Question: Why does the BCS exist and who runs it?
(They BCS is not a “they” or an “it”; It’s a “him”)
Answer: For the benefit of one person and his small constituency.One person is pulling the strings, along with a collection of mostly unwitting accomplices.To find that person, we have to identify who we indisputably know is not responsible for the BCS.1) NCAA President Mark Emmert: On Nov. 7, 2008, 16 months before he took office as new NCAA President, then-Univ. of Washington President Mark Emmert told the SEATTLE TIMES, “I happen to be one that thinks it’s inevitable we’ll have a [college football] playoff.”One week after watching his own organization, led by NCAA office colleague Greg Shaheen, reportedly internally initiate the expansion of the NCAA basketball tournament to 68 - and possibly 96 - teams in the future, new NCAA President Emmert said of the NCAA’s role in a future college football playoff system:
“It’s not particularly relevant what I want as an individual in this one (NCAA football playoff). The NCAA knows how to run championships, if they (BCS) want us to be involved being helpful then I stand ready to do it.“
So though the NCAA initiated the expansion of March Madness, NCAA President Emmert said his organization would have no role in initiating any changes in major college football’s postseason.2) ESPN (Disney): ESPN prints money not because of original programming, but because it has a death grip on broadcast rights to so many premium play-by-play properties - like major college football. (And the BCS.)The ability to exclusively broadcast the best and biggest games allows ESPN to charge cable operators - and viewers - by far the largest fees of any cable channel to carry its programming. Take away the games, and you take away ESPN’s leverage to charge cable operators those exorbitant fees, which are nearly the sole source of ESPN’s hefty profit margins.To lose the ability to air college football games would strike at the core of ESPN’s business model. So in order to hold onto plum college football broadcast rights, ESPN does as it’s told.The next comment an official representative of ESPN’s business side makes in public about the validity of the BCS will be the first - and last.3) SEC Commissioner Mike Slive: The strongest public proponent of a playoff, and ditching the BCS, is also the man who presides over the BCS conference with the best collection of college football teams - by far.During the decade of the ’00s, SEC teams went 48-31 in bowl games while Big Ten teams went 28-41. In BCS bowl games during that 10-year span, the Big Ten went 6-11 while the SEC went 12-3. (SEC teams were 6-0 in BCS Championship Game.)Despite the SEC’s lopsided on-field advantage over the Big Ten, from 2000-2009 the conference actually received less at-large BCS bowl invitations than the Big Ten - which is why in 2008 SEC Commissioner Slive pushed harder than any other BCS conference commissioner for a limited playoff option but was reportedly blocked by the Big Ten.And why in 2006 Slive said of his term serving as “BCS Coordinator”: “These are my two years in the penalty box.”That same year, final entry to the BCS Championship game came down to the SEC’s 12-1 Florida Gators and the Big Ten’s 11-1 Michigan Wolverines. SEC Commissioner and BCS Coordinator Slive said at the time:
“I think any team that wins our league with one loss should have the chance to play for the national championship.”
When asked what his reaction would be if Michigan won out because of BCS computers and polling, the acknowledged leading public proponent of the BCS, Slive, said at the time, “I’d be disappointed.”So the man most responsible for representing the BCS to the public in 2006 said that had Michigan been awarded the BCS title game spot over Florida, he would’ve disagreed with the conclusion of the very system he was charged to support.To recap where we are so far:The NCAA President, the world’s largest and most influential sports television network and the man who oversees the top football conference in college football, the SEC Commissioner, have no power to remove or modify the BCS. 4) Chairman of NCAA Board of Directors and former Chair of the BCS Governance Oversight Committee Harvey Perlman: As current Chairman of the NCAA’s Board of Directors, many would argue that Perlman is the most powerful man in college athletics. But the NCAA Board of Directors is the final deciding mechanism on all things NCAA except the BCS.While Chairman of the BCS Governance Oversight Committee in 2009, Perlman appeared before the U.S. Senate’s Subcommittee on Antitrust, Competition Policy and Consumer Rights:
“Well, I don’t know enough about the X’s and O’s of college football. I do know, having been both a Southeastern Conference president and a Big Ten president, that it’s like murderer’s row every week for these schools. We do not play the Little Sisters of the Poor. We play very fine schools on any given day. “So I think until a university runs through that gantlet that there’s some reason to believe that they not be the best teams to [be] in the big ballgame.”
