This is the letter from Orrin Hatch, Sen from Utah. Wow, my timing is impeccable!
Fight On!
Troy
HATCH REQUESTS DOJ INVESTIGATION INTO BCS
Sends Letter to Obama Outlining Issues
Washington – U.S. Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) today sent a letter to President Obama to express his concerns regarding the Bowl Championship Series (BCS) and request that the Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division look into the legality and fairness of the system.
“Mr. President, as you have publicly stated on multiple occasions, the BCS system is in dire need of reform,” wrote Hatch in the letter. “Some may argue that the college football postseason is too trivial a matter to warrant government involvement. However, given the amount of money involved in the BCS endeavor and its close relationship to our nation’s institutions of higher education, it is clear that the unfairness of the current system extends well beyond the football field.
“Furthermore, I do not believe we should lower the standards of legal and ethical behavior simply because a case involves collegiate sports. If anything, our nation should hold our colleges and universities to a higher standard than we would a purely commercial enterprise.
“I believe a strong case can be made that the BCS is in violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act. Therefore, I respectfully request that the Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division look into this matter.”
The Senate Antitrust Subcommittee, on which Senator Hatch is the Ranking Member, held hearings on the antitrust implications of the BCS earlier this year. At the time, Hatch indicated that further government intervention or investigation into these matters could have been avoided by voluntary action on the part of the BCS.
The full letter is below, a signed copy including footnotes attached:
October 21, 2009
President Barack Obama
The White House
Washington, DC 20500
Dear Mr. President:
I am writing to express my concerns regarding the legality and fairness of the Bowl Championship Series (“BCS”). On July 7, 2009, the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Antitrust, Competition Policy and Consumer Rights, of which I am the Ranking Republican Member, held a hearing to examine the antitrust implications of the BCS. After a careful examination of both the written and oral testimonies presented at this hearing, I believe a strong case can be made that the BCS is in violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act. Therefore, I respectfully request that the Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division look into this matter.
BCS SYSTEM BACKGROUND
Our nation’s obsession with college football reaches its yearly climax in late December and early January with the playing of the college bowl games. While literally dozens of such bowl games are played every year, the most prestigious and lucrative bowl games are those taken under the BCS banner, consisting of the Rose, Sugar, Fiesta, and Orange Bowls, as well as the so-called “National Championship Game.” Only teams from the Football Bowl Subdivision (“FBS”), formerly known as Division 1-A, may qualify to play in the BCS bowl games, from which the participants receive national visibility and significant revenue derived from media broadcast rights.
While the BCS, which was established in 1998, has undergone changes over the past decade, it continues to separate the FBS’s eleven conferences into two separate categories. The first category consists of the Atlantic Coast Conference (ACC), Southeastern Conference (SEC), Big East, Big 12, Big Ten and Pacific 10, along with Notre Dame. The champions of these six privileged conferences receive automatic bids to play in the BCS games, regardless of their overall performance. Uniquely, Notre Dame receives the seventh slot if it places eighth or better in the BCS rankings. The second category consists of the five remaining conferences. The champions from these non-privileged conferences must earn an invitation to play in a BCS bowl game.
The most apparent result of this construct is that, of the ten available opportunities to participate in the BCS bowls, six have already been allotted to privileged conferences before the season even begins. However, for all practical purposes, nine of the ten slots are ultimately reserved for the privileged conferences due to the selection criteria utilized by the BCS. In order to automatically qualify for a BCS game, the champion of a non-privileged conference must either be ranked among the top twelve in the final BCS standings, or be ranked in the top sixteen in the final BCS standings while being ranked higher than a champion from a privileged conference. Yet, if multiple teams from non-privileged conferences meet these qualifications, the BCS arrangement only requires that one receive a BCS bid. This happened just last season wherein both the University of Utah and Boise State University completed their seasons undefeated and, according to the rules, eligible to play in a BCS bowl. However, only Utah received such an opportunity, while multiple teams from privileged conferences with records and rankings inferior to Boise State’s participated in BCS bowls.
In addition to the competitive disadvantages inherent in the BCS structure, the BCS distributes its revenues in an inequitable manner. Every privileged conference receives an equal share of the BCS revenue to distribute among its teams, with the potential for increases if it sends more than one team to a BCS game. As a result, each school which is a member of a privileged conference is guaranteed to receive a sizable share of the BCS’s revenues, even if they fail to win a single game. This contrasts with the five non-privileged conferences which receive a single share to divide among themselves. The actual distribution is quite astounding. During the past four seasons, privileged conferences received more than $492 million, or 87.4 percent, of the total BCS revenue, whereas the non-privileged conferences, whose collective membership consists of nearly half of all the schools in the FBS, received less than $62 million or 12.6 percent. These are hardly trivial sums, particularly considering that many, if not most, FBS schools rely upon football revenues to do such things as fund other athletic programs, provide scholarships, and meet the requirements of Title IX.
The BCS’s governance system also ensures that non-privileged conferences remain at a disadvantage. Under the current structure, the BCS Presidential Oversight Committee is composed of eight representatives. Each of the privileged conferences and Notre Dame select one board member. The five non-privileged conferences share a single, collective vote, all but ensuring that they will have little influence on proposed changes or reforms.
The inequities of this system also affect competition on the field by creating a false perception that there are two classes of college teams in FBS football. For example, though all FBS teams are members of the BCS, many in the media typically, and incorrectly, refer to the privileged and non-privileged conferences as being “BCS” and “non-BCS,” respectively. It has been argued this false impression influences the decisions of pollsters, television networks and sponsors, ensuring inequitable treatment. In addition, since the BCS utilizes subjective polling systems to determine participation in its bowl games, some evidence suggests that this false impression has led to a self-fulfilling prophecy that non-privileged teams do not perform at the same level as privileged conference teams.
Furthermore, teams ranked number one and number two in the BCS standings qualify for the so-called “National Championship Game.” Ostensibly, this suggests that participation in this game, and the prestige, revenues, and visibility that come with it, are open to all schools regardless of conference membership. However, as noted above, due to the nature of the polling system, the systemic division between the privileged and non-privileged conferences limits the ability of non-privileged teams to attain sufficient ranking to play in the “National Championship Game”. As recent seasons demonstrate, it is virtually impossible for a team from a non-privileged conference to qualify for the “National Championship Game.”
THE LEGAL ARGUMENT
A - Applicability of the Sherman Antitrust Act
The immediate question arises whether our nation’s antitrust laws apply to intercollegiate athletics. In 1984, the Supreme Court ruled on this issue in National Collegiate Athletic Assoc. v. Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma, where it found that antitrust laws do apply to inter-collegiate athletics. In light of the Court’s disposition on this issue, the BCS’s organization and operations must meet the requirements of the Sherman Antitrust Act.
B – Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act
The BCS arrangement likely violates Section 1 of the Sherman Act because it constitutes a “contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce….” To establish violations of Section 1, the Court has utilized two separate analyses, the per se analysis and the “rule of reason.” With regard to the BCS, a violation can be found utilizing either test.
1 – The per se Rule
The Supreme Court has determined a per se violation of Section 1 exists when the conduct in question is so anticompetitive as to be conclusively unreasonable. In Board of Regents, the Court stated:
Horizontal price fixing and output limitation are ordinarily condemned as a matter of law under an ‘illegal per se’ approach because the probability that these practices are anticompetitive is so high…In such circumstances a restraint is presumed unreasonable without inquiry into the particular market context in which it is found.
The Court’s conclusions with regard to horizontal price fixing, output limitation, and concerted refusals to deal are particularly relevant to this analysis.
At its most basic level, the BCS is “an agreement among competitors on the way in which they will compete with one another” and how they will compete with schools outside their elite circle. As stated above, the BCS system ensures an inequitable distribution of revenue between the privileged and non-privileged conferences. In recent years, champions from the privileged conferences have been outperformed both on the field and in television ratings by one or more of their counterparts from non-privileged conferences. Yet, under the BCS system, such developments are irrelevant as the privileged conferences continue to enjoy far greater shares of the revenues. These inequities are systemic and set in advance by the BCS arrangement. Therefore, the BCS arrangement likely constitutes a horizontal restriction, which is a per se violation of Section 1.
Furthermore, the BCS system effectively limits the number of non-privileged teams that will play in BCS bowl games to at most one in any given year. In addition, the arrangement artificially limits the number of nationally-relevant bowl games to five, and the number of participants in such games to ten. The result is reduced access to revenues and visibility which creates disadvantages to schools in the non-privileged conferences. In this way, an argument can be made that the BCS is a horizontal restriction, not only on price but also on output and the quality of the output, which would substantiate a per se violation of Section 1.
Finally, the BCS appears to constitute a concerted refusal on the part of the privileged conferences to deal with the schools from the non-privileged conferences. Though, once again, all FBS schools are part of the BCS agreement, the system has been designed to limit the number of teams from non-privileged conferences that will play in BCS games. This is demonstrated by the fact that the champions from non-privileged conferences must meet higher performance standards than their counterparts in the privileged conferences just to be invited to a BCS bowl. And, once again, even if multiple non-privileged teams meet these heightened standards, the system limits the number of automatic bids that can be awarded to such teams to, at most, one per year.
The Supreme Court has, on a number of occasions, stated that concerted refusals to deal and group boycotts are often per se violations of Section 1. This is even the case in those instances, such as the BCS, in which there is not a complete refusal to deal, but the defendants have ensured that competition takes place under terms that are discriminatory or unfavorable toward specific competitors. Both the disparate qualification standards for participation in BCS bowl games and the inequitable distribution of revenue appear to fall in this category, once again suggesting a per se violation of Section 1.
Though the Court applied the rule of reason in Board of Regents , the circumstances with regard to the BCS are different. In the aforementioned case, the decision to apply the rule of reason was the result of the Court’s recognition of the NCAA’s essential role in creating certain constraints within college football. The BCS holds no special status, as it is not a governing body for all of college football, and therefore is not essential, in contrast to the NCAA, which was the defendant in Board of Regents. Instead, it is a group of schools and conferences in a acting in concert to control an important aspect of college football. As a result, Board of Regents does not provide an escape for the BCS from the per se analysis.
2. Rule of Reason
Under the rule of reason, only those contracts and combinations that unreasonably restrain trade violate Section 1. Specifically, the Court in Chicago Board of Trade v. U.S., determined the test under this approach is “whether the restraint imposed is such as merely regulates and perhaps thereby promotes competition or whether it is such as may suppress or even destroy competition.” Under this test, a violation will be found if a plaintiff can demonstrate the agreement in question has an anti-competitive effect and if the defendant cannot demonstrate such effects are outweighed by pro-competitive benefits. A plaintiff making such a claim must also demonstrate that there is a less restrictive alternative available.
As has been shown, the anticompetitive effects of the BCS are numerous. Most obvious, it has eliminated the competition that once existed between the major bowl games by making almost all of them subject to the same agreement. In addition, it explicitly limits the ability of non-privileged teams to compete in these lucrative games. In addition, it creates a so-called “National Championship Game,” the limited eligibility for which is effectively determined before the season even begins.
The BCS argues that the current system creates a number of pro-competitive benefits including the playing of a so-called “National Championship Game.” However, to date, no arguments have been advanced to justify why it is necessary to severely limit the participation of non-privileged teams in either the “National Championship Game” or the BCS bowls or to reward equal performance with unequal revenues. In addition, a multitude of less-restrictive alternatives have been proposed. In the end, the BCS’s justifications for the current system are designed, not to preserve competition in the national college football market, but to preserve the elevated status of it privileged members. Such justifications find no safe-haven in antitrust law.
C – Section 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act
Section 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act prohibits monopolies, attempted monopolies and conspiracies to monopolize. The Supreme Court in United States v. Grinnell Corp., articulated a two-prong test for establishing a Section 2 violation. First, “possession of monopoly power in the relevant market” must exist. Second, there must be a “willful acquisition or maintenance of that power as distinguished from growth or development as a consequence of a superior product, business acumen or historic accident.”
Regarding the first prong, the Court has stated that a party has monopoly power when it has the “the power to control prices or exclude competition.” The relevant market, according to the Court, is that which contains a product and other reasonably interchangeable products that are used by consumers for the same purposes. With regard to sporting events for a national market, the Court has determined that separate markets exist for championship and non-championship events.
In this case, there are two markets in question. First, the four BCS bowls exist in a market of their own. They enjoy far more revenues and visibility to be considered interchangeable with lesser bowls. The games also enjoy their own stage because, as a result of the BCS agreement, they are played in the days after New Year’s Day after the vast majority of the other bowls have been played.
The second relevant market is the “National Championship Game,” the creation of which is the stated purpose of the BCS. The Supreme Court has determined that championship events exist in separate markets from other sporting events. Indeed, the BCS has gone to great lengths to distinguish the “National Championship Game” as a completely separate endeavor from the other BCS games. By its very exclusive nature, a game billed as a national championship is not interchangeable with any other set of games.
As has been demonstrated, the BCS has market power in both these markets. The BCS is the only entity governing access to its games. Membership in the BCS is required for any team to qualify for either the “National Championship Game” or any of the other four BCS bowls. The Court has stated, “when a product is controlled by one interest, without substitutes available in the market, there is monopoly power.” Indeed, the BCS is the very definition of monopoly power.
The second prong of the Grinnell test, the willful acquisition or maintenance of monopoly power, revolves around whether a monopolist has used its power to “foreclose competition, gain a competitive advantage, or to destroy a competitor.” Put simply, Section 2 prohibits business enterprises from expanding their monopoly by reducing competition.
The BCS arrangement clearly violates the second prong of the Grinnell test in both relevant markets. The privileged conferences, who are also the BCS system’s architects, do not enjoy their unequivocal market dominance due to superior performance, but to the barriers they’ve imposed on competition. Once again, the BCS is governed by a panel of representatives, the composition of which is severely weighted in favor of the privileged conferences. This makes any proposals for change in favor of the non-privileged conferences difficult, if not impossible, even if the non-privileged conferences outperform their counterparts in the college football broadcast market or on the field of play. These barriers are not justified by a legitimate business purpose. In fact, the systemic exclusion of outside competitors by privileged conferences on the basis of pre-existing arrangements likely violates the law. Specifically, given the BCS’s power in the relevant market, such exclusionary practices seem to run afoul of Section 2.
CONCLUSION
Mr. President, as you have publicly stated on multiple occasions, the BCS system is in dire need of reform. Some may argue that the college football postseason is too trivial a matter to warrant government involvement. However, given the amount of money involved in the BCS endeavor and its close relationship to our nation’s institutions of higher education, it is clear that the unfairness of the current system extends well beyond the football field. Furthermore, I do not believe we should lower the standards of legal and ethical behavior simply because a case involves collegiate sports. If anything, our nation should hold our colleges and universities to a higher standard than we would a purely commercial enterprise.
As you know, Assistant Attorney General Christine Varney has stated her desire and intention for the Justice Department to play a more active role in the enforcement of the Sherman Act. As a faithful advocate of our free market system, I have long believed that our antitrust laws play an essential role in ensuring our nation’s long-term prosperity. Indeed, the essence of the free market is competition. Toward that end, I respectfully request that you, Attorney General Holder, and Assistant Attorney General Varney examine these issues to determine whether Justice Department action is necessary. However, while I believe there is a strong case that the BCS violates the Sherman Act, an antitrust inquiry is only one possible avenue for addressing these issues. Though I would prefer to see those with the power to change the status quo do so voluntarily, I believe there are a number of measures that can be taken by various governmental agencies with regard to the BCS and I am willing to support any reasonable effort to ensure that all schools, students, and student-athletes are treated fairly.
Thank you for your attention to this matter. I look forward to a constructive dialogue with your Administration regarding these concerns.
Sincerely,
Orrin G. Hatch
United States Senator
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
Troy on Troy - BCS Un-just
More backup for my claim that the BCS is an unjust organization.
Fight On!
Troy
By FREDERIC J. FROMMER, Associated Press Writer Frederic J. Frommer, Associated Press Writer – 42 mins ago
WASHINGTON – Shortly after winning last year's presidential election, Barack Obama said he was going to "to throw my weight around a little bit" to nudge college football's Bowl Championship Series to move to a playoff system.
On Wednesday, Sen. Orrin Hatch took him up on that.
Hatch asked the president to launch a Justice Department investigation into the way the BCS — a complex system of computer rankings and polls that often draws criticism — crowns its national champion.
"Mr. President, as you have publicly stated on multiple occasions, the BCS system is in dire need of reform," Hatch, R-Utah, wrote in a 10-page letter, obtained by The Associated Press.
Hatch, who held a hearing on the BCS in July, told Obama that a "strong case" can be made that the BCS violates antitrust laws.
Under the BCS system, some conferences get automatic bids to participate in top-tier bowls while others don't, and the automatic bid conferences also get far more of the revenue. Hatch's home state school, the University of Utah, is from the Mountain West Conference, which does not get an automatic bid. The school qualified for a bid last season but was bypassed for the national championship despite going undefeated.
The system "has been designed to limit the number of teams from non-privileged conferences that will play in BCS games," he wrote.
Hatch said that the BCS arrangement likely violates the Sherman Antitrust Act, because, he argued, it constitutes a "contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce," quoting from the law.
He said that the system "artificially limits the number of nationally-relevant bowl games to five. The result is reduced access to revenues and visibility which creates disadvantages to schools in the non-privileged conferences." Hatch is the top Republican on the Senate Judiciary's subcommittee on antitrust, competition policy and consumer rights.
