Handful of Congressmen Protest UF's Title

[SoonerBacker]

Handful of lawmakers protest Gators’ title, BCS
By BEN EVANS, Associated Press Writer
2 hours, 56 minutes ago

WASHINGTON (AP)—A handful of lawmakers used a resolution commending the University of Florida’s national football championship Thursday to protest college football’s much-maligned BCS system.

A dozen House members voted “no” or “present” on the resolution, the latest signal from the nation’s capital that many people aren’t happy about the way the NCAA chooses its football champion. Many of the dissenters were from Utah and Texas, both of which have schools that made a case to play for this year’s national championship but were passed over.

“A fine school with a great team deserves better than a national championship that was decided inside somebody’s computer,” said Rep. Joe Barton, a Texas Republican who has introduced legislation to force a playoff system. “The Gators certainly could have won it on the field, but they didn’t get the chance any more than Utah, Texas and USC.”

President Barack Obama also has repeatedly criticized the Bowl Championship Series, saying he plans to “throw (his) weight around a little bit” to pressure the NCAA to adopt a playoff system.

The BCS was created in 1998 by the six most powerful conferences. It features a title game between the top two teams in standings that are based on two human polls and six computer rankings.

This season, Florida (12-1) met Oklahoma (12-1) in the championship game. Florida won 24-14 and ended up with a 13-1 record.

But the game was under scrutiny even before it began. Several schools that played in lesser bowls claimed they deserved a shot at the championship, including undefeated Utah (13-0), Texas (12-1) and Southern California (12-1).

“Utah has a legitimate claim but we’ll never know because they couldn’t play for it,” said Rep. Marion Berry, D-Ark., who said he also voted against the resolution because he thinks it’s a waste of Congress’ time.

A spokesman for Rep. Bobby Bright, an Alabama Democrat and Auburn University graduate, said his reasons for not supporting the measure were simpler: He simply couldn’t bring himself to support a school that is such a bitter rival of his state’s universities.

[OUinFLA]

Im pleased our legislative branch of the government has nothing really important to worry about.

[fadada1]

funny how joe barton didn't mention texas tech, oregon state, or ole miss in his comments.

[boomersooner28]

"Utah has a legitimate claim but we’ll never know because they couldn’t play for it,” said Rep. Marion Berry, D-Ark., who said he also voted against the resolution because he thinks it’s a waste of Congress’ time.



Gee, ya think?

[Frozen Sooner]

What, is he smoking crack?

[Crucifax Autumn]

These idiots need to all be voted out next time. Even if they DO insist on wasting time on this instead of doing their real job, they oughtta hold actual hearings and come up with something better than protest-no-votes.

Not to mention the whole "I'm doing this because MY team got screwed this time" bit.

[JLEW1818]

FL beat us... so idc who wins it. ( cept saxet )

[rainiersooner]

How pathetic. This entire exercise is nothing but a campaign exercise for the congressmen. They should get docked pay.

[Leroy Lizard]

What's next, the Oscars? How about American Idol?

Texas must be the home of the biggest sore losers in the nation.

It is none of Congress' damn business how college football determines its champion.

[sooner59]

At first, I was all for supporting a playoff. But now, I see that the NCAA just won't do it on their own and Congress has to stick their nose in it. NEWS FLASH: Congress! Worry about our country and the economy! Not college football. While you are worried about sports, people are losing their jobs and the DOW is shrinking by the minute. Find something better to do! There... I got it off my chest. Any congressman focusing on sports at this time should be replaced. That is all. Boomer.

[OU_Sooners75]

WTF?

This cannot be serious.

The NCAA is a private organization. The US lawmakers cannot pass law that oversees the NCAA and forces the NCAA to have a play off system.

Hell, the BCS is not even part of the NCAA!

[IBleedCrimson]

2 foreign wars, an economy at its lowest point since the great depression, instability in countries with nuclear arsenals all over the world.... but we gotta fix college football :rolleyes:

[Crucifax Autumn]

Hell, they coulda proclaimed it SpongeBob Day or somthin if they just wanna jerk around!

Again I say...If these a-holes were serious and not just gobbling constituent schlong, they'd have keld hearings, brought in conference commisioners, laid down some real pressure, etc.

They are just trying to get the ugga-ugga caveman vote thinking college football fans are dumb enough to buy their crap. It'll work in Texas, but other than that jackhole, they're screwed like one of the teams they defend! lol

[Spray]

Congress most certainly has the right to oversee a muti-billion dollar industry. And if the system is set up unfairly so that a few universities take all the money all the time and my state university never gets a shot at the windfall that comes with being national champion, then I would most certainly expect my representatives in Congress to do something about it. This is not about grandstanding (okay, it kind of is), its really about money.

[rainiersooner]

Congress most certainly has the right to oversee a muti-billion dollar industry. And if the system is set up unfairly so that a few universities take all the money all the time and my state university never gets a shot at the windfall that comes with being national champion, then I would most certainly expect my representatives in Congress to do something about it. This is not about grandstanding (okay, it kind of is), its really about money.

The DOJ's antitrust division would be the more appropriate authority to investigate this, imo.

[soonerfan28]

If this had come at a different time in American history then I would fully support it, but they need to be worrying about other issues such as the economy and the housing market.

[Sooner47]

Im pleased our legislative branch of the government has nothing really important to worry about.

I'd rather have them voting on stupid college football resolutions than spending another trillion dollars of our money. In fact, the country would no doubt be a lot better off if they spent more of their time worrying about football.

[fadada1]

I'd rather have them voting on stupid college football resolutions than spending another trillion dollars of our money. In fact, the country would no doubt be a lot better off if they spent more of their time worrying about football.

if congress was good enough to qualify for a BCS game, they'd have 17 million less on the deficit.

[L-Boy]

Handful of lawmakers protest Gators’ title, BCS
By BEN EVANS, Associated Press Writer
2 hours, 56 minutes ago

WASHINGTON (AP)—A handful of lawmakers used a resolution commending the University of Florida’s national football championship Thursday to protest college football’s much-maligned BCS system.

A dozen House members voted “no” or “present” on the resolution, the latest signal from the nation’s capital that many people aren’t happy about the way the NCAA chooses its football champion. Many of the dissenters were from Utah and Texas, both of which have schools that made a case to play for this year’s national championship but were passed over.

“A fine school with a great team deserves better than a national championship that was decided inside somebody’s computer,” said Rep. Joe Barton, a Texas Republican who has introduced legislation to force a playoff system. “The Gators certainly could have won it on the field, but they didn’t get the chance any more than Utah, Texas and USC.”

President Barack Obama also has repeatedly criticized the Bowl Championship Series, saying he plans to “throw (his) weight around a little bit” to pressure the NCAA to adopt a playoff system.

The BCS was created in 1998 by the six most powerful conferences. It features a title game between the top two teams in standings that are based on two human polls and six computer rankings.

This season, Florida (12-1) met Oklahoma (12-1) in the championship game. Florida won 24-14 and ended up with a 13-1 record.

But the game was under scrutiny even before it began. Several schools that played in lesser bowls claimed they deserved a shot at the championship, including undefeated Utah (13-0), Texas (12-1) and Southern California (12-1).

“Utah has a legitimate claim but we’ll never know because they couldn’t play for it,” said Rep. Marion Berry, D-Ark., who said he also voted against the resolution because he thinks it’s a waste of Congress’ time.

A spokesman for Rep. Bobby Bright, an Alabama Democrat and Auburn University graduate, said his reasons for not supporting the measure were simpler: He simply couldn’t bring himself to support a school that is such a bitter rival of his state’s universities.

I have read nothing that indicates that any of these people are "protesting" UF's title. They are just whining about the BCS, and most of them are TX or UTAH homers.

[OUAlumni1990]

So when was football more important than the economy? Fix our economy problems congress THEN talk football!

[Leroy Lizard]

Congress most certainly has the right to oversee a muti-billion dollar industry.

Great. College football is now a public utility.

I once paid too much for a ticket to a game. Congress must act!! We need price controls. And while we're at it, why not have the ATF monitor beer sales in the stadium?

[OU_Sooners75]

Congress most certainly has the right to oversee a muti-billion dollar industry. And if the system is set up unfairly so that a few universities take all the money all the time and my state university never gets a shot at the windfall that comes with being national champion, then I would most certainly expect my representatives in Congress to do something about it. This is not about grandstanding (okay, it kind of is), its really about money.

This is where you are wrong.

1. We do not have a socialist government in place here in the United States. It is a free democracy. Meaning they government does not have the right to be prying in the business of any business or organization.

2. The NCAA is an organization to oversee the major university/college athletics as in setting a standard of rules and laws. They defend the amature athlete.

