Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 9 of 16

Thread: Senator wants Congress to look into BCS

  1. #1

    Default Senator wants Congress to look into BCS

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...ntitrust-laws/

    When I first heard that Congress was considering investigating the BCS, I thought the same thing most people think: WHAT A JOKE!

    Now, after reading Orrin Hatch's reasoning in the latest issue of SI, I think he's got some valid points.

    Maybe Congress should get involved, what with all the money involved.
    Your ignorance is painful to witness.....

  2. #2
    Olympic Champ
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    It's a long way from East Colorado
    Posts
    3,740

    Default Re: Senator wants Congress to look into BCS

    An outsider examining U.S. culture might conclude that that college football and the BCS is one of the most important issues of the day. More important than food, or medicine, or work, or family, or (god forbid) education.

    The WashTimes article doesn't bother to explain the concept of anti-trust although the legal experts quoted seem to think it's a non-starter with respect to the BCS. A key element I see is: how have the schools (e.g. Utah) been harmed?

    Not having the benefit of the SI article, I'm still falling on the What a Joke side.
    Last edited by matclone; 07-07-2009 at 10:57 AM.

  3. #3

    Default Re: Senator wants Congress to look into BCS

    Your ignorance is painful to witness.....

  4. #4
    Olympic Champ
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    It's a long way from East Colorado
    Posts
    3,740

    Default Re: Senator wants Congress to look into BCS

    Hatch gives us a definition of anti-trust: contracts, combinations, and conspiracies designed to reduce competition. Which raises the question: competition amongst whom and for what purpose? I assume the anti-trust laws are designed to prevent wrong doing in matters of business. Not sure how schools fit in here. He seems to be saying that the reduced competitiion is a school's inability to attract the best players because they weren't in the top bowls. I don't find that too persuasive.

    As the legal scholar mentioned in the other link, a finding of anti-trust requires a showing that someone was harmed. I don't see any harm to the schools except, again, the claim that they weren't able to attract that best players. On that basis, does that mean I can sue U.S. News and World Report for anti-trust because they gave me a low ranking in their flawed rankings of schools resulting in the top students going elsewhere?

    Finally, Hatch says "anything is better than what we have now". My memory is not perfect, but it seems like I heard that argument a few years ago when they came up with the BCS scheme. Not everyone was happy then. Not everyone is happy now. The real problem seems to be that big dollars are at stake, and different players all want a larger piece of the pie.

  5. #5
    Olympic Champ RYou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    8,376

    Default Re: Senator wants Congress to look into BCS

    I'm sure "harm" is defined as financial harm. With the mammoth BCS payouts compared to the 2nd tier bowls and the conference tie ins, that is where certain conferences may be able to leverage a crack in the door. Restrictive conference ties in could be deemed a restriction of trade. However, that would probably not be sufficient to leverage a playoff, only an accommodation to expand the spread of bowl revenue - likely through expanding the "BCS Bowls" to 5 rather than 4 and giving an automatic tie in to more conferences.

    I don't think the ability to attract playersw has anything to do with it, it's the cash. Those big pay days go a long way to supporting the overall cost of athletics within a conference (most if not all conferences have adopted a bowl revenue sharing policy).
    Life's not the breaths you take, the breathing in and out that gets you through the day ain't what it's all about. It's the moments that take your breath away.

  6. #6

    Default Re: Senator wants Congress to look into BCS

    FWIW I was in the Capitol today and it reminded me of how much I dislike politicians. The place just reeks of egos.

    I feel bad for Obama having to deal with all those knuckleheads on both sides.

    As for Hatch.....sore loser all the way around.

  7. #7

    Default Re: Senator wants Congress to look into BCS

    The BCS system seems to be stupid (I don't understand it really, but anything other than a regular playoff seems dumb to me.)

    Congress investigating the BCS seems stupid.

    WUW, do you think that Obama is better (ie less ego, less dislikable) than other politicians? I like the guy personally but I would like to know why you feel he's "above" the other political figures.

  8. #8

    Default Re: Senator wants Congress to look into BCS

    He's absolutely above the other politicians. He is the only guy out there who really is trying to work with the other side. He means what he says and he's trying to work with the knuckleheads who run the republican party of NO.

    Personally, I wish he would tell them all to pack sand (remember GWB?) and push things through regardless of the whining of the repubs and the DINO's.

    The party of NO once whined loudly and loooooooooohg about how the Dems were trying to use the filibuster. Those clowns actually were going to attempt a "nuclear" option to thwart the Dems. Now, those hypocritical repubs are nothing but obstructionists. Funny how that works.

    In spite of it all, Obama continues to try to placate the repubs on most if not all issues that are important to most Americans.

  9. #9

    Default Re: Senator wants Congress to look into BCS

    Quote Originally Posted by washed up wrestler View Post
    He's absolutely above the other politicians. He is the only guy out there who really is trying to work with the other side. He means what he says and he's trying to work with the knuckleheads who run the republican party of NO.

    Personally, I wish he would tell them all to pack sand (remember GWB?) and push things through regardless of the whining of the repubs and the DINO's.

    The party of NO once whined loudly and loooooooooohg about how the Dems were trying to use the filibuster. Those clowns actually were going to attempt a "nuclear" option to thwart the Dems. Now, those hypocritical repubs are nothing but obstructionists. Funny how that works.

    In spite of it all, Obama continues to try to placate the repubs on most if not all issues that are important to most Americans.
    Can you give me one example where Obama has tried to work with Republicans? Inviting them to the White House to watch the Super Bowl and asking them to vote on a stimulus plan (with nothing stimulative in it -- it's a social reengineering plan) that is as far left as any piece of legislation in recent memory is not exactly "working with the Republicans". Obama and his administration have no desire to work with Republicans. They have huge majorities in both houses. They don't need Republican support.

    Obama is great at setting the anchor so far left that any movement back to the center looks like a compromise. "Let's see... I really want to spend about $800B on this social plan.. ummm.. let's call it a Stimulus Plan, put a price tag of $950B on it. When we move back to $800B, everyone will give me credit for compromising."

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •