 |
The $24 Million Spin Job
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
|
|
The BCS recently released its unofficial estimate of net revenue from the 2010 BCS bowls. The report indicates that the MWC and WAC will receive a total of $24 million dollars from their participation in the BCS bowl games this year. The BCS characterized this payment as proof that the BCS is providing equal distribution and “access” to the non-automatic qualifying conferences. At first glance, the payment indeed sounds like a lot of money, but as usual, peeking behind the sticker price reveals some interesting details.
BCS Executive Director Bill Hancock announced: “Because of the BCS, all 11 conferences have more access, more revenue and more opportunity from post-season football than before the creation of the BCS, and we’re very proud of that record.” Playoff PAC has been over this ground before; however, we are still waiting for someone to explain how an arguable minor improvement is justification for stalling future growth and progress. On a “good/better/best” continuum, the BCS is fixated on the “better,” while avoiding the question of why we can’t have “best.”
The reports show that the MWC and WAC will divide this money between five non-automatic qualifying conferences, leaving the MWC with $9.8 million and the WAC with $7.8 million. The Big Ten and SEC will each receive $22 million. The other four automatic qualifying conferences (ACC, Big East, Big 12 and PAC 10) will each receive $17.7 million.
Hancock spins this by suggesting that the MWC and WAC receive less than the other conferences because they chose to distribute the money in a certain way (“the expected allocation is a result of their decision.”). This misses the point. Even if the MWC and WAC decided not to share their distribution with other non-AQ conferences, each would have taken only $12 million, compared to the $17.7 million received by each AQ conference with one team in a BCS game.
Mr. Hancock, if you perchance have any time when you get back from Vail or wherever it is you enjoy the fruits of your exacting labor, could you perhaps answer a simple question? Why do the MWC and WAC deserve $5.7 million less than the ACC, Big East, Big 12 or PAC 10, who also sent just one team to the BCS bowls? You might try to say that it’s because of the ratings these teams generate. But the numbers don’t agree. The TCU-Boise State Fiesta Bowl game kept pace with or exceeded the ratings of other BCS bowls. In-stadium attended exceeded previous years, when only BCS teams played in Arizona. So hmmmm . . .what was the reason again? Mr. Hancock? Are you there?
In short, the BCS does not have any answers to these simple questions. Instead of addressing them, the BCS flashes around the $24 million, hoping that everyone will ignore the ongoing, inexplicable disparities in the system. Upon looking behind the smokescreen of the professional BCS public relations team, the real message is that non-automatic qualifying conferences should shut up and be grateful the crumbs that fell from the big dogs’ table this year happened to be a little larger than usual.
|
|
|
 |