The senator said that the hundreds of millions generated by college football "are hardly trivial sums," given that many schools use such revenue to fund things like other athletic programs.
The White House declined to comment. The Justice Department and BCS officials had no immediate comment.
Hatch's letter comes a few days after the BCS released its first standings of the year. And on Monday, a group of college football fans launched the Playoff PAC, with the hope of electing more lawmakers who will pressure the BCS to switch to a playoff system. Several lawmakers have introduced bills this year aimed at forcing a playoff system, but none of the bills has moved.
Fight On!
Troy
By FREDERIC J. FROMMER, Associated Press Writer Frederic J. Frommer, Associated Press Writer – 42 mins ago
WASHINGTON – Shortly after winning last year's presidential election, Barack Obama said he was going to "to throw my weight around a little bit" to nudge college football's Bowl Championship Series to move to a playoff system.
On Wednesday, Sen. Orrin Hatch took him up on that.
Hatch asked the president to launch a Justice Department investigation into the way the BCS — a complex system of computer rankings and polls that often draws criticism — crowns its national champion.
"Mr. President, as you have publicly stated on multiple occasions, the BCS system is in dire need of reform," Hatch, R-Utah, wrote in a 10-page letter, obtained by The Associated Press.
Hatch, who held a hearing on the BCS in July, told Obama that a "strong case" can be made that the BCS violates antitrust laws.
Under the BCS system, some conferences get automatic bids to participate in top-tier bowls while others don't, and the automatic bid conferences also get far more of the revenue. Hatch's home state school, the University of Utah, is from the Mountain West Conference, which does not get an automatic bid. The school qualified for a bid last season but was bypassed for the national championship despite going undefeated.
The system "has been designed to limit the number of teams from non-privileged conferences that will play in BCS games," he wrote.
Hatch said that the BCS arrangement likely violates the Sherman Antitrust Act, because, he argued, it constitutes a "contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce," quoting from the law.
He said that the system "artificially limits the number of nationally-relevant bowl games to five. The result is reduced access to revenues and visibility which creates disadvantages to schools in the non-privileged conferences." Hatch is the top Republican on the Senate Judiciary's subcommittee on antitrust, competition policy and consumer rights.
The senator said that the hundreds of millions generated by college football "are hardly trivial sums," given that many schools use such revenue to fund things like other athletic programs.
The White House declined to comment. The Justice Department and BCS officials had no immediate comment.
Hatch's letter comes a few days after the BCS released its first standings of the year. And on Monday, a group of college football fans launched the Playoff PAC, with the hope of electing more lawmakers who will pressure the BCS to switch to a playoff system. Several lawmakers have introduced bills this year aimed at forcing a playoff system, but none of the bills has moved.
Troy on Troy - Playoffnow.com
I am so very tired of the BCS and their ratings system. Every year, this invisible group of people get behind closed doors and determine the fate of hard working student athletes, coaches and fans. The fans by the hundreds of thousands complain every year how the system is broken. The sports writers fill their columns with line after line of stats and suggestions but they never listen to the outcry for a new way, a fair way to determine the Division 1 National Champion for Football.
Did you know that in all of college sports, everyone ends with a champion determined thru some sort of a play-off system? Even the other lower divisions of football have their champions confirmed by their actions on the field, not by old guys in suits.
I am tired of screaming and not being heard… so I am going to do something about it. My goal is to start a petition and get 1 million electronic signatures by the start of Bowl Season. I want to be able to submit it live on the air on ESPN and debate all comers as to why we can’t have a play-off to determine a National Champion like every other college sport. I want to take it to court and get this thing officially challenged.
I need your help. In the next few days, I am going to have a website set up to accept signatures via website and email where we can have a running count for everyone to see how many signatures we have. I need this taken to the local press and then the national press. Once this thing gets going, it is going to snowball and what seems like a big number, 1,000,000, may in fact be not that big at all. (Well, compared to our new national debt.)
Imagine this, every week there are some 50 games being played in Division 1. There 120 teams representing 11 conferences including the three independents, Notre Dame, Navy and Army. Each game has from 10,000 to 110,000 screaming fans that actually attend the games with millions more who watch from the comfort of their couch at home. The number of potential signatures is actually ridiculously high.
My challenge isn’t going to get people to agree to change the BCS; it is getting the petition in front of those thirsting for a real play-off.
Now for the play-off system. It is very simple and anyone who says that it won’t work isn’t being honest.
The play-off would consist of 8 teams. The conference champions from the ACC, Big East, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac 10 and the SEC would get an automatic bid. It doesn’t matter how you crown your conference champion. That is strictly up to each league. The final two spots would be determined through rankings and even other championship games to be played. How great would it be to have Utah from the WAC play Boise St. of the Mountain West; to play each other for the right to go to the play-offs? It would be amazing and I bet they would rather do that then sit home and say “What if?!?!?!”
The traditional Bowls could be kept as part of the play-off. Example, this year for the opening round of the play-off, USC would play Iowa in the Rose Bowl.
The days of a split National Championship would be gone forever. And so would the discrimination of the so called sub-conference football programs. It’s time, once and for all, to have an open debate in front of the college football world and crown a true National Champion.
I have always said, I would rather USC finish 2nd or 4th or even 8th if it meant that a true championship was earned, not appointed. I wouldn’t want the title to be mythical as we have had since the flawed BCS system was created. The BCS Champion is just that, the Champion of the BCS ratings system. Whenever you have 1 or even 2 loss teams in the final game, getting there is subjective. Then there are other scenarios that are equally unfair. When USC, Oklahoma and Auburn were all undefeated, Auburn got left behind and had no chance at a title.
There is no need for me to “preach to the choir.” Let’s get this thing cranked up and see where it goes. I’ll let you know where I am with the petition. Once we are up and running, all I need is contacts to the press to get the story out. Let’s do this thing!
Fight On!
Troy
Did you know that in all of college sports, everyone ends with a champion determined thru some sort of a play-off system? Even the other lower divisions of football have their champions confirmed by their actions on the field, not by old guys in suits.
I am tired of screaming and not being heard… so I am going to do something about it. My goal is to start a petition and get 1 million electronic signatures by the start of Bowl Season. I want to be able to submit it live on the air on ESPN and debate all comers as to why we can’t have a play-off to determine a National Champion like every other college sport. I want to take it to court and get this thing officially challenged.
I need your help. In the next few days, I am going to have a website set up to accept signatures via website and email where we can have a running count for everyone to see how many signatures we have. I need this taken to the local press and then the national press. Once this thing gets going, it is going to snowball and what seems like a big number, 1,000,000, may in fact be not that big at all. (Well, compared to our new national debt.)
Imagine this, every week there are some 50 games being played in Division 1. There 120 teams representing 11 conferences including the three independents, Notre Dame, Navy and Army. Each game has from 10,000 to 110,000 screaming fans that actually attend the games with millions more who watch from the comfort of their couch at home. The number of potential signatures is actually ridiculously high.
My challenge isn’t going to get people to agree to change the BCS; it is getting the petition in front of those thirsting for a real play-off.
Now for the play-off system. It is very simple and anyone who says that it won’t work isn’t being honest.
The play-off would consist of 8 teams. The conference champions from the ACC, Big East, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac 10 and the SEC would get an automatic bid. It doesn’t matter how you crown your conference champion. That is strictly up to each league. The final two spots would be determined through rankings and even other championship games to be played. How great would it be to have Utah from the WAC play Boise St. of the Mountain West; to play each other for the right to go to the play-offs? It would be amazing and I bet they would rather do that then sit home and say “What if?!?!?!”
The traditional Bowls could be kept as part of the play-off. Example, this year for the opening round of the play-off, USC would play Iowa in the Rose Bowl.
The days of a split National Championship would be gone forever. And so would the discrimination of the so called sub-conference football programs. It’s time, once and for all, to have an open debate in front of the college football world and crown a true National Champion.
I have always said, I would rather USC finish 2nd or 4th or even 8th if it meant that a true championship was earned, not appointed. I wouldn’t want the title to be mythical as we have had since the flawed BCS system was created. The BCS Champion is just that, the Champion of the BCS ratings system. Whenever you have 1 or even 2 loss teams in the final game, getting there is subjective. Then there are other scenarios that are equally unfair. When USC, Oklahoma and Auburn were all undefeated, Auburn got left behind and had no chance at a title.
There is no need for me to “preach to the choir.” Let’s get this thing cranked up and see where it goes. I’ll let you know where I am with the petition. Once we are up and running, all I need is contacts to the press to get the story out. Let’s do this thing!
Fight On!
Troy
Troy on Troy - Non Conferences Patsies
On Sept. 5, while Florida feasted on Charleston Southern and Texas opened with Louisiana-Monroe, the Oklahoma Sooners played a strong BYU team on a neutral field.
