Abstract
The purpose of this investigation aimed to examine public information presented at U.S. Congressional Hearings regarding the legitimacy of the Bowl Championship Series (BCS) arrangement from important stakeholders related to the Division I (Football Bowl Subdivision). This work centered on using actual transcripts, letters, and testimonies published by the: a) Senate Committee on the Judiciary (2003); b) Judiciary Subcommittee on Anti-trust, Competition Policy, and Consumer Rights (2005); c) House Committee on Ways and Means (2006); and the d) Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and Consumer Protection (2009). A content analysis identified several themes which juxtaposed BCS-charter members and their supporters against non-BCS conferences and their supporters. The various themes emerging from this public discourse centered on the: a) welfare of student-athletes; b) protecting the sanctity and tradition of bowl games; c) the growing financial chasm between BCS and non-BCS institutions; d) logistical concerns related to alternative postseason formats; e) antitrust concerns regarding the current BCS agreement; and f) the fundamental fairness of the BCS arrangement, structure, and selection process compared to alternative formats (e.g., playoff).
Recommended Citation
Seifried, Chad and Smith, Todd
(2011)
"Congressional Hearings and the Division I (Football Bowl Subdivision) Postseason Arrangement: A Content Analysis on Letters, Testimonies, and Symposiums,"
Journal of Issues in Intercollegiate Athletics: Vol. 4, Article 1.
Available at:
https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/jiia/vol4/iss1/1