Utah sues the BCS

[MDZip]

State of Utah sues BCS for anti-trustThey are doing it on behalf of the University of Utah and the more than half of the FBS schools who would never even have the opportunity to compete for a championship. While I think the odds of having one of those schools be the choice for a championship game are small, I think it could help open up eligibility for the other games, since non-BCS schools essentially get only one chance to get a BCS-bowl slot.The article mentions that the BCS has distributed over $70M to non-BCS conferences over the last nine years, it doesn't mention that it has given nearly $1B to the six BCS conferences. Utah is looking for other schools/states to join the fight. I can't see where anything negative would come out of this for Akron and the timing might just be perfect for us. I'd love to see the playoff come out of this - 16 teams, the 11 conference winners and 5 at large to be seeded just like a region of the NCAA basketball tournament. Of course that probably means the Sun Belt and MAC get the 16 and 15 seed every year.

[RootforRoo44]

State of Utah sues BCS for anti-trustThey are doing it on behalf of the University of Utah and the more than half of the FBS schools who would never even have the opportunity to compete for a championship. While I think the odds of having one of those schools be the choice for a championship game are small, I think it could help open up eligibility for the other games, since non-BCS schools essentially get only one chance to get a BCS-bowl slot.The article mentions that the BCS has distributed over $70M to non-BCS conferences over the last nine years, it doesn't mention that it has given nearly $1B to the six BCS conferences. Utah is looking for other schools/states to join the fight. I can't see where anything negative would come out of this for Akron and the timing might just be perfect for us. I'd love to see the playoff come out of this - 16 teams, the 11 conference winners and 5 at large to be seeded just like a region of the NCAA basketball tournament. Of course that probably means the Sun Belt and MAC get the 16 and 15 seed every year.

i would take the 32nd seed if it meant we had a chance to play for something meaningful like the NCAA championship in football.As much fun as bowls are for mid majors like us, they still are stupid.

[skip-zip]

While I've thought all along that having a long playoff is probably never going to be possible, I welcome anything that helps Akron get a shot at some publicity and more money. A 16-team playoff with us getting at least one well-watched extra game (if we win the MAC) would be a great thing for us if it would happen. However, I'm thinking it would be a fight to get all of the conference champs into a 16 team playoff.

[MDZip]

If you look at last years final teams the conference champs would be:ACC VTSEC FloridaB10 Penn StB12 OUBE CinPAC 10 USCMAC BuffaloWAC BoiseMWC UtahSunbelt TroyConfUSA ECUThe five at-large would likely be:AlabamaOSUTexasTCU Georgia, Oregon, TexTech (pick one)I don't think you could argue that a deserving team didn't get in, plus one more non-BCS team gets a slot (in TCU). And just like the NCAA tournament, there are teams that get in that wouldn't have if you just took the top teams (and none of them would have a chance at winning the national title in either sport) so even though the 12th, 13th or maybe even 14th ranked team might have an argument (just like the say 46th ranked team for the NCAA tournament) but none of them win it either. Plus it gives the higher ranked teams a potential "breather" with the possibility of a tremendous upset. In this scenario the only three teams you could argue with would be Buffalo, Troy and ECU and all of them were a champion on a FBS conference too and they all have the same disadvantages of competing again the Big Boys so recognize that and give them a shot or kick them out of FBS (of course we'd have to re-name FBS). Plus you could schedule the prelims in December and play the final three games after the "other" bowl games have concluded. 8 teams would get the same number of games anyway, 8 would play one extra game, 4 would play two extra games and and 2 would play three extra games. It is highly unlikely any conference would get more than three teams (in this one no one has more than two) and if you can't finish in the top three of your own conference you don't deserve to play for the national title.By the way my seedings would have been:1 Florida16 Troy8 VT9 OSU5 Utah12 TCU4 Penn St13 G/O/TT3 Oklahoma14 ECU6 Alabama11 Cincinnati7 Texas10 Boise St2 USC15 BuffaloWho wouldn't want to watch that?

[Blue & Gold]

That would honestly be fantastic. Given our country's incredible fascination with football, that would be bigger than March Madness and, taken as a whole, could possibly be even more popular than the NFL playoffs and Super Bowl.But above all - IT'S FAIR. The BCS is a racket.