That’s when Sam Bradford sprained his shoulder while being sacked, an injury that derailed OU’s title hopes.
A week later, while Florida annihilated Troy and Texas blew out Wyoming, Southern California played at Ohio State.
Photo Tim Tebow and Florida are No. 1 in the BCS standings.
(Al Messerschmidt/Getty)
That’s when freshman Matt Barkley was himself sacked and hurt. He was forced to sit out the next game, which the Trojans lost. Now they’re behind the national title 8-ball.
Related Video
Coaches in trouble
Coaches in trouble
Coaches in trouble
Overrated/underrated Upset alert Heisman update
More NCAAF Videos
More From Dan Wetzel
* Moment of truth for Weis, Clausen Oct 15, 2009
ADVERTISEMENT
That’s two tough games, two season-changing injuries and two more examples why as long as the Bowl Championship Series exists, there is no good reason any power team should risk playing a rugged non-conference schedule.
Check out the BCS standings. Florida and Texas are ranked No. 1 and 3 respectively, despite playing weak non-conference teams. Both know if they win out, they’ll play for the title anyway.
This isn’t scheduling cowardice, it’s, in fact, what passes for BCS intelligence.
If you’re a big-name program, it’s foolish to prove yourself outside of the mandated league games. A monster showdown might be fun to play in, but it isn’t proportionately rewarded by either the voters or the computers. All it does is open you up to a loss, an injury or an emotional letdown.
You’re best served staying home and playing patsies.
This column isn’t about who should or shouldn’t be No. 1 or whether this team could win the games on that team’s schedule. There’s plenty of places and time for those debates.
It’s about how despite the BCS’ claim that it, unlike a playoff, protects the “sanctity of the regular season,” it has actually cut down on the exciting games the sport was built on.
And as coaches increasingly figure out how to rig this silly system, the trend toward the dull has only just begun.
“Is the goal to find the team with the best record or the best team?” USC’s Pete Carroll asked reporters after the first BCS standings found his 5-1 Trojans in seventh place, hurt by computers that left the Trojans in the teens.
Photo
Carroll
Carroll should know the answer by now. Sometimes they are one in the same. The one certainty in this uncertain system is that the most likely road to the title game for a big-name team is an undefeated record. Auburn, in 2004, is the lone exception.
“We’ve told our kids that we need to win them all,” said Texas coach Mack Brown of the blueprint for winding up in the BCS title game.
What is the easiest way to “win them all?” Play the weakest competition imaginable; and do it on your campus.
The Longhorns’ non-conference schedule features UL-Monroe, Wyoming, UTEP and Central Florida. It’s an embarrassing slate for a team of its stature, but it’s also one reason UT walked into the Oklahoma game Saturday in excellent health, high confidence and with backups having gained valuable experience.
All of that was enough to leave with a 16-13 victory over the battered Sooners.
Both Brown and Florida coach Urban Meyer are staunchly anti-BCS, but as long as they are stuck with this system, they’re going to try to figure out how to beat it.
While Bradford and Barkley were getting injured against physical non-conference opponents, quarterbacks for Florida and Texas, Tim Tebow and Colt McCoy, were watching long stretches of blowouts from the safety of the sideline.
Last offseason Brown brought in a bunch of BCS gurus to Austin to break down how the system works. He didn’t lack for familiar examples. In his own Big 12 he’s watched both Kansas (2007) and Texas Tech (2008) rise to No. 2 in late-season BCS standings, despite playing laughable non-conference schedules, essentially turning the season into two or three serious games.
If you can “win them all” the BCS doesn’t care about the “all.”
Brown, and just about everyone else, is scheduling with this in mind. The Horns’ future opponents are only modestly more challenging than this season. UT will play three weaker teams and add a single major conference opponent per season, none of them true heavyweights – UCLA, Mississippi and Cal.
Meyer, meanwhile, knows that as long as his Gators win the Southeastern Conference, even with one loss, he’s probably in the BCS title game. The non-conference is meaningless to the Gators’ title hopes … unless they lose. So why risk it?
UF hasn’t played a non-conference game outside the state of Florida since the BCS was created and had only two outside Gainesville in the past five seasons. The only major non-conference team on the long-term schedule is fading Florida State. The Gators will play South Florida in 2010 and 2015, but other than that, it’s straight sisters of the poor.
Photo
Stoops
“I don’t plan on changing the way we schedule,” Meyer said last summer.
Why would he? Why would anyone? This isn’t just what the BCS rewards, it’s what it demands.
In the 1980s, pre-BCS, there were annually between 15-20 non-conference games featuring two preseason ranked teams. This year there were just four.
There was a time when scheduling a Football Championship Subdivision team (formerly I-AA) was unheard of; now teams regularly play two of them.
All this despite the expanding of the season that offered more opportunity for real games.
Carroll, for one, tries to schedule only major conference opponents and doesn’t want to hear that retreating is the smartest policy. He believes the thrill is still in the challenge. USC is one of just four schools to have never played a FCS team.
He joins Stoops as part of a small group of coaches who still seeks out two or three powerful non-league opponents each season, fallout be damned.
OU is set up with dates with Ohio State, LSU, Cincinnati, Notre Dame, TCU and Tennessee over the next eight years. Carroll, whose team took two long trips to the Midwest this season, has future series with Notre Dame, Virginia, Boston College, Texas A&M, Syracuse and Hawaii and is looking for more.
It means every year those two national challengers are voluntarily walking a gauntlet, making chasing a championship exponentially more difficult.
They’d be best served joining Texas, Florida and the rest of the crowd that are playing by the rules the BCS has created – line up the weaklings as their fans’ eyes glaze over in boredom (while still charging full price for tickets, of course).
Apparently Pete Carroll and Bob Stoops still believe in the sanctity of the regular season.
It’s the BCS that doesn’t.
That’s when Sam Bradford sprained his shoulder while being sacked, an injury that derailed OU’s title hopes.
A week later, while Florida annihilated Troy and Texas blew out Wyoming, Southern California played at Ohio State.
Photo Tim Tebow and Florida are No. 1 in the BCS standings.
(Al Messerschmidt/Getty)
That’s when freshman Matt Barkley was himself sacked and hurt. He was forced to sit out the next game, which the Trojans lost. Now they’re behind the national title 8-ball.
Related Video
Coaches in trouble
Coaches in trouble
Coaches in trouble
Overrated/underrated Upset alert Heisman update
More NCAAF Videos
More From Dan Wetzel
* Moment of truth for Weis, Clausen Oct 15, 2009
ADVERTISEMENT
That’s two tough games, two season-changing injuries and two more examples why as long as the Bowl Championship Series exists, there is no good reason any power team should risk playing a rugged non-conference schedule.
Check out the BCS standings. Florida and Texas are ranked No. 1 and 3 respectively, despite playing weak non-conference teams. Both know if they win out, they’ll play for the title anyway.
This isn’t scheduling cowardice, it’s, in fact, what passes for BCS intelligence.
If you’re a big-name program, it’s foolish to prove yourself outside of the mandated league games. A monster showdown might be fun to play in, but it isn’t proportionately rewarded by either the voters or the computers. All it does is open you up to a loss, an injury or an emotional letdown.
You’re best served staying home and playing patsies.
This column isn’t about who should or shouldn’t be No. 1 or whether this team could win the games on that team’s schedule. There’s plenty of places and time for those debates.
It’s about how despite the BCS’ claim that it, unlike a playoff, protects the “sanctity of the regular season,” it has actually cut down on the exciting games the sport was built on.
And as coaches increasingly figure out how to rig this silly system, the trend toward the dull has only just begun.
“Is the goal to find the team with the best record or the best team?” USC’s Pete Carroll asked reporters after the first BCS standings found his 5-1 Trojans in seventh place, hurt by computers that left the Trojans in the teens.
Photo
Carroll
Carroll should know the answer by now. Sometimes they are one in the same. The one certainty in this uncertain system is that the most likely road to the title game for a big-name team is an undefeated record. Auburn, in 2004, is the lone exception.
“We’ve told our kids that we need to win them all,” said Texas coach Mack Brown of the blueprint for winding up in the BCS title game.
What is the easiest way to “win them all?” Play the weakest competition imaginable; and do it on your campus.
The Longhorns’ non-conference schedule features UL-Monroe, Wyoming, UTEP and Central Florida. It’s an embarrassing slate for a team of its stature, but it’s also one reason UT walked into the Oklahoma game Saturday in excellent health, high confidence and with backups having gained valuable experience.
All of that was enough to leave with a 16-13 victory over the battered Sooners.
Both Brown and Florida coach Urban Meyer are staunchly anti-BCS, but as long as they are stuck with this system, they’re going to try to figure out how to beat it.
While Bradford and Barkley were getting injured against physical non-conference opponents, quarterbacks for Florida and Texas, Tim Tebow and Colt McCoy, were watching long stretches of blowouts from the safety of the sideline.
Last offseason Brown brought in a bunch of BCS gurus to Austin to break down how the system works. He didn’t lack for familiar examples. In his own Big 12 he’s watched both Kansas (2007) and Texas Tech (2008) rise to No. 2 in late-season BCS standings, despite playing laughable non-conference schedules, essentially turning the season into two or three serious games.
If you can “win them all” the BCS doesn’t care about the “all.”
Brown, and just about everyone else, is scheduling with this in mind. The Horns’ future opponents are only modestly more challenging than this season. UT will play three weaker teams and add a single major conference opponent per season, none of them true heavyweights – UCLA, Mississippi and Cal.
Meyer, meanwhile, knows that as long as his Gators win the Southeastern Conference, even with one loss, he’s probably in the BCS title game. The non-conference is meaningless to the Gators’ title hopes … unless they lose. So why risk it?
UF hasn’t played a non-conference game outside the state of Florida since the BCS was created and had only two outside Gainesville in the past five seasons. The only major non-conference team on the long-term schedule is fading Florida State. The Gators will play South Florida in 2010 and 2015, but other than that, it’s straight sisters of the poor.
Photo
Stoops
“I don’t plan on changing the way we schedule,” Meyer said last summer.
Why would he? Why would anyone? This isn’t just what the BCS rewards, it’s what it demands.
In the 1980s, pre-BCS, there were annually between 15-20 non-conference games featuring two preseason ranked teams. This year there were just four.
There was a time when scheduling a Football Championship Subdivision team (formerly I-AA) was unheard of; now teams regularly play two of them.
All this despite the expanding of the season that offered more opportunity for real games.
Carroll, for one, tries to schedule only major conference opponents and doesn’t want to hear that retreating is the smartest policy. He believes the thrill is still in the challenge. USC is one of just four schools to have never played a FCS team.
He joins Stoops as part of a small group of coaches who still seeks out two or three powerful non-league opponents each season, fallout be damned.
OU is set up with dates with Ohio State, LSU, Cincinnati, Notre Dame, TCU and Tennessee over the next eight years. Carroll, whose team took two long trips to the Midwest this season, has future series with Notre Dame, Virginia, Boston College, Texas A&M, Syracuse and Hawaii and is looking for more.
It means every year those two national challengers are voluntarily walking a gauntlet, making chasing a championship exponentially more difficult.
They’d be best served joining Texas, Florida and the rest of the crowd that are playing by the rules the BCS has created – line up the weaklings as their fans’ eyes glaze over in boredom (while still charging full price for tickets, of course).
Apparently Pete Carroll and Bob Stoops still believe in the sanctity of the regular season.
It’s the BCS that doesn’t.
Friday, October 16, 2009
Troy on Troy - Budget Deficit Out of Control
I just thought I would let everyone start the weekend on an up note. I was going through the paper and saw this gem from the Associated Press. I was just talking in a Blog earlier this week and saying how spending in Washington is out of control. Here is an article backing up my claim. Just so you know, the increase in this years deficit is going to cost each of us over $4,700.00 this year alone on top of the taxes you pay out. Is health insurance reform free? Cash for Clunkers free? Who pays for all of this... that's right, we do you and I. They are spending OUR money. Tell both parties to stop it. Would you like an additional $4,700.00 this year to pay your own bills? I know I would. It is a very informative article. Take the time to read the entire piece.
Fight On!
Troy
By MARTIN CRUTSINGER, AP Economics Writer Martin Crutsinger, Ap Economics Writer – 8 mins ago
WASHINGTON – What is $1.42 trillion? It's the federal budget deficit for 2009, more than three times the most red ink ever amassed in a single year.
It's more than the total national debt for the first 200 years of the Republic, more than the entire economy of India, almost as much as Canada's, and more than $4,700 for every man, woman and child in the United States.
As a percentage of U.S. economic output, it's the biggest deficit since World War II.
And, some economists warn, unless the government makes hard decisions to cut spending or raise taxes, it could be the seeds of another economic crisis.
Treasury figures released Friday showed that the government spent $46.6 billion more in September than it took in, a month that normally records a surplus. That boosted the shortfall for the full fiscal year ending Sept. 30 to $1.42 trillion. The previous year's deficit was $459 billion.
"The rudderless U.S. fiscal policy is the biggest long-term risk to the U.S. economy," says Kenneth Rogoff, a Harvard professor and former chief economist for the International Monetary Fund. "As we accumulate more and more debt, we leave ourselves very vulnerable."
Forecasts of more red ink mean the federal government is heading toward spending 15 percent of its money by 2019 just to pay interest on the debt, up from 5 percent this fiscal year.
President Barack Obama has pledged to reduce the deficit once the Great Recession ends and the unemployment rate starts falling, but economists worry that the government lacks the will to make the hard political choices to get control of the imbalances.
Friday's report showed that the government paid $190 billion in interest over the last 12 months on Treasury securities sold to finance the federal debt. Experts say this tab could quadruple in a decade as the size of the government's total debt rises to $17.1 trillion by 2019.
Without significant budget cuts, that would crowd out government spending in such areas as transportation, law enforcement and education. Already, interest on the debt is the third-largest category of government spending, after the government's popular entitlement programs, including Social Security and Medicare, and the military.
As the biggest borrower in the world, the government has been the prime beneficiary of today's record low interest rates. The new budget report showed that interest payments fell by $62 billion this year even as the debt was soaring. Yields on three-month Treasury bills, sold every week by the Treasury to raise fresh cash to pay for maturing government debt, are now at 0.065 percent while six-month bills have fallen to 0.150 percent, the lowest ever in a half-century of selling these bills on a weekly basis.
The risk is that any significant increase in the rates at Treasury auctions could send the government's interest expenses soaring. That could happen several ways — higher inflation could push the Federal Reserve to increase the short-term interest rates it controls, or the dollar could slump in value, or a combination of both.
The Congressional Budget Office projects that the nation's debt held by investors both at home and abroad will increase by $9.1 trillion over the next decade, pushing the total to $17.1 trillion decade under Obama's spending plans.
The biggest factor behind this increase is the anticipated surge in government spending when the baby boomers retire and start receiving Social Security and Medicare benefits. Also contributing will be Obama's plans to extend the Bush tax cuts for everyone except the wealthy.
The $1.42 trillion deficit for 2009 — which was less than the $1.75 trillion that Obama had projected in February — includes the cost of the government's financial sector bailout and the economic stimulus program passed in February. Individual and corporate income taxes dwindled as a result of the recession. Coupled with the impact of the Bush tax cuts earlier in the decade, tax revenues fell 16.6 percent, the biggest decline since 1932.
Immense as it was, many economists say the 2009 deficit was necessary to fight the financial crisis. But analysts worry about the long-term trajectory.
The administration estimates that government debt will reach 76.5 percent of gross domestic product — the value of all goods and services produced in the United States — in 2019. It stood at 41 percent of GDP last year. The record was 113 percent of GDP in 1945.
Much of that debt is in foreign hands. China holds the most — more than $800 billion. In all, investors — domestic and foreign — hold close to $8 trillion in what is called publicly held debt. There is another $4.4 trillion in government debt that is not held by investors but owed by the government to itself in the Social Security and other trust funds.
The CBO's 10-year deficit projections already have raised alarms among big investors such as the Chinese. If those investors started dumping their holdings, or even buying fewer U.S. Treasurys, the dollar's value could drop. The government would have to start paying higher interest rates to try to attract investors and bolster the dollar.
A lower dollar would cause prices of imported goods to rise. Inflation would surge. And higher interest rates would force consumers and companies to pay more to borrow to buy a house or a car or expand their business.
"We should be desperately worried about deficits of this size," says Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Economy.com. "The economic pain will be felt much sooner than people think, in the form of much higher interest rates and much higher rates of inflation."
If all that happened rapidly, it could send stock prices crashing and the economy tipping into recession. It could revive the pain of the 1970s, when the country battled stagflation — a toxic mix of inflation and economic stagnation.
Paul Volcker, then the chairman of the Federal Reserve, responded by raising interest rates to the highest levels since the Civil War in a determined effort to combat a decade-long bout of inflation. His campaign pushed banks' prime lending rate above 20 percent in 1981 and sent the country into what would be the longest post-World War II downturn before the current slump. Unemployment jumped to a postwar high of 10.8 percent in December 1982.
The battle against inflation, though, was won.
Most economists say we have time before any crisis hits. In part, that's because the recession erased worries about inflation for now. In its effort to stimulate the economy, the Fed cut a key interest rate to a record low last December and is expected to keep it there possibly through all of next year. Demand for loans by businesses and consumers is so weak that low rates are not seen as a recipe for inflation.
