NCAA Only Interested in Expanding Pocketbook By Adding Bowl Games
The NCAA has clearly made its goal known over the last two weeks: making money is job No. 1.
In recent weeks, not only has college athletics' governing body discussed spoiling arguably their most exciting product—the NCAA Basketball Tournament—but they have gone ahead and approved the addition of two new bowl games.
Just the name of the bowls, the Dallas Football Classic and the New Era Pinstripe Bowl in New York, stink of money grubbing.
So much for the NCAA's goal to make academics first.
They haven't even seriously looked at doing away with the archaic bowl system in favor of a tournament format used by every other NCAA sport, including D2 and FCS football.
The constant arguments are that students will miss too much class and the season will be expanded too long, or even devalued.
So my question to the NCAA would be: Does adding two more bowls do anything outside of putting more money in your pocket?
I mean who really wants to watch two mediocre teams square off in a bowl as if they were actually accomplishing something?
Now the big boys in Indy will have you believe it is in the best interest of the schools participating.
No offense to the 6-6 teams that will probably participate in those games, but awarding mediocre must be in fashion.
Why else would the NCAA want to expand an already popular and successful basketball tournament if it wasn't about the added revenue?
For college football, it would be one thing to add additional BCS Bowls—but that will never happen.
Instead we'll get two generally worthless games of little interest to most football fans.
The logical solution to deciding a true champion would be to play a tournament.
That would take pressure off coaches, kids, and programs to go undefeated. As long as teams stay near the top, they have a shot at a national championship.
But the NCAA is "worried" about the strain on the "student" athletes.
If they are really worried athletes will miss too many classes, then why the talk of adding another week to the already three-week-long basketball tournament?
That reeks of contradiction to me.
In the end it is the all-mighty dollar that is the driving force behind college athletics. The NCAA has made that abundantly clear.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?