine. Get it past the house and senate and see what happens, my guess is it won't even get out of committee.

jordo212000 wrote:

Al Bundy wrote:
Every D1 school chooses to be part of this, so I really don't think it is an issue for Congress. I would like to see a playoff, but I don't think we are close to that. All of the non-BCS teams could leave the NCAA and start their own organization with a playoff system, but when it comes down to it, they don't want to lose out on the big money generated from the current system. They all receive huge amounts of money from playing at BCS schools in non-conference games.

What "real" choice do any of them have? Do you really think any of the non-BCS schools would have the nuts to do something like that?

I don't think they have nuts to do it. However, they agreed to the current system (and the money their programs generate from it).

Al Bundy wrote:
I don't think they have nuts to do it. However, they agreed to the current system (and the money their programs generate from it).

Once again... of course they did. What other choice do they have?

Imagine a playoff for the top 8 teams. Of course there would still be the teams complaining that they didn't make it and the teams that finished 9-12 will still be upset, but the games would be amazing to watch. Then we would be able to crown a true champion and award teams that got hot at the end of the season and not just play easy schedules and have one good game. IE TCU, Cincy, and Boise State.

Imagine this year if Boise was the only undefeated team and went to the NC game vs say Alabama. They had their best game and won by 1 point and were national champions. It would be horrible. If they played in a 3 game playoff theres no way they would beat say Alabama, Florida, and OSU three games in a row.

jordo212000 wrote:

Al Bundy wrote:
I don't think they have nuts to do it. However, they agreed to the current system (and the money their programs generate from it).

Once again... of course they did. What other choice do they have?

They have the choice to start their own association if they thought people really wanted to see those teams play. Let's see how the TV ratings for the Fiesta Bowl compare to the other BCS bowls. I really don't think there is as much demand to see some of these teams as the teams in those conferences think there is. The ratings will give us a good way to compare the demand. I would be very surprised the Fiesta Bowl has ratings even close to the Rose, Sugar, and Orange Bowls.

Once again, this bill would not force a playoff in any way.

It is unlikely that Congress will ever force a playoff. The issue from what I understand, or the extent to which they will go, is that the NCAA can not advertise a "championship" game if they don't have a championship. It is funny that the NCAA doesn't actually recognize a champion, yet they back the advertisement and take the money generated from it. That is a problem and would be a problem if any other business pulled a similar fraud.

And that is why Congress SHOULD be involved. The NCAA is operating a multi-million dollar yearly business (maybe a billion dollar business?), yet they retain their tax-exempt status as being non-profit. If it weren't for profit, then money wouldn't be driving the system to the point of preventing a real championship. Again, it is a complete fraud.

The issue IS much bigger than just whether to have a playoff or not and the money/business issue is the business of the American people and Congress as a representative.

Do you really want to create a set up where 1 and 2 don't play each other? If Congress passes something that eliminates a championship game, each conference will be locked into bowl games. This year for example, Alabama would go to Sugar and Texas to Fiesta. While I would prefer a playoff, the BCS matching up #1 and #2 is better than the old system. It was very rare in the old system to have #1 and #2 play each other because of conference tie-ins with certain bowl games. I know I'm probably crazy, but I really don't Congress to make this situation any better.

Al Bundy wrote:

jordo212000 wrote:

Al Bundy wrote:
I don't think they have nuts to do it. However, they agreed to the current system (and the money their programs generate from it).

Once again... of course they did. What other choice do they have?

They have the choice to start their own association if they thought people really wanted to see those teams play. Let's see how the TV ratings for the Fiesta Bowl compare to the other BCS bowls. I really don't think there is as much demand to see some of these teams as the teams in those conferences think there is. The ratings will give us a good way to compare the demand. I would be very surprised the Fiesta Bowl has ratings even close to the Rose, Sugar, and Orange Bowls.

Just like we have the choice to move to Iran if we wanted to because we are so disheartened with the current shape of our economy. The choice is there, but it makes absolutely no sense when reform within the system is possible. I mean, what are they going to do, join the NAIA? Unfortunately, the BCS is where the money is and money is going to dominate college athletics at the end of the day, to the detriment of the kids who actually play on the field.

Of course the TV ratings aren't going to compare, people don't want to watch these two play each other cause it proves absolutely nothing. The demand is to watch these teams play somebody from the bigger conferences and prove that they can play right with them. Which is why we need to reform the system because these teams will never get a fair shake otherwise. How people can legitimately defend the BCS when it robs the fans and players is beyond me.

enigmaax wrote: It is unlikely that Congress will ever force a playoff. The issue from what I understand, or the extent to which they will go, is that the NCAA can not advertise a "championship" game if they don't have a championship.

Isn't it advertised as the BCS championship game? It's not an NCAA championship.

They're not going to eliminate the championship game, just what it's called. Period.

That is all they can do.

That's of course if the ball gets rolling which I have my doubts

Al Bundy wrote: Do you really want to create a set up where 1 and 2 don't play each other? If Congress passes something that eliminates a championship game, each conference will be locked into bowl games. This year for example, Alabama would go to Sugar and Texas to Fiesta. While I would prefer a playoff, the BCS matching up #1 and #2 is better than the old system. It was very rare in the old system to have #1 and #2 play each other because of conference tie-ins with certain bowl games. I know I'm probably crazy, but I really don't Congress to make this situation any better.

But I'm not even sure the BCS is setting up #1 vs #2. How can you be sure they are setting up #1 vs #2? There are 3 undefeateds left and they are playing for nothing. All because their programs play in "lesser" conferences (i.e. not one of the schools the BCS caters to) or their program's history doesn't match the others.

Al Bundy wrote:

enigmaax wrote: It is unlikely that Congress will ever force a playoff. The issue from what I understand, or the extent to which they will go, is that the NCAA can not advertise a "championship" game if they don't have a championship.

Isn't it advertised as the BCS championship game? It's not an NCAA championship.

Yeah and who is behind it? The "BCS" is a very transparent creation. On one hand, they weren't stupid enough to call it an NCAA title because they knew they couldn't get away with that. So they called themselves something else to say exactly that, "it isn't us". Luckily, Congress is seeing right through that.

jordo212000 wrote:

Al Bundy wrote: Do you really want to create a set up where 1 and 2 don't play each other? If Congress passes something that eliminates a championship game, each conference will be locked into bowl games. This year for example, Alabama would go to Sugar and Texas to Fiesta. While I would prefer a playoff, the BCS matching up #1 and #2 is better than the old system. It was very rare in the old system to have #1 and #2 play each other because of conference tie-ins with certain bowl games. I know I'm probably crazy, but I really don't Congress to make this situation any better.

But I'm not even sure the BCS is setting up #1 vs #2. How can you be sure they are setting up #1 vs #2? There are 3 undefeateds left and they are playing for nothing. All because their programs play in "lesser" conferences (i.e. not one of the schools the BCS caters to) or their program's history doesn't match the others.

That's why they're JUST GOING TO FORCE A NAME CHANGE!

jordo212000 wrote:

Al Bundy wrote: Do you really want to create a set up where 1 and 2 don't play each other? If Congress passes something that eliminates a championship game, each conference will be locked into bowl games. This year for example, Alabama would go to Sugar and Texas to Fiesta. While I would prefer a playoff, the BCS matching up #1 and #2 is better than the old system. It was very rare in the old system to have #1 and #2 play each other because of conference tie-ins with certain bowl games. I know I'm probably crazy, but I really don't Congress to make this situation any better.

But I'm not even sure the BCS is setting up #1 vs #2. How can you be sure they are setting up #1 vs #2? There are 3 undefeateds left and they are playing for nothing. All because their programs play in "lesser" conferences (i.e. not one of the schools the BCS caters to) or their program's history doesn't match the others.

I agree. It is still an arbitrary system. It is the single worst system in all of college sports.

They have no clue if it is #1 vs #2. Not one single person knows who is #1 it is basically meaningless and illogical.

A playoff will determine a champion and not who is #1 unless you define #1 as the team who wins the championship, in this system you really do not have a champion at all.

I would rather have an on the field champion than an arbitrary #1.

Al Bundy wrote: Do you really want to create a set up where 1 and 2 don't play each other? If Congress passes something that eliminates a championship game, each conference will be locked into bowl games. This year for example, Alabama would go to Sugar and Texas to Fiesta. While I would prefer a playoff, the BCS matching up #1 and #2 is better than the old system. It was very rare in the old system to have #1 and #2 play each other because of conference tie-ins with certain bowl games. I know I'm probably crazy, but I really don't Congress to make this situation any better.

It is funny how everyone hates the BCS, but no one wants anyone who can to do anything about it. I've said for a long time that it is better than the alternatives, meaning better than it was and better than what will ever feasibly happen with the NCAA still controlling the system. Because they are never going to go to a playoff.

Now people get what they wish for in that someone is stepping in and trying to change the system, but that is going to blow up in their faces too.

Al Bundy wrote:

enigmaax wrote: It is unlikely that Congress will ever force a playoff. The issue from what I understand, or the extent to which they will go, is that the NCAA can not advertise a "championship" game if they don't have a championship.

Isn't it advertised as the BCS championship game? It's not an NCAA championship.

What does the NCAA have to do with the current D-1A postseason? This isn't D-1AA, D-II, or D-III.

It is what it is, a bowl game and the media calls the winner the "best". If they want a true championship, go to a playoff system (8 or 16 teams).

ytownfootball wrote: That's why they're JUST GOING TO FORCE A NAME CHANGE!

This is exactly what it all comes down to. I'm sure they'd like it to be the catalyst for a system overhaul, but once they stop calling it a championship game, Congress is out of the picture and we go back to the same old system.

Ho hum...here we go again.:s

Ladies and gentlemen...your tax dollars at work!:dodgy: