Quantcast
Sports

Doug Robinson: Non-AQ schools should bust BCS by forming their own championship playoff system

Comments

Return To Article
  • Zona Zone Mesa, AZ
    May 18, 2011 1:29 a.m.

    That already exists, it's called Division I-AA or Football Championship Subdivision. If the non-BCS form their own championship, it will just feed into the BCS's argument the so-called Non-AQ's are subpar. To be honest, many Non-AQ's are more I-AA than I-A. Looking in your direction, Utah State. (Seriously, Aggies, who do you think you're kidding?)

    The only remedy here is a legal remedy. The Sherman Antitrust Act needs to be invoked, and the BCS should be fined severely and shattered altogether, but even that will not guarantee a playoff. The real solution is to break up the power conferences, but that's not going to happen.

  • DC Alexandria, VA
    May 18, 2011 6:26 a.m.

    Form their own championship? And what money will they share? Most of these programs are already a cost burden to their school/state, and most only have a minimal to regional fan base at best.

  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    May 18, 2011 6:36 a.m.

    That is exactly what we need. We need the equivalent of the NIT for football. You have seen how much of a following it has in Basketball. Add to the comment above, if the ratings for the FCS Championship were any indication of interest, this would end up on ESPN 360, somewhere squished between water ballet and the Curling championship.

    An NIT for football..... brilliant idea.

  • Mountainman56 Alpine, UT
    May 18, 2011 6:44 a.m.

    I have to agree with Zona Zone. A Non-AQ playoff would be considered 2nd tier just like the NIT in basketball and would serve to strengthen the BCS because they would then feel that the Non-AQ's have their own post-season program so why would they ever want to include them in their party?

    Legal action is the only way the BCS will get taken down. Let's hope it happens sooner than later. Bring down the evil empire that is the BCS!

  • garysticht Clinton, UT
    May 18, 2011 6:47 a.m.

    As a Ute fan I hated this idea when we were in the MWC. I agree with Zona this argues that the Non-AQ's can't compete with the AQ teams which we know is not the case. This would be like the NIT. Tell, me. Who won the NIT this year? I don't know I didn't watch any of the games because in the grand scheme of things it was the also-ran tourney and frankly, I just didn't care. I would rather channel my energies into getting rid of the whole system that uses popularity contests to see which SEC team will play either the winner of the Big 10, Big 12, or Pac 12. Put them all in a tournament and slug it out. If

  • PR North Ogden, UT
    May 18, 2011 6:53 a.m.

    Bring it on. Lets pick the champion on the field, not in the elite sports writers' minds (writers who I dare say probably haven't put on a uniform since high school) or on some secret computer.

  • garysticht Clinton, UT
    May 18, 2011 6:53 a.m.

    Who won the NIT this last year? I don't know because I quite frankly didn't care. As a Ute fan I hated the idea of a Non-AQ tournament when we were in the MWC and I still do now that we aren't. Zona's right that this will feed the BCS' argument that non-AQs don't deserve their spot with the "elite" which is rubbish.

    Get rid of the stupid bowls and get me a playoff. I'm tired of the popularity contest that exists to determine which SEC team will play the prettiest Big 10/12 or Pac 12 team for the MNC.

    If the have nots try to form their own playoff they may as well form a whole new Division because that's in essence what they would become. I just want the NCAA to find its spine and take back the post season they lost to this stupid monopoly that is the BCS.

  • IndianaCoug Bloomington, IN
    May 18, 2011 7:31 a.m.

    I think BYU and Utah fans are united in wondering why this article was written? We don't want or need an NIT for football. For the upper tier teams from non-AQ conferences this would make no financial sense, would not add prestige, and simply has no positive outcomes.

  • Y4LYFE Lubbock, TX
    May 18, 2011 7:45 a.m.

    The only thing the Non AQs could do (excluding ND)is ALL TOGETHER refuse to play BcS teams for one season down the road, that will force all BcS schools to play each other for 12 straight games, and they will really hate that.

