http://www.playoffpac.com/The latest headlines and articles from PlayoffPAC.comPlayoffPAC5For the first time ever, two teams from non-automatic qualifying conferences (“non-AQ”)—Boise State and TCU—are highly placed in the season’s first poll rankings. If either the Broncos or Horned Frogs run the table, they may be the first non-AQ team to land in the BCS title game. Naturally, this possibility has given rise to a question among some college football fans: if Boise State or TCU wins the title, doesn’t that show the Bowl Championship Series works, even for non-AQs? http://www.playoffpac.com/news/read.aspx?id=277Mon, 06 Sep 2010 00:00:00 GMThttp://www.playoffpac.com/news/read.aspx?id=273Thu, 02 Sep 2010 00:00:00 GMTThe BCS likes to say that “at the beginning of the season, every bowl subdivision team starts out with an equal chance to become national champion.” However, an empirical analysis of BCS berths undermines this position: history proves that any team not at the very top of the preseason ranking has virtually no chance to go to the BCS Title Game.http://www.playoffpac.com/news/read.aspx?id=272Wed, 01 Sep 2010 00:00:00 GMTBefore the 2010 season officially kicks off and brings its own new happenings, we here at Playoff PAC thought a look back at 2010’s off-season months would be worthwhile.http://www.playoffpac.com/news/read.aspx?id=270Mon, 30 Aug 2010 00:00:00 GMThttp://www.playoffpac.com/news/read.aspx?id=262Mon, 19 Jul 2010 00:00:00 GMTThe nation’s chief antitrust regulators will not hold the BCS to a lower standard because it is centered on a game. http://www.playoffpac.com/news/read.aspx?id=257Wed, 09 Jun 2010 00:00:00 GMTThe funding disparity has nothing to do with non-AQs voluntarily bargaining away their share. The BCS just gives non-AQs less money without justification—it’s that simple.http://www.playoffpac.com/news/read.aspx?id=253Fri, 28 May 2010 00:00:00 GMTAn opposite ruling from the High Court today in the American Needle case could have granted the BCS a wholesale exemption from the Sherman Act. http://www.playoffpac.com/news/read.aspx?id=251Tue, 25 May 2010 00:00:00 GMTThe BCS repeatedly boasts that it “has delivered a match-up between the two top teams every year.” This claim should be viewed with some skepticism.http://www.playoffpac.com/news/read.aspx?id=245Thu, 29 Apr 2010 00:00:00 GMTThe BCS’s latest disclosure is hopefully just the start. Playoff PAC expects that further pressure from high places will cause the BCS to disclose even more about its opaque operation. http://www.playoffpac.com/news/read.aspx?id=242Thu, 22 Apr 2010 00:00:00 GMT"Winning" is no longer necessary for bowl berths. "Deserving" is enough under new NCAA rules. http://www.playoffpac.com/news/read.aspx?id=239Thu, 15 Apr 2010 00:00:00 GMTCollege football reform’s only aim is for schools to have a “fair shake” at earning benefits through competition. Conservatives should favor this modest effort to eliminate stacked decks and instill competition.http://www.playoffpac.com/news/read.aspx?id=237Thu, 08 Apr 2010 00:00:00 GMTIt’s unfathomable how the BCS can declare balloting inadequate to pick a playoff’s 16th seed, and then turn around to proclaim that it’s the ideal way to award a title. http://www.playoffpac.com/news/read.aspx?id=233Thu, 01 Apr 2010 00:00:00 GMTThe inequity of the BCS extends beyond manufacturing a national champion year after year. It extends beyond the exorbitant payouts to the same six conferences, regardless of whether those conferences have proven anything on the field or in the post-season marketplace. The BCS influences where we apply and attend school.http://www.playoffpac.com/news/read.aspx?id=230Thu, 25 Mar 2010 00:00:00 GMTOn this wonderful first day of March Madness, Playoff PAC fervently hopes major college football will soon join college basketball by injecting more competition into its post-season.http://www.playoffpac.com/news/read.aspx?id=225Thu, 18 Mar 2010 00:00:00 GMTIn honor of Selection Sunday and March Madness, Playoff PAC is releasing to the public a marvel of minimalism--it's the 2011 Bowl Championship Series Tournament Bracket. Who needs a tiresome multi-round post-season competition when you can combine the First Round, Second Round, Sweet Sixteen, Elite Eight, Final Four, and Championship