Bowl Championship Series

The controversy surrounding the Bowl Championship serial (BCS) in college football has many competing factions. There are those who believe that BCS computerized ranking system of rules offers the most objective option based on the available statistics for each(prenominal) team. Opponents to the BCS argue that the computers system unfairly weighs certain factors in find out the rankings. No matter where you stand, ends for any side of the case dirty dog be convincingly made.With this research, my goal will be to show how contempt the controversy of the ranking system, it appears that the main purpose of the BCS system is to make as much cash as possible through the televising and sponsorship of the bowl games themselves which make up millions of dollars through advertising revenue. According to their own website, the BCS is designed to match the deuce top-rated teams in a national wizionship game and to create kindle and competitive matchups between eight other highly rega rded teams (The BCS).The key linguistic communication here are, in my opinion, exciting and highly regarded. In other words, the BCS wants teams that learn well to the television due to their popularity and due to the likelihood of creating a high-profile matchup that will draw in millions of viewers as opposed to determining the football programs that deserve to be there based on their spell throughout the season. This is understandable from a business point of view, but worrisome on the other hand for two major reasons considering the staggering monetary numbers.With their new four-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 stimulate special treatment and most of them are on scholarship toilsome to make it into professional football and the increased media exposure can up their stock, but these benefits pale in comparison to the financial windfalls reaped by the colleges and sponsors.The snatch problem is that this system creates a cycle where high-profile football conferences maintain their dictum due to the disproportionate amount of money they receive from profiting from the BCS system, which in cover offers these conferences more money to pour into scholarships to attract the best athletes (who contain seen these teams on TV and know and want to then play for them), more money to spend on better facilities and training programs, and more money to hard additional television broadcasting rights.According to ESPNs college football expert Gregg Easterbrook, every(prenominal) 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 confer ences will scarcely bring in $200,000 if they are fortunate enough to even have 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 mankind 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 wide bump from Fox. Sports Business Journal. 3 November 2008. http//www. sportsbusinessjournal. com/article/60463.