PlayoffPAC

FAQs on Barton's BCS Bill

Friday, December 11, 2009

Yesterday, Congressman Joe Barton’s College Football Playoff Act (“CFPA”) was overwhelmingly approved by the House Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection. The following paragraphs address frequently asked questions regarding the CFPA. A full synopsis of the bill is found here.

If Enacted, What Would the CFPA Do?
- The CFPA is a truth-in-advertising bill. It would make marketing the current BCS system as a “championship” (or marketing the BCS using synonymous terms) an illegal and “deceptive” act. Basically, it will require the BCS to choose — either make college football's championship a competitively earned honor or stop billing it as a “championship.
Does This Mean the Government is Taking Over College Football?
- No, the CFPA would not result in federal bureaucrats running college football’s post-season. This is not Congress legislating narrower uprights or calling for a “fifth” down. The CFPA contains no mandates and would allow college football’s leaders complete autonomy in establishing a post-season playoff. The CFPA is simply a way to knock down a status quo that has harmful on- and off-the-field consequences for college football’s stakeholders
With Everything Else Happening, Doesn’t Congress Have More Important Things to Worry About?
- Yes, Congress has weightier issues to tend to. No one claims that this is Afghanistan or health care. But this issue merits attention, even with everything else on Congress’s plate. College football’s reach extends past the playing field. College football is a billion-dollar enterprise. Its revenues can fund schools’ athletic departments, academic programs, and capital projects. There are off-the-field consequences—especially in this economy—when the BCS distributes bowl proceeds in an anti-competitive manner. Football success may help schools earn national publicity, strengthen alumni networks, and boost admissions applications. There are off-the-field consequences when the BCS hands out championship and bowl invitations in a way that’s often divorced from merit.
Has This Type of Approach Been Successful in the Past?
- Yes. Past congressional hearings led directly to increased access for non-BCS schools. In fact, this is the only type of approach that can work. In an ideal world, the BCS would react to its abysmal approval rating with self-initiated reform. But BCS officials have repeatedly demonstrated their unwillingness to respond to overwhelming public sentiment—at least 85 percent of college football fans disapprove of the status quo. Regrettably, the BCS will listen only when addressed by a powerful voice: the people speaking through their elected representatives. Legislation, congressional hearings, and antitrust investigation requests to the Department of Justice appear to be the few avenues of leverage available to the public.

Forward to Friends

Printer Friendly Format

Paid for by Playoff PAC
Not authorized by any candidate or candidate’s committee
www.PlayoffPAC.com