April 23, 2009

BCS meets, no change.

Short version:
The BCS met this week and no change was made. The MWC proposal was reviewed and only the idea of a selection committee had any traction.

One might suspect this to be an inside threat from the same people who basically operate the selection committee that left SDSU and New Mexico on the sidelines for the NCAA basketball tournament after the MWC presented their BCS proposal.

Long version: Darth Prather unleashed
End of summer Summer 2008: Darth Prather encounters Bronco Mendenhall's concept of a play-in game and wheels begin turning. Echo's of Jedi Reagan's teaching about a flexible structure and two selection criterion help shape his subconscious thoughts. WEA attempts to warn the world of Darth Prather's imminent attempt to concur the world, somehow involving Utah and oppressive mathematical relations.

December 2008: Darth Prather, brandishing a new concept, emerges in the lull between Bowl selection and actual bowl games to awaken the boiling post season structure debate. Wrestling with Jedi Regan, on and off line, only left the concept stronger.

January 15 2009: Darth Prather launches a blog to sort through his concept in gory detail. The discontent with the status quo among fans reemerges. Initial attempts to contact Utah officials ends with futility.

March 4th: Days before Darth Prather was ready to send his first distillation of his concept to BCS authorities the MWC generates a buzz with a proposal of their own. Darth Prather delays his concept to make presentation changes in his distillation.

Spring Break: From his parents beach house in Panama City Beach, Florida, Darth Prather takes the week to make phone calls and submit his proposal to significant parties.

March 30th: Bill Hancock, the BCS administrator, is reached by phone and found to be surprisingly pleasant to talk with. Darth Prather e-mails his proposal to Bill Hancock and John Swofford for consideration.

March 31st: Darth Prather receives email:
"Darth Prather,
Got it; thanks. Will take some time to look it over and will let you know if we have any questions.
Bill"

and

"Darth Prather,
Wanted to let you know that John Swofford received your e-mail as well, and he has asked me to thank you for sending it.
Bill"

Darth Prather continues to contact MWC's Javan Hedlund about their proposal and is surprised to find out how intent they are about pursuing it. Attempts to contact the WAC failed. Content with the contact with Bill Hancock, urgency diminished and an attempt to consider revenue sharing was pursued.

April 3: The following e-mail is sent to Charles Bloom of the SEC:
"Thank you for your time. I am asking that you consider whether the following three ideas to improve the BCS system warrant forwarding on to the appropriate SEC representatives. They involve the limit of each conference to two teams, revenue sharing, and the structure itself.

Two team limit

In 2007 the BCS made a mid season executive decision to expand the list of eligible teams to the top 18 if not enough teams could be found in the top 14. In 2008 it was decided that a conference could have three teams if they had the top two teams in the BCS standings, neither of which are the conference champion.

The 2007 ruling allows for the possibility that certain events may occur that would lower the bar for the most prestigious games. I suggest the following rule to handle both cases:

A conference may have at most two teams eligible for a BCS bowl unless 1) they have the #1 and #2 team in the BCS standings and a third team is determined to be the conference champion or 2) their would not be enough eligible teams in the top 14 otherwise.

Revenue Sharing

The BCS is criticized for its revenue sharing plan, but what criteria is used to measure a conference's value? The BCS's revenue comes primarily through TV contracts. The TV contracts are supported by advertisers. Advertisers are drawn to games with lots of fans. If the revenue is to be distributed in a way to promote the kind of competition that is going to increase the value of the BCS, it needs to be tied to the fan base of each conference.

The bowls generate revenue that is incrementally increases at a reasonable rate until the BCS bowls are reached. Conference payouts comparable to these values would be 9 million for the first team and 4.5 million for additional teams from each conference or any independents. The remainder of the revenue should be distributed according to each conference's fan base.

This would amount to 54 million from the six automatic qualifying conferences plus 9 million from the at-large conferences. One should expect one at-large conference to participate each year, making 54 million a typical figure.

I have used NCAA average attendance figures over the last four years in the attached calculations. It is clear that the Big East's value to the BCS is closer to C-USA or the MWC than the SEC, Big 10 or Big 12.

A more robust system would allow season ticket waiting lists to be included if an annual fee or booster membership charge is required to maintain a place on the list. No fan could count for more than two seats regardless of the number of seats requested.

Post Season Structure

University of Georgia President Michael Adams and University of Florida president James Bernard Machen have expressed a desire for some form of change in the current structure. Formidable obstacles stand in the way.

Attached is a structure that:

** Maintains the current scheduling limits.
- Stays within the December 19th through the second Monday in January bowl window.
- Does not allow any team to participate in more than 16 games total.
- Does not reduce the current length of the regular season.
** Increases consensus at the cutoff.
- Allows all undefeated teams to participate.
- Keeps the number of teams small.
- Uses gaps in the average rather than ordinal values to determine eligibility.
** Adds transparency to the high profile decision making process.
- Explicitly specifies what warrants a particular designation.
- Explicitly states how changes in designation are handled.
** Restores college football traditions.
- New Year's Day once was a celebration of elite college football.
- Bowl timing once represented each bowl's level of prestige.
- Conferences and bowls tie-ins once had a competitive incentive.
** Minimizes impact on existing structures.
- Maintains the existing BCS bowls through 2014.
- Maintains the existing rotation of the National Championship Game through 2014.
- Improves the significance of conference tie-ins.
- Does not interfere with the regular season or conference championship games.
- Defines a role for bowls outside the BCS.

Thank you for your time. I can be reached at darth.prather@sethlord.com or by phone at (###)###-####.

Sincerely,

Darth Prather"

April 4th: Contact with PAC 10 and Big 10, the most prominent obstacles, fails. Input regarding the possible small impact of this proposal on the Rose Bowl was worth avoiding having teams like USC unhappy with their inability to get a game with SEC teams or Michigan getting left out of the title game was requested.

April 15th: Email from Charles Bloom:

"Darth Prather - I'll pass this on to Commissioner Slive in advance of next week's BCS meetings. Take care. Charles"

April 20-22nd: BCS meets and get nothing accomplished.

Future: Darth Prather's stadium sized BCS death ray under construction...

The truth is out there. Other than names, e-mail and phone numbers (to protect the true identity of Darth Prather) and the removal of some white space, the email's above are genuine. Death ray plans to be announced soon.

Comments:

