Eliminating BCS Automatic Bids Would Change the Face of College Football

Reports about the BCS getting rid of all automatic bids, and just concentrating on a match-up between the No. 1 and No 2 teams, are out there.  If this turns out to be the case, college football would change drastically and might be confronted with legal challenges; the kind the sport has never seen before.

If, indeed, the BCS does eliminate automatic bids starting 2013,  when the current contract expires, four major bowls—the ones that pit winners of BCS automatic bids against each other—would be allowed the freedom to chose any teams they want.

This is how the system worked before the BCS era began.

The Rose Bowl would go back to selecting the winners of the Big Ten and Pac-12, taking into consideration that teams from both conferences could be in the BCS Championship Game.

The Sugar Bowl would go back to selecting the highest ranked SEC team available. The Orange Bowl would likely renew their old ties with the Big 12 and whatever the Fiesta Bowl decides, it would be their decision.

One thing is certain: there's a high probability the Orange, Sugar, and Fiesta Bowl would try to get Notre Dame, even if they finished 6-6, over high-ranking teams from conferences like the Big East and ACC.

And there's a high probability the Sugar Bowl, if an SEC team played in the BCS National Championship Game, would rather select another SEC team than a higher ranking team from another conference.

Well, isn't it the right of any bowl, not contracted into a BCS system, to select any team they want?  Isn't it their right to try to sell out the stadium with local and traditionally popular teams?

The truth is that it may or may not be their right!

It may be a similar situation to the fair housing laws that safeguard every citizen from being discriminated in search for housing.

The bowls might be challenged in the courts for not exercising "fair bowling' laws.

Wasn't it Senator Orrin Hatch of Utah, who already held hearings on the legality of the BCS in 2009, when the University of Utah wasn't offered a chance to play for the BCS Championship?

Back to the freedom to chose issue. Has the BCS been a gift to the Big East Conference teams and non-BCS qualifiers who would have never had a chance to make the huge BCS bowl playoffs if they were guaranteed automatic bids?

I think the answer is yes.

But what would the resurrection of the old system mean to the face of college football?

For one, it would make the distribution of wealth more unbalanced and the Notre Dame's and SEC teams would have an easier time bringing home the big payouts.

It would make it extremely difficult for Big East teams, regardless of their ranking, to get a shot at the big bucks.

The rich would get richer and the poor would get poorer.

Just the rumors of returning to the old system could dash the hopes of the Big East's proposed expansion to 12 teams.

If the Big East couldn't guarantee Boise State the chance to play in a BCS game, if they win the conference, wouldn't it lose its biggest selling point?

Scott Michaux of the Augusta Chronical writes "the BCS must be feeling a little guilty about setting in motion all the conference upheaval."

I believe he feels this is one of the reasons the BCS might be looking to get out its current system and just concentrate on the BCS National Championship Game.