Doug Robinson: BCS has given us a bowl system full of flaws

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Igualmente Mesa, AZ
    Dec. 12, 2010 11:29 a.m.

    "FIFTEEN do or die games that would make the Big Dance pale in comparison" --skywalker

    Excellent post.

    And I would add, don't wait a month. Bring it on two weeks after regular season. Teams don't need time to heal. I want them when they're on a roll. And I can't wait til Christmas. I hate this football void! (no offense to those who follow the NFL, not a fan.)

  • Ute Fan In Utah West Jordan, UT
    Dec. 9, 2010 10:30 a.m.

    @Bored to the Point, I don't ever hear anyone complain about playoffs in the NFL; unless of course it's about their own team stinkin' it up.

    16 team playoff would be amazing. 8 mid level bowls before Christmas, the 4 BCS bowls for the 8 winners the week after, Semi-finals around New Year, and the REAL championship a week later.

  • flintrock Rigby, Id
    Dec. 8, 2010 7:51 p.m.

    It has been estimated that a playoff system for the top 16 or top 12 with a couple of qualifyer games would bring in an additional 1 Billion dollars to the NCAA. The BCS does not want to let go of THEIR money train even though in the long run they would benefit.

  • skywalker Palo Alto, CA
    Dec. 8, 2010 7:29 p.m.

    Go Big Blue!!!

    The BSC bowls are one of the highlights of the season.

    Four more meaningless bowls, like Connecticut vs Oklahoma, and one questionable championship game


    FIFTEEN do or die games that would make the Big Dance pale in comparison?

    The BCS lovers go on blindly drinking the BCS Koolaid and spouting the company line, while the major college football post-season could be second only to the NFL playoffs and Super Bowl in excitement.

  • JustintimeY Boise, Id
    Dec. 8, 2010 4:50 p.m.

    667 winning percentage my bad. And the WAC also went 2/2 last year in their bowl games going 1-1 against the Mountain west.

  • JustintimeY Boise, Id
    Dec. 8, 2010 4:45 p.m.

    Bowls, For the fourth consecutive year, the Mountain West Conference will send five teams into postseason bowl games in 2010. The Mountain West has earned 46 bowl bids since 1999 and holds a 25-16 all-time record in those games, including a 9-3 mark against BCS automatic-qualifying conferences since 2004. The Mountain West finished with a 4-1 (.800) mark in postseason play last year and claimed the Bowl Challenge Cup, becoming the only conference to win the trophy three times since the award's inception in 2002-03. The MWC is 2-1 in BCS bowl games and has a 670 winning percentage in BCS Bowl games.

  • Go Big Blue!!! Bountiful, UT
    Dec. 8, 2010 3:49 p.m.

    It is not the BCS that is hurting college football. It is the constant whinning of the mid-majors crying about not being worthy to play for the NC. The fixation with the NC takes away from the regular season and the conference titles and the overall enjoyment of watching your team play each week.

    The BSC bowls are one of the highlights of the season. Enjoy!

  • TrueBlue Orem, UT
    Dec. 8, 2010 3:27 p.m.


    "$750 Million? How did you figure this?"

    He didn't.

    Google Dan Wetzel and the book titled, "Death to the BCS."

    The authors cite experts who say a playoff could generate $750 million per year and $1 billion within five years or $600-$850 million more in revenue than the current system generates.

  • Igualmente Mesa, AZ
    Dec. 8, 2010 2:54 p.m.

    TrueBlue is right on!

    Mo money, mo money, mo money!

    With early round game sites at the higher ranked teams' stadiums, and quarterfinals, semi-finals, and championship played at current Bowl sites, everyone will have a shot at more revenue. The NCAA or Bowls should consider sharing team travel expense, if they don't already.

    Fanatical fans WILL follow their team to three bowls in row, if the title was on the line.

    In effect, every regular season game will be part of the national playoff. All teams will have their shot, no one will be left out.

    Mo money for all, and an unbefore-seen excitement for the college game!

  • Bored to the point of THIS! Ogden, UT
    Dec. 8, 2010 2:30 p.m.

    re: lonestarrunner

    $750 Million? How did you figure this? People argue the BCS is about money and control, IF that argument is true and that number is true, don't you think they'd be doing it?

    People complained about the bowl system so we now have the BCS. They'll complain about the BCS until we get a playoff. THEN, we'll complain about how the playoff is not fair! Then we'll allow all teams in. Then we'll say you have to have at least 6 wins to qualify. Then we'll start getting individual sponsers for each games. Then we'll be back at the bowl system! FULL CIRCLE!!!

