First-blush thoughts before reading what the “experts” have to say...
Today’s Senate hearing regarding antitrust issues surrounding the BcS just concluded moments ago, and one thing seems certain before all of the dust has settled: there will almost assuredly be some type of investigation/litigation/legislation in the organization’s not-too-distant future.
While I am neither a lawyer nor have I ever slept with one at a Holiday Inn Express, it’s patently clear that Utah Senator Orrin Hatch will push very hard for changes in the current system. By any means necessary and available to him.
The antitrust lawyer for the BcS seemed to make no headway in convincing Hatch that Sherman had not been violated. If anything, the antitrust attorney for the Mountain West Conference (whose name escapes me at the moment) bolstered the senator’s line of thinking that the BcS does indeed violate the Sherman Antitrust Act.
If this were a heavyweight bout, the anti-BcS camp won by a TKO in the fifth round. To be fair, though, the pro-BcS certainly didn’t enjoy the type of home-ring advantage their opponents did, and most certainly wouldn’t be put at such a disadvantage in a court of law.
In the interview posted below this one, the senator made it clear that he would prefer to forego the legislative route in achieving change, relying rather on the BcS itself to institute a major tweak of their system.
However, based on his closing comments -- that he seems more certain of the unfairness of the current system than before the hearing began -- it appears likely that, failing an unexpected reversal by the BcS, the senator will indeed put forth legislation to bring about the change he -- and a multitude of others -- seeks.
