BCS in The Hot Seat

Finally the long drawn out season of boring summer sports is over. It is fall and with fall comes the arrival of college football. When college football returned it was like Christmas morning all over again, a whole day of excitement and surprises. But with the return of college football comes the return of the problems with college football as well. Many conflicts and problems plague college football today. The most fought over problem by far is the Bowl Championship Series or BCS. Has great control over college football and with that control comes many problems. It is time to fix the BCS or bust it.

The Bowl Championship Series was created in 1998 in place of the Bowl Alliance. In regards to the BCS, the BCS official website said, “It is designed to ensure that the two top-rated teams in the country meet in the national championship game” (BCS). Not only has the BCS tried to cater to the top two teams, but it has also brought some other benefits to college football. The BCS has produced higher ratings, better media coverage for college football, and has brought in millions of dollars to be given to the schools that play in the BCS bowl games. With all good things there comes problems and the BCS has its share of them.

The BCS has developed the idea of BCS conferences or automatic qualifying conferences. What are these? These are conferences across college football that produce automatic births into the BCS bowl games. There are only five BCS bowl games. They are the Orange Bowl, Sugar Bowl, All-State National Championship Bowl, Rose Bowl, and the Tostitos Fiesta Bowl. These five bowls are the biggest bowls in the nation because they bring in the most money to the conferences and the schools. It is safe to assume that the best teams in the nation qualify for these bowl games right? Well, the answer is sometimes. Occasionally these BCS conference teams are very good and rank in the top of the nation, but more often than not these BCS conference champions are only the best in their conference, not in the nation. An example of this is the 2008-2009 Orange Bowl; number 19 Virginia Tech faced number 12 Cincinnati. That same season in the Poinsettia bowl, a non-BCS game, number 9 Boise state faced number 11 TCU (“BCS Controversies”). What is wrong with this? Virginia Tech and Cincinnati were both ranked lower then TCU and Boise State and were apart of the BCS conferences. This shows that BCS conference teams may be the best in their conferences but not the best in the nation. Shouldn’t this right and honor go to the teams that earn the right to play in the BCS games?

Could monopolies form with BCS conferences getting all the money and attention? Ralph Nader seems to think so. In his article, “The BCS College Football’s Monopoly”, he writes:

The BCS is responsible for concentrating the wealth that comes from the major post-season events among the schools in conferences with BCS influence, and leaving the other Division I-A, non-BCS schools at a competitive, financial and recruiting disadvantage. It’s like telling nearly half of your members that they are not welcome at the club and are not eligible for the benefits that membership provides. (Nader)

What kind of financial disadvantage do non- BCS schools face? According to the Deseret News:

Of the expected $133.9 million in total revenue that should be generated by the BCS games, $115.8 million will go to the automatic qualifier conferences. A total of $19.8 million will be split among the five non-BCS conferences, with any league that has a team in the BCS bowl games getting an 18-percent share and the other conferences getting 9 percent. The rest of the money is divided in smaller portions to Notre Dame ($4.5 million), Army and Navy ($100,000 each) and the football championship subdivision conferences ($1.8 million total). (Burwell)

 With all this money going to BCS conference teams it is clear why all other teams are at a huge disadvantage. Since the BCS came into power in 1998 all the champions have been from the BCS conferences (ESPN), 7 of them form the Southeastern Conference, and last season alone 45 teams from BCS conferences played in bowl games (ESPN).

With all the BCS national champions’ coming from BCS conferences, the question isn’t just is it a monopoly. The question is how are teams picked to play in the national championship? According to Rivals.com, “Eight sets of rankings are used in the BCS standings, the USA Today coaches' poll and Harris Interactive poll each make up one-third, while the final third is an average of six computer polls” (Fox). It sounds like a waterproof plan but there are still some leaks. No matter how hard you try to combat bias in human polls there is always going to be some. To combat the human bias the BCS decided to use computer rankings as well. I have noticed that computers don’t have a brain, a heart, or feelings. How is a computer supposed to choose between teams that have a strong schedule, notable wins, and competitive hearts? It can’t. An example of this is the 2008- 2009 season. According to ESPN, the University of Utah was undefeated heading into bowl week but was ranked number six in the nation. The national championship teams Oklahoma and Florida were ranked number one and two, but both teams had the same record of 12-1 (ESPN). There are many unsupported conclusions why Utah didn’t get to play for the championship, but all of them are unsupported because nobody really understands the BCS ranking system. Pete Carroll, the former University of Southern California head coach, states:

 I don't understand how the thing works, I don't really know... What are the criteria of the process? Is it to pick the team that has the best season, that has the season that you like the most and feel best about voting for? Or is it the best team at the end of the year, the team that would win a playoff system if you did have it? I don't know how the computer thing works... I don't know how the computer knows how good another team is. I don't understand that… (ProCon.org)

 If we can't understand how the computer rankings work then why should we let a computer be in control of such a big decision? I can’t believe college football has come so far just to give a huge decision to a computer.

What would be the solution to this problem? Chris Suellentrop, a New York Times editor said, “The obvious solution is a playoff. Players want one. Fans want one. The media want one. Even many risk-averse coaches want one...” (ProCon.org). It is the obvious solution. To the best of my knowledge all other sports use a playoff or tournament system of some kind. Even the Olympics and the FIFA World Cup use playoff systems. They use tournament systems because they work. No one can dispute a playoff system “winner take all” but everyone can dispute the BCS national championship. What is the most exciting part of almost every sport? The playoffs. Think of March Madness - the reason why it’s so successful is because it allows for upsets, Cinderella stories, emotion from players, and the pounding hearts of fans. But playoffs don’t allow monopolies. The BCS argues:

In every sport, brackets began with a few teams. Then schools felt slighted, and so the brackets grew to accommodate more teams. And grew and grew and grew. It is known as 'bracket creep.' The NCAA Division I Men's Basketball Championship started with eight teams. It's now 65, and some college officials want to expand beyond that... (ProCon.org)

Even with a bigger bracket, in college football, it gives not only more teams a chance to win a championship, but it also brings more excitement and fairness to the sport.

College football is an amazing and wonderful sport. Let’s not let the problems of BCS conferences, monopolies, and corrupted polls ruin the sport. Two things could be done; we could sit, be silent, and watch the BCS rule in corruption, or we could get up, use our voices, and do what’s best for college football. Which is to fix or bust the BCS.

Work Cited

BCS. "BCS background." Bowl Championship Series. BCS, 2011. Web. 17 Sep. 2011. .
“BCS Controversies.” Wikipedia. Wikipedia, 19 Sept. 2011. Web. 19 Sept. 2011
Burwell, Bryan. "BCS System Is All About Preserving Monopoly of Power Conferences." Desert News. Desert News, 10 Dec 2009. Web. 17 Sep. 2011. ."
College Football National Champions." College Football Poll. Google, 08 Jan 2010. Web. 19 Sep. 2011. .
ESPN. "2008-2009 Bowl schedule/results." ESPN College Football. ESPN.com, 08 Jan 2009. Web. 19 Sep. 2011. .
Fox, David. "Inside the BCS: How does it work?." Rivals.com. Yahoo, 26 Nov. 2007. Web. 17 Sep 2011. .
Nader, Ralph. "The BCS: College Football." Counter Punch. Counter Punch, 24 Dec 2006. Web. 17 Sep. 2011. .
ProCon.org. "Should college football replace the Bowl Championship Series (BCS) with a playoff system?." ProCon.org. ProCon.org, 13 Apr 2011. Web. 17 Sep 2011. .