In late October, Big 12 Conference Commissioner Dan Beebe put forward a troublesome proposal to revamp college football’s bowl eligibility standards.
Under current rules, teams with .500 records can receive a bowl bid only if the school’s conference already has a deal with a bowl and all other teams with winning records have been invited to post-season games. Mr. Beebe’s proposal would “eliminate those exceptions and permit 6-6 teams to be accepted immediately.”[1] In other words, the rule change would “treat football teams with .500 records the same as teams with winning records for bowl participation.”[2]
Beebe’s proposal may seem relatively benign on its face. But rest assured, it is not merely another effort to reward mediocrity in this country. This is a naked power grab. Why? Bowls forced to go outside their “Big Six” conference affiliations in order to fill spots often turn to winning “non-AQ” programs, meaning that these schools usually benefit most from these standards. Beebe’s plan would allow a 6-6 “AQ” team to take a bowl game spot from a seven-, eight-, or nine-win “non-AQ” team.
Lest anyone attribute a nobler purpose to Beebe’s crusade, Beebe has said that he seeks laxer standards because a “six-win team is probably more marketable in some cases than the others, so it should be treated the same.”[3] Somehow, Beebe believes bowls bids aren’t already enough about money. Perhaps the valuable thing about Beebe’s plan is that it would eliminate any argument that bowls are about anything besides money.
In relaxing bowl eligibility standards, Beebe’s plan would also further loosen the relationship between rewards and on-the-field achievement. And as columnist Ray Rotto put it, Beebe’s plan could also have devastating long-term effects on college football’s overall health:
This is essentially one more step toward forcing the other five conferences to give up and become FCS schools. If your reward for having a football program is losing money, the occasional body-bag game and no bowl appearance if there are enough mediocre big-time programs who qualify, then exactly why would you bother with football at all?[4]
Playoff PAC is greatly concerned that Beebe’s proposal would perpetuate and extend the caste system imposed by the BCS these past 11 years—a system that is ultimately bad for all teams. As we understand it, the full proposal is forthcoming and will be considered at the NCAA Convention in January. We will keep you updated on new developments.
[1] Associated Press, Big 12 Proposal Seeks More Leniency (Nov. 2, 2009), http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=4616889.
[2] Michelle B. Hosick, Board Sponsors Bowl Proposal on 6-6 Teams, The NCAA News (Nov. 2, 2009), http://bit.ly/5gazq9.
[3] Michelle B. Hosick, Big 12 Proposes Bowl Eligibility Change, The NCAA News (Oct. 28, 2009), http://bit.ly/6PNLuq.
[4] Ray Rotto, The Elitist Thing: BCS Schools Want Have-Nots to Have a Little Less, CBSSports.com (Nov. 19, 2009), http://bit.ly/nT7Ka.