PlayoffPAC

A 2007 Gallup poll found that only 15 percent of college football fans approve of the Bowl Championship Series. 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. They’re not elected, so they don’t listen.

Playoff PAC sees little point in asking anyone to boycott Tostitos or mail petitions to university presidents. BCS officials already know the BCS is unpopular. A stack of angrily scribbled signatures will not be a revelation. 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.

Critics often assert that “Congress has more important matters to tend to than college football.” Yes, America has weightier issues to tackle. This will always be so. It is especially true during this deep economic recession. But our leaders can walk and chew gum at the same time. And this issue merits attention, even with everything else on Congress’s plate. Other critics try to characterize Congress’s interest in college football reform as government meddling with the inner workings of a private game. But let’s be clear. Congress will not legislate narrower uprights or call for a “fifth” down; federal bureaucrats will not run a post-season tournament.

Playoff PAC’s call for intervention is simply an acknowledgment that 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 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.

Finally, college football is culturally important. References to the game are ubiquitous, and Americans spend resources to study, discuss, and watch football players, coaches, and teams. There are off-the-field consequences when a cultural icon is cheapened by backroom deals and legacy entitlements.

In other words, college football reform is Congress’s business because it is the people’s business. Even if it’s not the most important issue of the day, democratically elected leaders should devote attention to a national institution that’s financially and culturally important to their constituents—particularly when BCS officials demonstrate repeated, willful deafness to the public’s appeals for change.

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