1 of 22

Write now Article Tools

When I first broached this subject, nearly four years ago, my view on the subject was very limited as I did not understand all the issues that are at play in college football. On the surface, much like an iceberg, the issues are obvious and plain to see. But if you dive deep beneath the surface, you begin to understand just how complex the issues and dangers can be in recommending an NFL style playoff for college football. This article will be unlike the others on this website because it will expose and attack the issues that have affected college football over a fifty year period, because it goes beyond simply stating "Yes, I think a playoff is needed." As a result, you the reader, will begin to understand the dynamics and parameters that have prevented college football from moving forward, because the issues are multifaceted, complex and constantly changing from season-to-season. So if you can hang with me for a few moments I can dive deep and expose the major hurdles that have truly prevented college football from entering the new century.

The real dilemma facing the BCS and NCAA decision makers regarding a playoff type of system is how to change the system without causing, for lack of a better word, the most change. There are so many things that you would have to change that the project seems massive in scale. There is no doubt the BCS (Bowl Championship Series) is in violation of the antitrust laws of the Sherman Act. As a matter of fact, given the history of college football, we have simply managed to exchange one coercive monopolistic barrier for another throughout its history and specifically in the television era.

Within the horizontal agreements between the super-conferences of the BCS, a boycott (monopoly) has been created. Thus, the BCS is an illegal restraint of trade and an illegal conspiracy to monopolize. In short, the BCS prevents over 50 NCAA mid-major Division I-A college football teams from ever competing for a national championship.

Not only is the BCS a limited opportunity for the mid-major non-BCS teams, but the opportunity for programs within the super conferences that are not rich in the historical evolution of college football are limited as well. Schools like Kansas, Missouri, Wake Forest, North Carolina State, Duke, Oregon, Oregon State, Washington State, Stanford, California, Baylor, Rutgers, Vanderbilt, Texas Tech, Indiana, Northwestern, Mississippi and Mississippi State will continue to face an uphill struggle in the polls to match

• 1
• 2
• 3
• ...
• 8
• next page >>

Add your voice

Know something about The BCS system revised: A new proposal?
We want to hear your view. Write now!