Monday all into one? Who will take the title next year when the SEC champion faces off against Ohio State, Oklahoma, Texas, or USC? It's anyone's guess. http://www.playoffpac.com/news/read.aspx?id=224Sun, 14 Mar 2010 00:00:00 GMTFolksy BCS Executive Director Bill Hancock reflexively responded to the Senators’ letter: “[I]t sure seems odd for Congress to worry so much about college football when the nation has so many important issues to deal with.” As one of our favorite sports blogs, Everyday Should Be Saturday, put it: “That’s the kind of argument someone guilty of embezzling makes, as in ‘Hey aren’t there arsonists you should be worrying about, or serial killers or some other criminals out there?’”http://www.playoffpac.com/news/read.aspx?id=223Fri, 12 Mar 2010 00:00:00 GMTOhio State president Gordon Gee has offered colorful quotes over the years about college football's BCS. Weeks ago, he provided another: "[E]veryone is being rewarded in this [BCS] system, plus there's a mystery to it. I love the elegance of the mystery." http://www.playoffpac.com/news/read.aspx?id=219Thu, 04 Mar 2010 00:00:00 GMTWould a playoff system really "conflict with exams," as the BCS claims?http://www.playoffpac.com/news/read.aspx?id=218Thu, 25 Feb 2010 00:00:00 GMTPerhaps the BCS’s oddest lobbying partner was Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp., which previously broadcasted BCS bowl games through its FOX network. For added firepower, the BCS has now tapped a second team of lobbyists, Hogan & Hartson, with a retainer that paid $70,000 in just the final quarter of 2009. http://www.playoffpac.com/news/read.aspx?id=216Thu, 18 Feb 2010 00:00:00 GMTA “super conference” system would create a tangible, regular season playoff system where over half of the current teams in the Football Bowl Subdivision (“FBS”) could compete for a national title. http://www.playoffpac.com/news/read.aspx?id=213Thu, 11 Feb 2010 00:00:00 GMTHow can we be satisfied with a world where BCS Executive Director Bill Hancock and his kind run around, cleverly explaining to certain kids on the wrong side of the tracks that they cannot grow up to be doctors, because . . . well, just because? Are we truly content with Mr. Hancock offering a pat on the head and a warm explanation: “Be content, young man, not every one can be a doctor, but you can have a good life, and you may even sneak into Physician’s Assistants School”?http://www.playoffpac.com/news/read.aspx?id=212Thu, 04 Feb 2010 00:00:00 GMTThe 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. http://www.playoffpac.com/news/read.aspx?id=204Tue, 26 Jan 2010 00:00:00 GMTWe are just getting started. There are ads to be run, storylines to be pushed, and legal complaints to be filed. We have no shortage of ideas. We simply need funding to turn them into reality. http://www.playoffpac.com/news/read.aspx?id=217Tue, 19 Jan 2010 00:00:00 GMTForget about the hypothetical BCS disasters that would’ve occurred if Nebraska’s kick-off specialist weren’t inebriated or if the refs hadn’t thrown a second back on the clock for Texas. The actual moment the BCS avoided Armageddon was on Selection Sunday when TCU and Boise State got stuffed into the “Separate But Equal” Bowl.http://www.playoffpac.com/news/read.aspx?id=181Mon, 04 Jan 2010 00:00:00 GMTThe BCS must account for why a team that failed to play by the rules will play in Pasadena next week, and why “major” NCAA violations are somehow not “major” under the BCS system. http://www.playoffpac.com/news/read.aspx?id=177Fri, 01 Jan 2010 00:00:00 GMTOne puff of a playoff, Bill Hancock warns us, and we’ll wake up years down the road a toothless bracket addict, longing for the whimsical bowls of our youth.http://www.playoffpac.com/news/read.aspx?id=175Wed, 30 Dec 2009 00:00:00 GMTWe must also remember that government action in college football is not unprecedented. President Theodore Roosevelt convened representatives of Harvard, Yale, and Princeton in 1905 to address the brutality of the sport and to address foul play. Once new rules were put in place the sport flourished into what we all enjoy today. When college football steps beyond certain boundaries, the government can and should play a role.http://www.playoffpac.com/news/read.aspx?id=161Wed, 23 Dec 2009 00:00:00 