The American Spectator

home
ADVERTISEMENT
Print Email
Text Size

Sports Arena

Sportsman in Chief

Alas, Commssioner Obama isn’t the only pol BCS-ing about college and professional sports.

Florida won the BCS title game, staking its claim to the national championship. But Texas, USC, and Utah all disagree. With not the slightest interest in sports — other than the view, as a Seminole, that in a just world Florida would lose every game — I have no opinion as to which is the best team. Nor do I have any interest in how the national champion is anointed.

However, the president-elect has an opinion. While appearing on ESPN Radio’s “Mike & Mike in the Morning,” candidate Barack Obama promised to “have my attorney general investigate the possibility of instituting a college football playoff system through executive order. I’m tired of this nonsense at the end of every college football season.” And on “60 Minutes” he opined that “I don’t know any serious fan of college football who has disagreed with me on this. So I’m going to throw my weight around a little bit.”

He has not yet added the proposal to his stimulus package, and his tongue might have been firmly planted in his cheek, but others take the idea much more seriously.

Rep. Joe Barton (R-Tex.), representing the disappointed Longhorns, proposed legislation, introduced just hours before the Florida-Oklahoma contest, to bar “the marketing, promotion, and advertising of a post-season game as a ‘national championship’ football game, unless it is the result of a playoff system.” Explained Rep. Barton: “The BCS championship game is not a championship game under any sensible interpretation of the manner in which sports champions are determined.” Alas, he complained that hearings had been ineffective: “Simply exposing the flaws and subjecting them to discussion, however, hasn’t led to improvement.” Barton is joined by fellow Texas Republican Michael McCaul and Illinois Democrat Bobby Rush — who so effectively played the race card in the Rod Blagojevich-Roland Burris affair.

Last session Representatives Neil Abercrombie (D-Hawaii), Jim Matheson (D-Utah), Mike Simpson (R-Idaho), and Lynn Westmoreland (R-Ga.) introduced their own legislation, declaring the current system to be an illegal restraint of trade. Rep. Abercrombie fulminated: “It’s a racket. They’ve got a little cartel. It’s La Cosa Nostra … and slavery.” (Interestingly, on his website Rep. Westmoreland denounces excessive government regulation.)

Rep. Barton talked with President-elect Obama after the election and suggested that the two work together on the issue: “Sure, let’s do it,” the latter supposedly responded, though his transition office refused to comment. But last week the president-elect observed: “I’ve got to pick and choose my battles. I probably am going to be spending more time focusing on creating three million more jobs.” (He really will be busy if he is personally creating those jobs.)

Football fan and Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff headlined a recent blog entry “UTAH WINS! UTAH WINS! UTAH WINS!”, exulting that “the non-BCS Utah Utes destroyed the storied Alabama Crimson Tide.” But, he added: “Unfortunately, the BCS monopoly, with its money and its exclusive club and its computers, will crown another team as National Champion next week.”

To remedy this injustice — and incidentally fulfill his “duty to enforce federal and state antitrust laws,” he said — he is investigating the BCS for violating the antitrust laws. “We’ve established from the very first day, from the very first kickoff in the college season, more than half of the schools are put on an unlevel playing field,” said Attorney General Shurtleff: “They will never be allowed to play for a national championship.” At stake is not “just about bragging rights to say we’re number one truly. It’s about money.”

This is not the first time that politicians have thought they should take over the sports business. Four years ago major league baseball was preparing to sell the Washington Nationals franchise. One of the contending syndicates included liberal billionaire George Soros. Rep. Tom Davis (R-Va.) declared: “Now they’re going to hand [the team] over to a convicted felon of an insider trading charge [in France, not the U.S.] who wants to legalize drugs and who lives in New York and spent $5 million trying to defeat the president?”

Ironically, Davis was then chairman of the Government “Reform” Committee. He said that Congress would not interfere with the sale, but “I think Major League Baseball understands the stakes. I don’t think they want to get involved in a political fight.” After all, “They enjoy all sorts of exemptions,” and “If Soros buys the team and seeks public funding for the new stadium or anything else, the GOP attitude would be, ‘Let him pay for it’.”

Rep. Davis’ implicit threats were not academic. Based on a 1922 Supreme Court decision that baseball was purely a “local” matter, MLB alone among sports is exempt from the antitrust laws. Whether that makes any sense is another matter. But congressmen routinely chatter about killing the exemption.

In the aftermath of the players’ strike in 1994-1995, legislators made several attempts to lift the exemption. A decade ago Congress wrote the exemption into law, while limiting its application by giving players the same unionization rights as in other sports. The issue provides legislators with a convenient chain to pull whenever they want to meddle.

Congress turned its attention to steroids a few years back. Among the best-publicized crusaders were Rep. Davis, yet again, Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Ca.), a prolific regulator who cannot imagine a human activity outside of government control, and Senators Jim Bunning (R-Kent.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.), the former a onetime MLB pitcher and the latter an incipient presidential candidate. The results were public hearings and proposals to mandate a testing regime on all players in all sports, with penalties including a lifetime ban. (To his credit, when asked about Sen. McCain’s strange priorities, candidate Barack Obama opined: “I gotta admit that seeing a lot of congressional hearings around steroid use is not probably the best use of congressional time.”)

