Congress getting involved over BCS...calls it a racket.

[Overtime]

looks like this may be gaining some steam.

http://www.sportsline.com/collegefootball/story/11163890

WASHINGTON -- Taking aim at a BCS system he said "consistently misfires," a member of Congress planned to introduce legislation Wednesday that would force college football to adopt a playoff to determine the national champion.

Rep. Joe Barton of Texas, the ranking Republican on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, didn't specify what sort of playoff he wants -- only that the BCS should go.

"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," Barton said in a statement released ahead of the bill's introduction. "Despite repeated efforts to improve the system, the controversy rages on."

He said the bill -- being co-sponsored by Reps. Bobby Rush, an Illinois Democrat, and Michael McCaul, a Texas Republican -- "will prohibit the marketing, promotion, and advertising of a postseason 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."

The BCS was created in 1998 by the six most powerful conferences. Since then, the system has been tweaked to make it easier for teams from smaller conferences to qualify for the top games. The sites for the four BCS bowls -- the Rose, Orange, Sugar and Fiesta -- take turns hosting a championship game between the top two teams in the BCS standings, which are based on two human polls and six computer ratings.

This season, Florida (12-1) and Oklahoma (12-1) will meet in the BCS title game Jan. 8 in Miami.

Barton cited Southern California in 2003 and undefeated Auburn in 2004 as examples of worthy teams left out of the BCS national championship game.

"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,'" he said.

When an Energy and Commerce subcommittee held a hearing about the BCS in 2005, lawmakers said they weren't going to pursue legislation.

"The BCS method of determining who is No. 1 consistently misfires," Barton said Wednesday. "Simply exposing the flaws and subjecting them to discussion ... hasn't led to improvement by those who run the system."

[RealBronco]

No 30 teams would still be even.


Opening Round (1st Saturday of December)
28 Teams, 14 Games.
The #1 and #2 ranked teams get a 1st Round bye.


Explosive 16 (2nd Saturday of December)
16 Teams / 8 Games.


Magnificent 8 (3rd Saturday of December)
8 Teams / 4 Games


Powerhouse 4 (4th Saturday of December)
4 Teams / 2 Games


Championship Game (1st Saturday of January).
2 Teams/1 Game to determine Champion.

Alright I think I figured it out. The teams may still be a little... iffy. But I narrowed it down to 10 conferences, each containing 12 teams and 2 divisions.

This's gonna be awesome I'm gonna make a new thread. I think I'll actually incorporate the 30 team idea instead of 32 because I have a great way to do it.

[Overtime]

Makes sense... I don't know why they think it wouldn't work. 30 teams would take no time to get through. Sure there would be a lot of games... but you could stagger them like they do. And there are already a ton of college games to sift through on Saturdays anyway... so it's not like 15 games for round one would be a lot.

actually we'd need 32 teams to make the playoffs even.

THE WAR IN DECEMBER
(you know, basketball has the March Madness)

the JUGGERNAUT round: 32 TEAMS

16 Games to decide who advances... to

the COLOSSAL round: 16 TEAMS

8 Games to decide who advances... to

the ARMAGEDDON round: 8 TEAMS

4 Games to decide who advances... to

the GRIDIRON round: 4 TEAMS

2 Games to decide who advances... to

the NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP: 2 TEAMS

1 Game to decide who is crowned the NCAA Division I-A National Champion!

No 30 teams would still be even.


Opening Round (1st Saturday of December)
28 Teams, 14 Games.
The #1 and #2 ranked teams get a 1st Round bye.


Explosive 16 (2nd Saturday of December)
16 Teams / 8 Games.


Magnificent 8 (3rd Saturday of December)
8 Teams / 4 Games


Powerhouse 4 (4th Saturday of December)
4 Teams / 2 Games


Championship Game (1st Saturday of January).
2 Teams/1 Game to determine Champion.

[RealBronco]

I think 30 teams would be perfect for a playoff system. This way it would be just like the NFL, you have your regular season games, then the playoffs start the week after the regular season ends, and only #1 and #2 get a 1st round bye. Then it just reduces by half every week until the Championship Game the 1st week of January.

That way you have football going until the end of the year, but it doesn't extend past the 1st week of January, that way you aren't compromising students study time in the next semester, but you dont have a 2-3 week gap between the Conference Championship Games and the Bowl Games that you have now.

Makes sense... I don't know why they think it wouldn't work. 30 teams would take no time to get through. Sure there would be a lot of games... but you could stagger them like they do. And there are already a ton of college games to sift through on Saturdays anyway... so it's not like 15 games for round one would be a lot.

actually we'd need 32 teams to make the playoffs even.

THE WAR IN DECEMBER
(you know, basketball has the March Madness)

the JUGGERNAUT round: 32 TEAMS

16 Games to decide who advances... to

the COLOSSAL round: 16 TEAMS

8 Games to decide who advances... to

the ARMAGEDDON round: 8 TEAMS

4 Games to decide who advances... to

the GRIDIRON round: 4 TEAMS

2 Games to decide who advances... to

the NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP: 2 TEAMS

1 Game to decide who is crowned the NCAA Division I-A National Champion!

[CTM]

If Pro is the opposite of Con, whats the opposite of Congress?

Think about it....

[Overtime]

i'd much rather see a 16 team playoff because a lot of teams that deserve to be there will miss out in an 8 team playoff. who would the teams going to the playoffs be? the conference champs of each conference? that would still lead to controversy, are you teling me out of texas, oklahoma, missouri, and texas tech, only one of them deserve to be in the playoffs? and boise state deserves to be there more than the other 3? i think it should be the top 2 teams from each conference going to the playoffs.

I think 16 or more is a good idea. How many teams get into the college basketball playoffs? It's more than 16 right? Because they have a "Sweet 16" round. So still, more than 16 teams would still work out.

I think 30 teams would be perfect for a playoff system. This way it would be just like the NFL, you have your regular season games, then the playoffs start the week after the regular season ends, and only #1 and #2 get a 1st round bye. Then it just reduces by half every week until the Championship Game the 1st week of January.

That way you have football going until the end of the year, but it doesn't extend past the 1st week of January, that way you aren't compromising students study time in the next semester, but you dont have a 2-3 week gap between the Conference Championship Games and the Bowl Games that you have now.

[RealBronco]

Also, one important thing to note about the way I reconstructed the conferences is that if you're worried or upset that some team made it in with a "powerhouse" conference, like TCU being in the Big East now, etc...

Well, you see all that power ranking and strength of schedule goes out the window under a playoff system. So, if we wanted to we could stick Utah State and Idaho or Troy in the SEC... they'd likely never make it to the playoffs, but maybe on a really good year...

also as I mentioned before, I think it could still use some tinkering.

[RealBronco]

i'd much rather see a 16 team playoff because a lot of teams that deserve to be there will miss out in an 8 team playoff. who would the teams going to the playoffs be? the conference champs of each conference? that would still lead to controversy, are you teling me out of texas, oklahoma, missouri, and texas tech, only one of them deserve to be in the playoffs? and boise state deserves to be there more than the other 3? i think it should be the top 2 teams from each conference going to the playoffs.

either way, people saying there are more important things for the government to focus on... it's not like the government is saying "whoa, we need to stop worrying about the economy and put all of our attention on college football". the government is always working on many different things at the same time and i'm sure this college football bill is low on their list of "things to accomplish" and not taking away resources that they would be using to work on fixing the economy

I think 16 or more is a good idea. How many teams get into the college basketball playoffs? It's more than 16 right? Because they have a "Sweet 16" round. So still, more than 16 teams would still work out.

