Non-BCS conferences get $24 million; Big Ten receives $22.2 million
WASHINGTON (AP) — The five non-Bowl Championship Series college athletic conferences will receive a record $24 million from this year's BCS bowl games, according to BCS figures obtained by The Associated Press Monday.
The distribution of money has been a main point of contention for critics of the Bowl Championship Series system in Congress. They have pushed legislation aimed at forcing the BCS to switch to a playoff system rather than the ratings system it currently uses to set the games that determine the college championship.
Despite the record amount that now goes to the non-BCS schools, it still represents a sum far less than that received by the half-dozen BCS conferences.
Most of the $24 million will go to the two non-BCS conferences that sent teams to BCS games: Mountain West Conference, at $9.8 million, and the Western Athletic Conference, at $7.8 million. The other three non-BCS conferences will divide the remainder.
That compares to $22.2 million each to the Big Ten and Southeastern BCS conferences, and $17.7 million each for the other four BCS conferences. Those first two received more because they each had two teams in BCS bowls.
Under the BCS system, the six BCS conferences get automatic bids to participate in top-tier bowl games while the other five don't. The non-BCS conferences will reap a record take this year because they sent two teams to BCS bowls for the first time — Boise State and Texas Christian.
BCS executive director Bill Hancock told the AP the new numbers show the distribution is "fair and appropriate."
"It's an opportunity for us to remind people that every conference had a chance to earn automatic qualification, and will again, based on the current evaluation," he said. Hancock said that the BCS has helped all 11 conferences get more access, revenue and opportunity to play in the postseason. The previous record for non-BCS conferences was $19.3 million, set last year, he said.
Still, the figures aren't likely to win over critics in Congress.
Rep. Joe Barton, a Texas Republican, has cited the revenue discrepancy as a reason for his legislation that would ban the promotion of a postseason NCAA Division I Football Bowl Subdivision game as a national championship unless it results from a playoff. The bill passed a subcommittee last month but faces an uphill battle in Congress.
In the Senate, Utah Republican Orrin Hatch has called on President Barack Obama to ask the Justice Department to investigate whether the BCS violated antitrust laws, arguing that the millions of dollars at stake justify oversight by the federal government.
Craig Thompson, commissioner of the Mountain West Conference, last year called the money distribution system "grossly inequitable."
Neither Barton, Hatch nor Thompson immediately returned messages seeking comment on the BCS numbers.
Comments
chapmaja
Tue, Jan 26, 2010 : 12:44 a.m.
This isn't as dumb of an issue as it seems. This is a Big Money issue with college athletics and it will get much bigger in the next couple years. There is a big difference between $1.6 million per school and $300,000 per school which is the average difference between payments to BCS Conference members and non-BCS conference members in recent years. When it comes to this type of money, the government does need to pay attention. Remember most of these schools get federal money and in many cases the student athletes on these teams are getting some sort of federal aid, as well was their scholarships from the schools (Pell Grants, ect). As for how they can stop them from calling it a national championship game? That is tougher, however one thing that needs to be considered is where these games are played. Who wons the stadiums and how exactly were they funded. The laws aren't nearl as simple as they seem and I'm sure someone in Washington will find some way to do something stir this even further. As for the BCS conference schools pulling out. There is a big problem with that. The NCAA would get invovled and that could be its own big mess. The BCS brings in a lot of $$$$, however it is small change compared with the money that March Madness brings in. Considering the number of schools in D1, and the voting structure of D1, the BCS conference schools have to be very careful not to pull away too much or they could cut off a significant funding source for thier programs, NCAA revenue sharing payments. Money drives college athletics, not only at the BCS Conference level, but all the way down to D2 and D3. The NCAA recently passed new rules which basically make it almost impossible for a D2 team to move to D1. The reason wasn't told, but it boils down to less D1 schools means more money to be split between the ones that are in D1.
johnnya2
Mon, Jan 25, 2010 : 11:44 p.m.
Let's see, a representative from the district covered by TCU and a senator from Utah are trying to get the government involved in a college sporting playoff. Can you say, obvious. I have major issues with the BCS, and think the best thing to happen will be when a major conference decides to not participate and do their own thing. Once that happens, there is no way for the BCS to claim anything.
garrisondyer
Mon, Jan 25, 2010 : 10:39 p.m.
Although I'm no expert on the matter, I don't get how the federal government thinks they can justifiably force the agency running the national championship to stop calling it the national championship. Unless, of course, the BCS is a part of the federal government itself... I don't like the idea of our government thinking they can bully their opinion through on stuff that has no relation to congress' job whatsoever. Any clarification?
Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball
Mon, Jan 25, 2010 : 1:26 p.m.
Funny how Congress just wastes time on the dumbest of issues. Why don't they go regulate Hollywood Movies - they made way more money. Maybe Hollywood needs a "Playoff system".