GMTLet’s blow down his straw man about a playoff not “escap[ing] controversy.” Under the BCS, we argue over who is No. 2 vs. who is No. 3. In an eight-team playoff that argument would instead be about who is No. 8 vs. No. 9. If you believe the former is better for college football, you might want to take advantage of the BCS’s recent hiring binge. Your logic would fit-in well there.http://www.playoffpac.com/news/read.aspx?id=154Wed, 16 Dec 2009 00:00:00 GMTThe 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. http://www.playoffpac.com/news/read.aspx?id=146Fri, 11 Dec 2009 00:00:00 GMTTexas is a great football team, but asking the question “what if” can’t be avoided. What if TCU is a better football team than Texas? What if Boise State posted 460 yards (the Bronco’s season average) on the Alabama defense? Unfortunately, without a playoff in college football, we will never know the answers to these questions. Without a playoff, college football’s ultimate prize will remain tarnished by controversy.http://www.playoffpac.com/news/read.aspx?id=137Wed, 09 Dec 2009 00:00:00 GMTTo be clear, Playoff PAC is not advocating that government meddle in the inner workings of a private game. Federal bureaucrats won’t be running college football’s post-season. No one is asking Congress to legislate narrower uprights or mandate a fifth down. http://www.playoffpac.com/news/read.aspx?id=119Fri, 04 Dec 2009 00:00:00 GMTA few weeks back, sports radio host Dan Patrick interviewed Bill Hancock, the new Executive Director of the Bowl Championship Series. Although some time has passed, Playoff PAC thinks this interview is worth revisiting. Mr. Hancock does his best to defend the status quo, but his arguments do not withstand even the mildest scrutiny. As we’ve said previously, Playoff PAC believes that the more the BCS is forced to talk about their system, the more apparent the need for change will behttp://www.playoffpac.com/news/read.aspx?id=118Wed, 02 Dec 2009 00:00:00 GMTWe’re not saying that Utah would’ve beaten Florida, Texas, Oklahoma, Auburn, or USC. We’ll never know. The point is that commentators shouldn’t be the ultimate arbiters of college football’s championship. Their off-the-field predictions about Utah proved grossly inaccurate. Why should college football rely on the same guesswork about hypothetical match-ups to crown a champion? http://www.playoffpac.com/news/read.aspx?id=110Fri, 27 Nov 2009 00:00:00 GMTLest 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.” 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.http://www.playoffpac.com/news/read.aspx?id=109Wed, 25 Nov 2009 00:00:00 GMTPhil Knight, BCS hires former WH Press Secretary Ari Fleischer, and "With 'Fans' Like These..."http://www.playoffpac.com/news/read.aspx?id=105Tue, 24 Nov 2009 00:00:00 GMTAs you may have discovered, the BCS recently started a Facebook page and a Twitter account. We can’t blame the BCS for wanting to try to improve their image—a recent Sports Illustrated survey found that only 10% of college football fans surveyed prefer the status quo. But perhaps Facebook and Twitter aren’t the best outlets for an organization that is so uniformly despised.http://www.playoffpac.com/news/read.aspx?id=98Fri, 20 Nov 2009 00:00:00 GMTWe need not accept the BCS’s premise that the old bowl system is the only relevant measuring stick. Despite the misguided and dishonest rhetorical tactics of both Mssrs. Bryan and Perlman, teachers should teach evolution, and college football should not remain Cro-Magnon simply because it was once primordial. Essentially, Mr. Perlman argues that we should keep our VHS, because VHS is better than our old slide projector. http://www.playoffpac.com/news/read.aspx?id=93Wed, 18 Nov 2009 00:00:00 GMTWake up, Mr. Hancock. You are not the Administrator of puppies and rainbows. You’re the Administrator of the BCS, and the BCS is not well-regarded. It’s not that you aren’t pleasing everybody. It’s that you’re satisfying nobody. Only 15 percent of fans approve of your organization. To steal words from Senator John McCain, “When you get down that low, you’re down to paid staffers and blood relatives.” You simply can’t chalk-up BCS opposition to a portion of the public’s preferences. It’s not the people. It’s the product.http://www.playoffpac.com/news/read.aspx?id=89Fri, 