Since Gee made his comments, have you heard any representative of the BCS come out in support of the Ohio State President?The only people who supported Gee’s contradictory stance on the BCS are the attorneys trying to use the BCS to get the NCAA’s anti-trust exemption removed.For someone long known as a leading proponent of the BCS, Gee’s criticism is rather ironic considering he sold the same BCS in 2007 to the CINCINNATI POST as inclusive to all schools:
“The rich would get richer and all the others would be excluded. Now, I happen to be at a school that’s at the top of the heap, but I recognize that this would be wrong. It would be against the university values system.“You would have to pry a national championship (tournament) from my cold, dead fingers. My view is a simple one. Any notion of a college football playoff system is absolute nonsense.”
Someone needs to get his story straight.OSU President Gee’s opinion of the college football postseason is also in direct conflict with his own coach, Jim Tressel.Appearing on the Dan Patrick Show on Nov. 12, 2010, Tressel said of his sport’s future:
“I’m sure we’re headed for change, playoffs one day I’m certain will be part of the package. Within five years we will be positioned for a playoff of sorts.”
You and me.My god. Who then does that leave?Who is still out there who benefits enough to want to do everything in his power to keep the BCS alive?THIS:
Him. (Big Ten Commissioner Jim Delany.)
How do I know?On Dec. 7, 2005, Delany appeared at a U.S. Congressional hearing titled, “Determing a Champion on the field, A comprehensive review of the BCS.” In a candid, unguarded moment, Delany showed his hand when he was asked if the BCS existed only to enrich certain conferences.
I am absolutely sure that an NFL-style football playoff would provide maybe three or four times as many dollars to the Big Ten than the present system does. In fact, a number of corporations have come forward and tried to lure us into a playoff with those kinds of dollars. There is no doubt in my mind that we are leaving hundreds of millions of dollars on the table for the reasons that have been expressed here around this table, so there is more money out there and we have turned our back, we don’t get very much credit. We get credit for taking it, but for not turning our back on it.
That was 2005.By now, it isn’t impossible to think that a college football playoff could net NCAA schools up to a billion dollars per season.With the U.S. economy a shambles, major schools like Cal currently cutting national championship sports programs, Delany’s own Big Ten schools (most recently Minnesota, Illinois, Wisconsin) accessing millions in taxpayer funds to balance athletic budgets and the NCAA still seriously considering expanding March Madness to 96 teams, why on earth would Delany not promote a college football playoff?Take a look around college football right now:
- What league makes more money for its individual schools right now than any other because of its landmark television network? (Big Ten)
- What league, despite a mediocre bowl game record the past ten years, got more at-large BCS bowl game bids than any other conference? (Big Ten)
- What league offers school presidents like Ohio State’s Gordon Gee a chance to have their opinions about football actually reported as news? If there was a playoff, would anyone care about what a college president or commissioner thought? (Big Ten)
Now, what happens to the Big Ten if there’s a playoff:1) Major bowl bids/playoff spots would be based on the quality of teams, not how many fans, television eyeballs or Bucky Buckeye commercials ESPN runs. (I know, it’s a hybird.)2) The already shaky ACC, Big East and Big 12 would suddenly enjoy a huge financial windfall per school, stabilizing the conferences and likely preventing possible defections to the Big Ten and/or a massive conference re-configuration.3) Non-BCS conference teams would suddenly have an actual, realistic opportunity to make a postseason playoff field and be matched with a Big Ten team in a game that meant something.Most importantly, the Big Ten’s relevance and leverage with television networks would no longer be based on the opinions of pollsters, computer formulas and cable televison executives.In other words, the certainty of the Big Ten’s business model - which presently delivers power and prominence - goes out the window.None of this is to say that a playoff isn’t coming. It is. Delany’s double-cross-wrought expansion drama earlier this year guaranteed that. Now Delany is trying to best position the Big Ten for the inevitable postseason shift - which was one of the reasons he plucked football-heavy Nebraska from the Big 12.When BCS conference commissioners last seriously considered a playoff in 2008, everything was peachy. Or “healthy’ as Delany and his unwitting accomplices referred to it at the time. The only effective dissenter to Delany’s charade was the SEC’s Slive, and he was shot down by men who put their trust in Delany’s repeated assurance that business had never been better.Guys like Big 12 Commissioner Dan Beebe, who promised his member schools last April at its annual conference meetings that Delany would contact him if the Big Ten planned to attempt to add a Big 12 team. (”I trust him implicitly,” Beebe said.)Two months later, Nebraska was in the Big Ten and Beebe was the last to know.