Some hold out hope that Congress and the administration will act before another crisis erupts.
Robert Reischauer, a former head of CBO, said that in an optimum scenario, Congress will tackle the deficits next year. A package of tax increases and spending cuts could be phased in starting in 2013 and gradually grow over the next decade.
The administration has pledged to include a deficit-reduction plan in its 2011 budget, which will go to Congress in February.
Stanley Collender, a budget expert at Qorvis Communications and a former staff aide to House and Senate budget committees, cautions that unless investors show nervousness about the debt, the budget debate next year could feature more posturing between the two parties than any real action to fix the problems.
But Alan Greenspan, who led the 1983 commission that made changes to avert a crisis in Social Security, said in an interview that he was optimistic that politicians will eventually work out a solution.
"I have always been a great supporter of Winston Churchill's statement about the United States," Greenspan said. "The United States can be counted on to do the right thing, after having tried all other conceivable alternatives."
Fight On!
Troy
By MARTIN CRUTSINGER, AP Economics Writer Martin Crutsinger, Ap Economics Writer – 8 mins ago
WASHINGTON – What is $1.42 trillion? It's the federal budget deficit for 2009, more than three times the most red ink ever amassed in a single year.
It's more than the total national debt for the first 200 years of the Republic, more than the entire economy of India, almost as much as Canada's, and more than $4,700 for every man, woman and child in the United States.
As a percentage of U.S. economic output, it's the biggest deficit since World War II.
And, some economists warn, unless the government makes hard decisions to cut spending or raise taxes, it could be the seeds of another economic crisis.
Treasury figures released Friday showed that the government spent $46.6 billion more in September than it took in, a month that normally records a surplus. That boosted the shortfall for the full fiscal year ending Sept. 30 to $1.42 trillion. The previous year's deficit was $459 billion.
"The rudderless U.S. fiscal policy is the biggest long-term risk to the U.S. economy," says Kenneth Rogoff, a Harvard professor and former chief economist for the International Monetary Fund. "As we accumulate more and more debt, we leave ourselves very vulnerable."
Forecasts of more red ink mean the federal government is heading toward spending 15 percent of its money by 2019 just to pay interest on the debt, up from 5 percent this fiscal year.
President Barack Obama has pledged to reduce the deficit once the Great Recession ends and the unemployment rate starts falling, but economists worry that the government lacks the will to make the hard political choices to get control of the imbalances.
Friday's report showed that the government paid $190 billion in interest over the last 12 months on Treasury securities sold to finance the federal debt. Experts say this tab could quadruple in a decade as the size of the government's total debt rises to $17.1 trillion by 2019.
Without significant budget cuts, that would crowd out government spending in such areas as transportation, law enforcement and education. Already, interest on the debt is the third-largest category of government spending, after the government's popular entitlement programs, including Social Security and Medicare, and the military.
As the biggest borrower in the world, the government has been the prime beneficiary of today's record low interest rates. The new budget report showed that interest payments fell by $62 billion this year even as the debt was soaring. Yields on three-month Treasury bills, sold every week by the Treasury to raise fresh cash to pay for maturing government debt, are now at 0.065 percent while six-month bills have fallen to 0.150 percent, the lowest ever in a half-century of selling these bills on a weekly basis.
The risk is that any significant increase in the rates at Treasury auctions could send the government's interest expenses soaring. That could happen several ways — higher inflation could push the Federal Reserve to increase the short-term interest rates it controls, or the dollar could slump in value, or a combination of both.
The Congressional Budget Office projects that the nation's debt held by investors both at home and abroad will increase by $9.1 trillion over the next decade, pushing the total to $17.1 trillion decade under Obama's spending plans.
The biggest factor behind this increase is the anticipated surge in government spending when the baby boomers retire and start receiving Social Security and Medicare benefits. Also contributing will be Obama's plans to extend the Bush tax cuts for everyone except the wealthy.
The $1.42 trillion deficit for 2009 — which was less than the $1.75 trillion that Obama had projected in February — includes the cost of the government's financial sector bailout and the economic stimulus program passed in February. Individual and corporate income taxes dwindled as a result of the recession. Coupled with the impact of the Bush tax cuts earlier in the decade, tax revenues fell 16.6 percent, the biggest decline since 1932.
Immense as it was, many economists say the 2009 deficit was necessary to fight the financial crisis. But analysts worry about the long-term trajectory.
The administration estimates that government debt will reach 76.5 percent of gross domestic product — the value of all goods and services produced in the United States — in 2019. It stood at 41 percent of GDP last year. The record was 113 percent of GDP in 1945.
Much of that debt is in foreign hands. China holds the most — more than $800 billion. In all, investors — domestic and foreign — hold close to $8 trillion in what is called publicly held debt. There is another $4.4 trillion in government debt that is not held by investors but owed by the government to itself in the Social Security and other trust funds.
The CBO's 10-year deficit projections already have raised alarms among big investors such as the Chinese. If those investors started dumping their holdings, or even buying fewer U.S. Treasurys, the dollar's value could drop. The government would have to start paying higher interest rates to try to attract investors and bolster the dollar.
A lower dollar would cause prices of imported goods to rise. Inflation would surge. And higher interest rates would force consumers and companies to pay more to borrow to buy a house or a car or expand their business.
"We should be desperately worried about deficits of this size," says Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Economy.com. "The economic pain will be felt much sooner than people think, in the form of much higher interest rates and much higher rates of inflation."
If all that happened rapidly, it could send stock prices crashing and the economy tipping into recession. It could revive the pain of the 1970s, when the country battled stagflation — a toxic mix of inflation and economic stagnation.
Paul Volcker, then the chairman of the Federal Reserve, responded by raising interest rates to the highest levels since the Civil War in a determined effort to combat a decade-long bout of inflation. His campaign pushed banks' prime lending rate above 20 percent in 1981 and sent the country into what would be the longest post-World War II downturn before the current slump. Unemployment jumped to a postwar high of 10.8 percent in December 1982.
The battle against inflation, though, was won.
Most economists say we have time before any crisis hits. In part, that's because the recession erased worries about inflation for now. In its effort to stimulate the economy, the Fed cut a key interest rate to a record low last December and is expected to keep it there possibly through all of next year. Demand for loans by businesses and consumers is so weak that low rates are not seen as a recipe for inflation.
Some hold out hope that Congress and the administration will act before another crisis erupts.
Robert Reischauer, a former head of CBO, said that in an optimum scenario, Congress will tackle the deficits next year. A package of tax increases and spending cuts could be phased in starting in 2013 and gradually grow over the next decade.
The administration has pledged to include a deficit-reduction plan in its 2011 budget, which will go to Congress in February.
Stanley Collender, a budget expert at Qorvis Communications and a former staff aide to House and Senate budget committees, cautions that unless investors show nervousness about the debt, the budget debate next year could feature more posturing between the two parties than any real action to fix the problems.
But Alan Greenspan, who led the 1983 commission that made changes to avert a crisis in Social Security, said in an interview that he was optimistic that politicians will eventually work out a solution.
"I have always been a great supporter of Winston Churchill's statement about the United States," Greenspan said. "The United States can be counted on to do the right thing, after having tried all other conceivable alternatives."
Troy on Troy - USC Vs. Notre Dame, The Game is On! Part II
The Game is On!
Part II
Notre Dame and USC are two of the most storied programs in college football, with each school winning 11 national championships and 7 Heisman Trophies, more then any other school. They have combined to produce the most College Football Hall of Famers and NFL Hall of Famers. The series began in 1926 and is considered one of the most important rivalries in college football as well as the greatest inter sectional rivalry of all time.
The winner of the game captures the Jeweled Shillelagh. This is an Irish weapon from days past. Depending on the team that wins, either a gold Trojan head or a silver clover, with the score engraved, is added to the wooden trophy. If either team wins a National Championship or has a Heisman Trophy winner, a ruby stone is added to the eye of the Trojan head or an emerald to the clover.
The series started as a "conversation between the wives" of Notre Dame Head Coach Knute Rockne and USC Athletic Director Gywnn Wilson. As the story goes, the rivalry began with USC looking for a national rival. USC dispatched Wilson and his wife to Lincoln, Nebraska, where Notre Dame was playing Nebraska on very cold Thanksgiving Day. On that day (Nebraska 17, Notre Dame 0) Knute Rockne resisted the idea of a home-and-home series with USC because of the travel involved, but Mrs. Wilson was able to persuade Mrs. Rockne that a trip every two years to sunny Southern California was better than one to snowy, hostile Nebraska. Mrs. Rockne spoke to her husband and on December 4, 1926, USC became an annual fixture on Notre Dame’s schedule.
