NCAA Football Bowl Games

The six BCS leagues already get most of the BCS bowl game slots and now there's a greater chance they'll start gobbling up all of the at-large bids to the minor bowls beginning in 2010.

Last week, the NCAA's Division I Board of Directors agreed to sponsor legislation that would treat football teams with .500 records the same as teams with winning records for bowl participation. If the legislation passes, it would allow a bowl, that has to go outside its conference affiliation to fill a spot, to select a more attractive 6-6 BCS school over a 7- or 8-win non-BCS school.

Which is exactly why the Big 12 proposed the legislation. Sources told FanHouse that the Big East and ACC support the legislation, while the other BCS leagues (Big Ten, Pac-10 and SEC) also are expected to support it.

We've had BCS outrage across the land, two anti-trust hearings in Congress, and enough fan anger to power a trip to Mars (if spaceships ran on rage). None of it has changed the BCS. At least, not yet. Now there's a new front in the fan war against college football's broken system. Meet the Playoff PAC, a political action committee, that is raising money to fight the powers-that-be in the BCS. Their goal? Donate money to candidates who also support a college football playoff until they've remade Congress in their pro-playoff image.

Don't believe me? Read their mission statement including this stirring finale "To that end, Playoff PAC helps elect pro-reform political candidates, mobilizes public support, and provides a centralized source of pro-reform news, thought and scholarship." Already the PAC has received the commendation of three elected officials in Congress, Senator Orrin Hatch of Utah and Representatives Neil Abercrombie of Hawaii and Joe Barton of Texas.

---

---

The Big East and Big 12 conferences will announce their participation in the Yankee Bowl Wednesday in a press conference at Yankee Stadium.

FanHouse first reported the participants for the new Yankee Bowl two weeks ago.

Unless the NCAA takes the win away, Bobby Bowden just did college football a big favor. His Florida State team beat Brigham Young, knocking out a pretender to the throne.

Then Oregon beat fellow pretender Utah. Now if somebody could dump Boise State, we'll all have a merry Christmas.

That's not likely because the Broncos have already gone unbeaten in their one-game season. It's all over but the routing of San Jose State, Idaho, UC Davis, UC Chula Vista and UC Schwarzenegger.

---

---

In the least secret secret negotiations ever, it appears that the Alamo Bowl is about to ditch the Big Ten for the Pac 10. The San Antonio-based bowl has already moved its game into January and is increasing its per-team payout to $3 million.

If the rumored plan is true the Pac 10's No. 2 team would head to San Antonio to play the Big 12's No. 3. Currently the Pac 10's runner-up plays in the Holiday Bowl.

As a college football fan, I can only applaud the move. It's been no secret that the Pac 10's bowl tie-ins have been, how shall we say, a little weak. Maybe it's because they don't play any games outside their home territory, apart from the Sun Bowl in that well-known media hotspot El Paso.

But isn't this a huge insult to the Big Ten?

In case you're wondering how the Motor City Bowl is doing these days with Michigan's economy running like an anemic hamster on an exercise wheel, the answer is "Not so hot." Chrysler used to be one of the bowl's big sponsors, but dropped out a while back. General Motors is too busy trying to get out of bankruptcy to muck about with bowl games. Ford's still in the picture, but crikey, are there any Detroit-area businesses healthy enough to save the Motor City Bowl?

Yes yes.

Little Caesars Pizza, long-time friend of cash-strapped college students, is entertaining the thought of becoming the game's sponsor, and their sponsorship could lead to a new name for college football's most maligned bowl game. But what will they call it?

DALLAS --Texas Tech coach Mike Leach has always cut against the grain.

You can look at his career choice after graduating law school, or his fascination with pirates, and, of course, his wacky offensive system.

So go figure when it comes to his stance on a college football playoff. Leach has long been an advocate of some type of playoff system in Division I-A football to determine the national champion.

So it has come to this: Brandon Kennedy, a 21-year-old former college football player, is currently living on the streets of Washington, DC in support of a cause dear to his heart. Health care reform? Foreign policy? Third World debt relief?

Of course not. He's agitating for playoffs in college football.

Kennedy played football at Central Washington, which is a Division II school. They have playoffs in Division II. The very highest level of college football does not. Few people are happy with this. None have gone so far as to live on the streets so they can be closer to the seats of power.

Brandon Kennedy has a plan, and he wants it to get a fair hearing.

Last week, we learned that the BCS doesn't exist as a legal entity. Most of us found that shocking. At least those of us who can define the word "entity." (Sorry, Ohio State fans. As much as we all might wish the word involves the female breast, sigh, it doesn't. If it did the drafting of legal documents would be an awfully lot more interesting.)

What we're left with is a void, an eternal gaping chasm in our existence. We know the BCS exists, otherwise how can we hate it so? But, for legal purposes it doesn't. That's why we're renaming the BCS. Now.

The rules are simple. You have to make me aware of your suggestion. Via e-mail, via FaceBook, via Twitter @NCAAFanHouse, via posting at the bottom of the page, via African swallow ... basically you have to get your idea to me. And then with a team of brilliant marketing experts (such as the people who came up with Stanford's We Work slogan), we'll select a group of six finalists to combine with my four suggestions below. Those six finalists will be given a paragraph to make their argument in the column. And then y'all vote for your favorite. There will be prizes, world renown, and the satisfaction of a job well done.

Tuesday afternoon, the United States Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing in the U.S. Capitol to examine whether or not the BCS violated antitrust laws. The question, essentially, was whether the BCS functions as a monopoly or a cartel and, if so, whether it violates the Sherman Antitrust Act.

Much of the coverage of Tuesday's hearing focused on the usual arguments for and against a college football playoff rather than actually looking at the question at issue in the hearing: Does the BCS as presently constituted violate United States antitrust laws?

It's a simple question with a complicated answer, but after reviewing the submitted documents, the testimony of those called before the committee, and applying my legal education that set me back almost $150k (that I'm still paying off), I'll give you an answer: Yes.