[zen]

If you look at last years final teams the conference champs would be:ACC VTSEC FloridaB10 Penn StB12 OUBE CinPAC 10 USCMAC BuffaloWAC BoiseMWC UtahSunbelt TroyConfUSA ECUThe five at-large would likely be:AlabamaOSUTexasTCU Georgia, Oregon, TexTech (pick one)I don't think you could argue that a deserving team didn't get in, plus one more non-BCS team gets a slot (in TCU). And just like the NCAA tournament, there are teams that get in that wouldn't have if you just took the top teams (and none of them would have a chance at winning the national title in either sport) so even though the 12th, 13th or maybe even 14th ranked team might have an argument (just like the say 46th ranked team for the NCAA tournament) but none of them win it either. Plus it gives the higher ranked teams a potential "breather" with the possibility of a tremendous upset. In this scenario the only three teams you could argue with would be Buffalo, Troy and ECU and all of them were a champion on a FBS conference too and they all have the same disadvantages of competing again the Big Boys so recognize that and give them a shot or kick them out of FBS (of course we'd have to re-name FBS). Plus you could schedule the prelims in December and play the final three games after the "other" bowl games have concluded. 8 teams would get the same number of games anyway, 8 would play one extra game, 4 would play two extra games and and 2 would play three extra games. It is highly unlikely any conference would get more than three teams (in this one no one has more than two) and if you can't finish in the top three of your own conference you don't deserve to play for the national title.By the way my seedings would have been:1 Florida16 Troy8 VT9 OSU5 Utah12 TCU4 Penn St13 G/O/TT3 Oklahoma14 ECU6 Alabama11 Cincinnati7 Texas10 Boise St2 USC15 BuffaloWho wouldn't want to watch that?

That does look good. You make a great case.I still think it should be 24 teams with 8 getting a bye. But the 16 scenario that you showed actually looks better than I imagined it would.

[johnnyzip84]

I've long favored a 16-team playoff, in the same manner (ALL conference champs receive automatic bids) as proposed by MDZip. If it ever gets close to reality, please make no mention of the basketball "play-in game" (64 vs 65) to the powers-that-be. Otherwise the MAC champ might find itself playing the Sunbelt champ just to get into the "football dance" I like the 16-team, all champs invited format so well that I'd even be willing to allow the higher seed to host early round games (say up until the Final 4?). This might placate the BCS conferences enough to actually give it consideration. Is it fair? Of course not. It will be MUCH harder to pull off the #16 win over the #1 or the #15 win over the #2. But at least it might get the MAC "in". Frankly, I don't see it happening without some sort of monetary concession to the BCS conferences.

[GJGood]

State of Utah sues BCS for anti-trustThey are doing it on behalf of the University of Utah and the more than half of the FBS schools who would never even have the opportunity to compete for a championship. While I think the odds of having one of those schools be the choice for a championship game are small, I think it could help open up eligibility for the other games, since non-BCS schools essentially get only one chance to get a BCS-bowl slot.The article mentions that the BCS has distributed over $70M to non-BCS conferences over the last nine years, it doesn't mention that it has given nearly $1B to the six BCS conferences. Utah is looking for other schools/states to join the fight. I can't see where anything negative would come out of this for Akron and the timing might just be perfect for us. I'd love to see the playoff come out of this - 16 teams, the 11 conference winners and 5 at large to be seeded just like a region of the NCAA basketball tournament. Of course that probably means the Sun Belt and MAC get the 16 and 15 seed every year.

I say a 14 team playoff with the top two seeds getting byes (for those who like the chase for the top 2 the BCS now creates)...the 11 conference winners and three wild cards. Seeds 1-11 (or 12 if an independent reaches a certain level) go to the conference champs and the wild cards are seeded at the end. At least the first round would be played at campus sites. This allows for marquee matchups every week as the wild cards are liable to be national powerhouses AND would result in some non-BCS conference champs getting the opportunity to host a game since seeds 3 thru 8 (all conf champs) would start at home.That is just what I'd like to see. I think it creates a more level playing field that way and emphasizes winning the conference no matter what the name on the jerseys may read.

[xu9697]

16 team is ideal.Also, no reason you can't still have 15-20 bowl games. Kind of like the NIT of college football.

[tbozeglav]

16 team is ideal.Also, no reason you can't still have 15-20 bowl games. Kind of like the NIT of college football.

I recall back in 2007 an ESPN editor tried to create an eight-team tournament (maybe it was 16, I don't remember). Anyways, in that scenario he used the bowl games as all of the tournament games. For a 16 team tournament, you would have 15 bowl games.Also, johnnyzip84, I think your idea of higher-seed home field advantage would be enough concession for the BCS to consider this. They will probably still put the current "big conference" teams in the higher seeds, and therefore give them a better chance to win.

its a step forward tho. At least give every conference a chance to make it. Personally, I have always been an advocate of the 16-team tournament. It works the best. As far as the locations for the games, I originally thought that the tournament could be worked into the bowl games in a way, but I don't think that'd work as well. Something else to consider... with the amount of time there is already between the end of most seasons and the beginning of bowl season, theres PLENTY of time. With a 16-team tournament, there are only 14 games to be played, meaning you would only need 3 weeks to play all the playoff games. A quick check online shows most conference tournaments of the major BCS conferences are on 12/5/09 this year, leaving a perfect 3 week deadspace between the conference championships and when most of the major bowl games would start. Something else attractive about this is that it would eliminate that awkware 4 week layoff between playing games for those teams who would be playing in the Championship game. They'd be constantly playing and not having that weird time where they arent doing anything.

[MDZip]

And if every conference champion makes it, maybe it might help convince Notre Dame to join one so we don't have to keep seeing them every week, every year on NBC. Hasn't the viewing public suffered enough?

[tbozeglav]

And if every conference champion makes it, maybe it might help convince Notre Dame to join one so we don't have to keep seeing them every week, every year on NBC. Hasn't the viewing public suffered enough?

I think ND has a contract with NBC for at least a couple more years. Its kinda sad, actually. I went to the ND game vs USC back in 2007 and it was the longest football game ever. So many commercial breaks... However, if this system is implemented and ND still isn't in a conference, they wouldn't have much motivation to join a conference because the seeding in the playoffs would largely be decided the same way it is in the NCAA BBall tourney.

[scottditzen]

Loving the idea of a playoff, but I think inserting the MAC champion into a 16 team tournament would cause an uproar. I mean, how often is it that the MAC champ is ranked that high at the end of the season? It's hard to argue that we're deserving.Don't get me wrong, I think the conference champion idea is commendable, especially for us, as it would surely raise the prominence of our conference. But I think you have a better argument for the MAC's inclusion if the tournament has more teams, say 24. Then the "Top 8 that wait" TM could have a first round bye. And the bowls can be placated by1. integration into the tournament and2. have the rest serve, like Xu said, as NIT type games.

[johnnyzip84]

Loving the idea of a playoff, but I think inserting the MAC champion into a 16 team tournament would cause an uproar. I mean, how often is it that the MAC champ is ranked that high at the end of the season? It's hard to argue that we're deserving.Don't get me wrong, I think the conference champion idea is commendable, especially for us, as it would surely raise the prominence of our conference. But I think you have a better argument for the MAC's inclusion if the tournament has more teams, say 24. Then the "Top 8 that wait" TM could have a first round bye. And the bowls can be placated by1. integration into the tournament and2. have the rest serve, like Xu said, as NIT type games.

You can make a similar argument in hoops that champs of the Northeast, MEAC, SWAC etc. have no business being in the "dance". But that's all part of the charm of the hoops tourney, and we should try to keep that same "David vs. Goliath" charm in the football tourney (at least , if we can pull it off).I also agree that many of the bowls can remain "outside" of the NCAA tourney and still have some success.

[RACER]

akron and all of the other non bcs schools need to get invlolved in this.i think they would have a strong case forantitrust.the bcs schools will find any way to keep the non bcs schools out of $.i think most of themwould like to have all the non bcs schools drop down a division ;so they would not have split any money up.this would never happen, but college football needs to model after the pro's with the maxium football budget.this would not be salary cap ,but would make college football a level playing field.schools like osuspend millions more on their football program than mac schools.if you put a cap on what any team could spendevery year you would start seeing things even out.mac schools will ever be able to compete with bcs schools unless something changes with $ teams can spend,or how the revenue is split up.

