Senate reviewing how college football picks No. 1
Seeing how congress has done such a great job in building us a Utopian society, it has now set it's precious time focusing on the huge national problem of how the BCS picks a #1 team. Your tax dollars at work.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hV4mOJQgUsQthrydU_Vty…
Wow, I was particularly surprised (sarcasm) that Congressmen from Utah and Texas were leading the charge!
Seriously, what do they hope to accomplish? They will either force the BCS to make a slight change, or they will abolish the BCS all together, and it will go back to the way things were. I am pretty pissed they are actually wasting tax dollars on this.
Utah has a valid case, Texas does not. It seems as if we need to break out some antitrust laws from the 20's to combat this injustice... wow... this is a joke.
March 26th, 2009 at 10:16 AM ^
Isn't calling the BCS an injustice going too far? It isn't like the BCS is a crime against humanity. It is just a system that SOME PEOPLE think is unfair. (My apologies if you were being sarcastic.)
Also, Utah DID NOT have a valid case. When I get a little spare time, I will be posting a diary explaining why Utah has nothing to complain about.
March 26th, 2009 at 12:33 PM ^
Utah did go undefeated and beat some ranked teams along the way. If you recall, the Mountain West beat up on the Pac-10 in the non-conference. Which at the time meant little, until the Pac-10 went undefeated in the bowl season. Utah also beat a team that was ranked number 1 for part of the year and came from the SEC.
P.S. Don't give me some BS about how Alabama didn't care and was overlooking them. That argument can be made every year by just about every team that loses their bowl game.
Because it is a valid argument! You can't call something BS just because it is evidence against your point.
Not to mention, Alabama had two starters on their O-Line out. That Utah pass rush may not have been so potent if Bama had Andre Smith...
If Threet hadn't thrown the pick-6 against Toledo, UM would have won. If Lopata had made that FG, UM would have beat Toledo in OT. IF, IF, IF, IF, IF......
clean the man-glaze out of your Sarcasm Detector
That was sarcasm, sorry for my inability to make it blatant enough. (more sarcasm).
March 26th, 2009 at 10:09 AM ^
"Obama and some members of Congress favor a playoff-type system to determine the national champion."
They present it like it's one of his political platforms, lol.
March 26th, 2009 at 10:11 AM ^
The reality is the way it is now is the best of a plethora of choices which will never satisfy people.
Did everyone enjoy the first 4 months of the basketball season outside of one or two games? I didn't think so. The tournament de-values the rest of the season.
If we had a 16-team playoff, does anyone doubt that by the end of the season in 2009 that Florida would be in there, even if they were 7-5, due to SEC "strength of schedule" and blah blah blah?
March 26th, 2009 at 12:49 PM ^
"The tournament de-values the rest of the season."
And scheduling cupcake OOC doesn't devalue anything?
I would much rather watch UM play Florida, Texas, USC, and Oklahoma for their OOC knowing they still have a shot at the title by winning the Big10, than watching them play Delaware St, Notre Lame, Miami (OH), and Eastern Michigan knowing that a loss to ANY team along the way means no shot at the title.
March 26th, 2009 at 12:51 PM ^
Mostly.
March 26th, 2009 at 12:53 PM ^
2007 for UM is a perfect example of why a playoff is great for college football.
The anticipation of the season, hopes of winning the national title, all dashed in a week one loss. Now, if UM wins the Big10, they go on to the playoff and still have a chance. To me, this makes the rest of the season more exciting than the retarded "one-and-done" the BCS has become.
March 26th, 2009 at 10:11 AM ^
...remember senators are elected at the local level, and I promise you that this goes over well with their local constituents.
I remember a couple years ago there was a big fuss made over the fact that revenue to the NCAA and individual schools for football isn't taxed because they are educational institutions (I may be muddling the details), but nobody in congress would ever bring up the issue, because they didn't want to upset their local constituents. It's all an attempt by people in power to stay in power.
March 26th, 2009 at 10:37 AM ^
Revenue to schools is not taxed if they are state schools.
