Boise State football's Public Enemy #1 is a coordinated effort by OBNUG to decide which loathsome individual has the distinct privilege of us making fun of him (or her!) all year. Previously: Colin Kaepernick, Robb Akey. Today: John Swofford. Tomorrow: Graham Watson.
The BCS is an easy target for Public Enemy #1. It's the Establishment, it's the Man, it's everything we've come to hate about college football and love to complain about. However, it's awfully ambiguous.
Who do we blame for this travesty? Should it be the six BCS conferences? The companies that continue to sponsor these games? I must admit I am a big fan of Tostitos, and it's just a pain to switch insurance companies. Should it be Notre Dame just because they're so smarmy? How about the Rose Bowl since its cries for tradition really just mean cries for more money? Maybe Roy Kramer, alleged creator of this system?
Join me after the jump as I present the case for John Swofford, ACC commissioner and current BCS cooridinator.
(On a personal note, I'd like to stretch out and say it's good to be back. This is my first post since the OBNUG comback. Come September, the Slim Pickings will be back and I'll look forward to continuing my dominant streak in the Bowl Pick'em challenge.)
John Swofford has been the commissioner of the ACC since 1997. During his tenure he has expanded the ACC to 12 teams by bringing in Boston College, Miami and Virginia Tech and brought the inaugural ACC Championship game in 2005. Since this move to turn the ACC into an elite power conference, the ACC champions have been:
- 2005 -- Florida State (8-5)
- 2006 -- Wake Forest (11-3)
- 2007 -- Virginia Tech (11-3)
- 2008 -- Virginia Tech (10-4)
A conference commissioner serves as BCS coordinator.
"First of all I want to congratulate newly elected President Obama and I am glad he has a passion for college football like so many other Americans," Swofford said in a statement. "For now, our constituencies -- and I know he understands constituencies -- have settled on the current BCS system, which the majority believe is the best system yet to determine a national champion while also maintaining the college football regular season as the best and most meaningful in sports."
Meanwhile, Swofford couldn't decide whether the BCS exists for financial or competitive reasons. Asked why the six power conferences and Notre Dame each get a vote at the presidential level while the five little-brother conferences get one vote combined, Swofford replied that when the BCS was formed in 1998, the power conferences and Notre Dame provided more market value.
That's absolutely correct. Nothing wrong with that statement.
But it rang hollow when Swofford toggled to the other plank of the BCS platform, saying a playoff system would devalue the regular season and ruin the competitiveness of the game. It's either about money, or it's about competitiveness. It can't be about both.
"While some conference reports indicated possible interest in a future evaluation of elements of the proposal, specifically governance structure and revenue, there was no overall support for the proposal."
Western Athletic Conference commissioner Karl Benson declined to comment other than to say "the WAC supports the need for great access and greater revenue distribution." However, he repeated the earlier statement that his league does not support the MWC's proposed automatic qualifying criteria.