Reader comments
Jay Evensen: Shurtleff has nation a-twitter over BCS posting

All Fairness | 3:09 a.m. Jan. 11, 2009

Amen to the last statement. Lets do a playoff to make everybody be on the same common ground.

Bob R. | 6:56 a.m. Jan. 11, 2009

Social scientists should not be telling anyone how much attention anything deserves. A national vote on whether to end either football or Social Science would put an end to Social Science.

Ute Fan | 7:29 a.m. Jan. 11, 2009

What Florida won was not a National Championship, only the championship of six conferences. Granted, after the win, the AP hid in the shadows of the system and named Florida its champ as well. Polls are biased in favor of coaches who are able to vote to protect themselves and the system which sustains them.

A champion is one who defeats all challengers. Utah did that, Florida didn't. I think the AG has a valid point and should follow it, wherever it leads.

Thanks for the effort--I think the six conferences use the rest of the teams in the country to build national interest, without giving them a chance to share in the ultimate game with its ultimate rewards.

Comments continue below

The key | 7:37 a.m. Jan. 11, 2009

The key to the case is that at present every one of the 1-A conferences (even the "disenfranchised poor step children") have agreed to the system as it stands. To attack it on the grounds that some schools are treated unfairly is dead on arrival. Surely, someone understands that much don't they? The courts will take one look at it and throw it out -- that's why the BCS has stated publicly that they are firm ground.

Dh | 8:19 a.m. Jan. 11, 2009

With all the major issues facing this country I cannot even believe that an elected official would spend his time and my tax money considering such a meaningless pursuit as this.

Wants attention | 8:22 a.m. Jan. 11, 2009

Shurtleff messed up big time with the problems in ColoradoCity etc. He did nothing. He was afraid of his own shadow. Now he wants to take on the BCS. Someone needs to remind him that all 11 CONFERENCES SIGNED OFF ON THE DEAL. THE BCS DOES NOT BREAK ANY LAWS. This guy must be going through media withdrawal. I will be impressed when he wants to sue when Boise State doesn't get in or some other little school doesn't get it. Not impressed that he is looking in to it now for the Utes. He would not look into it if it were BYU or Wyoming or CSU.
He has an ax to grind. NOT IMPRESSED. Besides he is a nobody. He has no clout. Move on.

jhug | 8:40 a.m. Jan. 11, 2009

I sincerely hope that Utah will hang a 2008 National Champions banner at Rice-Eccles...Let Florida have the BCS Championship title (they deserve it), UTAH can claim the National Champions title!

H Henderson | 8:57 a.m. Jan. 11, 2009

What Shutleff's flap about the BCS really shows is how eager he is to attract attention and how frivolous his management of the attorney general's office is. Where was he when for several months the gas prices in Utah were 20 cents per gallon more than in almost every other state and the national average? Isn't price fixing illegal? There were several million dollars involved in this, probably more than in the BCS and in this situation the citizens of Utah paid the price and I didn't hear anything about the Attorney General threatening to investigate. Football is just a game which brings no direct monetary benefit to average Utah citizens, in fact it costs average Utah citizens through the taxes they pay which fund the outrageous budgets of football programs at Utah universities while many worthwhile academic programs suffer for lack of funding.

ted | 9:08 a.m. Jan. 11, 2009

this bcs thing is all about equality. you would think an issue of equality would be very importent to the new president.

Anonymous | 9:17 a.m. Jan. 11, 2009

I'm a little unfamiliar with how the BCS was originally created. This article stated that "everyone agreed to it that way" (meaning all conferences agreed to the BCS system).

Is that true? It seems to me that if the BCS approached all the conferences with this plan, there would be at least a few who wouldn't have bought in. Did everyone really sign up for this system?

Cougar Fan | 9:45 a.m. Jan. 11, 2009

Utes are number one fair and square. No Question! If they can not win it this year none of us will ever be able to! Wyoming, Nevade, Idaho, New Mexico, Colorado ....should all join in with Shurtleff and go after this once and for all. It is the only thing that can gather enough attention to make a change! Let's all support him on this and go after the idea! It will put Utah on the map of "Do not mess with us!"

Anonymous | 9:59 a.m. Jan. 11, 2009

Waste of time.

The Key | 10:34 a.m. Jan. 11, 2009

That is awesome...Since the BCS has said that they are on "solid ground" obvioulsy means that they are...

Owning slaves in this country was once legal solid ground.

Made illegal.

Fully automatic weapons could be bought through the Sears catalog back in the 1920's.

Made illegal.

What other choice were the D. 1 college presidents given? Oh, there was no other choice given. Bam! Now you have an antitrust case.

Just because the D. 1 schools went with the system does not make it legal. Either they signed up for the system, and get the money that goes with it, or don't go with the system and get ZERO dollars.

Yeah, it is an anti trust violation. It was from the outset.

It gives preference to certain schools.

I say good for Shurtleff.

And just because somebody can do something, get away with it, and call it legal does not make it so.