Also what do you mean, Boise State deserves it more than the others in its conference or more than Texas, OK, etc? lol... Cuz if it's their own conference.... that's a no brainer. They are after all the only undefeated team in their conference and I don't think Nevada or San Jose deserve a shot.... maybe if their records were better. Sometimes it's closer and comes down to the last game to decide the conference champ (like last year with Hawaii).

But nonetheless I think it would also have to factor in record etc. And that falls in line with what you were saying, and kind of picks up ideas from NFL...

If one conference has all these teams with outstanding records and another conference only has one (or its champion) then by all means, the conference with 4 teams with better records should get playoff spots. And then there would be obvious tie-breakers and such to consider.

Look how many freaking bowl games there are. NOT counting the National Championship game, there are 33 bowls. That's 66 teams that make it to bowl games out of 119 teams. That leaves out 53 teams. I don't think we need 66 freaking teams every year playing in bowl games. I've always thought the amount of bowl games was ridiculous. It's almost like everyone can make it to a bowl game...just don't get last place in your conference! Almost...

There are 12 conferences (if you count the independents). They could force those schools to join a conference, as well as restructure the conferences. Now this is where it gets a little far fetched and complicated. I mean this is only one scenario. They could leave it as is and just determine the number of rounds and teams that are allowed in.

BUT (okay now this is going to be a long post...because I'm bored):

RESTRUCTURING:

A.C.C: Stays as is.

Big 12: Stays as is.

Big East:

North:

Air Force
Army
Connecticut
La Tech
Navy
Rutgers

South:

Louisville
Syracuse
TCU
Western Kentucky
West Virginia
South Florida

N.E.C.: (Formerly the Big 10):

North:

Cincinnati
Penn State
Pittsburgh
Ohio State
Michigan
Michigan State
Notre Dame

South:

Iowa
Illinois
Indiana
Northwestern
Minnesota
Purdue
Wisconsin

C.U.S.A: We'll put UTEP in the Mountain West and replace them with Ball State.

Mid-American: We'll just move Bowling Green over to the West division to even things out.

P.C.C.: (Formerly the Pac-10) Let's break it down:

Pacific:

Boise State
Oregon
Oregon State
San Diego State
Stanford
Washington
Washington State

Coast:

Arizona
Arizona State
California
Fresno State
Hawaii
USC
UCLA

Mountain West:

East:

Colorado State
BYU
Utah
UTEP
Wyoming

West:

Nevada
New Mexico
New Mexico State
UNLV
San Jose State

Sun Belt: We'll add Idaho and Utah State

S.E.C.: Stays as is.

Now, I originally had it a little different with a few conferences with more teams... but the stupid Sun Belt messes things up. I guess the easy way out is just to down grade the whole conference (plus Idaho and Utah State) to Division I-AA.

I know some of you might not agree with how I set it up, plus I didn't take too much time.. (yeah right lol)... I tried to set it up geographically etc.. as well as programs etc. I could've just made the P.C.C. strictly coastal schools, but the A.C.C. isn't that way either so...

also the SB and Mountain West are the only two with less than 12 teams, but I think that could be fixed...because there are a fue with 14 teams. Maybe San Diego and Hawaii could come out of the P.C.C. and then two more teams from somewhere else to make them an even 12...

*shrugs* it was fun though... but i'm hungry.

oh yeah also note that the WAC and Independents are now disbanded.

[CoryWinget81]

All of these Ideas sound great. But It will never happen. Too much money is changing hand to hand to hand to hand.

Big name teams get big time money on prime spot television. So all of these sponsors get their ads on and pay big money to do it. Then, there are TV royalties, logo royalties, etc etc. Then the FCC gets their cut too.

No way the people involved in this are gonna take their hands out of their pockets. And then ESPN swoops in just in time to REALLY make sure the B(c)S never changes.