[ZachTheZip]

I would like to see all the non-BCS conferences go all in on this. Go for broke and put all your weight behind taking down the BCS. If you win, awesome. If not, what could you lose?

[Zipsrifle]

Personally, I think Akron's approach will be sit back and wait to see what happens in Utah. I think that if the BCS system stays intact after this, Utah will be shunned by the BCS. I wouldn't be suprised if they were penalized by the NCAA and the BCS for some minor infraction that the BCS Schools have swept under the rug every year. That is why the State is doing it on the behalf of Utah and the Other schools. If it goes to a playoff (Which I think is a great idea), great. If not, we'll at least avoid the wrath of the NCAA.

[ksu sucks]

Personally, I think Akron's approach will be sit back and wait to see what happens in Utah. I think that if the BCS system stays intact after this, Utah will be shunned by the BCS. I wouldn't be suprised if they were penalized by the NCAA and the BCS for some minor infraction that the BCS Schools have swept under the rug every year. That is why the State is doing it on the behalf of Utah and the Other schools. If it goes to a playoff (Which I think is a great idea), great. If not, we'll at least avoid the wrath of the NCAA.

I think what uakronkids ideas would prevent precisely what you're talking about. If, and thats a big if, all the non BCS conferences came together, the case would be stronger. But do you really think the president's at school like BG, Can't and OU give a hoot about the BCS? Unfortunately, many non BCS schools don't mind it the way it is.

[Zipsrifle]

Personally, I think Akron's approach will be sit back and wait to see what happens in Utah. I think that if the BCS system stays intact after this, Utah will be shunned by the BCS. I wouldn't be suprised if they were penalized by the NCAA and the BCS for some minor infraction that the BCS Schools have swept under the rug every year. That is why the State is doing it on the behalf of Utah and the Other schools. If it goes to a playoff (Which I think is a great idea), great. If not, we'll at least avoid the wrath of the NCAA.

I think what uakronkids ideas would prevent precisely what you're talking about. If, and thats a big if, all the non BCS conferences came together, the case would be stronger. But do you really think the president's at school like BG, Can't and OU give a hoot about the BCS? Unfortunately, many non BCS schools don't mind it the way it is.

I also agree that that approach would likely work, IF everyone jumped on the bandwagon. The problem is that everyone needs to jump on the bandwagon about the same time which isn't going to happen. We'll have to see how this works out. Big, Big money involved, should be interesting. Wait, wait, I know how it will work out! They will simply add another BCS Bowl to be played in Salt Lake City.....that's how it will work out!!

[zen]

If the BCS shuns Utah, it would have to be done very covertly.Utah's Attorney General may lose the anti-trust case, but the last thing that the BCS wants is a full conspiracy, collusion, racketeering case if there is visible evidence of an effort to hurt Utah.

[ZachTheZip]

If the BCS shuns Utah, it would have to be done very covertly.Utah's Attorney General may lose the anti-trust case, but the last thing that the BCS wants is a full conspiracy, collusion, racketeering case if there is visible evidence of an effort to hurt Utah.

Yes. That's why they're making this case as high profile as they can. If they do lose and the BCS retaliates in some way everyone will see it.

[GJGood]

