Tonight college football fans will be watching the on-field competition in the Bowl Champion Series game between Florida and Oklahoma, which will determine the BCS “national champion.” But some politicians, in addition to President-elect Barack Obama, are as interested in off-field issues such as how the participating teams in this game are determined and how this game is described.
Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff claims the BCS system unfairly prevents universities from non-BCS conferences (e.g., the undefeated Utah Utes) from participating in the BCS championship game, which places these schools at a competitive and financial disadvantage in violation of the federal antitrust laws. Two Texas Republican congressmen, Joe Barton and Michael McCaul, along with Illinois Democrat congressman Bobby Rush, have introduced federal legislation that would “prohibit the marketing, promotion, and advertising of a postseason game as a ‘national championship’ football game, unless it is the result of a playoff system.” Their proposed bill would make any non-compliant football championship game “an unfair or deceptive act or practice” that violates the Federal Trade Commission Act. The Utah attorney general’s antitrust investigation and proposed federal legislation both seek to have the major college football championship determined by a playoff system rather than a complex formula based on subjective human polls and computer rankings that determine the #1 and #2 ranked teams at the end of the regular season.
It’s easy to see why the Utah attorney general and the Texas congressmen (Texas was not selected for the BCS championship game despite defeating Oklahoma during the regular season) want to eliminate the BCS system based on its current adverse effects on universities in their respective states. But it’s a mystery to me why Congressman Rush is co-sponsoring the proposed federal legislation because no Illinois universities have been harmed by the BCS system since its inception.
I don’t think the Utah attorney general’s investigation will lead to an antitrust suit (especially if the Utes are voted #1 in the final AP poll, thereby gaining a share of the “national championship”) or that the proposed federal legislation will be enacted (although characterizing the “BCS national championship” as “deceptive” speech would raise some interesting First Amendment issues). Regarding sports and politics, it’s once again accurate to say “after all is said and done, there’s always a lot more said than done.” Enjoy tonight’s game—regardless of whether you think Florida and Texas are the two best college football teams and/or that the winner should be crowned “national champion.”