BCS meets, no change.
Short version: The BCS met this week and no change was made. The MWC proposal was reviewed and only the idea of a selection committee had any traction. One might suspect this to be an inside threat from the same people who basically operate the selection committee that left SDSU and New Mexico on the sidelines for the NCAA basketball tournament after the MWC presented their BCS proposal. Long version: Darth Prather unleashed End of summer Summer 2008: Darth Prather encounters Bronco Mendenhall's concept of a play-in game and wheels begin turning. Echo's of Jedi Reagan's teaching about a flexible structure and two selection criterion help shape his subconscious thoughts. WEA attempts to warn the world of Darth Prather's imminent attempt to concur the world, somehow involving Utah and oppressive mathematical relations. December 2008: Darth Prather, brandishing a new concept, emerges in the lull between Bowl selection and actual bowl games to awaken the boiling post season structure debate. Wrestling with Jedi Regan, on and off line, only left the concept stronger. January 15 2009: Darth Prather launches a blog to sort through his concept in gory detail. The discontent with the status quo among fans reemerges. Initial attempts to contact Utah officials ends with futility. March 4th: Days before Darth Prather was ready to send his first distillation of his concept to BCS authorities the MWC generates a buzz with a proposal of their own. Darth Prather delays his concept to make presentation changes in his distillation. Spring Break: From his parents beach house in Panama City Beach, Florida, Darth Prather takes the week to make phone calls and submit his proposal to significant parties. March 30th: Bill Hancock, the BCS administrator, is reached by phone and found to be surprisingly pleasant to talk with. Darth Prather e-mails his proposal to Bill Hancock and John Swofford for consideration. March 31st: Darth Prather receives email: "Darth Prather, Got it; thanks. Will take some time to look it over and will let you know if we have any questions. Bill" and "Darth Prather, Wanted to let you know that John Swofford received your e-mail as well, and he has asked me to thank you for sending it. Bill" Darth Prather continues to contact MWC's Javan Hedlund about their proposal and is surprised to find out how intent they are about pursuing it. Attempts to contact the WAC failed. Content with the contact with Bill Hancock, urgency diminished and an attempt to consider revenue sharing was pursued. April 3: The following e-mail is sent to Charles Bloom of the SEC: "Thank you for your time. I am asking that you consider whether the following three ideas to improve the BCS system warrant forwarding on to the appropriate SEC representatives. They involve the limit of each conference to two teams, revenue sharing, and the structure itself. Two team limit In 2007 the BCS made a mid season executive decision to expand the list of eligible teams to the top 18 if not enough teams could be found in the top 14. In 2008 it was decided that a conference could have three teams if they had the top two teams in the BCS standings, neither of which are the conference champion. The 2007 ruling allows for the possibility that certain events may occur that would lower the bar for the most prestigious games. I suggest the following rule to handle both cases: A conference may have at most two teams eligible for a BCS bowl unless 1) they have the #1 and #2 team in the BCS standings and a third team is determined to be the conference champion or 2) their would not be enough eligible teams in the top 14 otherwise. Revenue Sharing The BCS is criticized for its revenue sharing plan, but what criteria is used to measure a conference's value? The BCS's revenue comes primarily through TV contracts. The TV contracts are supported by advertisers. Advertisers are drawn to games with lots of fans. If the revenue is to be distributed in a way to promote the kind of competition that is going to increase the value of the BCS, it needs to be tied to the fan base of each conference. The bowls generate revenue that is incrementally increases at a reasonable rate until the BCS bowls are reached. Conference payouts comparable to these values would be 9 million for the first team and 4.5 million for additional teams from each conference or any independents. The remainder of the revenue should be distributed according to each conference's fan base. This would amount to 54 million from the six automatic qualifying conferences plus 9 million from the at-large conferences. One should expect one at-large conference to participate each year, making 54 million a typical figure. I have used NCAA average attendance figures over the last four years in the attached calculations. It is clear that the Big East's value to the BCS is closer to C-USA or the MWC than the SEC, Big 10 or Big 12. A more robust system would allow season ticket waiting lists to be included if an annual fee or booster membership charge is required to maintain a place on the list. No fan could count for more than two seats regardless of the number of seats requested. Post Season Structure University of Georgia President Michael Adams and University of Florida president James Bernard Machen have expressed a desire for some form of change in the current structure. Formidable obstacles stand in the way. Attached is a structure that: ** Maintains the current scheduling limits. - Stays within the December 19th through the second Monday in January bowl window. - Does not allow any team to participate in more than 16 games total. - Does not reduce the current length of the regular season. ** Increases consensus at the cutoff. - Allows all undefeated teams to participate. - Keeps the number of teams small. - Uses gaps in the average rather than ordinal values to determine eligibility. ** Adds transparency to the high profile decision making process. - Explicitly specifies what warrants a particular designation. - Explicitly states how changes in designation are handled. ** Restores college football traditions. - New Year's Day once was a celebration of elite college football. - Bowl timing once represented each bowl's level of prestige. - Conferences and bowls tie-ins once had a competitive incentive. ** Minimizes impact on existing structures. - Maintains the existing BCS bowls through 2014. - Maintains the existing rotation of the National Championship Game through 2014. - Improves the significance of conference tie-ins. - Does not interfere with the regular season or conference championship games. - Defines a role for bowls outside the BCS. Thank you for your time. I can be reached at darth.prather@sethlord.com or by phone at (###)###-####. Sincerely, Darth Prather" April 4th: Contact with PAC 10 and Big 10, the most prominent obstacles, fails. Input regarding the possible small impact of this proposal on the Rose Bowl was worth avoiding having teams like USC unhappy with their inability to get a game with SEC teams or Michigan getting left out of the title game was requested. April 15th: Email from Charles Bloom: "Darth Prather - I'll pass this on to Commissioner Slive in advance of next week's BCS meetings. Take care. Charles" April 20-22nd: BCS meets and get nothing accomplished. Future: Darth Prather's stadium sized BCS death ray under construction... The truth is out there. Other than names, e-mail and phone numbers (to protect the true identity of Darth Prather) and the removal of some white space, the email's above are genuine. Death ray plans to be announced soon.