Bowl Honkey!

To paraphrase Blaine Historian Phil Burgess, a lot of what I've read lately is just a bunch of bowl roar. Including from our host and, on a bigger stage, from my Dawg at the WSJ (link only temporary; must subscribe for permanent). I've commented on how the bowl system is set up so that the rich stay rich. If you think Auburn or Cal got screwed last year, think of them as a tiger/bear-skinned rug that the Bowl Gods walked all over. Then the undefeated Utahs and Boise States of the world are the dirt that gets swept under that tiger/bear-skinned rug. These teams will never, ever have a chance at the big prize unless there is a playoff.

Foolishly, I actually recorded the congressional hearing on the BCS last week, and I finally got through all of it (I had to go back several times cuz Rep. Snoozenstein and Commissioner Comatose kept putting me to sleep). I still don't see why they are so dead-set against a playoff. The Big Ten guy who testified was pretty believable when he said that an "NFL-style" playoff would bring a lot more money to the schools. (Why do they always say "NFL-style" with such disdain? At the hearing they said it at least 35 times, and it's all over the BCS website. Wouldn't it really be "Div. I-AA-style"?) So they try to say it's not about money, but I think that is just deflection. It is about money, but under a playoff system, the conferences would take money away from the bowls themselves and the sponsors, because many of the playoff games would have to be on campus. How the bowl brass brainwashed the conference officers and college presidents into parroting the "Bowls-are-Best" mantra is beyond me. We may be dealing with a more powerful force than we could possibly understand, as evidenced by the fact that the guy who was the biggest dick to the BCS and bowl reps nearly died less than a week after badmouthing the Almighty Bowl System. Coincidence?

When most of the congressmen were agreeing (as, indeed, I do) that a plus-one game is probably the best fix, the entire witness panel broke into a chorus of the "slippery slope" argument, saying that March Madness started out with just 8 teams, now they are at 65, and they're talking about going to a full 128 (which would be awesome!). They never directly answered the question of what is so bad about a playoff. The Alamo Bowl President kept talking about a playoff reducing the amount of postseason opportunities for players, and how right now we end the season with 28 different teams going out on a win. Yippee! Just like how our Little Leaguers all get "participation trophies." Do we really need to stroke the egos of college athletes? I'd say they get enough stroking from cleat-chasing coeds.

The only real benefit from watching the hearing was the Alamo Bowl president's mustache and that sexy, sassy hellcat, the Gentlelady from Tennessee, Marsha Blackburn.


Classic San Antone 'Stache: Derrick Fox