|
||||||||||||||||||||
BCSReform.org
ARGUMENTS FOR BCS
In 1998, the Swiss sports marketing firm, International Sports and Leisure (ISL), reportedly initially offered the BCS a proposed 8 year college football Division 1 – A playoff plan worth $2.4 billion or $300 million per year. The BCS inexplicably turned down ISL's incredible offer – even though it meant a doubling of the 1998 BCS gross revenue stream of $113 million (see Table 4 –5 entitled, “Gross Revenue – All Division 1 – A Postseason Bowl Games Since 1988 – 89” of a June 2004 comprehensive and excellent report for the Knight Commission On Intercollegiate Athletics (Knight Commission) entitled, “Division 1 – A Postseason Football History and Status” by UCLA researcher, John Sandbrook, (Sandbrook Report at www.knightcommission.org). Only 1 year later in 1999, ISL, who had the rights to both the men's and women's World Cups and the Olympics (i.e., the most popular sporting events worldwide), reportedly raised its bid to the BCS to $3.0 to $4.0 billion over 8 years or $375 million to $500 million per year – a tripling (or more) of the BCS gross revenue stream! The BCS again declined ISL's offer. The BCS cited (and continues to cite) the following questionable rationale for doing so:
1). An American playoff would trivialize the regular season – A fair and open American playoff (e.g., a sixteen (16) team playoff including the champion of each of the eleven (11) Division 1 – A / FBS conferences and the best five (5) “at – large” remaining teams) actually does the opposite. Teams will now try harder to make the playoff, so that they can have an opportunity to play for the National Championship (a dream that has never happened nor will it realistically ever happen for all 54 non – BCS teams under the BCS plus the remaining 56 BCS teams not ranked in the TOP 10 in preseason polls – remember that only 11 different teams have played in the 10 BCS National Championship Games – the other 109 teams have not). A playoff (with at – large berths) gives top teams a second chance to recover from an earlier season loss. Teams that play in conferences such as the SEC or Big 12 aren't penalized for their intense conference schedules. Because of the at – large bids, an Auburn or Michigan team may have lost a game against Florida or Ohio State, but no longer will they be banished from national championship contention because of, for example, a weaker, undefeated Big East champion. All 3 very strong teams from one conference (e.g., Texas, Oklahoma, and Texas Tech in the Big 12 this year) could realize their National Championship Game dreams by making the playoff. The trend toward playing very weak non – conference opponents (e.g., Division 1 – AA / FCS teams, etc.) would decline since teams can use good non – conference games as preparation for their conference schedule and play other strong BCS and non – BCS teams without penalty. Fans, players, and coaches would enjoy those games more than games versus weak opponents. Every conference regular season championship race would have national championship implications as opposed to having just a few games in a few conferences that matter across the country toward the end of the season. A fair and open American playoff allows all an equal opportunity for the National Championship title!;
2). The length of the season with an American playoff would cause academic / physical hardships for the participating student – athletes – The hypocritical BCS (and its university presidents / chancellors / Conference Commissioners) authorized the addition of conference championship games, a 12th game to the regular season, and a 5th BCS National Championship game a week later in each (all extensions to the length of the season). Basketball players and other student – athletes at their BCS programs all currently participate in lengthy playoff systems (e.g., March Madness, etc.). Indeed, the equally - hypocritical NCAA is presently considering an increase in the number of teams participating in the NCAA Division 1 – AA / FCS football playoff from 16 teams to 20 teams in 2010 (which results in a more lengthy playoff). Teams could easily limit their regular season to 11 games and participate in a 16 – team playoff system. Such a playoff would require only an increase for many teams of only 1 additional game per season over what they currently are playing - 8 teams (i.e., losers in round 1 of the playoff) would play 12 games in their season, 4 teams (i.e., second round losers) would play 13 games in their season, 2 teams (i.e., third round losers) would play 14 games in their season, and the 2 finalist teams would play 15 games in their season. College football teams already have played or play 14 or 15 games per season (e.g., BYU's 5th ranked team in 1996 was 14 – 1, Ohio State's 1st ranked team in 2002 was 14 – 0, etc.). Teams are presently playing a 12 - game season, plus a conference championship game and a possible BCS game, a total 14 games. The concern of an extended season is unwarranted and hypocritical.
