News, Analysis and Opinion from Bonesville's Denny O'Brien

Pirate Notebook No. 157
Monday, November 17, 2003

By Denny O'Brien
Staff Writer and Columnist

The most significant battle in college football this weekend wasn't fought on a field in Norman, Oklahoma, or Columbus, Ohio.

Representatives from the Coalition for Athletics Reform, a group comprised of presidents from schools currently outside the Bowl Championship Series, met with a group of BCS CEOs Sunday in New Orleans to discuss potential changes to the system that crowns college football's national champion.

Each Division I-A conference was represented by one president from a member school, and Notre Dame president Father Edward Malloy also attended. The meeting was facilitated by NCAA president Myles Brand.

Though no definitive decisions resulted from yesterday's meeting, the two sides did exchange ideas and appear to be working together toward finding a solution to the college football postseason.

"I would put this in the win column," Brand said in a teleconference after the meeting."

"A process was agreed upon by all parties to go forward in a constructive way," he added. "It was a frank dialogue. I think this is the most you could expect at this meeting, and it was accomplished."

"I would say that it was a very constructive day," Cowen said. "This is a very complex process for everybody who is involved.

"I think there was clearly enough common agreement on enough things today for us to craft the very detailed process we described today, and for us to come back again in 60 or 90 days with some very specific proposals hopefully from our commissioners.

"I would say that was as good of an outcome as you could have expected today. It would have been premature and inappropriate for us to come out and say, 'Well the solution is X', and not have discussed that with our colleagues or tested it in any way with our commissioners."

While no concrete decisions were made, several options for a future postseason format were discussed by the two groups. The current BCS agreement runs through the 2006 season, so any new direction that is taken will not be put into place until at least 2007.

"No plans were rejected today," Cowen said. "We came to the table as we both had promised each other with some models that we discussed, and we didn't really rule out any of those models today.

"We just feel like we need to do more discussion with our conference presidents, as well as commissioners, and do some testing on the models we talked about today. Nothing was rejected."

Members of the 13-person panel would not disclose which models are being considered, but Cowen confirmed that each side offered at least one for discussion. Out of each model, Cowen said, an "infinite" number of possibilities was examined.

The group did state that an NFL-style playoff is not among the proposals on the table. All parties agreed that, at this point, a playoff would not be beneficial to the well-being of student athletes.

The next step in the process is for each representative to present the proposed models to his conference commissioner, who then must receive feedback from his own outside consultant. The panel expects to re-convene again in 60-90 days to continue discussions.

"We've looked at it with an entirely open mind," Oregon president David Frohnmayer said. "We wish it to be inclusive, and we wish it to be something in which there is value added for all people.

"To the extent we can find options that revise or change the system that do that, I think it's in everyone's interest. That's the spirit in which we've approached it."

At the same time, though, Frohnmayer would not label the cartel controlled by six of the nation's 11 I-A conferences, four major bowls and television interests a lame duck.

Remarking on "whether or not the BCS is dead," Frohnmayer said, "No, I don't think that either that terminal pronouncement or the question is appropriate to answer at this point."

"Clearly there will be changes in the system to the extent that they can be made to accommodate the interests that have been expressed, the principals that have been argued, and we will do our very best to do that," Frohnmayer said. "It's premature to put a name on anything that may emerge. Our point of departure is the present system. It doesn't involve scrapping the system and starting over.

"If we are advised by the joint meeting of the commissioners and persuaded in our meetings and discussions together that there is a better way to do it, we'll consider that. Perhaps at that point, the BCS is a historical artifact. But right now, it's a point of departure, not something that we pronounce to be dead or even dying."

Cowen has been one of the biggest critics of the present system because it excludes five of the 11 Division I-A conferences from its four postseason games — the Fiesta Bowl, Orange Bowl, Rose Bowl, and Sugar Bowl.

Under the current agreement, the ACC, Big East, Big Ten, Big XII, Pac 10, and SEC receive automatic BCS bids, with the final two slots awarded at-large. Since its inception in 1998, no school outside of a BCS conference has received a bid, though Conference USA member Texas Christian (10-0) currently is threatening to break that barrier.

The BCS has been under intense scrutiny since June, when Cowen vowed to become a linchpin in athletics reform. The proclamation came on the heels of a vote on June 10 by Tulane board of directors to extend the Green Wave's 113-year football tradition after seriously considering canceling it.

His primary target has been the BCS, which he says has widened the gap considerably in college football.

"None of us were sensitive enough or knowledgeable enough to know what long-term impact the BCS arrangement was going to have on college athletics," Cowen said earlier this summer. "The contract was originally signed back in '96 or '97 and I'm not sure how much was on the radar screen of presidents.

"Well, now we've gone through five, six, seven years, and we're seeing the cumulative effect that that arrangement is having on not just football, but departments in general. We're seeing that it is having some really adverse impacts. If we don't try to find some way to minimize or eliminate that impact, it really is going to run havoc on Division I-A."

In addition to spearheading the Coalition for Athletics Reform, Cowen gave his testimony in September to the House of Representatives Committee, and followed that late last month by addressing the Senate Judiciary Committee. Last week, he hosted a National Symposium on Athletics Reform, at which key players in college athletics openly discussed, among other things, the pros and cons of the BCS.

Cowen's organization of schools outside of the BCS process has had a friendly reception from Washington, though he has stated from the beginning that he hopes university presidents can work out their differences without intervention from Capitol Hill.

"We have been very clear since day one that we would prefer to resolve these issues among university presidents and that we would not go to Congress and to the Courts unless we had exhausted every possibility and found those possibilities unsatisfactory," Cowen said. "We've had a consistent approach on that from day one.

"Today was another step and a very constructive dialogue, and we see no reason other than to have this dialogue because we think we are on a path to success."

Utah attorney general Mark Shurtleff sent a letter Thursday to Elliot Spitzer, New York's attorney general and chairman of the Antitrust Committee of the National Association of Attorneys General. In the letter, Shurtleff said that if a resolution didn't emerge from yesterday's meeting, he would request an investigation of the BCS by the Antitrust Committee.

Frohnmayer, also a lawyer and former attorney general, insists the BCS arrangement does not step cross the line when it comes to the law.

"We are quite confident that there is no violation of the antitrust laws of the United States in the present configuration of the Bowl Championship Series," Frohnmayer said. "We have high confidence in the legal advice that has guided the BCS from prior to its formation.

"That may remain a legitimate difference in opinion amongst us, but I don't want to let the question pass without re-affirming our very clear view that this is not a legal matter. It is a matter of accommodating colleagues in Division I-A football, and we are going to do our very best to do that."