    Isn't life great!

    I accept the BCS for what it is. A means for a SPORT at the college level to decide a top dog! I worry more about my family, the economy, and what the future hold for my kids. I'll let all you "smart people" with all the answers worry about the BCS!

  • Pogi Hermiston, Oregon
    Dec. 8, 2010 2:18 p.m.

    While the column is great, you can't generalize the Big East "regularly getting killed" in their BCS bowl. The Big East is overrated, but as a Mountaineer, I have to point out that both times West Virginia has represented the Big East in the BCS (2006 and 2008) they beat Georgia from the almighty SEC, and Oklahoma. I agree the Big East is overrated, but they have won 3 of their last 6 BCS games since Miami and Va. Tech left for the ACC. Lets make sure we're doing our homework, huh!!

  • Triple B Milford, NH
    Dec. 8, 2010 2:11 p.m.

    @ Corn Dog. Please tell us where you went to college or which college you route for. I guarantee it's not a "mid major"!

  • BlueCoug Orem, UT
    Dec. 8, 2010 1:52 p.m.

    How Ohio State lost $79,597 on the Rose Bowl.

    The $18.5 million [Ohio State received for making the Rose Bowl last January] went to the Big Ten, where it was added to a pool of bowl revenue that was then sliced into 12 shares - one for each team, one for the league office. That still left Ohio State with a tidy $2.2 million to spend, which the Buckeyes did. Ohio State's team travel costs were $352,727. Unsold tickets ran the school a cool $144,710. The bill to transport, feed and lodge the band and cheerleaders came to $366,814. Throw in entertainment, gifts and sundry other expenses and the Buckeyes lost $79,597.

  • TrueBlue Orem, UT
    Dec. 8, 2010 1:50 p.m.

    Corn Dog

    The bowl system makes an enormous amount of money

    for the bowl cities - true

    for the participating schools - false, in fact many teams LOSE money attending bowl games (Ohio State LOST $79,597 on last year's Rose Bowl.)

    and for the television networks - true

    Replacing the bowl system with a playoff system...

    Who said you have to replace the bowl system entirely to have a playoff?

    would entail far fewer games - false

    It could actually result in more games, depending on how many bowls continue.

    fewer participating schools - false (see above)

    and bring in a lot less money - FALSE

    Studies have shown that a playoff would generate $750 million to $1 billion MORE than all of bowls COMBINED!

    A share of the playoff money could be given to every conference, spreading the wealth to more than just a few schools, and even then, the top programs would receive much more money than they getting from the bowl system.


  • Led Zeppelin II Bountiful, UT
    Dec. 8, 2010 12:59 p.m.

    They will find cures to cancer and the common cold before the BCS is fair with anybody. I will no longer watch or support college football.
    I have boycotted it! What is the point in watching sports anyway if we already know they are rigged?
    Star treatment is another joke in sports that ruins the fun for everybody. It is difficult to even be a fan when you face the truth.

  • Corn Dog New York, NY
    Dec. 8, 2010 12:48 p.m.

    The bowl system makes an enormous amount of money for the bowl cities, the participating schools, and the television networks. Replacing the bowl system with a playoff system, though it would crown a legitimate national championship, would entail far fewer games, fewer participating schools, and bring in a lot less money. The bowl system is not about determining a champion, but giving schools a chance to bring in more income. Most programs depend on a bowl game to break even. And it's usually the schools' football programs that pay for all other sports. That's why the BCS exists and why there won't be a playoff system.

  • Triple B Milford, NH
    Dec. 8, 2010 12:44 p.m.

    We need a playoff now! 1AA does it just fine. Ask anyone from Weber State, Montana or any other FCS school if they would rather go to a bowl game or have their team in a playoff with a chance to win, yes win, a true National Championship.

  • DEW Cougars Sandy, UT
    Dec. 8, 2010 12:02 p.m.

    Really some utah fans - now you support bcs? Whatever!

  • byronbca Salt Lake City, UT
    Dec. 8, 2010 11:50 a.m.

    Saying that the BCS system has flaws is like saying Salt lake City has a smog problem . Everyone knows it, but fixing it...

  • Igualmente Mesa, AZ
    Dec. 8, 2010 11:46 a.m.

    LonestarRunner is right on!

    Why does the BCS want only a 1-game playoff of two teams? A playoff of 16 teams using the BCS bowls is an excellent idea.

    If this runs too late into January, just move it up to start at least 2 weeks after the end of the regular season/conference championships.