3. The NCAA does not control the BCS. The BCS is an entirely different organization made up of the commissioners of the 6 major conferences (ACC, Big 12, Big 10, Big East, PAC-10, & SEC) and the major bowl committes (Rose, Orange, Sugar, and Fiesta). The BCS does not have to include any of the mid-major conferences (MAC, WAC, CUSA, MWC, Sun Belt), or the Independent schools, if they so choose.

4. There are rules set in place. These rules should be ratified, but they are what the BCS commissioners agreed upon before the start of each season. The Mid-Majors have the chance to play in a BCS Bowl. And if they finish #1 or #2 in the nation, they have the right to play for the BCS National Championship.

From the above, there is not a damn thing our federal government can do about it since the NCAA is not a organization relying on the government for their finances or oversight.

[OU_Sooners75]

The DOJ's antitrust division would be the more appropriate authority to investigate this, imo.

It is not an antitrust issue either. The NCAA does not have a monolopy on college sports.

It is a system where the NCAA should actually take charge of and implement a something that the NCAA will consider a true national champion.

[L-Boy]

This is where you are wrong.

1. We do not have a socialist government in place here in the United States. It is a free democracy. Meaning they government does not have the right to be prying in the business of any business or organization.

2. The NCAA is an organization to oversee the major university/college athletics as in setting a standard of rules and laws. They defend the amature athlete.

3. The NCAA does not control the BCS. The BCS is an entirely different organization made up of the commissioners of the 6 major conferences (ACC, Big 12, Big 10, Big East, PAC-10, & SEC) and the major bowl committes (Rose, Orange, Sugar, and Fiesta). The BCS does not have to include any of the mid-major conferences (MAC, WAC, CUSA, MWC, Sun Belt), or the Independent schools, if they so choose.

4. There are rules set in place. These rules should be ratified, but they are what the BCS commissioners agreed upon before the start of each season. The Mid-Majors have the chance to play in a BCS Bowl. And if they finish #1 or #2 in the nation, they have the right to play for the BCS National Championship.

From the above, there is not a damn thing our federal government can do about it since the NCAA is not a organization relying on the government for their finances or oversight.


For the record, socialism is an economic system, and democracy is a political system. It is possible to have a both. Perhaps you are more referring to capitalism vs socialism, and as we have seen with the recent economic collapse, unregulated capitalism can lead to significant negative externalities.

[Spray]

Great. College football is now a public utility.

I once paid too much for a ticket to a game. Congress must act!! We need price controls. And while we're at it, why not have the ATF monitor beer sales in the stadium?

Sorry. "Multi billion dollar business". You know what I meant.

[Spray]

This is where you are wrong.

1. We do not have a socialist government in place here in the United States. It is a free democracy. Meaning they government does not have the right to be prying in the business of any business or organization.

2. The NCAA is an organization to oversee the major university/college athletics as in setting a standard of rules and laws. They defend the amature athlete.

3. The NCAA does not control the BCS. The BCS is an entirely different organization made up of the commissioners of the 6 major conferences (ACC, Big 12, Big 10, Big East, PAC-10, & SEC) and the major bowl committes (Rose, Orange, Sugar, and Fiesta). The BCS does not have to include any of the mid-major conferences (MAC, WAC, CUSA, MWC, Sun Belt), or the Independent schools, if they so choose.

4. There are rules set in place. These rules should be ratified, but they are what the BCS commissioners agreed upon before the start of each season. The Mid-Majors have the chance to play in a BCS Bowl. And if they finish #1 or #2 in the nation, they have the right to play for the BCS National Championship.

From the above, there is not a damn thing our federal government can do about it since the NCAA is not a organization relying on the government for their finances or oversight.

I never referred to the NCAA. I was speaking to the business as a whole. The fact is the current system is weighted heavily in favor of the 6 major conferences at the expense of over half the teams in Div. 1 (FBS, if you prefer). Because of the extreme amounts of money involved, the Senator from Idaho, for example, may feel his state's universities aren't getting a fair opportunity to grab a piece of the pie, wheteher directly from bowl payouts, or the indirect benefits of conference TV contracts, exposure leading to merchandising sales (although I'm not sure how that works from a licensing standpoint), etc., etc., etc. That's what the representative was elected to do- protect the interests of his state. When the dollar numbers are high enough, you'll see Congress getting involved.