And … while we’re on the subject of unwitting accomplices, how about the timeline of Nebraska boarding Delany’s train?
On July, 1, 2009, Nebraska Chancellor Harvey Perlman was named Chairman of the BCS Governance Oversight Committee. In other words, Perlman took over the highest public office of Delany’s beloved BCS.
11 months later, Nebraska blindsided Beebe and his Big 12 constituents by joining Delany’s Big Ten. At the same time as the Big Ten move, Perlman ascended to the highest NCAA post a university president can occupy, Chairman of the NCAA Board of Directors.
So having just served duty as designated BCS Presidential Pinata, see his embarrassing performance before Orrin Hatch and the U.S. Senate in 2009, Perlman oversaw Nebraska’s move to the Big Ten and also was named the NCAA’s Chairman of the Board.
Coincidence? Probably.
It is interesting to note though that the NCAA initiated the expansion of March Madness without consulting Delany or any athletic personnel whatsoever. Shaheen did consult with the NCAA Board of Directors (university presidents) but that was before Perlman took over as Chairman.
What’s that tell you about what the NCAA thinks of Delany these days?
But now that Delany’s has Perlman as Chair of the NCAA Board of Directors, you can guarantee he’ll be in the loop on everything that matters.
So. Now you know the truth about the BCS.
The BCS isn’t a “they” or an “it.” It’s a “him.”
1:01 am on November 27th, 2010
Gordon Gee is a weasel and a turd. POS tried to ruin CU twenty years ago. He was no friend to the football team. It is hilarious and ironic that he ended up at one of the biggest football factories in the U.S., OSU. What a little bitch.
1:36 am on November 27th, 2010
The BCS should be charged with every RICO violation the Feds can come up with.
11:35 am on November 27th, 2010
Excellent report. Thanks for your efforts and time and study putting this together.
Lots of insightful and intriguing stuff here. Was wondering why Gordon Gee, who has been the president at more universities than anyone in US history, at this point went BACK to OSU, a public university and a Big Ten school.
Mark Emmert is seen as a protege of Gee’s, having worked under him in earlier years. Emmert, however, does not have any ties to — or history with — the Big Ten. He has been at the PAC 10 (at Washington) and the SEC (LSU).
12:38 pm on November 27th, 2010
I think the SEC would be exposed in a playoff…look at that AU/BAMA game yesterday. Looked like one of the old wacky WAC shootouts, where both teams take turns playing terribly and the game ends up “close”.
3:46 pm on November 27th, 2010
Facts not meathead meatballs loyalty to a weak big ten etc should obscure the truth.
Brooks, aside from the large tennis boobs, this is the best, most impactful piece you’ve done. Kudos!
4:29 pm on November 27th, 2010
This is impactful? We’ve known Delany is behind the BCS for YEARS. Brooks may think Slive is the commissioner of the most powerful conference in football but that’s BS. Delany is the most powerful man in football regardless of how his conference is. It’s been known for years he’s used his influence to push conference support away from a playoff and lock out the mid-majors. If in fact we ever do get a playoff, I fully expect Delany to lock out the WAC, MWC, Sunbelt, and the rest outside of the BCS conferences.
5:16 pm on November 27th, 2010
Interesting piece, Brooks. Follow the money, follow the people. The BCS is a well-managed conspiracy.
6:07 pm on November 27th, 2010
… Fred’s RICO pull is perfect. the rest of you windowlickers should read up.
Flebno
Brick City
6:41 pm on November 27th, 2010
The idea for the BCS originated within the SEC. The setup favors the SEC. That anyone in the SEC would actually want a playoff I find hard to believe - not that they would say it, that they would mean it. The SEC has done very well in BCS bowls, please let us know how many BCS bowls they have won away from the SEC. Not playing for six or more weeks and being at home (or very close to home) is a great advantage. A playoff system would force the SEC to play teams that had not been off for several weeks and play them away from the SEC. Yes, the Big 10 has more money and this article did explain to me why the Big 10 helped the SEC get the BCS system installed (the BCS was initiated by the SEC but was implemented due to the Big 10). I don’t for a second believe the SEC wants a playoff but obviously the Big 10 doesn’t either. Too bad Texas didn’t let the Big 12 fold and join the Sunbelt. Under the BCS rules they could have been eligible for the title game almost every year - something the SEC would not have liked. A move like that from Texas would have forced the end of the BCS as we know it. Texas has enough power and money to act independently and not be a slave to the BCS system, but they are one of the few. (Why do you think Notre Dame has that cushy deal with the BCS?) Would schools like Boise or TCU win in a true playoff system, probably not, too many hard games to play. They have a better chance winning in the BCS where everything rides on one game instead of several. Is a true playoff coming? This article seems to indicate it is but I for one haven’t seen anything to make me think so. The BCS got together with TV and politicians to keep Texas from upsetting the apple cart earlier this year; that sure doesn’t sound like they expect their gravy train to end any time soon.
8:12 pm on November 27th, 2010
It’s been a two team league for years and everyone with any football IQ knows it.
8:19 pm on November 27th, 2010
their should be a playoff in college football for 3 weeks thety dont play it can be done to get a true champion. the top 16 teams in the ap poll and coaches poll it would be fantastic and great to watch and then yoiu would have a true champ
8:33 pm on November 27th, 2010
Perhaps it is “We” who are in charge of the BCS. It is after all, we, who allow the BCS to usurp the NCAA. The BCS is not synonymous with the NCAA – we just allow it to influence us as such. The BCS is a ‘for profit’ business and marketing plan; benefiting select conferences and bowls (and broadcast media). We allow the BCS to declare the contenders for a national championship, despite other methods. We allow the BCS to declare their bowl games are “The Bowl Games”, despite many others. If Jim Delany is the BCS Sheppard, then we are his sheep (and b*tch*s). And really, who can blame them. For many schools, College Football produces more money than an NFL team, and has use of volunteer (student) labor. The BCS was never supposed to be a fair judge of the national football scene - it was supposed to secure the borders…
12:21 am on November 28th, 2010
Ok now is the time for the big mouths to step up, with is losses of BSU, LSU, and Ok. State, you can set one of the BCS games between Ohio St and TCU, and watch the fun begin. Then we will see who is best of the big mouths.
4:37 am on November 28th, 2010
Great piece, very well researched. I agree with your conclusions but you forgot to mention that when the Bowl Alliance was founded, the Big 10/Pac 10 & Rose Bowl didn’t. They held out for a couple of years before agreeing to the formation of the BCS.
Delany then negotiated two separate TV contracts.
One for the Rose Bowl & one for the rest of the conferences. That’s the real source of power. The ability to withdraw the Rose Bowl almost at will. I rank the Pac 10 up there in the power structure with Delany speaking for their interests as well as the Big 10’s.
Please note that while the Big 10 went after Neb the Pac 10 grabbed Colorado & Utah. just lucky timing or a blatant & coordinated power grab.
Not sure those boys are finished yet!
I really think the powers that be in the Big 10 or Pac 10 don’t care whether their is a playoff system or a BCS for that matter, Now that they have their 24 teams and the Rose Bowl wrapped up.
What say you?
4:38 am on November 28th, 2010
Sorry I forgot to leave my mail for you, GM
10:21 am on November 28th, 2010
As much as I enjoy your “investigative reporting,” Brooks, this piece resembles you trying to find out why the sun rises in the east and sets in the west.
Hasn’t it been known for years why there’s no college football playoff? I mean I thought I remember Dan Wenzel writing a similar column like one or two years ago indicting Delany as the roadblock toward that playoff path. It’s pretty obvious to me that if Delany (and some other Big Ten presidents wanted a playoff), the rest of the NCAA would follow suit. Duh.
11:37 am on November 28th, 2010
It was an interesting read, but I’m not buying it. It seems like one of those pieces where you come to a conclusion and try to come up with facts to back that up, rather than letting the evidence drive the conclusion. Much of the evidence you cited is circumstantial at best, but probably more coincidental.
Don’t get me wrong, I’d love to see a playoff. I’d love to see a system where any team in the country has a legitimate shot at a national title. I’m no BCS apologist. But tryingt o paint Delaney as the evil mastermind I don’t think get’s us any closer to that goal.
12:49 pm on November 28th, 2010
It is clear that the PAC 10 and the Big 10 are behind this BS system. It should be called the BS Nowl Championship. The SEC only started getting its due share after a undefeated Auburn got screwed out of playing in the Championship game followe by a orchestrated effort to get a rematch of the OSU - Mich game as the NC game. That is when the SEC had had enough and Slive told them to play fair or we are taking our ball and going home. Since then - Big 10 exposed on the field and consecutive SEC Championships.
