NCAA taking control over football postseason?

[ScottyBuff]

UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO
BOARD OF REGENTS

MEETING AGENDA
SECTION F. NOTICES OF MOTION

2. Resolution Endorsing an NCAA Division 1 Football Bowl Series

Does anyone know what this is about?

It has been on the agenda/minutes since May of 2009.

I'm curious if there is any correlation to this "resolution" and House Resolution 68 that was referred to House Judiciary Committee and the House Education and Labor Committee (and then referred to the Subcommittee on Higher Education, Lifelong Learning, and Competitiveness) on March 6, 2009.

This would also fit the stream of events with the possibility of U.S. Dept of Justice taking the action to consider investigating the BCS for antitrust law violations.


Are we on the verge of having an NCAA controlled postseason playoff and "bowl series"?

Are the current power conferences realinging to put themselves in positions of power in a division of football that weeds out the MAC, WAC, and SunBelt teams so that a "playoff" cannot include those teams?

 

[buff4bcs1985]

this is from the BDC from sept 16

CU Regent Tom Lucero pushing for college-football playoff
Republican may ask board to vote on resolution
By Brittany Anas, Camera Staff Writer
Boulder Daily Camera
Posted:09/16/2009 07:57:59 PM MDT
CORRECTION 9/17/09: This story incorrectly reported that University of Colorado Regent Tom Lucero was considering
asking the Board of Regents to endorse a college-football playoff at a meeting Thursday. There was no meeting scheduled
Thursday; Lucero may ask the regents to vote on the measure at a future board meeting.
University of Colorado Regent Tom Lucero has a play up his sleeve: He wants to help change the way college football
crowns its champs.
The Republican regent is considering asking the board to vote Thursday on a formal measure to move to a playoff system
-- one that some football fans root for to replace the Bowl Championship Series, saying the combination of human rankings
and computer-generated statistics lead to a flawed end result.
The controversy over BCS has bubbled up to the federal level, with congressional hearings and a measure to prohibit
calling any game a football national championship if it is not determined by a playoff system.
A CU resolution endorsing a NCAA Division 1 Football Bowl Series is on the agenda for Thursday's Board of Regents
meeting on the Boulder campus, although Lucero said it's a placeholder. He said he might formally introduce the measure
after he talks to the Boulder campus' chancellor and athletic director.
Critics of the Bowl Championship Series say it awards championships to teams arbitrarily and that the system's flaws were
seen in 2001, when the CU Buffs won the Big 12 Conference championship -- with two regular-season losses -- but the
BCS awarded the University of Nebraska a bid to the championship game.
The Cornhuskers that year had lost to CU and did not win the Big 12 Conference.
"There's always the question of who's the real champion," Lucero said.
But campus officials won't likely be rooting for the change, according to Bronson Hilliard, spokesman for the Boulder
campus.
Hilliard said a playoff structure could extend the football season, possibly leading to higher travel and lodging costs and
more time away from the classroom for student-athletes.
"It's a very complicated discussion," Hilliard said.
State Sen. Shawn Mitchell, a Broomfield Republican and Buffs fan, tried to push a similar resolution in 2008 saying that
"fair sports competitions are an important part of higher education."
At the time, CU's athletic department defended the current configuration, saying the bowl system has created opportunities
for student-athletes, allowing them to travel to annual bowl games and do charity work in host cities. Also, officials argued,
it would be a burden on college football fans to follow their teams for playoff games, given the high travel costs around the
holidays.

 

[SINKRATZ]

If the federal government is taking on the issue, I doubt they're leaving it up to a regent vote at each school.

This must be a sneaky cover for a regent vote on whether to accept an offer to join the Pac 10.

 

[buff4bcs1985]

If the federal government is taking on the issue, I doubt they're leaving it up to a regent vote at each school.

This must be a sneaky cover for a regent vote on whether to accept an offer to join the Pac 10.

thats not a bad notion

 

[ScottyBuff]

If the federal government is taking on the issue, I doubt they're leaving it up to a regent vote at each school.

This must be a sneaky cover for a regent vote on whether to accept an offer to join the Pac 10.

:lol:

What I would suspect in the playoff scenario is that the feds are putting pressure on the NCAA to solve the playoff problem so that they don't have to, or that it doesn't go to court for anti-trust or federal trade violations. The NCAA is a voluntary membership organization so they can only solve the issue by having their membership present and vote on a proposal, so if it does happen that way, every school will have to place such a proposal before their board or president.