The first few years were memorable. Notre Dame and USC played their first game in 1926, a 13-12 win for the Irish. Rockne was quoted as saying it was the greatest game he ever saw. The following year, Notre Dame and USC would play a memorable game at Soldier Field in Chicago, a slim 7-6 Irish victory. An estimated 120,000 people were in attendance, a crowd that is considered to be one of the largest attended games in NCAA history. USC's first win in the series also came during the same year they won their first national title in 1928. From 1928-1932, USC and Notre Dame combined to win the national title five straight years, with USC winning in 1928, 1931 and 1932, and Notre Dame winning in 1929 and 1930. During this period, there was some talk of canceling the series due to the long amount of travel time it took by train from South Bend to Los Angeles. Rockne argued for the series against the Notre Dame Faculty Board and its chair, Father Mulcaire, countering that "he saw the day coming when most college teams will be going by air exclusively.”
Thank goodness the game has gone on and now, ND leads the series over USC, 42 – 33 with 5 ties. There have been some amazing games but for whatever reasons, I can only remember the USC victories. As Rebecca says, I have selective memory!
My two favorite are the 55 – 24 comeback game where USC was loosing at half time 24 – 6. It would have been 24 – 0 but Anthony Davis caught a 7 yard TD pass from Pat Hayden with just seconds left in the half. AD then ran back the opening kickoff. USC scored 55 unanswered points. ND Head Coach Ara Parseghian resigned following the game and a Trojan moment was created that will last for all time.
And then we have the “Bush Push.” After beating the Irish by 31 points each of the past 3 years, the Trojans came into South Bend to meet Notre Dame and the offensive genius first-year head coach Charlie Weis. The Irish players entered the stadium before the game wearing green jerseys, and put the crowd into frenzy. They only do this for emotional games against USC. This was a tight game throughout; the Irish took the lead with two minutes left on a Brady Quinn touchdown run. The Trojans stormed back after a 4th and 9 pass by Matt Leinart to Dwayne Jarrett that brought the ball inside the ND 15 yard line. As Leinart scrambled and tried to dive into the end zone, he was hit hard short of the goal line, and the ball was knocked out of bounds with 7 seconds to go. However, the clock continued to count down, and after it hit zero, the Irish fans began to storm the field. There was no replay in this game, at the request of Coach Pete Carroll, but after huddling, the officials spotted the ball on the one-yard line and put 7 seconds back on the clock. On the next play, instead of securing a tie that would have resulted in overtime, the Trojan offense surprised the Irish by running the ball. Trojan running back Reggie Bush (allegedly) pushed Matt Leinart into the end zone, but the referees did not make the call. Weis said he would hope his running back would make a play like that in a similar situation. SC won that game 35 – 31.
In 2007, I took Rebecca to see a game at Notre Dame Stadium. She loved it! I don’t think she was as impressed with the 38 – 0 USC victory as I was, but she loved the campus and tradition of the day. When I played there in 1983 and 1985, it was about 30 degrees and snowed both games. On this day, it was 78 degrees and everyone was in shorts. That was a different scenario compared to the USC - Nebraska game we went to just 3 weeks earlier. Same result, USC 3 million, Nebraska 5 or something like that. Both stadiums are amazing and the traditions are over the top. But there is just something about the whole environment at South Bend. The stadium is flanked in one end zone by “Touchdown Jesus.” Literally, a huge mosaic of Jesus with his arms stretched upward signaling another Irish score and our Lord’s eyes subtly smiling at the field. I have always believed that God is a Trojan, but this made me have just a bit of doubt.
I have been there 6 times for games, twice on the field as a player and 4 times as a fan, I am 2 and 4. This Saturday, October 17 at 12:30 PM, two of the greatest football traditions square off at historic Notre Dame Stadium in South Bend Indiana. I won’t be there in body but all of my heart and soul will be with my Trojan brothers putting everything on the line to secure another Trojan victory!
Fight On!
Troy
Part II
Notre Dame and USC are two of the most storied programs in college football, with each school winning 11 national championships and 7 Heisman Trophies, more then any other school. They have combined to produce the most College Football Hall of Famers and NFL Hall of Famers. The series began in 1926 and is considered one of the most important rivalries in college football as well as the greatest inter sectional rivalry of all time.
The winner of the game captures the Jeweled Shillelagh. This is an Irish weapon from days past. Depending on the team that wins, either a gold Trojan head or a silver clover, with the score engraved, is added to the wooden trophy. If either team wins a National Championship or has a Heisman Trophy winner, a ruby stone is added to the eye of the Trojan head or an emerald to the clover.
The series started as a "conversation between the wives" of Notre Dame Head Coach Knute Rockne and USC Athletic Director Gywnn Wilson. As the story goes, the rivalry began with USC looking for a national rival. USC dispatched Wilson and his wife to Lincoln, Nebraska, where Notre Dame was playing Nebraska on very cold Thanksgiving Day. On that day (Nebraska 17, Notre Dame 0) Knute Rockne resisted the idea of a home-and-home series with USC because of the travel involved, but Mrs. Wilson was able to persuade Mrs. Rockne that a trip every two years to sunny Southern California was better than one to snowy, hostile Nebraska. Mrs. Rockne spoke to her husband and on December 4, 1926, USC became an annual fixture on Notre Dame’s schedule.
The first few years were memorable. Notre Dame and USC played their first game in 1926, a 13-12 win for the Irish. Rockne was quoted as saying it was the greatest game he ever saw. The following year, Notre Dame and USC would play a memorable game at Soldier Field in Chicago, a slim 7-6 Irish victory. An estimated 120,000 people were in attendance, a crowd that is considered to be one of the largest attended games in NCAA history. USC's first win in the series also came during the same year they won their first national title in 1928. From 1928-1932, USC and Notre Dame combined to win the national title five straight years, with USC winning in 1928, 1931 and 1932, and Notre Dame winning in 1929 and 1930. During this period, there was some talk of canceling the series due to the long amount of travel time it took by train from South Bend to Los Angeles. Rockne argued for the series against the Notre Dame Faculty Board and its chair, Father Mulcaire, countering that "he saw the day coming when most college teams will be going by air exclusively.”
Thank goodness the game has gone on and now, ND leads the series over USC, 42 – 33 with 5 ties. There have been some amazing games but for whatever reasons, I can only remember the USC victories. As Rebecca says, I have selective memory!
My two favorite are the 55 – 24 comeback game where USC was loosing at half time 24 – 6. It would have been 24 – 0 but Anthony Davis caught a 7 yard TD pass from Pat Hayden with just seconds left in the half. AD then ran back the opening kickoff. USC scored 55 unanswered points. ND Head Coach Ara Parseghian resigned following the game and a Trojan moment was created that will last for all time.
And then we have the “Bush Push.” After beating the Irish by 31 points each of the past 3 years, the Trojans came into South Bend to meet Notre Dame and the offensive genius first-year head coach Charlie Weis. The Irish players entered the stadium before the game wearing green jerseys, and put the crowd into frenzy. They only do this for emotional games against USC. This was a tight game throughout; the Irish took the lead with two minutes left on a Brady Quinn touchdown run. The Trojans stormed back after a 4th and 9 pass by Matt Leinart to Dwayne Jarrett that brought the ball inside the ND 15 yard line. As Leinart scrambled and tried to dive into the end zone, he was hit hard short of the goal line, and the ball was knocked out of bounds with 7 seconds to go. However, the clock continued to count down, and after it hit zero, the Irish fans began to storm the field. There was no replay in this game, at the request of Coach Pete Carroll, but after huddling, the officials spotted the ball on the one-yard line and put 7 seconds back on the clock. On the next play, instead of securing a tie that would have resulted in overtime, the Trojan offense surprised the Irish by running the ball. Trojan running back Reggie Bush (allegedly) pushed Matt Leinart into the end zone, but the referees did not make the call. Weis said he would hope his running back would make a play like that in a similar situation. SC won that game 35 – 31.
In 2007, I took Rebecca to see a game at Notre Dame Stadium. She loved it! I don’t think she was as impressed with the 38 – 0 USC victory as I was, but she loved the campus and tradition of the day. When I played there in 1983 and 1985, it was about 30 degrees and snowed both games. On this day, it was 78 degrees and everyone was in shorts. That was a different scenario compared to the USC - Nebraska game we went to just 3 weeks earlier. Same result, USC 3 million, Nebraska 5 or something like that. Both stadiums are amazing and the traditions are over the top. But there is just something about the whole environment at South Bend. The stadium is flanked in one end zone by “Touchdown Jesus.” Literally, a huge mosaic of Jesus with his arms stretched upward signaling another Irish score and our Lord’s eyes subtly smiling at the field. I have always believed that God is a Trojan, but this made me have just a bit of doubt.