[DrunkPanda]

i'd much rather see a 16 team playoff because a lot of teams that deserve to be there will miss out in an 8 team playoff. who would the teams going to the playoffs be? the conference champs of each conference? that would still lead to controversy, are you teling me out of texas, oklahoma, missouri, and texas tech, only one of them deserve to be in the playoffs? and boise state deserves to be there more than the other 3? i think it should be the top 2 teams from each conference going to the playoffs.

either way, people saying there are more important things for the government to focus on... it's not like the government is saying "whoa, we need to stop worrying about the economy and put all of our attention on college football". the government is always working on many different things at the same time and i'm sure this college football bill is low on their list of "things to accomplish" and not taking away resources that they would be using to work on fixing the economy

[RealBronco]

To me it is a no-brainer: just do the same thing in the FBS that is done in the FCS and Divisions 2 and 3. That way, there is one rule to determine a champ. Why don't big and little schools play by the same rules? That is ridiculous.

I also would propose forcing the NCAA to make all FBS conferences 12 teams. That way each conference will have a championship game. The Big Ten tried, but Notre Dame said no. If I had my way, Notre Dame would join the Big Ten. I liked the idea years ago to only allow conference championship participants, or preferably the winners of those games, eligible for the BCS title game. That way, the Big 12 South teams would not be dependent on meaningless polls to meet either Florida or Alabama in the next championship game; they would be national championship game participants by winning the conference title game just like Alabama or Florida will.

One more thing: I would love to see an end to idle teams staying put or going up in the polls just because they did not lose. Why do voters reward them for staying home? And why are schools allowed to schedule more than one bye in a season? That is ridiculous.

One major reason I prefer the NFL is the existence of a playoff as it should be (wildcard/division/conference/championship) and lack of weekly polls for team rankings. Another is the fact every team gets one bye week. Another is the setup (8 divisions with 4 teams in each) and opponent scheduling pattern (8 home, 8 away, meet all teams in same division every year, etc.) instead of allowing teams to individually make up their own cupcake schedules. If I could be queen of the world, I would make college football like the NFL, except with a lot more teams and no beer sponsors.

Well you're forgetting that there are only 32 teams in the NFL and there are what, 119 in Division I college ball? So it's not that easy...

However, at the same time, I think it's doable. If college basketball can have a playoff and Division II can have playoffs, I don't see any reason why Division I can't.

I think making the conferences even might be an interesting idea... that could work. then take the champions of those conferences and have a playoff.

and not to mention there is a whole entire month at least where college ball isn't played after the regular season ends for BCS teams or ranked teams where they just wait around for their bowl games.

that month can be used for playoff games.

also I don't agree with what you said about having teams move up or whatever if they don't play.

look at it the other way: should they be PUNISHED for not playing? No.... they didn't lose... and if they won the week before, why punish them and move them down further? That's not fair. I can understand staying the same rank, but if teams above them lose... they shouldn't still have to stay at the same spot.

All in all, playoffs need to happen.

[DarrentCB27]

My BCS proposal

never say never man...

i don't know how i feel about congress stickin' their nose in sports.

like, the whole NE fiasco where they wanted to investigate the NFL etc... and baseball.

the difference is that with the baseball investigation, it was about illegal drug use...

now that would make sense if congress investigated the NFL's policies on illegal drugs... i.e. letting players back after being convicted or charged as criminals, etc.

although, i think the BCS needs to get a grip and knock off their crap. Hey, let's allow auto-berths for the conferences that are in the BCS... even if those teams suck, have worse records and are ranked lower than other teams...

on the other hand, i dunno about an 8 team playoff.... there are over a hundred college teams... how are they gonna sit there and legitimately narrow it down to eight without being dangerously close to the current poll system...

but if college basketball can have a sweet playoff setup, i don't see why football couldn't have a similar one. they only play 12 games a season... can't be that hard...

not to mention there's like a month of dead time between the last regular season game and either any bowl games or the National Championship game.

To me it is a no-brainer: just do the same thing in the FBS that is done in the FCS and Divisions 2 and 3. That way, there is one rule to determine a champ. Why don't big and little schools play by the same rules? That is ridiculous.

I also would propose forcing the NCAA to make all FBS conferences 12 teams. That way each conference will have a championship game. The Big Ten tried, but Notre Dame said no. If I had my way, Notre Dame would join the Big Ten. I liked the idea years ago to only allow conference championship participants, or preferably the winners of those games, eligible for the BCS title game. That way, the Big 12 South teams would not be dependent on meaningless polls to meet either Florida or Alabama in the next championship game; they would be national championship game participants by winning the conference title game just like Alabama or Florida will.

One more thing: I would love to see an end to idle teams staying put or going up in the polls just because they did not lose. Why do voters reward them for staying home? And why are schools allowed to schedule more than one bye in a season? That is ridiculous.

One major reason I prefer the NFL is the existence of a playoff as it should be (wildcard/division/conference/championship) and lack of weekly polls for team rankings. Another is the fact every team gets one bye week. Another is the setup (8 divisions with 4 teams in each) and opponent scheduling pattern (8 home, 8 away, meet all teams in same division every year, etc.) instead of allowing teams to individually make up their own cupcake schedules. If I could be queen of the world, I would make college football like the NFL, except with a lot more teams and no beer sponsors.

[Overtime]

at first I was thinking Congress had no business sticking its nose into this mess, but after much thought I'm actually starting to think it has a right and I'll tell you why.

Below is a list of every National Champ and Co-National Champ from 1900-2007. If you look at the list from 1900 - 1945, just about any college had a shot to win a national championship. But after 1945 when Army won back to back national championships in 1944 and 1945, if you look at the history, you notice the smaller market teams don't win National Titles. Coincidence? Maybe.

1900 - Yale
1901 - Michigan
1902 - Michigan
1903 - Princeton
1904 - Pennsylvania
1905 - Chicago
1906 - Princeton
1907 - Yale
1908 - Pennsylvania
1909 - Yale
1910 - Harvard
1911 - Princeton
1912 - Harvard
1913 - Harvard
1914 - Army
1915 - Cornell
1916 - Pittsburgh
1917 - Georgia Tech
1918 - Pittsburgh
1919 - Harvard
1920 - California
1921 - Cornell
1922 - Cornell
1923 - Illinois
1924 - Notre Dame
1925 - Alabama (H)/Dartmouth (D)
1926 - Alabama (H)/Stanford (H, D)
1927 - Illinois
1928 - Georgia Tech (H)/USC (D)
1929 - Notre Dame
1930 - Notre Dame
1931 - USC
1932 - USC (H)/Michigan (D)
1933 - Michigan
1934 - Minnesota
1935 - Minnesota (H)/SMU (D)
1936 - Minnesota
1937 - Pittsburgh
1938 - TCU (AP)/Notre Dame (D)
1939 - USC (D)/Texas A&M (AP)
1940 - Minnesota
1941 - Minnesota
1942 - Ohio State
1943 - Notre Dame
1944 - Army
1945 - Army
1946 - Notre Dame
1947 - Notre Dame
1948 - Michigan
1949 - Notre Dame
1950 - Oklahoma
1951 - Tennessee
1952 - Michigan State
1953 - Maryland
1954 - Ohio State (AP)/UCLA (UPI)
1955 - Oklahoma
1956 - Oklahoma
1957 - Auburn (AP)/Ohio State (UPI)
1958 - LSU
1959 - Syracuse
1960 - Minnesota
1961 - Alabama
1962 - USC
1963 - Texas
1964 - Alabama
1965 - Alabama (AP)/Michigan State (UPI)
1966 - Notre Dame
1967 - USC
1968 - Ohio State
1969 - Texas
1970 - Nebraska (AP)/Texas (UPI)
1971 - Nebraska
1972 - USC
1973 - Notre Dame (AP)/Alabama (UPI)
1974 - Oklahoma (AP)/USC (UPI)
1975 - Oklahoma
1976 - Pittsburgh
1977 - Notre Dame
1978 - Alabama (AP)/USC (UPI)
1979 - Alabama
1980 - Georgia
1981 - Clemson
1982 - Penn State
1983 - Miami, Fla.
1984 - Brigham Young
1985 - Oklahoma
1986 - Penn State
1987 - Miami, Fla.
1988 - Notre Dame
1989 - Miami, Fla.
1990 - Colorado (AP)/Georgia Tech (UPI)
1991 - Miami(AP)/Washington (Coaches)
1992 - Alabama
1993 - Florida State
1994 - Nebraska
1995 - Nebraska
1996 - Florida
1997 - Michigan (AP)/Nebraska (Coaches)
1998 - Tennessee
1999 - Florida State
2000 - Oklahoma
2001 - Miami
2002 - Ohio State
2003 - LSU (National Champs)/USC (#1 in AP Poll)
2004 - USC
2005 - Texas
2006 - Florida
2007 - LSU

BYU was the last team from a minor conference to win a national title in 1984 (now part of the Mountain West Conference). Since then, the major conferences have gone on to dominate college football. Coincidence? No way. Monopoly? Absolutely.

Now I do take into account that college football has realigned, from the Big 8 to the Big 12. and that things have shifted, but shouldn't every college team have the right to earn a shot to win a National Title?

Why is it only schools from the Big 12, Big 10, PAC 10, and SEC should get a shot at playing for a National Title? How is that fair. Sure their schedules are tougher, but that's not the little schools faults.

Not only that but the current system has a glitch and allows for a Shared National Championship as well. It's certainly not fair that 2 schools have to "share" the National Championship. The whole purpose of a National Champion is so that 1 schools team can be the "Champion". There aren't 2 "Champions" in the NFL. or any other collegiate or professional sport for that matter, so why allow for it in college football?

Simple, because college football is a racket based on money, not athletics, not competition...but greed.

College football has created a monopoly that is fitted to their liking, their alignment, and to their advantage. The BCS is fitted to allow the major schools to pocket millions and rack up championships whether lone or shared while respectfully telling the other smaller schools to kiss it's collective ass.

I think it's high time Congress did get involved and put an end to this racket. and here's how.

* Make a 12 Game Regular Season that starts in August.

* Each team gets 1 bye week

* Athletic Directors no longer have the ability to schedule NON-Conference Games. Instead this is randomly done by computer.

* Record, Strength of Schedule, Quality Wins, Margin of Victory/Loss, will all be factors for the ranking system. Rankings will not apply once the playoffs begin.

* All the current teams & conferences are shuffled to a random computer generated alignment for ultimate parity (Conference Championship Games are eliminated in lieu of the playoff system)

* All Independent teams must join a conference (Notre Dame, Army, Navy) or they are not playoff/NC Game eligible

* The Top 30 Ranked Teams will be playoff Eligible at the end of the regular season, with the #1 and #2 ranked teams getting a first round bye. Playoff order will not go by seeding, but will be computer picked at random to ensure every school has a fair shot at winning, and that no team can "run the table" by seeding, rankings, or other forms such as voters, polls, etc.

* The Top 30 teams will commence the playoffs the first week of December and will go to end of December. Week 1 will consist of 14 games (#1 and #2 get a bye week). Week 2 will consist of 8 Games. Week 3 will consist of 4 Games, Week 4 Will Consist of the Semi-Finals, and the first week of January will consist of the National Championship Game.

[stnzed]

What could possibly be more important? Another Impotent Bail Out plan that only benefits CEO's because the people have no idea where the money goes?

Personally, I've been waiting for these politicians to finally do something that would benefit me.

So if politicians think can get these people to give all the money they make from this "Racket"? Have at it you Pimps.......

[LordTrychon]

I'm no fan of the BCS, but I think congress should be focused on more important things going on at the moment. Jmho.

I agree...