|
|
     
|
|
Where's Our Football Playoff?????? - Oct 22, 2007 | 14:57:10
posted by: Josh
Another exceptional NCAA intern will be joining the Double-A Zone as a frequent contributor. In his initial post, Michael Fly, who works with the Corporate and Broadcast Alliances staff, addresses why there isn???t a playoff in college football???s highest division. He also addresses some of the misconceptions he had about the NCAA before he headed to Indianapolis. As a child, growing up in the Bluegrass state, the first connection I remember having to the NCAA was the 1992 NCAA Basketball Tournament. I fell in love with college sports as a nine year old after watching my beloved Wildcats come within one Christian Laettner shot of making the Final Four. I can still remember the tears running down my face as Duke ran off the court in celebration, but more lasting than my tears was the idea that the NCAA would forever be linked in my mind to emotion, hope, and the idea that every team, even one with improbable odds, had the chance to compete for a championship. After letting my blue and white heart heal, I turned my attention to football season to see what the NCAA had in store for me in the fall. It only seemed logical to me that if the NCAA was responsible for such an amazing basketball tournament, football season would be just as exciting. Imagine my confusion and disappointment when the 1992 Kentucky football team went 4-7 and was not invited to a bowl game, much less a chance to play for a national title. Though it was a tough lesson, I was even more confused in 1997 when Michigan and Nebraska won the national championship. The shared national title was the last straw for me and I decided I was fed up with the NCAA. Why would it do such a great job with the Division I Men???s Basketball Tournament and let football fall by the wayside? How could the NCAA allow the dreams of fans and teams around the country to be crushed each Saturday if their team lost one game or did not play in a power conference? As a current NCAA employee, I now know how misguided I was to be angry at the NCAA for all of those years. However, after reading in Thursday???s New Haven Register that Dr. Myles Brand felt the need to clear up any misconceptions about the NCAA???s involvement with the FBS football postseason, it made me question whether the general public understands or still views postseason football as I did as a nine-year-old. Dr. Brand stated that ???the BCS runs totally without any NCAA involvement in postseason football??? and he explained that ???it???s not merely that we don???t have a vote???we???re not even consulted. People think that if they beat up on the NCAA enough, we???ll get a playoff. It doesn???t matter because we have no role to play.??? After Dr. Brand???s statements, the first questions I asked myself were ???Why is that the case? Why does the NCAA have no say if it governs the member institutions that field the football teams playing every weekend? How can the NCAA have no say when I see the NCAA logo on each college football field in the country???? With this in mind, I set out to separate fact from fiction and determine why the NCAA???s hands are currently tied in regards to the FBS postseason. According to my research, before 1982, the NCAA controlled the television rights of the member institutions and signed contracts with television networks in order to garner and then distribute the revenue from these contracts to the membership institutions. However, the CFA (College Football Association) began to compete with the NCAA for television contracts in 1981 and had the opportunity to establish a deal with NBC. In response to these actions, the NCAA determined such a relationship as punishable on the campus level and the CFA could not get enough support from member institutions to establish the NBC contract. In response, the University of Georgia and the University of Oklahoma, in conjunction with the CFA, brought a lawsuit against the NCAA. The lawsuit claimed that the Association???s control of football television was monopolistic and therefore in violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act. After losing the lawsuit in 1982, the NCAA brought the case before the Supreme Court in 1984 and again lost as the court determined The Association had restrained free trade. Institutional presidents claimed that the free market would be good for amateurism and that they were better equipped to run their own businesses than the NCAA. This decision caused the NCAA to lose its television contract revenue and in turn the Association???s voice in FBS football. Though the last three paragraphs read more like history notes than an opinionated blog, I realized after reading Dr. Brand???s statements regarding FBS postseason football, just how uneducated I was on the subject. As an NCAA employee, if I did not even know the reason that the NCAA had no say in a playoff system or the postseason as a whole, what must the average college football fan think? With that in mind, I hope that I have effectively put Dr. Brand???s statements into context for fans of the NCAA and college football and directed the misplaced anger of any nine-years-olds away from the NCAA. Although, if the right decision was made to take control away from the NCAA and give it to the member institutions, why is Dr. Brand forced to address an issue that he has no voice in, simply because of the public outcry against the current postseason football format? Something to think about??? 
CommentsThe last paragraph says it all. Very interesting how the writer used his own personal observations to make a valid point. Good writing style. Keep up the great work! Which means that if half the basketball teams in the country decided to band together and sell their own TV rights, they'd be legally justified in doing so as well, right? A better question might be to ask how much money does the NCAA pay out to those basketball schools that make the various levels of the NCAA tourney as compared to the FBS schools that go to a bowl game. Very informative and well written, Mr. Fly! Josh, As much I thought I knew about the NCAA and how some items worked, I did not know about the history lesson that he taught. People think that the NCAA is in control from A to Z with collegiate athletics, but really is just there to make it as even as possible. Keep of the good work Josh! Keep up the good work my friend. I love the reference to the NCAA v. Board of Regents Case. You make the sports lawyers of the world proud (you can never have enough antirust references in sports). With that said I have a couple questions after reading this: How much money do the DI schools make from the NCAA BBall tournament vs. current bowl payouts? What individuals sit on the governing body of the FBS postseason system and why haven???t they stepped up to the plate to take the burden of the NCAA by explaining why they don???t think a playoff is necessary? Great article man!!! Rob Keep up the good work Fly Guy, good read. Why would Dr. Brand address an issue that he has no voice in, you question? We all like to think that our voice can be heard; and that in so doing, even in a small way, we make a difference. Great thoughts, well written. Keep it up, Mike. tsw Very insightful article. I look forward to reading more. Good job and good read Michael. I am so proud of you. Michael, You are an excellent writer. I am so impressed with your writing style and your use of language. You were very concise in your explanations and it was a pleasure to read your article. I look forward to reading more of your work. Love ya, Kbaby! That is truly sad. And that is the NCAA today. The NCAA's history has been a history of cartelization (the Court in the case you referenced used "naked cartel") relative to anything revenue-producing. Anything. If you want to go back further, research the NCAA's policy on radio broadcasts and attendences. Fun stuff. They had to relax their monopolistic regulations in order to prevent a breakaway league 55 years ago. But then again, remember, the NCAA was vehemently against Title IX until it realized money was to be made in women's athletics. Thank you for clearing up my misconceptions. Well written and insightful! Football and basketball revenue distribution aren't really fair comparisons because the NCAA doesn't have anything to do with the football postseason and payouts. As for basketball, this link will take you to a document that provides information on payouts. Essentially, a victory in the NCAA tournament is good for about $177,000. If the NCAA doesnt have anything to do with Football playoffs.... then I hope some big corporation(s) out there steps up and creates a playoff. If they put enough money in, then the teams will do it. Maybe since the NCAA has no postseason control is why they renamed Div I and Div I-AA some arbitrary set or initials that sounds like a postseason tournament. Josh, good discussion. However, I wonder how much your observations are shaped by your paycheck as an employee of the NCAA. Informative post regardless. Post a Comment |
  
It means that two very good teams with very good coaches made it to the final game.
- Marie
   
|