I have been there 6 times for games, twice on the field as a player and 4 times as a fan, I am 2 and 4. This Saturday, October 17 at 12:30 PM, two of the greatest football traditions square off at historic Notre Dame Stadium in South Bend Indiana. I won’t be there in body but all of my heart and soul will be with my Trojan brothers putting everything on the line to secure another Trojan victory!
Fight On!
Troy
Thursday, October 15, 2009
Troy on Troy - USC Vs. Notre Dame, The Game is On!
The Game is On!
Part I
In my day to day job, I produce and run corporate events. As part of that job, I handle guest speakers, from their arrival all the way through their sound check, just making sure that everything is as comfortable as possible to help ensure their best possible performance.
In May of 2008, the keynote speaker for one of my customers was Lou Holtz. Lou-freakin’- Holtz, the former Head Coach of Notre Dame. I did not like this guy. Nothing personal, it was just my duty as a Trojan Football Alumni member to dislike Notre Dame, it had become part of my DNA and I was good at it. I swallowed my pride and made sure that our staff had everything he wanted in his room. You would be amazed at some of the request. His desires were basic: a small box of plain saltine crackers, 2 warm caffeine free diet cokes and a current USA Today and Wall Street Journal. I did a little research and found out what his favorite pipe tobacco was and had that laid out on the table in his room prior to his arrival.
He showed up right on time. I met him at the entrance and introduced myself, then took him to his room. Now for whatever reason, as soon as most people become public speakers, they turn into Prima Donna jackasses. He was totally opposite of that. What a true gentleman. Prior to the speech, I gave him about 10 questions that my customer had wanted to ask him during the Q&A portion of his presentation. I gave them to him on 3x5 cards and he and I sat down and went thru his afternoon confirming times and locations.
As part of his fee, he agreed to sign 200 footballs as gifts for some of the key attendees. I had the hotel lay the footballs out on a series of boardroom tables that had been draped with rumpled table cloths so the balls wouldn’t roll all over the place. I escorted him into the room, locked the door so we wouldn’t be interrupted and as it turns out, we were in there for about an hour and a half, just he and I, talking life. About 15 minutes into the conversation, we are talking about the USC vs. ND rivalry and he notices my Rose Bowl ring. Now this next part is hard to describe. If you’ve ever heard him talk on TV, Lou is somewhat hard to understand. In person, it is worse. TV must have some kind of filters or something because between his admitted lisp and the speed in which he talks, I caught about 80% of what was being said.
He looks at me from his 130 pound 5’5” frame and screeches, “Whtz dat wring forr?” I said, “It’s a Rose Bowl ring from 1985.” He commanded, “Let mee ceee it!” So I took it off and handed it to him. He takes it in his hands, puts it on and looks at it through coke bottle glasses and says, “What poszision did juu play?” I said, “I was the Punter.” (Only Punters capitalize the word Punter.) He looks at me and then real slow, he lowered his head and looks at the ring again. Finally he looks me right in the eye and caws, “Dey give wrings to puntrzz at USC?” Hilarious, I start laughing and he smiles knowing he had just nailed me on a joke he has used a hundred times.
Well as you can imagine, this guy nails his speech. He has everyone on the edge of their seats talking about doing the right thing, doing your very best all the time, overcoming obstacles. He told everyone “Look at me. If I can become the Head Coach at Notre Dame, you all can become whatever you want.” The night ended with about 8 of us having dinner in a private room and just sharing stories. He asked as many questions of us as we did of him. Finally, he had to head to the airport; he had a 10:00 am tee time the following morning at Augusta where he is a member. I walked him to the front door and shook his hand. I told him that I was really hoping that he was going to be a jackass because of the whole SC / ND rivalry, but that in fact I really enjoyed our day together. He told me I still had a chance to dislike my rival coaches, he said, “Dat Terry Donahue is a real son odda bitchzz!” (Terry Donahue was Head Coach at UCLA for many years) He broke out laughing again at his own joke and hopped into the Town car like the little leprechaun he is and off he went.
After he was gone, I went back into his hotel room and made sure he hadn’t left anything behind. The room was spotless, he had even made his bed and folded up the used towels and put them on the counter in his bathroom. On his desk were the ten 3x5 cards that I had given him for his Q&A. He had hand written his answers on the cards. I now have those cards with the football I had him sign for me. He wrote:
“Dear Troy,
It is easy to see why USC is so good. I wish I had coached you at Notre Dame. Play like a champion today and live like a champion everyday.
Lou Holtz, Head coach of Notre Dame 86 to 96”
That ball is proudly displayed on my trophy case next to my Rose Bowl team autographed ball and my USC Heisman Trophy winners ball.
What a great guy and a total class act. I sure hope Donahue is a jackass, I guy can only dream.
Fight On!
Troy
Part I
In my day to day job, I produce and run corporate events. As part of that job, I handle guest speakers, from their arrival all the way through their sound check, just making sure that everything is as comfortable as possible to help ensure their best possible performance.
In May of 2008, the keynote speaker for one of my customers was Lou Holtz. Lou-freakin’- Holtz, the former Head Coach of Notre Dame. I did not like this guy. Nothing personal, it was just my duty as a Trojan Football Alumni member to dislike Notre Dame, it had become part of my DNA and I was good at it. I swallowed my pride and made sure that our staff had everything he wanted in his room. You would be amazed at some of the request. His desires were basic: a small box of plain saltine crackers, 2 warm caffeine free diet cokes and a current USA Today and Wall Street Journal. I did a little research and found out what his favorite pipe tobacco was and had that laid out on the table in his room prior to his arrival.
He showed up right on time. I met him at the entrance and introduced myself, then took him to his room. Now for whatever reason, as soon as most people become public speakers, they turn into Prima Donna jackasses. He was totally opposite of that. What a true gentleman. Prior to the speech, I gave him about 10 questions that my customer had wanted to ask him during the Q&A portion of his presentation. I gave them to him on 3x5 cards and he and I sat down and went thru his afternoon confirming times and locations.
As part of his fee, he agreed to sign 200 footballs as gifts for some of the key attendees. I had the hotel lay the footballs out on a series of boardroom tables that had been draped with rumpled table cloths so the balls wouldn’t roll all over the place. I escorted him into the room, locked the door so we wouldn’t be interrupted and as it turns out, we were in there for about an hour and a half, just he and I, talking life. About 15 minutes into the conversation, we are talking about the USC vs. ND rivalry and he notices my Rose Bowl ring. Now this next part is hard to describe. If you’ve ever heard him talk on TV, Lou is somewhat hard to understand. In person, it is worse. TV must have some kind of filters or something because between his admitted lisp and the speed in which he talks, I caught about 80% of what was being said.
He looks at me from his 130 pound 5’5” frame and screeches, “Whtz dat wring forr?” I said, “It’s a Rose Bowl ring from 1985.” He commanded, “Let mee ceee it!” So I took it off and handed it to him. He takes it in his hands, puts it on and looks at it through coke bottle glasses and says, “What poszision did juu play?” I said, “I was the Punter.” (Only Punters capitalize the word Punter.) He looks at me and then real slow, he lowered his head and looks at the ring again. Finally he looks me right in the eye and caws, “Dey give wrings to puntrzz at USC?” Hilarious, I start laughing and he smiles knowing he had just nailed me on a joke he has used a hundred times.
Well as you can imagine, this guy nails his speech. He has everyone on the edge of their seats talking about doing the right thing, doing your very best all the time, overcoming obstacles. He told everyone “Look at me. If I can become the Head Coach at Notre Dame, you all can become whatever you want.” The night ended with about 8 of us having dinner in a private room and just sharing stories. He asked as many questions of us as we did of him. Finally, he had to head to the airport; he had a 10:00 am tee time the following morning at Augusta where he is a member. I walked him to the front door and shook his hand. I told him that I was really hoping that he was going to be a jackass because of the whole SC / ND rivalry, but that in fact I really enjoyed our day together. He told me I still had a chance to dislike my rival coaches, he said, “Dat Terry Donahue is a real son odda bitchzz!” (Terry Donahue was Head Coach at UCLA for many years) He broke out laughing again at his own joke and hopped into the Town car like the little leprechaun he is and off he went.
After he was gone, I went back into his hotel room and made sure he hadn’t left anything behind. The room was spotless, he had even made his bed and folded up the used towels and put them on the counter in his bathroom. On his desk were the ten 3x5 cards that I had given him for his Q&A. He had hand written his answers on the cards. I now have those cards with the football I had him sign for me. He wrote:
“Dear Troy,
It is easy to see why USC is so good. I wish I had coached you at Notre Dame. Play like a champion today and live like a champion everyday.
Lou Holtz, Head coach of Notre Dame 86 to 96”
That ball is proudly displayed on my trophy case next to my Rose Bowl team autographed ball and my USC Heisman Trophy winners ball.
What a great guy and a total class act. I sure hope Donahue is a jackass, I guy can only dream.
Fight On!
Troy
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)