Pro and Con: Should Congress Meddle With Bowl Championship Series?

Brief cases for and against

This article is from the archive of our partner .

It's not the first time that the Bowl Championship Series (BCS) has come before Congress. Overhauling the notably controversial system, which allows or disallows college football teams the opportunity to play in a post-season bowl game (and make a lot of money for the university if they do), is a favorite pet project of Senators Orrin Hatch and Max Baucus. Yesterday, however, Executive Director of the BCS Bill Hancock responded to the congressmen in a very public letter, saying

While I appreciate your interest, I believe that decisions about college football should be made by university presidents, athletics directors, coaches and conference commissioners rather than by members of Congress.

Considering the potential amount of money to be made from teams who participate in BCS bowl games, the issue has captured the attention of two sports bloggers in particular who've recently written on what role, if any, Congress should have in the matter.
  • Stay on the Bench, Congress Kristi Dosh of Forbes writes: "The argument of Senators Hatch and Baucus, and the others who have come before them, is that schools outside of the six automatically-qualifying conferences are at a disadvantage in terms of their ability to get into a BCS bowl game AND that they receive a much smaller share of the revenue," she says. "So what? The top conferences would pull in the lion's share of revenue regardless of the BCS."
  • Stay in the Game, says Andy Staples at Sports Illustrated. "So with all due respect to Hancock and his request that the government butt out of the business of more than 100 taxpayer-funded universities, maybe the Justice Department has some evidence if it wants to investigate whether the BCS violates the Sherman Antitrust Act."
This article is from the archive of our partner The Wire.