13 Nov 2009 00:00:00 GMTBecause of the BCS system, however, Utah has perhaps more to gain by losing to TCU than by winning. Yes, the Utes would love to knock off the fancy-uniformed Horned Frogs on their home field, and earn another conference championship trophy. But by winning, the Utes stand to lose the more than $1 million their program would receive from TCU’s trip to the BCS. And a Utah win would jeopardize the Mountain West Conference’s reputation and ability to earn an automatic BCS berth. http://www.playoffpac.com/news/read.aspx?id=90Fri, 13 Nov 2009 00:00:00 GMTThe college football powers that be have created a championship that’s a popularity contest masquerading as a competitively earned honor. We all know this. The BCS values perception over performance. You see, under the BCS, it’s no longer good enough to have a quality quarterback. You need a top-flight media consultant too.http://www.playoffpac.com/news/read.aspx?id=85Wed, 11 Nov 2009 00:00:00 GMTThe hearing exposes the faulty logic of the BCS for all to see. It’s no wonder why the BCS is so worried about Congress getting involved. If the adage that “sunlight is the best disinfectant” is true, we need Congress to keep shining the light on the BCS. http://www.playoffpac.com/news/read.aspx?id=82Fri, 06 Nov 2009 00:00:00 GMTFootball helps fund lacrosse sticks, balance beams, volleyballs, trainers, and everything else associated with collegiate athletics. And football revenue can make it possible for thousands of student-athletes to attend college. http://www.playoffpac.com/news/read.aspx?id=81Wed, 04 Nov 2009 00:00:00 GMTThe truth is that nearly every year, the BCS method has proven a disaster in determining the top two teams to play for the national championship.http://www.playoffpac.com/news/read.aspx?id=74Fri, 30 Oct 2009 00:00:00 GMT"To be clear, we are not complaining about criticism. That is to be expected in a political context... We wanted to alert you to this situation because you will realize that there are larger issues at stake for ESPN. We are confident that you recognize your responsibility to present all of the facts to your viewers. We are also hopeful that you will appreciate the need for ESPN to air opposing views and to demonstrate that you are not advancing the agenda of your new contract partners."http://www.playoffpac.com/news/read.aspx?id=73Thu, 29 Oct 2009 00:00:00 GMTImagine that you were given the task of designing a tournament for more than 100 teams. The tournament should provide each team with a dozen or more competitive games and ultimately produce a champion by pitting the best two teams against each other. The obvious choice is a pool play tournament followed by a championship bracket. If only we could do this for college football.http://www.playoffpac.com/news/read.aspx?id=70Wed, 28 Oct 2009 00:00:00 GMTFor the first time anywhere, Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff fully explains his decision to move forward with a state-level anti-trust lawsuit against the Bowl Championship Series.http://www.playoffpac.com/news/read.aspx?id=63Fri, 23 Oct 2009 00:00:00 GMTMr. Sharp’s main criticism is beside the point. He told us only why college football reform should consume less of our elected officials’ time than the economy and national security. He never explained why college football reform is wholly unworthy of modest legislative attention. Mr. Sharp didn’t attempt to make that case because he would have a hard time doing so. http://www.playoffpac.com/news/read.aspx?id=57Wed, 21 Oct 2009 00:00:00 GMTThe Championship Fairness Act of 2009 prohibits “the receipt of Federal funds by any institution of higher education with a football team that participates in the NCAA Division I Football Bowl Subdivision, unless the national championship game of such Subdivision is the culmination of a playoff system.”http://www.playoffpac.com/news/read.aspx?id=42Fri, 16 Oct 2009 00:00:00 GMTThe BCS ultimately did what it does best—it arbitrarily selected teams to play in the BCS championship game. Even though the Longhorns won a head-to-head contest by 10 points, they lost to the Sooners in what was the equivalent of a rounding error.http://www.playoffpac.com/news/read.aspx?id=39Wed, 14 Oct 2009 00:00:00 GMT