|
----------
BCS boss says playoffs
feasible but not preferred
Congressional panel
questions validity of justifications for current system
By HOWARD FENDRICH
AP Sports Writer
WASHINGTON � A playoff
system could be used in major college football and the so-called
"plus-one" model for determining a national champion should be
reconsidered, the head of the Bowl Championship Series told Congress on
Wednesday.
When House Subcommittee on
Commerce Trade and Consumer Protection Chairman Cliff Stearns, R-FL,
pointed out that lower divisions have playoffs for football, BCS
coordinator Kevin Weiberg said: "It certainly, Congressman, is possible
to have a playoff at the Division I-A level, as well. We have chosen not
to go down that path."
Between jokes about
needing tickets for bowl games and remarks about more important matters
they could be addressing, lawmakers on the subcommittee � which examined
steroids in professional sports earlier this year � made clear they are
not interested in pursuing legislation.
But they did want to know
why Division I-A football is the only college sport without a playoff
system.
"Why can't it do it? Why
can't it do it?" asked Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas. "We're not going to
introduce a playoff bill after this hearing. But I hope this hearing
causes discussion. I would like to see the NCAA and the major
conferences and the BCS come together on their own to develop a playoff
system."
There are 28 bowls, and
four are in the BCS: the Rose, Orange, Fiesta and Sugar. Those take
turns hosting a championship game between the Nos. 1 and 2 teams in the
BCS standings, based on two human polls and computer ratings.
The "plus-one" concept, in
which the fifth game of the BCS format would be a championship game with
two teams advancing from the first four bowl games, was considered in
2004.
Weiberg, the commissioner
of the Big 12 and one of six witnesses Wednesday, testified that the
"'plus-one' model is one that deserves review. It is not one, as of yet,
that has had full opportunity for review."
He said he's open to
changing the current setup but noted that school presidents would have
to approve playing extra postseason games � something they have shown no
inclination to do.
Weiberg is in his final
season as BCS coordinator. Mike Slive, who left his job as Conference
USA commissioner in 2001 to assume the same position with the
Southeastern Conference, starts a two-year tenure as BCS boss in 2006.
Big Ten commissioner Jim
Delany, Rose Bowl management committee chairman William Johnstone and
other witnesses offered several arguments against playoffs: They would
abandon tradition, diminish the importance of the regular season, lower
the economic impact of some bowls, and create academic conflicts.
"The bowls are not
perfect, and the Bowl Championship Series is not perfect," Football Bowl
Association chairman and Alamo Bowl CEO Derrick Fox said. "But a playoff
system is dangerous."
Barton questioned the
concern about academics, citing a recent report that said 41 percent of
this year's bowl-bound college football teams fall below the NCAA's new
academic benchmark.
"Let's don't use
(academics) as an excuse not to have a playoff system � and then ignore
it," Barton said.
He also wondered aloud
whether money is the biggest reason there isn't a playoff.
"Doesn't it really boil
down to that the major bowls ... don't want a playoff system because you
think it's going to impinge on the money that the big bowls make?"
Barton said.
Delany responded that "an
NFL-style football playoff would provide three to four times as many
dollars to the Big Ten as the current system does. There is no doubt in
my mind that we are leaving hundreds of millions of dollars on the
table."
The BCS was created in
1998 by the six most powerful conferences. Since then, the system has
been tweaked to make it easier for teams from smaller conferences to
qualify for the top games.
02/23/07 10:43 AM
�2005 The Associated Press. All
rights rights reserved. This material may
not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
|
