Alamo Bowl Official Fear for Jobs
Alamo Bowl officials say playoff push needs to be declared offside
By W. Scott Bailey - San Antonio Business Journal
Updated: 7:00 p. m. ET Dec. 19, 2004
URL:
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/6736485/
From Seattle, Wash., to Gainesville, Fla., and all points in between, someone is arguing for college football to scrap its current post-season format and replace it with a playoff system.
But not everyone is ready to scrap a century-old bowl history in favor of pacifying television executives and teams that feel they are losing out under the current Bowl Championship Series (BCS) formula.
San Antonio's place in college football is limited to the NCAA Division III Trinity Tigers and an annual bowl game. But it is here where anti-playoff forces are drawing some of the toughest lines in the sand. Opponents say the hype that would surely surround a playoff system would not compensate for the damage it could inflict on bowl games - including San Antonio's MasterCard Alamo Bowl.
Every day, the line for those who support a playoff system grows longer. It includes some college football players and coaches, as well as fans and members of the media.
"Surely, the NCAA and Division I-A football can join the other 23 intercollegiate sports and devise a system that determines a true champion, preserves the integrity of the game and levels the playing field," said retired Brigham Young football coach LaVell Edwards, when he testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee last October.
Among the journalists pressing for such a system is Milwaukee sports columnist Steve Czaban, who recently wrote: "Whenever I get into an argument about the merits of an NFL-style playoff in college football, the person I am arguing with inevitably brings up the ol' saw about how 'if they create a playoff system, it would make all these great regular season games meaningless.' This is usually my cue to just shut up and keep drinking my beer. Because anybody who thinks this is more full of it than a Porta-Potty at an outdoor Meatloaf concert."
Standing firm
Alamo Bowl President Derrick Fox says in the rush to sell a playoff system to the masses, proponents have neglected to sit down with those who would be most affected -- the bowls. He says a playoff system could wipe out games like the Alamo Bowl.
"No one ever comes to the bowls to ask for our input on all of this," explains Fox. "But we're the ones who have been around the block."
Alamo Bowl officials know there is a lot of public support for a playoff system. But Fox adds, "It's easy for the public to jump in. They aren't in our business."
Les Miles and Jim Tressel will lead their respective Oklahoma State and Ohio State teams into the 2004 Alamo Bowl. Both head coaches say they understand the argument for playoffs. But both also understand what such a system could do to the bowl landscape.
Tressel told reporters as his 2002 team was preparing to win a national title: "I think the fact that we have such a great bowl tradition ... that right now it's the best thing."
Nebraska Chancellor Harvey Perlman says risking the demise of the bowl system as we know it for playoffs is unwise.
"The bowl system provides rewarding post-season experiences for far more student athletes than will ever play in a playoff," Perlman contends. "We should continue to nurture that system and permit our student athletes to enjoy the many benefits of the bowl experience without requiring them to play what is, in effect, the equivalent of an NFL season."
Texas A&M head coach Dennis Franchione is also leery of a playoff system and told reporters recently that, unlike the numerous bowl victors, only one team would come out of a playoff system feeling like a winner.
Messing with history
"The bowl system has been around for almost a hundred years," says Fox. "The bowl system has not been a bad thing for post-season college football. It's been a great reward for the fans and more importantly for the kids."
Fox adds, "It doesn't matter what plan you throw out there, you are never going to have the exact science. There will always be those who feel they were unfairly left out no matter what system is in place."
There are other arguments against a college football playoff system. One is that such a system would destroy the importance of regular season games, driving down attendance and television ratings. Another is that a playoff system would open the door for even more commercialism than already exists in college football and would also interfere with final exams.
But maintaining the integrity of the current bowl picture and the revenues they generate are arguably the biggest reasons some opponents are fighting the playoff talk.
Last year, 28 bowl games distributed more than $187 million to NCAA schools, according to the Football Bowl Association (FBA). The FBA contends that more than $1.35 billion has been paid out in the past 10 years and that the bowls will conservatively pay out more than $2.1 billion over the next 10 years. In San Antonio, officials say the Alamo Bowl and affiliated events generate an annual economic impact of roughly $20 million.
FBA officials say a playoff system would "kill the golden goose" by eliminating the bowl system as we know it. Opponents argue that even if the bowls were worked into the playoff picture, some would be left out and others would likely lose all control over what teams and conferences played in their games.
Says Fox, "The bowls would be the first to sit down and try to make post-season college football the absolute best experience it can be. So let's get around a table and get everyone's input in this -- including the bowls."
But don't expect him to give up much ground.
"As far as a playoff," says Fox, "it just doesn't make sense logistically for a whole number of reasons."
###
Oh ... I almost forgot: