BCS Under Fire...Again

BCS Under Fire ... that's my new band's name.

 

I could see some state's AG take on the BCS, wasn't it a state AG that ended up getting billions from the tobacco companies?
Do I want this to happen? No. I'd rather hear more sordid details about these BCS bowl lobbying efforts getting embarrassing enough that the NCAA decides it wants to step up to the table.

 

THE STATE AGS ARE NOT GOING TO SUE THE BCS. If they do this, they will be suing their own state!

 

Besides, the suit would have to be filed in federal court.

 

Hey, for once congress could pass legislation that people want...

 

State attorneys general file suits in federal courts all the time, or are defendants. It's a routine part of law.

 

For yet another time, there is a difference between saying "No federal funds shall go to X group" (like ACORN) and putting stipulations on who is eligible to receive federal funds. If the legislation says, "No money shall go to an NCAA member school under any circumstances" that is probably a bill of attainder. If the legislation says, "Here are the qualifications we are placing on receipt of federal funds" then it is not.

In order for a school to receive federal funds, it must allow military recruiters on campus, regardless of how the school feels about Don't Ask, Don't Tell. And the Supreme Court upheld it by a 9-0 vote. There are laws which prohibit a vessel that has spilled at least one million gallons of crude oil into Prince William Sound after March 22, 1989 from entering Prince William Sound. Exactly one entity qualifies -- Exxon Mobile. And that law was held up on appeal. Another key provision when judging bill of attainder cases is whether the affected class is being judged based on "irreversible conduct." If the persons targeted can easily change their behavior to conform, courts are MUCH less likely to strike it down.

Saying you can't single out one organization is a blatant misreading of the provisions that prohibit a bill of attainder. It's like saying "the 2nd Amendment protects the right to bear arms, so I can carry a grenade launcher down the street."

 

Of course not, because determining "the best team" is not what championship tournaments attempt or claim to do. Championship tournaments determine a champion. That's it. That's all.

"The best team" is a purely subjective determination. The BCS's biggest fault is not that it does a poor job of trying to determine "the best team" and a playoff would do better. The BCS's fault is that it even tries to determine "the best team" at all. It can't be done. Even if there's just one undefeated team and no other team with fewer than 2 losses, that undefeated team isn't necessarily the best. It's just undefeated.

Trying to determine a "best team" is entirely subjective and, thus, impossible to do in an equitable manner. I'd much prefer the old college football bowl system than this hybrid BCS that tries to claim it's both determining a "best team" and is a "playoff" of sorts at the same time. At least the old system was transparent in its subjectivity in determining the mythical national champion.

A playoff is the only equitable way to determine a champion, which is the only objective thing you can do at the end of a season if you want to declare a winner. You can always argue over who is "the best team." Having a playoff wouldn't, couldn't and doesn't attempt to change that. What it would do is determine an objective champion, which is something that can't legitimately be argued.

 

Congress, if it wants, could easily force a college football playoff system. All it needs to do is threaten to remove the tax exempt status for college sports.

 

How often do we hear after the NCAA Tournament that the best team didn't win?

Does it happen? Sometimes, but it comes from a team that just lost and really has no reason to complain.

 

You're right. And that's because it doesn't matter who "the best team" is. The NCAA Tournament objectively determines a champion, which is all you can do. All this "best team" stuff is missing the point entirely. With a college football playoff, would some people still want to argue over who "the best team" was after the season? I guess. Some people will argue over anything. But the answer to the question will be irrelevant, because we'll have a champion upon which everyone can agree.

 

Or make them shit their pants by threatening to investigate how much money the NCAA is making while their athletes can't borrow a car.