    All other teams below the 16, can have their own bowls as well.

    Its a great compromise, and long overdue!

  • SportsFan Orem, UT
    Dec. 8, 2010 11:28 a.m.


    "playoff system would... require a lot more travel for student athletes and also fans."

    Somehow fans of D1-AA, DII and DIII teams are able to travel.


    Somehow NCAA basketball fans are able to travel (mid-terms and finals occur during March Madness for most NCAA basketball players).

    But, fans of major college football can't travel?

    Most of the major college playoffs would occur during winter break, so the impact on student athletes would be minimal -- a few days at the beginning of a new semester for a handful of different teams each year.

    The arguments about increased travel and the impact on student athletes are myths perpetuated by the bowls and the BCS to maintain their strangle hold on the major college football post-season.

    The BCS produces SIGNIFICANTLY LESS revenue that a playoff would -- $750 million to $1 billion according to some studies -- money that could be used by colleges and universities, instead of filling the pockets of funny-coat wearing bowl committees.

  • TheSpiker Alpine, UT
    Dec. 8, 2010 11:20 a.m.


    "... the BCS system works fine. I'm more than happy to be a part of it once we enter the PAC-12! I used to be ant-BCS, but now I'm all for it!"

    The ultimate Ute hypocrite.

  • Ufan Salt Lake City, UT
    Dec. 8, 2010 11:10 a.m.


    Your playoff proposal would have more intriguing matchups IN THE FIRST ROUND, than we'll have in this year's 35 bowls COMBINED.

    Even in the PAC 12, the chances of Utah ever playing in a BCS championship game are almost nil, meaning, no chance for a national championship.

    With a playoff, the Utes would have a decent opportunity to finish in the Top 16 and at least have a chance to play for a national championship.

  • doughnutboy South Jordan, UT
    Dec. 8, 2010 11:07 a.m.

    I like the BCS bowl system. Just accept it for what it extra game at the end of the season against a decent opponent. I like the way 1 and 2 are determined, and the rest of the bowls...who cares...just enjoy the game!

    The BCS tries to give us a championship game with the two BEST teams from the regular season. It is what it is. I don't think that a playoff system would be any more fun to watch and would require a lot more travel for student athletes and also fans. Bad idea!

  • TrollPolice Salt Lake City, UT
    Dec. 8, 2010 11:03 a.m.

    Gotta love all of the little trolls trying to get a rise out of the crowd by pretending to be BCS lovers.

    No true fan of major college football could possibly prefer watching Connecticut(8-4) vs. Oklahoma(11-2) in the Fiesta Bowl, rather than Oklahoma(11-2) at Arkansas(10-2) in the first round of a playoff.

    Anybody who claims they'd rather watch Connecticut vs. Oklahoma is either a serious Connecticut homer, or is lying.

  • utopia381 Salt Lake City, UT
    Dec. 8, 2010 10:46 a.m.


    A great proposal and I agree with you.

  • Truth Machine Salt Lake City, UT
    Dec. 8, 2010 10:45 a.m.

    There is no such thing as a "bowl system".

    The bowls are nothing more than stimulus packages for local chambers of commerce.

    There's nothing "championship" about the BCS. You could take this year's NFL Super Bowl champions, put them in the MAC where they could obliterate every team on their schedule and using the current BCS "formula", they'd be lucky to finish in the Top 20, with no chance at all of playing in the BCS championship game.

    The BCS is a complete farce and will eventually collapse under the weight of its own stupidity.

  • Go Big Blue!!! Bountiful, UT
    Dec. 8, 2010 10:33 a.m.

    The BCS rocks!

  • LonestarRunner Salt Lake City, UT
    Dec. 8, 2010 10:32 a.m.

    What a major college football playoff would have looked like for 2010.

    Every ranked conference champion, plus the next highest ranked teams (AP/Coaches combined) to get to 16 teams.

    This year, the Big East, MAC, Sun Belt and C-USA champions wouldn't qualify for the playoffs; but, every conference would get a share of the playoff revenue. Conferences that advanced past the first round would get a larger share. A playoff would generate at least $750 million more than the BCS.

    Teams seeded according to ranking with higher ranked teams hosting the first-round games the first Friday and Saturday after Christmas.

    Friday, December 31st
    16.Oklahoma St. at 1.Auburn*
    9.Oklahoma* at 8.Arkansas

    13.Nevada* at 4.Wisconsin*
    12.Virginia Tech* at 5.Stanford

    Saturday, January 1st
    14.Missouri at 3.TCU*
    11.LSU at 6.Ohio St.

    15.Alabama at 2.Oregon*
    10.Boise St. at 7.Michigan St.

    Saturday, January 8th
    Quarter-finals in Orange, Sugar, Fiesta and Rose Bowls

    Saturday, January 15th

    Saturday, January 22nd

    Other bowls could still be played on any day except for playoff days.

    Conference Champions not included in playoff

  • Otis Spurlock Ogden, UT
    Dec. 8, 2010 9:41 a.m.

    The BCS system is great. For example, the PAC 12 is sending two teams to the BCS Bowl this year. That is over 40 million dollars that gets shared between the PAC 12 Conference members. The only people who seem to have a problem with the BCS are people who have never been to a BCS or don't belong to a BCS Conference.

    Go Utes, Go BCS, Go PAC 12!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • bucko Salt Lake City, UT
    Dec. 8, 2010 9:28 a.m.

    The BCS should be required to remove the word "championship" from its name. It is misleading and is false advertising, because the distribution of money is involved. Grab some of our overpaid congressmen away from their luncheons and brothels are make them do something about this.

  • UteFan24 Murray, UT
    Dec. 8, 2010 9:22 a.m.

    I don't know what the big deal is, the BCS system works fine. I'm more than happy to be a part of it once we enter the PAC-12! We'll finally be able to contend for a National Championship. I used to be ant-BCS, but now I'm all for it!

    Go Utes!

  • caleb in new york Glen Cove, NY
    Dec. 8, 2010 9:14 a.m.

    I think Doug hurts his own argument by including Stanford and Nevada as teams that should get consideration for who is the best team. Stanford lost to Oregon by 3 touchdowns. Nevada lost to Hawaii.

    U.S. sports fans often delude themselves into thinking that a playoff is the only fair way to determine a championship. I actually appreciate college football because of the emphasis it gives to the regular season, which none of the big leagues gives. NBA, MLB, NFL, NCAA basketball? wake me up when the playoffs start or the last week of the regular season. The Oregon vs. Stanford regular season game was a playoff matchup that gave extra excitement to the regular season. That excitement permeates through each week of the regular season for undefeated teams.

    But because of the small sample size for college football with only 12 games each and 120 teams, I think a plus-one playoff would be good, and I think that TCU has a legitimate gripe this year about being excluded. But I don't think Stanford and Nevada have legitimate gripes for being excluded at the end from championship contention.

  • CougFaninTX Frisco, TX
    Dec. 8, 2010 9:10 a.m.

    I agree the top two teams (based on their records) are playing each other, but a playoff system could yield a Stanford,TCU, Wisconsin or some other winner that we all felt good about. Quite frankly, The Big East does not deserve to have a team in a BCS bowl this year, and I'm not even sure the Big 12 deserves a spot.

    Forget about conference affiliations. If we can't have a playoff system, lets use these "magically" computer rankings and send the Top 12 teams to the BCS bowls. Number 1 plays 2. Number 3 plays 4 and so forth!

  • sisucas San Bernardino, CA
    Dec. 8, 2010 9:06 a.m.

    Hancock doesn't think the system is working for football, he thinks it is working for him and his friends to line their pockets with millions of dollars. He may have forgotten to qualify that in his prior statements.

    The only way to beat the BCS is to bring it down financially. If we all commit to not attend the games and notwatch the games on TV then they will lose money and quit.

  • RichDaddy Logan, UT
    Dec. 8, 2010 9:05 a.m.

    You forget about the history behind these bowl games. Most had direct conference tie in before the BCS and without them there would have been no BCS formula. Secondly to get all of the (then) major conferences to agree to a BCS format, all had to have a guarantee spot for their conference champions.

    The main purpose in developing the BCS format was one, to get a concensus one vs. two match up and second to eliminate the nonsense of 15 years ago when major bowl were extending invitations three weeks before the season ended and creating embarassments when those teams lost.

    The Big East ought to lose their guarantee and unless TCU somehow saves their bacon, they probably will in a couple of years. Sadly, if the MWC could have held itself together along with adding Boise State, they would be in line to pick up an automatic, but no more.

    As an independent, BYU has only a sliver of a chance of landing in a BCS bowl in the future. Utah will find out how tough it will be in a big boy league and maybe will get in once in ten years.

  • yarrlydarb Ogden, UT
    Dec. 8, 2010 8:58 a.m.

    Everyone but the BCS itself agrees that the system is flawed. Fans want a legitimate national champion crowned at the end of the season. The BCS only CLAIMS that's what it wants.

    Fans are truthful about what they want; the BCS lies. It's goal is money; money for itself, and money for the elite programs in the country because therein the BCS finds the greatest potential for profit.

  • That's A Good One Meridian, ID
    Dec. 8, 2010 8:36 a.m.

    Best comment on here so far comes from Utah'95 at 1:32 a.m. Dec. 8, 2010

    "And lastly, get a haircut!"

    I've been laughing out loud for 10 minutes at that one-And I'm a BYU fan. Nicely done Utah'95. That was priceless! See, BYU and Utah fans can get along when we want to ;-)

  • JNA Layton, UT
    Dec. 8, 2010 8:35 a.m.

    The column is good but it is flawed in one big way. You are assuming that the BCS has the desire to do the right thing and make it about football...when in fact it could care less about doing the right thing and it is always about money and power not about the players, fans and certainly never about the game.

  • Fubecao Alexandria, VA
    Dec. 8, 2010 8:06 a.m.

    1) The real importance of the Colley's rankings mess-up isn't that Appalachian State's game can affect LSU's ranking; it's that nobody checks the computer rankings to make sure there are no data-entry errors. Colley's is the only one that makes it public, which is how the error was discovered. How do we know that another one of the computer rankings didn't accidentally omit some other FCS game which would have put TCU into the title game? If they're going to base the championship on something other than wins on the field, at least make it transparent.

    2) I agree a playoff is the ideal. But I don't understand people who complain that there are too many bowl games or that 6-6 teams get to go. More football is a good thing. Sure, most bowls are meaningless, but they mean something to the fans of the teams involved, and even to others, there's another game on TV to watch while you wrap presents. More football is good!

  • Utah'95 FPO, AE
    Dec. 8, 2010 7:52 a.m.

    In the last 5 years, here are the win-loss numbers and winning percentages for the BCS bowls or the National Championship game participants:

    SEC: 7-2, 0.778
    WAC: 2-1, 0.667
    Pac 10: 3-2, 0.600
    Big East: 3-2, 0.600
    MWC: 1-1, 0.500
    Big 10: 4-6, 0.400
    Big 12: 2-4, 0.333
    ACC: 1-4, 0.200
    ND: 0-1, 0.000

    Interesting that no conference has received more BCS money than the Big Ten, but they have a losing record and five conferences have performed better than them in the BCS games.

  • dj2 Saint George, UT
    Dec. 8, 2010 6:53 a.m.

    Can you tell me what the percentage of these "power conferences" have played a NAQ away from their home for their non conference schedule. - How do we know they are "power". We just have to take their and ESPN's word for it. I think I heard the gators haven't played a NAQ away for 20 years or something like that

  • NeilT Clearfield, UT
    Dec. 8, 2010 5:53 a.m.

    Totally agree. Connecticut in BCS Bowl, what a joke. BYU playing UTEP which lost 5 of it's last six. I think AK has an excellent point. Scrap the bowl system and form our playoff system. Love the idea.

  • rj Moss, Norway
    Dec. 8, 2010 4:08 a.m.

    Amen Doug! Now, can we pass a law that requires Bill Hancock and his colleagues to spend their workday reading articles like this one?

  • rvalens2 Burley, ID
    Dec. 8, 2010 3:41 a.m.

    End the BCS farce and let's go to a playoff system!

    I just hate all the useless and inane bowl games. A playoff would be so much more exciting to watch.

    Hopefully, I'll get to watch at least one College Football Championship playoff before I die in 25 years.

  • Utah'95 FPO, AE
    Dec. 8, 2010 1:32 a.m.


    VA Tech is 11-2, not 11-3.

    Back off the Big East. They are 3-2 in BCS bowls over the last five years. That's better than the Big 10, Big 12, and the ACC.

    Trust me, I know the BCS is flawed. Any number of teams, Boise State included, deserve better opponents than they will be playing in the next few weeks. But the BCS has improved the college football landscape from where it was decades ago.

    And lastly, get a haircut!

  • AK Cougar Palmer, AK
    Dec. 8, 2010 1:24 a.m.

    Doug, you hit in right on the head. If you from the outside looking in, like TCU, BSU, UofU, Hawaii, then the system is broken. If you are on the inside looking out, then the system works wonders, meaning the big boys get to keep all the money and pretend they are the best team in the nation by telling each other they are.

    Time for the rest of the college football nation to begin their own playoff game and crown their own. Refuse to participate in the silly .com, chick filet or Meineke bowls and make your own playoff. Which college President will step up and take the lead?