The Sandbrook Report states the following:
“The scheduling of postseason athletic competition during final examination periods of member institutions is evitable due to the disparate academic calendars used throughout U.S. higher education. While it is true that more than 80 percent of major universities and colleges now use the semester system, institutions that continue to use the quarter system find that the NCAA Basketball Championship tournaments overlap with Winter Quarter final examinations and the NCAA College World Series (baseball) overlap with the Spring Quarter final examinations. Similarly, spring sports such as the NCAA Tennis Championships often overlap with the final examination periods at many institutions that utilize a semester calendar.
The NCAA member institutions competing in the Division I – AA, Division II and Division III Football Championships not infrequently do so during final examination periods. Most institutions participating in postseason Division 1 - A football bowl games will at least be involved in practice and other preparations during their institutional final exam periods in December. For a smaller number, travel and even participation in bowl games can also be a reality in mid – December since the first bowl game in December 2003 was played on December 16 (New Orleans Bowl) between two Division 1 – A institutions not members of the BCS group. Those conferences with conference championship games on the first Saturday of December also find themselves with some of their members (and, thus, potential participants in the championship game at a location several hundred miles away from campus) having final examinations beginning the following Monday morning.”
BCS Big Ten Commissioner James Edward “Jim” Delaney has stated the following on this topic (see a revealing and excellent January 5, 2007 article by Josh Peter, Yahoo! Sports, entitled, “Playoff plunderer” at www.sports.yahoo.com (Peter Article) which discusses the power and influence in college athletics of Commissioner Delaney):
“I think that some of the arguments that have been advanced against the playoffs have not been credible. The academic effect, it's just not a credible argument. I haven't advanced it, but it's been out there… You could certainly create a playoff that didn't advance into the second semester. I could make an argument that a playoff has got better academic consequences.” (See Peter Article)
One (1) creative possible solution for the conflict that student – athletes have with the demand of their sport and the classroom is to allow them to concentrate strictly (or with a very reduced class load) on their sport during the semester that it occurs. Obviously, the student – athletes would have to attend classes during the third semester of the year or the summer / spring terms;
3). A multi – billion dollar American playoff would lead to too much “commercialization” of the sport – The sport is already commercialized. Historically, the bowls were associated with non – profit organizations. Now, most bowls have corporate sponsors and names. The Sandbrook Report states that, “At least 23 of the 28 Division 1 – A postseason bowl games now carry a corporate name. Most have had multiple corporate names within the past decade.” Sandbrook, himself, stated, “It runs contrary to the image that those who defend the bowl system like to convey, that it's a civic enterprise, to promote tourism, etc. I'm not sure that image holds up as well under the microscope today as it might have as recently as 10 years ago.” Advertising placards / signage is on stadiums, fields, posters, scoreboards, in – game on – screen information graphics, etc. The hypocritical BCS (and its university presidents and conference commissioners) have already commercialized college football! In 2001, the Pioneer Las Vegas Bowl, then operated by the Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority, had struggled at times to draw 25, 000 fans and hadn't been doing great financially. ESPN purchased the Pioneer Las Vegas Bowl in 2001 and began not just televising college football bowl games, but owning and operating them too (thus avoiding broadcast rights fees for such bowl games). Following a vertical integration strategy, ESPN since has created and bought 5 more bowl games (i.e., Sheraton Hawaii, St. Petersburg, Bell Helicopter Armed Forces, New Mexico, and PapaJohn's.com bowls). The Walt Disney Company (Walt Disney), corporate parent of ESPN, ESPN2, and ABC, aired 23 of the 32 bowls in 2006. This season, 27 of the 34 bowls will be aired by Walt Disney networks. ESPN just executed a contract with the BCS to broadcast the BCS games in 2011 through 2014 (at a price of $125 million annually), bringing Walt Disney's total to 32 of 34 bowls (i.e., the Insight Bowl and Texas Bowl are broadcast by the NFL Network). It is no surprise that ESPN broadcasters publically favor the BCS and dismiss a playoff;
4). An American playoff would damage the current bowl system – There is already a 2 tier bowl distinction presently made between the 5 BCS bowls and all other bowls. The current bowls would be used to host playoff games on a rotating basis. There has been a huge proliferation of the number of bowls. Just 10 years ago, there were 18 bowls and, now, this season there are a record 34 bowls. Bowls were once special rewards for teams having excellent seasons. Now, teams with an average, mediocre record of 6 – 6 play in bowls. One third of the 21 teams playing in 2006's 32 bowls entered their bowl games with records of 7 – 5 or 6 – 6! Virtually the only parties actually interested in the bowl games with these average teams are the players, coaches, students, conferences, alumni, and communities of the 2 schools playing. About 25 major bowl games have died through the years because of financial trouble. Indeed, the Sandbrook Report states that 7 non – BCS bowls reported a loss for the bowl games after the 2003 season. Twenty – two (22) teams played in 11 bowl games in 2006 that offered a $750,000 payout, with 18 teams of such responding to a San Diego Union – Tribune survey about how they fared financially. Six (6) teams reported that they lost money from the bowl trip and 2 teams broke even. There is very little interest on a national scale in these bowl games. An American playoff would greatly enhance the national interest, ratings, attendance, and economic value not only for the BCS bowl games, but, perhaps more importantly, that of the other 29 non – BCS bowls as well (see an excellent December 17, 2006 article on this topic written by Staff Writer Brent Schrotenboer of the San Diego Union – Tribune newspaper entitled, “Bowls gone wild!” at www.signonsandiego.com.
The Peter Article states that, “Studies indicate the slightest step toward a playoff – seeding the teams in four BCS bowl games and pitting the two top – rated teams emerging from those games in the national championship – could generate another $50 million. But with the new system, Delaney and the commissioners of the other BCS conferences could lose control of the knife that guarantees them a huge slice of the financial pie… The annual yield since had widened the financial gap between the haves and have – nots, and since the formation of the BCS eight years ago, no conference has benefited more than the conference Delaney runs. He appears determined to protect the Big Ten's economic interests even if it means preserving a flawed system.”
Basically, BCS Big Ten Commissioner Delaney, his other BCS conference commissioners, and the BCS university presidents / chancellors that they respond to and represent, have continued a flawed BCS system (and maintained their control of such) in lieu of going to a fair and open American playoff system that generates much more revenue than the BCS, yet diminishes their control. If the addition of only 1 more game would generate an additional $50 million in payout value annually (per Commissioner Delaney), it's reasonable to assume that a fair and open American playoff would generate at least $180 million in incremental value (doubling the BCS' present approximate annual payout for its 5 games of $180 million). The $300 million to $500 million per year ISL bids previously made to the BCS (which were rejected) are compelling evidence that a playoff would increase BCS revenues considerably (and that the BCS values control over the system more than additional revenues).
The ironic part is that the BCS schools / conferences would probably make more money under a fair and open American playoff due to an increased revenue pie. If it is assumed that a playoff doubles this year's BCS payouts from their present $180 million to $360 million and the other bowls' combined payout remains constant at approximately $40 million, then the total payout will increase to $400 million annually. Obviously, the payout formula will reward teams that advance in the playoffs. But, for this example, assume that the $400 million is shared equally by all 120 Division 1 – A / FBS programs. Each program would receive $3.3 million. In the 32 bowl season ending on January 8, 2006, the BCS conferences and Notre Dame received approximately $178 million or 85% of the estimated $210 total million bowl payouts; each of the 66 BCS programs received an average of $2.7 million. Accordingly, under a fair and open American playoff system, the BCS programs would receive an increase of payout of nearly 20% from the present $2.7 million to $3.3 million. More importantly, the biased and unfair BCS would be replaced with a fair and open American playoff that benefits all Division 1 – A / FBS programs, student – athletes, students, schools, and communities!
Website launched December 7, 2008 - let us always remember Pearl Harbor (December 7, 1941) and our Veterans / Armed Forces Personnel!
PLEASE SERIOUSLY SUPPORT THIS GRASSROOTS CAUSE BY FORWARDING THE LINK TO THIS SITE, www.bcswatchdog.com, TO 10 OF YOUR FAMILY / FRIENDS / WORK ASSOCIATES / FELLOW WORSHIPPERS / ETC., THAT FAVOR A PLAYOFF AND ENCOURAGE THEM TO VISIT THIS SITE, PUT THEIR NAMES ON THE NATIONAL FAN CONTRIBUTION LIST, AND THEN CONTINUE THE GRASSROOTS CHAIN BY DOING THE SAME! PLEASE ESTABLISH ONLINE, GRASSROOTS SOCIAL GROUPS / COMMUNITIES ON SOCIAL MEDIA SITES LIKE FACEBOOK AND MY SPACE TO PROMOTE BCSWATCHDOG.COM, PROVIDE A LINK TO THE SITE, REQUEST DONATIONS, AND SPREAD THE MESSAGE BY ADDITIONAL CHAINS OF CONTACT! THANK YOU!
BCS Watchdog User Poll
