The heat is turned up a little more.

Donate To GopherHole

Government has no business telling the NCAA how to run their football division. It's stupid.
 

Agree with Darren, but it seems the government is running every other businees recently so might as well the NCAA. I guess I can live with it though if it gives us a playoff.
 

I don't get why Congress is involved in this at all. What are we going to be able to say as a result of this? The economy sucks, people are getting laid off left and right, and we still have a home mortgage crisis going on but at least we have a clear cut college football champion? :confused:

Is it a problem? Yeah, but the government should have better things to do than this. This is the NCAA's problem, let the NCAA deal with it. Count me amongst those that feel that Congress has no business wasting the people's time and money on something as ultimately as trivial as this when compared to the bigger problems we have currently.
 

It's a major business, anti trust laws are real. College football has no business believing they are above the law. It is very proper that the legislature does there job and call on major business to behave ethically and to threaten them with applying the law if they should choose not to do so.

Utah is dead on correct in that they are being shut out because of anti competitive practices, as is any other non BCS school.

If you ask me, I believe the NCAA is purposefully enabling this so that they can force the big bowls compliance. Without the heavy hand of the law, they have little hope of cooperation from the big bowls.
 


Public institutions are involved and consequently, tax payer dollars are too. It sounds trivial and frankly we can all agree there are more important issues, but it's a legit issue if they decide to pursue it.
 

Either way, this is a ridiculous thing for the government to deal with right now... or ever.
 

Schnoodler said:
It's a major business, anti trust laws are real. College football has no business believing they are above the law. It is very proper that the legislature does there job and call on major business to behave ethically and to threaten them with applying the law if they should choose not to do so.

Utah is dead on correct in that they are being shut out because of anti competitive practices, as is any other non BCS school.

If you ask me, I believe the NCAA is purposefully enabling this so that they can force the big bowls compliance. Without the heavy hand of the law, they have little hope of cooperation from the big bowls.
Click to expand...

I completely disagree. A monopoly on a champion is irrelevant because anti-trust would only deal with the economics behind the BCS and whether or not they are getting shut out from playing in the BCS. The last time I checked Utah played in a BCS game and was paid handsomely for doing so. Yes, the championship may have paid more money so then you have to evaluate whether that was unfair for them.

The rules for Utah to go to BCS championship game are the same as for everybody else; they have to be #1 or #2 in the BCS polls to play in the game. Utah's complaint has to be with coaches that voted Florida or Oklahoma ahead of Utah even though Utah was the only 12-0 team and they can complain that the computer calculations were unfavorable to them.

This really isn't the concern of the gov't because they can't use anti-trust to dictate a playoff be played instead of a bowl system.
 

grunkiejr said:
I completely disagree. A monopoly on a champion is irrelevant because anti-trust would only deal with the economics behind the BCS and whether or not they are getting shut out from playing in the BCS. The last time I checked Utah played in a BCS game and was paid handsomely for doing so. Yes, the championship may have paid more money so then you have to evaluate whether that was unfair for them.

The rules for Utah to go to BCS championship game are the same as for everybody else; they have to be #1 or #2 in the BCS polls to play in the game. Utah's complaint has to be with coaches that voted Florida or Oklahoma ahead of Utah even though Utah was the only 12-0 team and they can complain that the computer calculations were unfavorable to them.

This really isn't the concern of the gov't because they can't use anti-trust to dictate a playoff be played instead of a bowl system.
Click to expand...

The system they set up prevents teams from rising to that 1 or 2 place. Wisconsin, Minnesota, Utah, Boise State, Texas Tech, etc.

Ohio State, Florida, USC, they get players that want to play for a National Championship. Only a handful of teams can ever promise that. Which is why these teams get an unfair amount of talent.

By putting in a playoff. This talent might trickle down. It levels the playing field to a point, which I think would be much more similar to what we see in Basketball.

Will Boise State ever win a national title? Nope. But they get a chance. But could Minnesota, Texas Tech, or Wisconsin? Very probable we might see a team here and there and take a championship from the national powers. Or make it into that championship game.

You bet your ass this system is corrupted in terms of keeping money in the major conferences ultimately ended up mostly going to the traditional powers.
 



We shall see. There are smarter more knowledgable people than you or me that will decide what constitutes anti competitive behavior and what does not.

I think it's clear, BCS schools have a distinct advantage in recruiting and TV revenues. Non BCS schools are at a severe disadvantage to compete and grow their business because of this. If there is bias, that limits inclusion and access and I think there is, i think the NCAA is standing on very thin ice. We'll see if the NCAA wants to face the courts. I have a feeling they won't want to test the laws.

College football is very big biz my friends. It is not trivial.
 

anticallihan said:
The system they set up prevents teams from rising to that 1 or 2 place. Wisconsin, Minnesota, Utah, Boise State, Texas Tech, etc.
Click to expand...

I disagree that Minnesota, Wisconsin and Texas Tech do not have a chance at a national title. If any of the three go undefeated next year, they will play in the NC game. They play in BCS conferences.

Utah would have been playing for the national championship if they had bothered scheduling just 1 more BCS-conference team. They played 2. Most BCS schools would pay them to come and play. But they refuse.

Boise State was even worse. They played only 1 BCS-conference team! And the WAC is a total joke.

The Utah proposal is not about creating a true national championship. It's about hikacking the spotlight late in the season when it is most lucrative so other schools end up paying their dues for them.

Next year Utah plays precisely ZERO teams from the Big Ten, SEC, ACC and Big 12. Odds are quite good they will be undefeated in December even if they are mediocre.
 

Schnoodler said:
We shall see. There are smarter more knowledgable people than you or me that will decide what constitutes anti competitive behavior and what does not.

I think it's clear, BCS schools have a distinct advantage in recruiting and TV revenues. Non BCS schools are at a severe disadvantage to compete and grow their business because of this. If there is bias, that limits inclusion and access and I think there is, i think the NCAA is standing on very thin ice. We'll see if the NCAA wants to face the courts. I have a feeling they won't want to test the laws.

College football is very big biz my friends. It is not trivial.
Click to expand...

Everything you said is correct. But this is still all about mediocre teams hikacking the national spotlight late in the season when it is most lucrative and least punative to be in that spotlight.

Utah would never agree to play USC or Texas during the regular season. Never.
 

Goldmember said:
I disagree that Minnesota, Wisconsin and Texas Tech do not have a chance at a national title. If any of the three go undefeated next year, they will play in the NC game. They play in BCS conferences.

Utah would have been playing for the national championship if they had bothered scheduling just 1 more BCS-conference team. They played 2. Most BCS schools would pay them to come and play. But they refuse.

Boise State was even worse. They played only 1 BCS-conference team! And the WAC is a total joke.

The Utah proposal is not about creating a true national championship. It's about hikacking the spotlight late in the season when it is most lucrative so other schools end up paying their dues for them.

Next year Utah plays precisely ZERO teams from the Big Ten, SEC, ACC and Big 12. Odds are quite good they will be undefeated in December even if they are mediocre.
Click to expand...

Without knowing the schedules.

If Florida, Minnesota, Michigan, and Oklahoma all go undefeated next year who goes to the National Championship game?

If you think Minnesota does you are crazy.

This is the problem. But I don't think we need a better example of the BCS flop than last years whole situation.
 



anticallihan said:
Without knowing the schedules.

If Florida, Minnesota, Michigan, and Oklahoma all go undefeated next year who goes to the National Championship game?

If you think Minnesota does you are crazy.

This is the problem. But I don't think we need a better example of the BCS flop than last years whole situation.
Click to expand...

That would be nearly impossible. But it is becoming increasingly likely as the regular season is dumbed-down.

So why not treat the problem? The BCS could just force the powerhouses to play-off in the non-conference portion of their schedule.

You seem to hate the BCS. I would would be willing to eliminate the BCS and go back to what we had in 1997. Would you?

Things were probably better when Big Ten vs. Pac Ten in the Rose Bowl was the defacto National Championship.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom