Apparently the situation has sparked the interest of the Department of Justice. I'm in no way a legal guru, so it is quite surprising to me that Anti-trust Laws could apply to college football. I guess at the end of the day it is about dollar signs, just like most things in America.
Mr. BCS boss scoffs at the DoJ's interest in the matter claiming there are more important things to worry about.
Sounds like a shady character to me, because of the DoJ had questions, I would want to answer them and make them go away rather than downplay their responsibilities in the matter.
Personally, I'm on the fence about the BCS.
My dislikes include: Favoritism for teams, the over-importance of the top 25, that stupid crystal football, undefeated teams left out of the NC and getting crappy games, ticket prices for BCS games, and Georgetown.
My likes include: Bowl games for almost every winning team, national exposure, rivalries and the weight that regular season games carry.
Will adding more games ruin a schedule? Will adding more games result in more injuries? Also, does the BCS create an uneven playing field for smaller niche markets like ours compared to the football crazy south?
Would things like the Cam Newton debacle or the Reggie Bush scandal continue to happen if so much of your title chances depended on aggregated prestige?
As for me, I can't decide. What do you folks think? Should there be playoffs? Should we keep the BCS?
What should we do with college football?
Keep the BCS. Bowls are the way to go. (3 votes)
Playoffs. We need a change. (70 votes)
Please rephrase the question. (don't care) (1 vote)
Alternate solution, post below. (3 votes)
No idea. (4 votes)
81 total votes