Thus, Congress could enact a piece of legislation mandating the system be overhauled to ensure Middle Tennesse St. has the same opportunity to play in a BCS game as Oklahoma, and it would most likely be grounded in antitrust law (it could be argued the BCS is a cartel). The power would come from the Commerce Clause in the Constitution. Now whether said piece of legislation would pass constitutional muster would still be for the courts to decide.

The fact remains that Congress could enact legislation, and money is the only factor that would prompt any action on their part. It definitely seems unimportant in light of other issues facing the country, but an extra $50 million could do wonders for the academic facilities in Boise. We will continue to see Congressmen shouting to the rooftops every year about this time until the BCS is changed.

[Leroy Lizard]

It is possible to have a both. Perhaps you are more referring to capitalism vs socialism, and as we have seen with the recent economic collapse, unregulated capitalism can lead to significant negative externalities.

There is nothing capitalist about a bailout. And there is nothing capitalist about providing oodles of revenue to social services. Just sayin'.

College football is doing very well, especially given the economy. Utah can complain all it wants, but its football team probably finished in the black this year. A lot of businesses didn't. So cry me a river.

It will be a dark, dark day when the Feds get involved in regulating college football.

[L-Boy]

There is nothing capitalist about a bailout. And there is nothing capitalist about providing oodles of revenue to social services. Just sayin'.

College football is doing very well, especially given the economy. Utah can complain all it wants, but its football team probably finished in the black this year. A lot of businesses didn't. So cry me a river.

It will be a dark, dark day when the Feds get involved in regulating college football.


There is no such thing as a pure capitalistic economic system out there. All have some degree of regulation and some degree of socialism.

I think the congress does have the right to intervene in the business of college football. Do I think they should? No. There are far more important matters.

[Leroy Lizard]

"Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, the University of Utah and the University of Texas want you to believe that college football is really a business, and should be regulated like one.

I agree. College football is very much a big business. So let's examine this issue from a pure business standpoint.

I am sure many of you own a business. If you don't, let's pretend that you do. One afternoon, you decide that you can make a better computer than anyone else. So you bring in some outside help and, voila, you start making them.

And they are very good computers. Better than Apples. Better than HPs. Better than Dells. And you have some great successes week after week. People are impressed. The nation wants you to succeed.

But then the Mother of All Bids comes out. You submit a proposal to supply Halliburton with 40,000 computers. Everyone wants this bid. And you don't get it; Dell does.

When you ask Halliburton why they chose Dell when your computer is better, they tell you something shocking: Dell is a big name and has produced good computers for a long time. Simply put, Dell has the bigger reputation, and even though the computers should have been judged purely on their quality, Dell got the bid because of its name-brand recognition.

THIS IS SO UNFAIR! you cry. It should only be about the computers, right?

Welcome to Big Business.

So let's look at the BCS. Utah wants to play for the national title, but Oklahoma got the votes from the sportswriters to play instead. Oklahoma's football team has built an incredible reputation built over a period of decades. They have won numerous national titles and their team is practically synonymous with winning. So based on name-brand recognition and the fact that they have an outstanding team this year (that set the modern NCAA scoring record), they got invited instead.

Tough!!!! That's the way it is in business. Reputation matters! What you do over a long period of time makes a difference in the pure business world.

So do you want college football treated as a big business? If so, how can you argue that Utah is entitled to go to the national title game? We don't have ENTITLEMENTS in big business. Your computer company is not entitled to win the Halliburton contract simply because YOU think your computers are better, or even if the entire world thinks they are better.

So if you're Utah and you want college football treated like big business, what can you do? Win. Win every year. Do what it takes to build that reputation. And if you go 3-9 next year, don't complain five years from now about being shafted by the voters. Don't suck, and you won't have this problem.

And if you're Texas, just shut your pie hole for once in your life."

[Soonersince57]

It's just grandstanding for their constituents. Turn off the cameras and they'll disappear.

[Spray]

"Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, the University of Utah and the University of Texas want you to believe that college football is really a business, and should be regulated like one.

I agree. College football is very much a big business. So let's examine this issue from a pure business standpoint.

I am sure many of you own a business. If you don't, let's pretend that you do. One afternoon, you decide that you can make a better computer than anyone else. So you bring in some outside help and, voila, you start making them.

And they are very good computers. Better than Apples. Better than HPs. Better than Dells. And you have some great successes week after week. People are impressed. The nation wants you to succeed.

But then the Mother of All Bids comes out. You submit a proposal to supply Halliburton with 40,000 computers. Everyone wants this bid. And you don't get it; Dell does.

