How much marketing does it take to get to the BCS?

Dan Wetzel of Yahoo Sports has a wonderful piece on the politics of lobbying for a spot in the BCS championship game.

http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news?slug=dw-bcs112608&prov=yhoo&type=lgns

His article details how LSU, with two losses, managed to lobby its way into the BCS a year ago on a marketing effort based on an observation from Kathy Miles, the wife of coach Les Miles. Her observation was simple and ultimately proved a successful lobbying argument.  LSU hadn't lost in regulation.  Two losses didn't really count, because neither was in regulation.  LSU's athletic department and politicking team were successful in selling that message to human poll voters, enough to garner a spot in the championship game.

No one here is arguing whether LSU deserved a shot a national title last year.  They were an outstanding team and would have had an envious seed in a playoff tournament were one in place.  The point here is to once again demonstrate a major fallacy in a primary argument for the BCS.

BCS supporters contend that with the BCS, the regular season functions as a de facto playoff system, a weekly whittling of champion hopefuls down to two.  If the BCS were successful at making the regular season a weekly playoff, then there would be no need for any post-season lobbying to participate in the championship game.  The "playoff" would produce two clear choices.

Of course that doesn't happen, and the reason is simple:  the BCS is not successful at making the regular season a weekly playoff.

Always a Good Time

Three congressmen have revived a bill designed to end the BCS:

http://www.sportsline.com/collegefootball/story/11121011/rss

Now, some may say that in the midst of an economic meltdown, the potential of hundreds of thousands of jobs to be lost in the American auto industry and elsewhere (if not millions), state governments in financial turmoil, war on two fronts (still), an increasingly fragile infrastructure, a health-care system that works as long as you are rich or don't get sick, a transfer of executive power, a ten-trillion-dollar national debt (think: your children's children's children will still be paying off that albatross), a voracious and insatiable dependence on foreign oil, a daily fear of an inevitable terrorist attack (whether a well-founded fear or not, does it really matter?)... some may say that in such a climate, our elected officials have better things to do than worry about some post-season system for playing football games. But of course, those people are wrong, for one simple reason.

It is always a good time to dismantle, annihilate, extinguish, obliterate, exterminate, or otherwise dance-on-the-grave of this monstrosity soon-to-be-formerly-known as the BCS.

All the best to congressmen Abercrombie, Simpson, and Matheson and their bipartisan effort to end this post-season monopolistic system. I have no doubt that if a special election were held today, with a single ballot measure to replace the BCS with a proper playoff system, Americans would vote for it in the high 90-percent range. Is there any issue with such lopsided support in America today?

Sure there are bigger problems, but this one is a no-brainer.

Obama wants a playoff!

Maybe the good senator could have some influence over the NCAA and college presidents? If he's elected President tomorrow, he'll have plenty more to worry about than how College Football div. 1-A selects a national champion. Still, when ESPN's Chris Berman asked if he could change just one thing about sport, Sen. Obama said it was time to have a college football playoff.

And if you didn't have enough reasons to vote for him, add BCS-ending to the list. Or at least a desire to end it.

Obama, McCain on what to change in sports (A.P.)

For his part, Sen. McCain had a good answer too (preventing the spread and use of performance-enhancing drugs).