So now all of sudden the Big 10 and the Pac 10 decide oh maybe this 12 team with a play off makes since as you get another big money game and it prepares your team for a championship game. It wont help them.
The Big 10 is past its hey dey and exposed on the field time and time again. But watch folks as the Big 10 pushes to grab 3 BCS big pay outs this year in spite of the recogniction of the SEC surpemacy on the field.
This BS is just a mirror of our whole society here in America now a days. The working man getting hosed while the fat cats sitting at the board level get big pay days limiting competition.
4:47 pm on November 28th, 2010
Absolutely fascinating report. Nice work. It’s hard to believe there’s hundreds of millions of corporate dollars that have been left on the table all these years. I know the Big Ten wants prestige, but at the price of millions of additional dollars? It’s against human nature. Hard to believe that……
Just a thought, but…..could the traditional, giant football institutions (Ohio State, Alabama, Texas, Penn State, Nebraska, USC, Oklahoma, etc.), fear NOT getting paid the big bucks in a new playoff system? In the current format, both teams get paid, win or lose. In other words, if your team makes the Rose Bowl, they get a BIG payday, win or lose.
Now, in a 3 or 4 week long playoff system, the teams would probably make more money the further they advance into the playoffs…..sound reasonable? So tell me, which one of the “Big boys” would actually WANT to play a TCU or Boise State type team in the 1st round? Hmmmm? The line would be a very short one. They would risk not advancing to the 2nd round, which would cost them probably millions of dollars.
9:02 pm on November 28th, 2010
delany should be ut on trail for college treason.
10:13 am on November 29th, 2010
1) Remove your blatant bias… it is dilutes everything in this report.
2) Double-check your facts… the B10 v. SEC record is VERY close, not lopsided at all
3) The truth is the last time a playoff was presented to the committee of commissioners it was UNANIMOUSLY voted down… that’s right, your golden boy SIlve included
the truth is that they agreed to the system, so quit complaining and come up with real, concrete solutions that will be easily applicable… most proposed playoffs systems are not…
9:48 pm on November 29th, 2010
Ripley is correct….using the overall BCS bowl records of the two conferences is not the best stat, mainly bc literally almost half of those Big Ten bowl games were playing USC (most talented team over the whole decade, almost never lost a “big game”) in a road game in the Rose Bowl. Any SEC team want to go out there and face them? Didn’t think so.
Instead look at the Big Ten vs SEC record over the past 8 years….the Big Ten leads 10-8. Not a typo. They matchup their 2nd and 3rd place teams in the CapOne and Outback bowls, and the Big Ten more than holds their own. Keep in mind that both of these games are in Florida and hence, essentially road games. In a playoff the SEC would have to play games in Dec/Jan in Big Ten weather sometimes, and with opposing fans.
This whole “SEC so much better than Big Ten” crap started bc Ohio State no-showed in two games….we’re basing a decade of reputation on two games by one team, not very smart.
I don’t disagree that Delaney and big conferences want to keep BCS around bc it keeps their power/money larger relative to other conferences, but no need to build up the “Big Ten Stinks” myth more than it already is. The Big Ten went 4-0 against teams in the Top 15 last bowl season, and I’m sure it will do well again this year. Arkansas-Ohio State? Michigan State-Alabama? We’ll see, looking forward to it.
8:26 am on November 30th, 2010
Missing a very important part to your story as for leaving millions on the table. The B10 is more interested in setting up a combination of schools in order to dominate the research grant market. This is will 100s of millions in increase revenue potential for the B10 schools. Watch how they add Rutgers/Missouri in ‘11 and Maryland/ND in ‘12. All top research schools except for ND. That’s the real money trail.
6:06 pm on November 30th, 2010
Boise State’s Kyle Brotzman did not miss the field goal in overtime against Nevada. I have reviewed the play dozens of times and he made the field goal-it was 2-3 feet inside the left upright. Why were the officials and ESPN’s commentators able to hoodwink the public into believing a lie? I’m sure it was just a monetary based decision. Too bad college football is controlled by dishonest money grubbers. If everyone simply took 10 seconds to review the play, they would see the kick was good. There was no effort made by ESPN or the MWC to review the play. They just keep saying he missed it-that’s a lie that they keep perpetrating. And people keep buying the lie like the dumb sheep they are. Obviously honesty and fairness are no longer the trademark of college athletics.