When you ask Halliburton why they chose Dell when your computer is better, they tell you something shocking: Dell is a big name and has produced good computers for a long time. Simply put, Dell has the bigger reputation, and even though the computers should have been judged purely on their quality, Dell got the bid because of its name-brand recognition.

THIS IS SO UNFAIR! you cry. It should only be about the computers, right?

Welcome to Big Business.

So let's look at the BCS. Utah wants to play for the national title, but Oklahoma got the votes from the sportswriters to play instead. Oklahoma's football team has built an incredible reputation built over a period of decades. They have won numerous national titles and their team is practically synonymous with winning. So based on name-brand recognition and the fact that they have an outstanding team this year (that set the modern NCAA scoring record), they got invited instead.

Tough!!!! That's the way it is in business. Reputation matters! What you do over a long period of time makes a difference in the pure business world.

So do you want college football treated as a big business? If so, how can you argue that Utah is entitled to go to the national title game? We don't have ENTITLEMENTS in big business. Your computer company is not entitled to win the Halliburton contract simply because YOU think your computers are better, or even if the entire world thinks they are better.

So if you're Utah and you want college football treated like big business, what can you do? Win. Win every year. Do what it takes to build that reputation. And if you go 3-9 next year, don't complain five years from now about being shafted by the voters. Don't suck, and you won't have this problem.

And if you're Texas, just shut your pie hole for once in your life."

Very legitimate explanation. The one key factor though is that Utah's conference doesn't have an automatic bid in the BCS. Thus the inequity and where the legilastion would come about.

[Crucifax Autumn]

Screw 'em, they're Utah and we're not to bastardize an old saying!

[Leroy Lizard]

The one key factor though is that Utah's conference doesn't have an automatic bid in the BCS. Thus the inequity and where the legilastion would come about

Utah was able to play in a BCS bowl game, so they haven't been damaged. Besides, no conference has an automatic bid for the national championship game, so Utah is on equal footing with other teams in that regard.

Utah has no claim no matter which way they spin it.

[OU_Sooners75]

For the record, socialism is an economic system, and democracy is a political system. It is possible to have a both. Perhaps you are more referring to capitalism vs socialism, and as we have seen with the recent economic collapse, unregulated capitalism can lead to significant negative externalities.

Thank you captain obvious. However there are also different ways each form of governments can and does operate.

the US is a free democracy. With free enterprise and based on a capitalist society.

Socialism is where the government, no matter which form, takes control of big business, media, and has control over all social programs.

Since we do not live in a socialistic society, the government does not have the right to butt in.

[OU_Sooners75]

I never referred to the NCAA. I was speaking to the business as a whole. The fact is the current system is weighted heavily in favor of the 6 major conferences at the expense of over half the teams in Div. 1 (FBS, if you prefer). Because of the extreme amounts of money involved, the Senator from Idaho, for example, may feel his state's universities aren't getting a fair opportunity to grab a piece of the pie, wheteher directly from bowl payouts, or the indirect benefits of conference TV contracts, exposure leading to merchandising sales (although I'm not sure how that works from a licensing standpoint), etc., etc., etc. That's what the representative was elected to do- protect the interests of his state. When the dollar numbers are high enough, you'll see Congress getting involved.
So what if it heavily favors the 6 major conferences. Those very conferences are the ones that made college football what it is today. So big freaking deal.

Do I agree with the system in place? No. I am very pro-playoff.

But the government has no jurisdiction in the matter on how the major division in College football determines their national championship.

[OU_Sooners75]

Maybe instead of the congress trying to flex their muscle toward the NCAA, they should enact legislation stating how top 25 human and computer polls are voted on?

I mean, in reality, the problem is not the BCS, it is the humans that do not watch many games thinking they know who is the best!

[Frozen Sooner]

This is where you are wrong.

1. We do not have a socialist government in place here in the United States. It is a free democracy. Meaning they government does not have the right to be prying in the business of any business or organization.

The US Constitution and the Supreme Court disagree with you here. Under the interstate commerce clause, the Congress most certainly has the explicit power to regulate anything that does business across state lines. The NCAA and BCS certainly qualify.

Whether it's a good idea for them to do so at this time, well, I don't necessarily agree with that.

Hell, it's not as if this would be the first time the federal government has mandated rule changes to college football. Teddy Roosevelt flat-out told the universities he'd ban the sport unless they changed the rules to keep kids from getting killed.