    That's all it would take, money making would be scarce for those FCS schools and others, but that kind of sacrifice is the best option not yet discussed.

    BYU is on the frontier of other creative means keep in mind.

  • BYUCOLORADO Castle Rock, CO
    May 18, 2011 7:46 a.m.

    I was reading this and thinking the entire time "Is he not aware of the Football Bowl Subdivision?" Then I saw Zona Zonza's comment.

    This solution would only solidify the BCS's argument. And you are missing one key point about what happened with the professional sports league, neither one was obviously better. They had two separate leagues and two separate championships and they there was roughly equal talent.

    This is not the case if your solution was implemented. People would just laugh at the stronger FBS championship because it would still be inferior football. It wouldn't force the BCS to take note, it would encourage them to laugh and say "Ha! We won. Cartel maintained!"

    You should have run this idea for an article by a few people before writing it. This would be a colossal mistake on the part of the non AQ teams.

  • Laser Iowa City, IA
    May 18, 2011 7:50 a.m.

    I've been saying this for years. Go for it. The BCS will become so non-irrelavent, they will be forced to concede. I also think to join the playoff format they need to pay a fine. 10 million for each BCS conf. that would like to join. After the first BCS league begs in, the fine goes up 5 million per year for the other conferences that are stubbornly dragging their feet. Oh, and all current BCS officials are banned from college football for life.

    College football Div. 1 playoffs would be more exciting than March Madness.

  • toosmartforyou Farmington, UT
    May 18, 2011 7:56 a.m.

    This sounds an awful lot like using a tournaquet for stopping a bloody nose. The cure is more deadly than the malady. No matter how you slice it, the Non-AQ's live on the wrong side of the tracks and just having your own party won't get you an inclusionary invite to the big dance on the other side of town. Nor will it produce anything but laughter among the BCS elite.

  • Silent Lurker Cottonwood Heights, UT
    May 18, 2011 7:57 a.m.

    After Utah and TCU leave the non AQ there is only one team of any significance left in all of the non AQ teams. That team is Bosie and even they would struggle with a BCS schedule. Forming a non AQ championship is exactly what the BCS wants. It would be the same as admitting you are second tier football. Great idea Doug.

  • goitalone w bountiful, ut
    May 18, 2011 8:16 a.m.

    Doug's "so simple" solution still ignores the anti-trust violations of the BCS cartel with the media and the bowls. Arbitrarily selecting six conferences to auto qualify for billions of dollars while limiting access to other schools competing in the same system is colusion and is at the heart of the issue.

    This is not about crowning a legitimate national champion, and creating another "sub-super' does not mitigate the financial theft perpetrated by the BCS. Not only does the system assure that profits from the BCS unfairly attribute to selected institutions, they assure that those institutions by way of improved facilities and other accomodations attract better recruits, thus tipping the field ever more in favor of only those institutions included in the BCS.

    You miss the point, Robinson, as do those of you who think this is about anything besides equal access and anti-trust violations. It is not a sports issue. It is about blatantly unfair business practices which should not be tolerated in any public venue. The DOJ and Congress took down ATT and MIcrosoft for the same practices. Why is the BCS exempt???

  • Bluto Sandy, UT
    May 18, 2011 8:18 a.m.

    120 schools, All Division 1, according to the NCAA bylaws.

    And yet, 68 or so are allowed to collude, tie up all the bowls, cut non equitable deals, while excluding one half of it's membership.

    Clearly illegal. Seriously, try these tactics in any other area of business and the feds are on you, yesterday.

    It takes an action in the courts to get the ball rolling. Up until now, none of the 120 institutions have been willing to do so. Until one, just one school sues, nothing will happen.

    If the 52 or so schools refused to play the so called big 6, they could never fill out their schedules. Then they would come to the table and negotiate more fairly.

    It's not about a playoff, or pitting #1 vs #2, the issue is the Monopoly of bowls and money, through illegal collusion.

    It's about cornering the marketplace and money, through collusion and backroom deals. It's Illegal!

    The BCS can avoid it all by giving every Conferenc a guaranteed spot, thus eliminating the AQ perjorative label and the contrived, man made, caste system.

  • govt rocks Salt Lake City, UT
    May 18, 2011 8:35 a.m.

    The only solution is for the NCAA to recognize a champion and force schools who have Div 1 football programs to participate if they want to participate in other Div 1 sports championships. The money will always be there for college football. But until the NCAA gets involved, nothing will ever change, even with any anti-trust lawsuits. All the BCS will do is change the rules a bit, just like they do every 4 or 5 years to get the heat off them for a bit.

    A non AQ playoff is raising the white flag.

  • WhatsInItForMe Orem, Utah
    May 18, 2011 8:47 a.m.

    There's nothing wrong with the BCS as a system for getting a national champ out of it. What IS wrong is how they exclude schools. Fix THAT and everyone's happy.

    It'll likely take legal action to make this happen, though.

    I prefer the BCS system over a playoff simply because a playoff doesn't allow a team to slip up even once and DOES allow a not-so-good team to get hot at the right time.

    This year's NCAA basketball tourney proved you can't get the best team in the end. It also proved that the year's worth of work can mean nothing in the end.

    A round-robin type of playoff is needed in both football and basketball to be fair and REALLY produce a non-questionable national champ, and we know THAT isn't feasible. Too many playoff games, especially for football. For basketball, just don't include so many teams to begin with, then it's feasible there.

    Let's just fix the current systems to minimize the fog.

  • WhatsInItForMe Orem, Utah
    May 18, 2011 8:49 a.m.

    If you want more interesting football reading, check out BYU's future as an independent in a recent Deep Shades of Blue article.

    Pretty tasty info, including the comments from its readers.

    So, when will DNews sports writers dig up this kind of info and report on it?

  • Veritas Aequitas Fruit Heights, UT
    May 18, 2011 8:52 a.m.

    It's how the NCAA basketball tourney busted the NIT.

    I agree with Zona Zone, but not a bad plan B if things don't change...

    It's always good to look at options.

    With all the money just for the PAC 12 championship game, a Division One sixteen team playoff could generate some huge financial interest.

  • DEW Cougars Sandy, UT
    May 18, 2011 8:55 a.m.

    I can see the idea to get rid of this long break between the final regular season and the bowl game. It should only have two teams from those 4 non-aq conferances to play the non-aq championship game. If one team still undefeated will be in but if one loss they won't get in. Conclusion, they will never be invited for NC game like what happen to utah.

  • Razzle2 Bluffdale, UT
    May 18, 2011 8:58 a.m.

    I think it's a great idea. But, they should call it the "NCS", The National Championship Series.
    Boxing did it and brought down the "World Heavyweight Champion" fiasco.
    The BCS does not own the term National Championship.
    Remeber the Dr. Seuss book, "The Sneetches".
    "Star-Bell Sneetches had bellies with stars. The Plain-Belly Sneetches had none upon thars."

  • Riverton Cougar Riverton, Utah
    May 18, 2011 9:28 a.m.

    I mostly agree with WhatsInItForMe. The BCS would be much, much better if they got rid of the whole "BCS conference" or "Automatic Qualification" confereces. That's bogus. Just because a conference has a lot of teams that tend to be good doesn't mean that every single year they will be superior. Look at the Big East and the ACC, and the PAC-10 a few years ago-- one, maybe two good teams, but the rest where certainly not "BCS" quality.

    If they stop excluding certain schools, it wouldn't be under as much fire. They could just take the top 10 and give them all BCS bowl games (even if it means two or more "non-BCS" schools are in it!). If they really believed what they said that "BCS schools" being superior, then the BCS schools would all be top 10 and nothing would change.

    Of course, their ranking system needs to be as unbiased as possible (it's getting better, but not quite there yet). Go ahead and use SOS a little; however, while beating good teams is impressive, remember that a team beating up on bad teams could be just as good.

  • TJ Eagle Mountain, UT
    May 18, 2011 9:28 a.m.

    Not smart!
    Never give up the fight to bust the BCS and have a playoff. Demand Equal money from the bowls. The BCS conferences already have big $$ from their TV contracts. The money generated from the bowls should be shared equally with all Division 1 teams. We need parity for better competition. Where is the NCAA in all this? What rock are they hiding under while the BCS corruption runs rampant?

  • Go Big Blue!!! Bountiful, UT
    May 18, 2011 9:34 a.m.

    Great idea. Call it the Insignificants' Bowl Series.

  • SoCalUte Trabuco Canyon, CA
    May 18, 2011 9:42 a.m.

    The only potential problem I can see with this idea is.. What if the top two NAQ teams are invited to a BCS bowl, and choose to play in the BCS bowl instead of the NAQ bowl? Then, even with a playoff, there is no real claim to the 'real' championship.

  • HopefulHeber Heber City, UT
    May 18, 2011 9:45 a.m.

    *Like Button*

  • Razzle2 Bluffdale, UT
    May 18, 2011 9:48 a.m.

    TCU does not move to the Big East until 2012. We have another year for BYU, Nevada, Hawaii, Navy, Louisville, and Southern Miss to be the next busters with BSU. But, the argument gets harder when the Big East finally has a legit team taking their spot.
    These teams should have their own playoff to up their schedule and mess with the polls.

  • utesovertide Salt Lake City, UT
    May 18, 2011 10:04 a.m.

    @Razzle2

    Louisville is already in the big east, so they can't be a bcs buster.

  • butters Salt Lake city, UT
    May 18, 2011 10:05 a.m.

    y4life

    even though i like your idea it will never happen. there's good money for a team like western kentucky or new mexico state to go somewhere like oklahoma and get whooped.

  • AZguy Phoenix, AZ
    May 18, 2011 10:14 a.m.

    I completely agree with Zona, DC, and UtahBlueDevil. The BCS would cheer this on and probably give them money to do it. It would further cement their monopoly.

  • Johnny Triumph American Fork, UT
    May 18, 2011 10:15 a.m.

    Here's a solution to the money problem. Bowls pay 90% of their revenue to a fund held by the NCAA and keep 10% to run the bowl. Schools pay their own way to get to bowls. NCAA distributes bowl monies to all schools equally and aimed at equality of sports (possibly to equalize for Title IX).

    This would weed out the lighter bowls, if schools can't afford to attend those bowls then the bowl should go away. Time was, and not too long ago, that not many schools went to bowl games.

    I think there are serious flaws with what Doug has written, but stretching it to fill Dec could put ratings heat on the BCS games.

  • Razzle2 Bluffdale, UT
    May 18, 2011 10:22 a.m.

    OOPS! Change Louisville and insert CFU.

    My point is that BYU thinks they are doing what they have to do to have strength in schedule. But, what if Texas and Utah tank? BYU's schedule won't help. Big gamble. BYU should join a play-off tournament at end of season.

  • sandgrules Durham, NC
    May 18, 2011 12:14 p.m.

    I think this is a great idea! It will be decades before anything political happens. It's time to let the players play, and take the politics out of football!

  • BP Salt Lake City, UT
    May 18, 2011 12:19 p.m.

    I agree on the NIT comments. Does anybody actually remember who won the NIT this year?

  • JJammer SLC, UT
    May 18, 2011 12:52 p.m.

    The BCS has so much power and money behind them, it reminds of early monopoly barons in early America. Nothing, NOTHING, will change the status-quo short of the combination of legal and government intervention.

  • dubw New Bern, NC
    May 18, 2011 12:58 p.m.

    The corruption of the BCS teamed with the ineptitude of the NCAA has no intention of doing anything to pluck the golden goose. The whole situation smacks of the worst collusion of monopolization known to the human race. I dare say the justice department will invest the national debt in discovering all of the overturned rocks, but will somehow fail to come to a conclusion. You would have to wash the laundry room to clean up Ohio State and Tennessee - If the NCAA falters in those cases, then don't count on any changes in this lifetime. A playoff for non - AQs? As has been said, the BCS would welcome it as it would eradicate the bothersome Non AQ fleas. Indeed it would mean the Non AQs were simply FCS Division I schools.

  • Hondo Springville, UT
    May 18, 2011 1:55 p.m.

    This article is pontless because neither BYU or Utah is a part of the non-AQ track. Utah got invited in because the PAC-12 wanted a punching bag and BYU will be a de facto member of the BCS by earning its way in every year.

    I see 12-1 for the 2011-2012 season etched in the BYU annals!

  • redfeather Palo Alto, CA
    May 18, 2011 2:05 p.m.

    Two words Doug.

    Dumb idea!

  • Ratman Salt Lake City, UT
    May 18, 2011 5:15 p.m.

    Ahem, Hondo. BYU is still non-AQ, aka Army & Navy.

  • Rock Of The Marne Phoenix, AZ
    May 18, 2011 7:42 p.m.

    As per Hondo "and BYU will be a de facto member of the BCS by earning its way in every year." Really? Your team has had 12 years to earn its way in with nary a BCS bowl invite. Compare that to Utah and TCU who busted the BCS twice in the same time period and were rewarded for it with invites out of the Mid-Majors into BCS conferences. BYU's best hope is to get to and win a couple of BCS games (not an easy task) and then hope the BIG 12 will then feel compelled to extend an invite.

    With regards to a Mid Major football playoff; very bad idea (would be viewed in the same vein as the Triple A or NBA Development League playoffs).

  • LonestarRunner Salt Lake City, UT
    May 18, 2011 10:21 p.m.

    pebbles

    "Your team has had 12 years to earn its way in with nary a BCS bowl invite."

    Your team has had 120 years to win a national championship with nary a sniff at a championship.

    Compare that to BYU which won its first National Championship almost 30 years ago.

    BYU doesn't need a couple of BCS wins to get a Big 12 invite. BYU is already the odds on favorite to be invited as soon as the Big 12 decides to expand. The Big East has already contacted BYU about the possibility of joining the Big East as a football-only member.

  • Howard S. Taylorsville, UT
    May 19, 2011 12:02 a.m.

    I propose that Robinson's suggested national championship game be dubbed the

    "The Fifth Priority Bowl"

    You know... for those schools that aren't willing to make football a main priority.

  • Riverton Cougar Riverton, Utah
    May 19, 2011 12:56 a.m.

    "I propose that Robinson's suggested national championship game be dubbed the

    "The Fifth Priority Bowl"

    You know... for those schools that aren't willing to make football a main priority."

    For having football be their fifth priority, BYU is pretty darn good! Imagine how good they'd be if it *was* their top priority. Or, imagine how bad the Utes would be if football was thier fifth priority!

  • The Rock Federal Way, WA
    May 19, 2011 12:45 p.m.

    In recent history Utah, TCU and Boise State have created serious doubt as to the validity of the BCS national champion.

    The NCAA tournament has the conference champion from each Division I conference and a multitude of other teams participate in the tournament. The NCAA destroyed the NIT by simply inviting all the decent teams to their tournament. The BCS could do the same if they expanded their participation.

    With quality teams like Utah, TCU, Boise State, BYU and others surging and participating in an alternative championship, it might just work.

    Teams playing in bowl games typically have some kind of let down due to not having played for more than a month. If a TCU just won the non-BCS tournament and they played a BCS bowl game, it could be really embarrassing for the BCS teams.

  • HSCOACH Heber City, UT
    May 19, 2011 1:56 p.m.

    us old-timers can remember when the NIT was the national championship and the NCAA squeezed them out. do not expect help from the NCAA they are about the status quo.

  • Howard S. Taylorsville, UT
    May 19, 2011 9:27 p.m.

    @Riverton Cougar

    "...Imagine how good they'd be if it *was* their top priority."
    ********

    Yeah, if football had been their top priority they might have been able to execute a simple field goal blocking scheme.

    Instead.... It's blocked... it's blocked.... it's blocked... game over...

    Better luck next time... thanks for playing.