Bowl Championship Series

The controversy surrounding the Bowl relief Series (BCS) in college football has umteen competing factions. There argon those who believe that BCS computerized ranking system offers the most objective option based on the available statistics for each team. Opponents to the BCS argue that the computers system unfairly weighs certain factors in determine the rankings. No matter where you stand, arguments for any side of the case can be convincingly made.With this research, my goal willing be to show how despite the controversy of the ranking system, it appears that the main purpose of the BCS system is to make as much bills as possible through the televising and sponsorship of the bowl games themselves which develop millions of dollars through advertising revenue. fit to their own website, the BCS is designed to match the two top-rated teams in a national championship game and to create exciting and competitive matchups between eight other highly regarded teams (The BCS).The key words here are, in my opinion, exciting and highly regarded. In other words, the BCS wants teams that translate well to the boob tube due to their popularity and due to the likelihood of creating a high-profile match-up that will draw in millions of viewers as opposed to determining the football programs that deserve to be there based on their play throughout the season. This is understandable from a byplay point of view, but troubling on the other hand for two major reasons considering the staggering fiscal numbers.With their new quaternary-year deal with Fox, the BCS is going to rake in $132 million dollars a year to broadcast the four BCS games, or in other words, $33 million a game (Ourand). The first reason is because these are student-athletes that do not reap the financial rewards that the sponsors and colleges are receiving from their labor. Surely these student-athletes do get special preaching and most of them are on scholarship trying to make it into professional foot ball and the increased media movie can up their stock, but these benefits pale in comparison to the financial windfalls reaped by the colleges and sponsors.The second worry is that this system creates a cycle where high-profile football conferences maintain their dominance due to the disproportionate amount of money they receive from profiting from the BCS system, which in turn offers these conferences more money to pour into scholarships to attract the best athletes (who have seen these teams on TV and know and want to then play for them), more money to spend on let on facilities and training programs, and more money to secure additional television broadcasting rights.According to ESPNs college football right Gregg Easterbrook, every team in the six football factory conferences stands to make $1. 5 million dollars from their BCS television profit sharing strategy. Meanwhile teams from the mid-major conferences will only bring in $200,000 if they are fortunate enough to even ha ve a team earn their way into the BCS (Eastbrook).BCS proponents cite these figures to strengthen their argument by saying that the profit-sharing strategy effectively lifts all boats when in reality the exciting and highly regarded programs and the BCS sponsors profit disproportionately at the cost of creating a structure that truly has the student-athletes well-being in mind on with actually determining the best team in the land. Works Cited Eastbrook, Gregg.The BCS doesnt always give us a clear national champand thats OK. ESPN. 4 December 2007. http//sports. espn. go. com/espn/page2/story? page. The BCS is Bowl Championship Series in association with Fox Sports. 15 August 2007. http//www. bcsfootball. org/bcsfb/definition. Ourand, John and Michael Smith. BCS seeks big bump from Fox. Sports phone line Journal. 3 November 2008. http//www. sportsbusinessjournal. com/article/60463.