Tweet
Along with a senator from Montana, sent a letter to the BCS executive director demanding that they disclose their secret formulas and other inside info.
http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_14640573
http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_14640573
Washington ยป Two high-ranking senators are demanding a peek inside the inner workings of college football's Bowl Championship Series, just the latest move in an ongoing campaign to force changes in the way the national champion is crowned.
In a letter sent Tuesday to the BCS executive director, Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, and Finance Committee chairman Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., said they have "ongoing concerns" that BCS leaders have not been forthcoming in explaining how their system operates.
"Legal and antitrust concerns aside, I think it's clear that the BCS is fundamentally unfair and harmful to schools, students, college football fans and consumers throughout the country," Hatch said in a statement. "At the very least, I think the architects of the BCS should provide the public with more information to dispel the notion that the system is explicitly designed to favor certain teams while disfavoring others."
The BCS is a mixture of human polls and computer rankings that determine the participants in the championship game. The rankings are also used to pick the teams for the four most prestigious bowl games.
Six conferences are considered "automatic qualifiers." Their top teams always have a spot and they get to share in the financial spoils. Teams from the other five conferences can earn their way in, as the University of Utah has done twice. These outsiders earn a big payday, but it is much lower than what the BCS schools receive.
The BCS argues the system has provided unprecedented opportunities for schools from conferences that are not traditional powerhouses, while also rightfully rewarding the teams that draw most of the fans.
But critics, such as Hatch, say the BCS is unfair, picking champions from elite conferences rather than through a playoff like every other college sport.
In their letter, sent to Bill Hancock, the BCS executive director, Hatch and Baucus asked for a slew of information including the financial details of the BCS's new TV deal, which begins this year. Particularly, they wanted to know about the revenue split between BCS and non-BCS conferences, highlighting what they said is "an increase in parity in competition among the privileged and nonprivileged conferences" in recent years.
They asked for details about how the BCS determines which conferences receive automatic bids and the legal structure of the BCS itself. The senators also called on the BCS to release the criteria used by the six computer rankings.
"Ultimately, our current concerns are not only with the current system employed by the BCS," the letter states, "but that the BCS's public representations do not accurately reflect the practical manner in which the system operates."
The BCS did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Hatch has emerged as the leading BCS critic in the Senate. He held a hearing on the system, encouraged the Justice Department to go after it on antitrust grounds and called on President Barack Obama to invite undefeated Boise State to the White House, just like he did BCS champion Alabama.
In a letter sent Tuesday to the BCS executive director, Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, and Finance Committee chairman Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., said they have "ongoing concerns" that BCS leaders have not been forthcoming in explaining how their system operates.
"Legal and antitrust concerns aside, I think it's clear that the BCS is fundamentally unfair and harmful to schools, students, college football fans and consumers throughout the country," Hatch said in a statement. "At the very least, I think the architects of the BCS should provide the public with more information to dispel the notion that the system is explicitly designed to favor certain teams while disfavoring others."
The BCS is a mixture of human polls and computer rankings that determine the participants in the championship game. The rankings are also used to pick the teams for the four most prestigious bowl games.
Six conferences are considered "automatic qualifiers." Their top teams always have a spot and they get to share in the financial spoils. Teams from the other five conferences can earn their way in, as the University of Utah has done twice. These outsiders earn a big payday, but it is much lower than what the BCS schools receive.
The BCS argues the system has provided unprecedented opportunities for schools from conferences that are not traditional powerhouses, while also rightfully rewarding the teams that draw most of the fans.
But critics, such as Hatch, say the BCS is unfair, picking champions from elite conferences rather than through a playoff like every other college sport.
In their letter, sent to Bill Hancock, the BCS executive director, Hatch and Baucus asked for a slew of information including the financial details of the BCS's new TV deal, which begins this year. Particularly, they wanted to know about the revenue split between BCS and non-BCS conferences, highlighting what they said is "an increase in parity in competition among the privileged and nonprivileged conferences" in recent years.
They asked for details about how the BCS determines which conferences receive automatic bids and the legal structure of the BCS itself. The senators also called on the BCS to release the criteria used by the six computer rankings.
"Ultimately, our current concerns are not only with the current system employed by the BCS," the letter states, "but that the BCS's public representations do not accurately reflect the practical manner in which the system operates."
The BCS did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Hatch has emerged as the leading BCS critic in the Senate. He held a hearing on the system, encouraged the Justice Department to go after it on antitrust grounds and called on President Barack Obama to invite undefeated Boise State to the White House, just like he did BCS champion Alabama.
Comment