I think from a legal perspective, the BCS is against the law. If AT&T can be broken up for antitrust violations, so can the BCS. Oh, and AT&T said they were legal befor the courts said it was illegal and broke it up as well...

J in Iowa | 10:35 a.m. Jan. 11, 2009

The non BCS conferences bought into the system? What were the circumstances at the time. Was it a take or leave it situation? How was the current system presented to the non-BCS conferences? If they had voted against it what would have been their alternatives? Were they involved in setting up the system or just given a chance to accept or reject it after others had presented it to them? Similar to taxation without representation?

If the NCAA is "sactioning" the BCS what other alternatives would non-BCS schools have?

Seems to me there are a lot of questions that have not been explored or presented to the general public. I don't think that you can always take statements at face value especially when so much money is at stake!

The BCS is all about power and greed, in my opinion.

To: Anonymous at 9:17 | 10:42 a.m. Jan. 11, 2009

It was an either, "You agree to it and get *some* money."

Or

"Don't agree with it, and you will get *no* money."

The BCS schools, that came up with the plan, get a ton of money. And they get automatic bowl games. The non-BCS schools get very little money, and at-large bids to bowl games (when the BCS-owned computers) let them.

observer | 11:22 a.m. Jan. 11, 2009

If the polls would have ended up ranking Utah no. 1 none of this would be happening. It all depends on whose ox is being gored. The season is over. Let's forget it, shall we?

J.R. | 4:14 p.m. Jan. 11, 2009

If Utah was awarded the national title, How does that help the citizens of Utah who are unemployed, losing their homes, or any number of social/economic issues there? Mark needs to check his priorities and deal with real issues that will benefit the people living in the state, what a self-centered idiot, good luck Utah, you had great season!

Classy | 4:36 p.m. Jan. 11, 2009

Please don't mess with the BCS. It has done its job most years and put the two best teams in the Championship. That includes this year. Going into the gam Fla. and OK looked like the best. Now it looks like USC and Fla. However Utah gets a parade. I here it will shame the Rose bowl parade.

so funny | 4:48 p.m. Jan. 11, 2009

Shurtleff is now going to have to do something--horror, horror. He was just after a little publicity, a few headlines, a boost to his political ambition, and now he's been pushed into a position where he's going to have to do more than make a little noise and let the subject drop. It's hilarious that Utah's pitiful AG has gotten himself in this pickle. Maybe people will start to see through this guy, although I doubt it. The public, especially in the Beehive state, is pretty gullible.

SD Blue | 5:25 p.m. Jan. 11, 2009

Are you kidding me? Utah is not number one. There is mo way they would have beaten Florida. The thing they proved was we need a playoff.

true blue | 5:39 p.m. Jan. 11, 2009

I'm sure that obama doesn't want his legacy to be the president who forced a college playoff.

Re: SD Blue @ 5:25pm | 8:10 p.m. Jan. 11, 2009

Um, which school was losing to Alabama until the very end of the game and which school was thumping them 21-0 within the first few min of the game? That's what I thought. Nuff said.

One reader | 9:09 p.m. Jan. 11, 2009

Forget emotions. Forget loyalty to Utah. This is about tyranny of the rich, big TV markets over the not-so-rich, smaller TV markets. This is about laws that are there to prevent the wealthy and powerful having tyranny over other less-wealthy and less-powerful. Essentially, a system is in place whereby the chances of a non-BCS school winning a national championship are virtually impossible. How then can such schools attract the best athletes. (The fact that Utah is as good as it is under these cirumstances makes their undefeated season all the more remarkable.)

Shurtleff was just re-elected by a huge margin. This is not political, this is about enforcing the same laws that were broken and allowed a handful of huge financial institutions to drag us all down into a recession. A small group of wealthy, powerful institutions caused the credit collapse. Laws that keep the rich and powerful under control are about to become very popular. Bring it on, Mr. Attorney General. This is no waste of time; this is the rule of law being enforced to undo a major inequity. Sports is merely the context.

Chip | 7:04 a.m. Jan. 12, 2009

My friend had a good idea. Utah needs to put up the national championship banner in their stadium. They have as much right to it as anyone. That would stir the pot more than litigation.

Too "Anonymous | 9:17 a.m." | 12:30 p.m. Jan. 12, 2009

I believe it's true that the whole NCAAA bought into the BCS strategy (basically had to agree).

It wasn't a real issue to the schools who weren't going to ever get to play there anyway. These conferences were more worried about getting ANY bowl to give them an automatic bid to their game. That was part of sell job on the package. "We will expand the number of bowl games significantly and give you an automatic bid to a second or 3rd tier bowl game if you buy into the BCS scheme.

Conferences that were never going to get to the BCS bowls anyway and just wanted to be affiliated with ANY bowl had to go along if they wanted a chance to participate in ANY bowl game.

It's a racket... setup to have a lot of benefit to the big BCS schools, but also a little bone to throw to the non-BCS schools so they have to buy in as well.

When a conference like the MWC has a down year, it's nice to have a fall-back like the Vegas bowl to insure at least the conference winner will get the reward and post-season recognition.

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.