BCS / Congress

by **SMU89** » Tue Jun 30, 2009 5:21 pm

http://blogs.usatoday.com/onpolitics/20 ... tball.html

Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, and President Obama have at least one thing in common: A distaste for college football's Bowl Championship Series.

The Senate Judiciary Committee's antitrust panel, of which Hatch is the top GOP member, will hold a hearing July 7 on the BCS. In an article for Sports Illustrated, Hatch says the case for government involvement -- either from Congress, the courts or the Justice Department -- is "compelling."

Obama has taken every opportunity to say the BCS should be scrapped and a playoff should be put in place, most recently in April when the University of Florida visited the White House as national champions.

Hatch no doubt has gotten an earful about the University of Utah. In 2008, the Utes were undefeated and snagged an invitation to a BCS game -- but not the national championship. Utah beat Alabama in the Sugar Bowl, 31-17, and remained undefeated.

Hatch notes the sentiment for a college football playoff and writes that "almost anything would be better" than what the BCS has in place now.

But before you go thinking that Congress has better things to do than mess with the BCS, think again. The senator cites the Sherman Antitrust Act, which prohibits "contracts, combinations or conspiracies" designed to reduce competition.

If "those with the power to reform the system" don't do so voluntarily, Hatch writes, then "legislation may be required to ensure that all colleges and universities receive an equal opportunity."

Hatch's article is in the issue of SI that goes on sale tomorrow.

Update at 5:20 p.m. : The Associated Press has moved a short story on Tuesday's hearing.

A faithful OP reader also notes that our USA TODAY colleague Jack Carey reported last week that the Mountain West Conference's proposal for a playoff got "no traction" from the BCS.

The Mountain West Conference wanted to use the BCS' current bowl games as quarterfinals in an eight-team tournament. Then there would be a semifinal round and then two finalists would play for the championship.

Part of the reason the idea got shot down: The BCS has contracts to broadcast postseason games with Fox and then ESPN.

Should make for an interesting discussion at the Senate hearing on Tuesday, which will be chaired by Sen. Herb Kohl, D-Wis. By the way: Kohl owns basketball's Milwaukee Bucks.

by **Paladin** » Tue Jun 30, 2009 7:29 pm

Jerry Jones said it best: "where we live today....sports..."

by **ponyte** » Wed Jul 01, 2009 7:06 am

I hate the BSC but I have even less faith in our goobernment to do anything right. Congress will make this worse for us and better for the big dollar boys. Be careful what one wishes for as one just might get it.

by **NavyCrimson** » Wed Jul 01, 2009 8:38 am

If "those with the power to reform the system" don't do so voluntarily, Hatch writes, then "legislation may be required to ensure that all colleges and universities receive an equal opportunity."

Yeah - right?!

Besides, if the non-BCS member wimps ever got together & fought it, all this would end in 24-hrs. But then again. That ain't happening!!

Turner - surprise me!!! Impress me!!! Lead the charge!!!

Right again. LOL!!!

by **The_RichAlum** » Wed Jul 01, 2009 11:19 am

Congress needs to quit inserting itself into baseball and sports in general. Go pave the road and protect the borders and leave people the hell alone.

Haven't they done enough damage already between lifetime Senators, Congressmen, Bush and the Great Obama?

by **PonyKai** » Wed Jul 01, 2009 11:22 am

The_RichAlum wrote:Congress needs to quit inserting itself into baseball and sports in general. Go pave the road and protect the borders and leave people the hell alone.

They're inserting themselves into every other aspect of our lives. Why leave sports alone?

by **couch 'em** » Wed Jul 01, 2009 1:36 pm

Step one in solving ANY problem should be to ban lawyers from becoming politicians. How can you expect someone trained to do nothing but push around words to come up with actual solutions to problems?

by **SMU89** » Wed Jul 01, 2009 1:57 pm

couch 'em wrote:Step one in solving ANY problem should be to ban lawyers from becoming politicians. How can you expect someone trained to do nothing but push around words to come up with actual solutions to problems?

Step one is Term Limits.

Then politicians will spend more time working for the American people / country and less time working on getting reelected.

by **abezontar** » Wed Jul 01, 2009 2:03 pm

SMU89 wrote:
couch 'em wrote:Step one in solving ANY problem should be to ban lawyers from becoming politicians. How can you expect someone trained to do nothing but push around words to come up with actual solutions to problems?

Step one is Term Limits.

Then politicians will spend more time working for the American people / country and less time working on getting reelected.

That's one way to think about term limits. Another could that that the politician will only worry about the people while he/she is trying to get elected or reelected, then when he/she is in his/her last term, working only for whoever is going to line his/her pockets when he/she can no longer serve.

by **SMU89** » Wed Jul 01, 2009 2:13 pm

Better to let them line their pockets until they are brain dead, die, or retire at 105?

by **abezontar** » Wed Jul 01, 2009 2:18 pm

SMU89 wrote:Better to let them line their pockets until they are brain dead, die, or retire at 105.

at least then there is the possibility that they will lose a reelection bid. I think campaign finance reform and campaign finance limits would do more than term limits.

Neither will happen though because the people responsible for enacting those limits are the people to which they would apply. Very few people are responsible enough to give up power once they have it.

by **SMU89** » Wed Jul 01, 2009 2:23 pm

by **Mustangsabu** » Wed Jul 01, 2009 2:37 pm

SMU89 wrote:
couch 'em wrote:Step one in solving ANY problem should be to ban lawyers from becoming politicians. How can you expect someone trained to do nothing but push around words to come up with actual solutions to problems?

Step one is Term Limits.

Then politicians will spend more time working for the American people / country and less time working on getting reelected.

my theory is that no-one in office should be allowed to do anything in order to be reelected, other than say if they want to be on the ballot. No campaigning, just judged on what they are doing. It is ridiculous that someone in office should need to campaign, they have a job to do.

by **Stallion** » Wed Jul 01, 2009 3:02 pm

New legislation is not necessary-and I don't know of many credible people who think that is a realistic idea considering the fact most Senators and Congressman have strong connections to state supported institutions. The legislation is already on the books-its the Sherman Anti-Trust Act which provides for prosecution by private parties but most importantly also by the U.S. Justice Department and the Attorney's General of each of the 50 states. The legality of the BCS under the Sherman Anti-Trust Act is the whole ballgame. Its either legal or it isn't.

by **The_RichAlum** » Wed Jul 01, 2009 3:07 pm

These are all good thoughts. Term limits are needed and money needs to be taken out of the equation.

There needs to be no more co-mingling between biz and politics. Government jobs need to be so powerless, with such crappy pay that it won't attract all the same sort of a-holes like Sanford, John Edwards, McGreevey, Blago, Ensign, etc... (I could keep going but I will stop here)

BCS / Congress

BCS / Congress

Who is online