Revenue to the NCAA, NBA, NFL, etc. is not taxed because of their status as not-for-profit organizations (tax code 501(c)3 or 501(c)6). Their tax-exempt status is predicated on their improving the field of business in which they are involved (this applies generally to leagues and associations for any business). Congress very lightly threatened to revoke the tax-exempt status of the NFL over their failure to do jack about the Belichik taping fiasco... but of course did nothing.
They will do nothing about the BCS, as well, imo. Just whining, whimpering, and overall poo-pooing.
March 26th, 2009 at 10:13 AM ^
Why? Why shouldn't Congress be involved in sports? It's just another business. And if trusts are forming to establish a competitive imbalance, why wouldn't that include athletic leagues?
I think it's the wrong way to go about it, and I think their anti-trust case is slim (the small schools actually get better exposure through the NCAA's TV deal than their alumni and student body base generates for the league), but there's hundreds of millions of dollars being thrown around for these games.
I always thought the funniest friendly pair in Washington has got to be Ted Kennedy and Orinn Hatch, the Senate's very own Chris Farley and David Spade.
This is going nowhere so long as the impish Hatch is up there leading the playoffs brigade out of spite for his hometown Utes being left out. But if the Kennedys' 'black sheep' gets behind this, then who knows?
The angle they're taking makes sense -- it's an anti-trust thing. But starting this out of the gate as a bone to pick from one disgruntled fan -- and he being one of the most widely disliked guys in the Senate -- is the wrong way to go about it. It makes it too easy for Senators who don't give a damn (or Senators from all the states that have BCS schools) to paint it as sore loserdom. And I doubt Hatch's Republican colleagues, anxious to re-paint themselves as the party of small government, are too hip to jumping on a hyped up anti-trust venture at this juncture.
Then again, if Teddy-boy shows up today with road flares strapped to his belly...
March 26th, 2009 at 10:39 AM ^
I'm sure that government intervention will make college football a lot better.
for everything else...................
March 26th, 2009 at 10:42 AM ^
Aren't the Senators sorta busy passing un-Constitutional ex-post facto taxes? They have more important things to deal with than the BCS.
March 26th, 2009 at 10:53 AM ^
If government discussion with some behind the scenes, thinly-veiled threats can put the game back in the hands of the schools and take it away from the bowls, I'm all for it.
The Big Ten and Pac Ten are responsible for stonewalling any discussion of a playoff at the NCAA level, because they like their "GRANDADDY OF THEM ALL" too much to even consider chaging the system to one that determines a bona fide champion on the field.
Back to that "Grandaddy," Gramps is tired and needs to go to a nursing home.
March 26th, 2009 at 12:23 PM ^
... the road to hell is paved by good intentions. You support gov. intervention here, because it suits your cause, but what about next time when it doesn't. In general, the less those bloated idiots in Washington are involved the better. Their only motivation is power and their preservation of it.
- Me, channeling Ron Paul.
Ron Paul, Ron Paul, Ron Paul.
http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/88989/june-21-20…
March 26th, 2009 at 12:56 PM ^
cosigned... a playoff is needed.
March 26th, 2009 at 11:07 AM ^
the gov't should keep their hands off. they've got no business getting involved in ncaa sports
The NCAA is tax-exempt based on their contribution to community betterment. If the government deems the NCAA is not providing a fair and valuable service to the community, they can start taxing the NCAA. For example.
March 26th, 2009 at 12:53 PM ^
Let's get political on a sports blog again!!! Yay! This always turns out so well!
And I say, that England's greatest Prime Minister was Lord Palmerston!
Pitt the Elder!
Lord Palmerston!
PITT THE ELDER!!!
Okay, you asked for it, CipASonic!
/internet tough guy punch out/
You watch too many movies, Sax.
It all started last year during a terrible thunderstorm, when I locked myself out of the house. Sheltering myself with a large piece of sheet metal, I ran for cover under the tallest tree I could find.
Something told me this was a very special, very magical piece of wood...that I could make a bat out of.
So, I immediately put my home made football on the back burner.
haha that was on the simpsons!