[OU_Sooners75]

The US Constitution and the Supreme Court disagree with you here. Under the interstate commerce clause, the Congress most certainly has the explicit power to regulate anything that does business across state lines. The NCAA and BCS certainly qualify.

Whether it's a good idea for them to do so at this time, well, I don't necessarily agree with that.

Hell, it's not as if this would be the first time the federal government has mandated rule changes to college football. Teddy Roosevelt flat-out told the universities he'd ban the sport unless they changed the rules to keep kids from getting killed.

The government does not have law over any company or organization when it comes to setting rules and policies for their respective company or organization....

In other words, the Federal law makers cannot tell the NCAA, "This is how you are going to determin the Major College Football National Championship for now on."

And there is a difference between if someone's life is in danger and settling a way to determine a championship.

I suppose congress should get involved with the Big 12 tie breaker issues then.

[Leroy Lizard]

The US Constitution and the Supreme Court disagree with you here. Under the interstate commerce clause, the Congress most certainly has the explicit power to regulate anything that does business across state lines. The NCAA and BCS certainly qualify.

Your post embodies much of what people fear about government regulation; that if you give Congress an inch, they'll take a mile.

Congress can regulate interstate commerce, but it cannot regulate a business simply because it engages in interstate commerce. If it did, just about any business under the sun would fall under government control.

Wal-Mart engages in interstate commerce. That doesn't give Congress a right to tell Wal-Mart how it should elect its officers or give out its promotions.

Now, if you really want Congress to run our businesses, keep in mind the business acumen of the typical Congressman.

[Leroy Lizard]

Hell, it's not as if this would be the first time the federal government has mandated rule changes to college football. Teddy Roosevelt flat-out told the universities he'd ban the sport unless they changed the rules to keep kids from getting killed.

I'm not sure where you're getting your information. Not even the great Teddy Roosevelt would have had the power to kill college football and I don't recall ever reading about such threats. (I have my copy of The History of College Football laying around here somewhere. Maybe I'll take a look.) He did urge college football to institute reforms to make the game safer, however.

[SoonerBacker]

I have read nothing that indicates that any of these people are "protesting" UF's title. They are just whining about the BCS, and most of them are TX or UTAH homers.

I was just quoting the title of the article, L-Boy.

As to the issues being discussed, Congress ahould concentrate on the more important things facing this nation right now.

Keep the government out of sports!!! (And everything else we can keep them out of.) I have a bumper sticker that reads: "U.S. Government Policy - If It Ain't Broke, Fix It 'Til It Is!" They tend to screw things up whenever they get involved.


That's just my opinion, though.

[Spray]

There seems to be some disconnect here- Frozen and I are telling you why Congress can legislate this situation. Leroy & 75- you're really arguing whether Congress should legislate in this situation.

I agree, Congress should leave it alone. However, the absloute fact is that Congress could legislate this if they so choose. I hope you don't honestly believe that if Wal Mart promoted only white men that Congress couldn't step in and legislate that- oh wait, they already have.

[L-Boy]

I was just quoting the title of the article, L-Boy.

As to the issues being discussed, Congress ahould concentrate on the more important things facing this nation right now.

Keep the government out of sports!!! (And everything else we can keep them out of.) I have a bumper sticker that reads: "U.S. Government Policy - If It Ain't Broke, Fix It 'Til It Is!" They tend to screw things up whenever they get involved.


That's just my opinion, though.


I agree, the title is misleading, but often they are to draw readers in Also, I agree, Congress does not need to waste time screwing with college football. As to your last statement - I generallly agree - to a point anyway.

[Leroy Lizard]

I agree, Congress should leave it alone. However, the absloute fact is that Congress could legislate this if they so choose.

Sure, if they bastardize the Constitution (which they have in the past). So they CAN do it, just not legitimately.

Essentially, if Congress can legislate college football, then no business is safe.


I hope you don't honestly believe that if Wal Mart promoted only white men that Congress couldn't step in and legislate that- oh wait, they already have.

Promoting White men only is a Constitutional issue and therefore falls under Federal oversight. The last time I looked, there was no Constitutional protection for universities located in minor conferences.

This is why plaintiffs in such cases always try to find a minority that is disadvantaged by a rule before they can ask the Courts to strike it down, and even then they have to show that the rule specifically discriminates against this group. I see no protected group that is disadvantaged by the BCS other than Mormans, and even then it would be a stretch to assume that the BCS rules specifically discriminates against Mormons.

The Special Ed clause of the Constitution does not protect Horn fans, so don't even go there.