Their excuse for hearings and legislation were the claim that players were “role models” for teenagers. Set aside the question whether congressmen act as good role models. To protect children Congress would protect adult athletes as children too. Should the federal government next target players who chew tobacco, cheat on their wives, and drive cars too fast? They are bad role models too.

Another congressional concern is sports gambling. After revelations that NBA referee Tim Donaghy bet on games that he was officiating, Rep. Rush, who chairs the House Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and Consumer Protection, warned NBA David Stern that “this could be one of the most damaging scandals in the history of American sports.” (At least other than the BCS system, presumably.) Rep. Rush threatened to “to intervene if necessary.” Earlier in the year his subcommittee held hearings on drug-testing and the safety of thoroughbred horses.

Page: 1 2  

About the Author

Doug Bandow is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute. A former Special Assistant to President Ronald Reagan, he is the author and editor of several books, including The Politics of Plunder: Misgovernment in Washington (Transaction).

Letter to the Editor View all comments (25) |

Ryan| 1.12.09 @ 9:31AM

Two points, one more important than the other:

1. Politicians need to stay the heck away from sports. Yeah, maybe deal with the drugs because they can kill people, but that's it. The steroids fiasco is best dealt with by the Leagues themselves, not by Congress who has better ways of wasting our tax dollars. (You know, that being said, maybe we need them to concentrate more on sports, and that way they won't mess up anything important...)

2. Colleges - not Congress - should tweak the BCS, maybe to a +1 system. The great thing about college football is the MASSIVE importance of the regular season, which negates the need for a big playoff. If smaller schools want a seat at the table, play a competetive schedule. Yeah, the system is broken, but it beats the way everything USED to work and just needs some tweaking and getting rid of the stupid Notre Dame bumping up rule. A playoff would STILL leave out some teams, anyway, and non-BCS divisions would still be fighting for a seat at the table because of their pancake schedules.

Ryan| 1.12.09 @ 9:32AM

One more point. Playoffs are about who's hot, not about who's best. Reward the regular season.

Trotter| 1.12.09 @ 10:16AM

I am so glad that the country has absolutely nothing going on that deserves the attention of the members of Congress so that they can involve themselves in things they have no business meddling with. Whew, for a minute there I thought we might be in an economic meltdown.

Steve | 1.12.09 @ 10:32AM

Reward the regular season?? You mean like when Texas beat OU in the hallowed regular season? How were they rewarded?
I hear this specious argument from bcs defenders, but it is hollow at best based on what actually happens.

Ryan| 1.12.09 @ 11:12AM

Texas MAY have had an argument, but you also have to figure in how and who they got beat by - a Texas Tech team that also was trounced later on. Oklahoma had a bit better argument.

In any case, it still shows the overall strength of the system. It does need some tweaking, however.

Chris| 1.12.09 @ 11:22AM

I wish these bloody pols would stay out of sports. They're only going to screw it up worse than it already is. The same way they screw up the world. The NCAA is already corrupt enough without the corruptor-in- chief getting involved.

This is also one of those debates that I'm tiring of. Until the greedy NCAA can find a way to make more money out of determining its "champion" then everything is going to stay the way it is. That's reality. Deal with it. For all of you people so upset with the "system," I don't see or hear any of you encouraging and organizing boycotts. That's probably because you would accept and celebrate a so-called "tainted" national championship if it came your school's way. Money talks. If you don't like it stop the whining and don't watch.

Alan Brooks| 1.12.09 @ 1:37PM

it must have been great to be at the field when Ty Cobb was playing.
progress.

phooey.

macdaddy| 1.13.09 @ 1:04PM

The current BCS system is lousy but it is a far better compromise than a play-off system. If a play-off system gets implemented, we should remove all pretense of the scholar-athlete and just pay these guys. As it is, with a play-off system, even with only 8 teams, you're talking a minimum of 3 more weeks of prep (probably more like 4). So why are these guys in school again? It's a little ironic that Obama is The One who is denigrating a college degree.

Personally, I think we should return to the old way. I watched nearly all of the 5 bowl games on New Year's Day and saw some great games. I watched about 5 minutes of the runner-up game and 10 minutes of the championship game. I just couldn't get into either game. The moment had passed. I realize that numbers were up for the championship game this year, but the Rose Bowl still out-drew the runner-up bowl. If Ohio State had played in the Rose Bowl instead of in the runner-up bowl, you may have seen Rose Bowl numbers that rivaled the championship game.

But all this is beside the point. And that point is that the government needs to stay the hell away from sports.

hgjhhj| 11.18.09 @ 8:22PM

Mac TOD Converter,
TOD Converter for Windows

gfhgf| 1.11.10 @ 2:11AM

FLV to WMV Converter,
Free FLV to WMV converter

ytryr| 3.1.10 @ 2:31AM

DVD to iTouch Converter Mac,
Convert DVD to iPod Touch

More Articles by Doug Bandow

More Articles From Sports Arena

http://spectator.org/archives/2009/01/12/sportsman-in-chief

ADVERTISEMENT

SPONSORED LINKS

FLASHBACK TO: 1995

Clip of the Day

ADVERTISEMENT