“How exactly has the market demanded this system?”

With the BCS title game in the books, we should be drawing close to a period of relative quiet on the BCS Sucks! debate front (it’ll pop back up when March Madness rolls around, if history is consistent).  But before we go elsewhere, I just wanted to respond to something in today’s Sally Jenkins piece, in which she quotes extensively from the Mountain West Conference’s lobbyist.

The BCS also loves to argue that it’s simply the result of a free-market system. Actually, it flies in the face of market forces.

Did you know: In the last four years the major bowl games involving the Mountain West and WAC teams on average had higher ratings and larger game attendance than the major bowls involving the ACC and Big East.

So did the MWC and WAC receive more money for that performance? Not under the BCS. Instead they received about half of what the ACC and Big East got.

If we are supposed to believe that the mid-majors are the equal of the Big Six in drawing power – more importantly, if the mid-majors themselves believe that – then why don’t they simply withdraw from the BCS and start their own postseason show?  This isn’t some sort of Microsoft vs. Netscape situation they face; nobody is stopping them from finding hosting venues and a broadcast affiliate of their own.  If the money is really there as Fishel implies, then they’re foolishly beggaring themselves by electing to stay a part of the BCS, which is, remember, a voluntary association.

I think we all know the answer to that.  I suspect the Justice Department does, too.


Filed under BCS/Playoffs, It's Just Bidness, Political Wankery

5 responses to ““How exactly has the market demanded this system?”

  1. Cousin Eddie

    So kick out the Big East and ACC or until they start to play football again.


  2. Bad M

    I’m for the little guy as much as the next person, but you need to draw fans yourself. Stop begging for handouts. If Green Bay can do it… If you had fans, you wouldn’t need to beg. Bowl and TV people would trip over themselves to get you big contracts. Otherwise, play in a lower level where the expectations, costs, competition is more to your liking. Give the little guy a shot on the field IF they earn it, but don’t beg for money. Make it yourself.


  3. Hogbody Spradlin

    Wouldn’t that be great! We could have competing college football championships, like World Wide Wrestling and World Wrestling Federation.


  4. Norm

    The bowls were stacked to give the preferred universities an easy game. Boise State should have played another university within plus or minus two rankings in the final poll, preferably minus two rankings due to the close one loss situation. Oklahoma or Oklahoma State would have been better matches. Boise State and the WAC would have liked to have a better chance for higher earnings. Nevada was also much higher in ratings as Utah.

    Added to this many anouncers were so biased for their own favorites that one with no favorite started routing for the other team.

    SMU started the first play against Army by three separate tackles of the quarterback(?). This should have been two penalties for abuse. Then it was followed by a header on the next play. Was this planned by the coach? After the first two look the other way penalties, the player should have been ejected. There are numerous situations like this in other games, which signified the favoratism in officiating.

    The questionable ‘not tackle’ was a stop in forward progress, which should have been whistled. The wishes of the crowd should have not played in the action on the field. All players had stopped their attention to the play, which was finished. How can it continue in such a situation?