If you look at last years final teams the conference champs would be:ACC VTSEC FloridaB10 Penn StB12 OUBE CinPAC 10 USCMAC BuffaloWAC BoiseMWC UtahSunbelt TroyConfUSA ECUThe five at-large would likely be:AlabamaOSUTexasTCU Georgia, Oregon, TexTech (pick one)I don't think you could argue that a deserving team didn't get in, plus one more non-BCS team gets a slot (in TCU). And just like the NCAA tournament, there are teams that get in that wouldn't have if you just took the top teams (and none of them would have a chance at winning the national title in either sport) so even though the 12th, 13th or maybe even 14th ranked team might have an argument (just like the say 46th ranked team for the NCAA tournament) but none of them win it either. Plus it gives the higher ranked teams a potential "breather" with the possibility of a tremendous upset. In this scenario the only three teams you could argue with would be Buffalo, Troy and ECU and all of them were a champion on a FBS conference too and they all have the same disadvantages of competing again the Big Boys so recognize that and give them a shot or kick them out of FBS (of course we'd have to re-name FBS). Plus you could schedule the prelims in December and play the final three games after the "other" bowl games have concluded. 8 teams would get the same number of games anyway, 8 would play one extra game, 4 would play two extra games and and 2 would play three extra games. It is highly unlikely any conference would get more than three teams (in this one no one has more than two) and if you can't finish in the top three of your own conference you don't deserve to play for the national title.By the way my seedings would have been:1 Florida16 Troy8 VT9 OSU5 Utah12 TCU4 Penn St13 G/O/TT3 Oklahoma14 ECU6 Alabama11 Cincinnati7 Texas10 Boise St2 USC15 BuffaloWho wouldn't want to watch that?

That does look good. You make a great case.I still think it should be 24 teams with 8 getting a bye. But the 16 scenario that you showed actually looks better than I imagined it would.

My 14 one would look similar and would not allow the very topped ranked teams to rest their starters at the end of the regular season because they'd want one of those top two seeds and a bye (in fact I would propose that those two universities host the national semifinals even if their teams get defeated prior to that round). It also wouldn't allow so many teams that didn't even win their conference in. 16 teams likely means you can finish second in 5 of the 6 BCS conferences. My way is only 3 of 6, or two if an independent qualifies.My first round would have looked like this (using the pre-bowl BCS rankings)1 Oklahoma (first round bye)9 East Carolina at 8 Virginia Tech13 Alabama at 4 Utah12 Texas at 5 Penn State11 Buffalo at 6 Boise State14 Ohio State at 3 USC10 Troy at 7 Cincinnati2 Forida (first round bye)I think those aren't too shabby and it allows a school like Utah or Boise State to get a home game, allows a northern school like Penn State to host a southern school, and creates marquee matchup potential like Ohio State-USC and Texas-Penn State in every round.

[Dave in Green]

Things adapt to whatever the rules are. While it may seem under present conditions that some of the smaller conferences may not be "worthy" of being locked into a 16-team national championship playoff, things would likely change if an inclusive playoff system like this were to be instituted. For example, if the MAC champion was locked into the playoffs every year, more good players might be attracted to sign with MAC teams over current BCS schools, and over time there might be less disparity between the haves and have-nots.Whether or not the NCAA would want something like this to happen is certainly open to question.

[Blue & Gold]

Things adapt to whatever the rules are. While it may seem under present conditions that some of the smaller conferences may not be "worthy" of being locked into a 16-team national championship playoff, things would likely change if an inclusive playoff system like this were to be instituted. For example, if the MAC champion was locked into the playoffs every year, more good players might be attracted to sign with MAC teams over current BCS schools, and over time there might be less disparity between the haves and have-nots.Whether or not the NCAA would want something like this to happen is certainly open to question.

Exactly. It would level the playing field (not entirely, but some). The BCS is a racket, they know it, and something must be done about it. Someone said that the BCS is close to organized crime. That's right. If even for the simple sake of what is right and what is wrong, the BCS must be drastically altered if not done away with entirely.

[Zipsrifle]

Things adapt to whatever the rules are. While it may seem under present conditions that some of the smaller conferences may not be "worthy" of being locked into a 16-team national championship playoff, things would likely change if an inclusive playoff system like this were to be instituted. For example, if the MAC champion was locked into the playoffs every year, more good players might be attracted to sign with MAC teams over current BCS schools, and over time there might be less disparity between the haves and have-nots.Whether or not the NCAA would want something like this to happen is certainly open to question.

Exactly. It would level the playing field (not entirely, but some). The BCS is a racket, they know it, and something must be done about it. Someone said that the BCS is close to organized crime. That's right. If even for the simple sake of what is right and what is wrong, the BCS must be drastically altered if not done away with entirely.

I agree, but it's money at the bottom of this whole thing! I think there is too much money in this for the people making the money to give up without a strong fight! Unfortunately, those people have a lot of influence over the NCAA (because of the money) so I think this will be going on a long time!