Played to an old Cowboys Junkies soundtrack, the John Junker story looks like a Greek tragedy. Unfortunately, one man's hubris will probably take down more than one individual. In Junker's case, it will either demote or completely exterminate the Fiesta Bowl. In the big picture, it also has serious repercussions for the very existence of the BCS college football postseason, long-term if not short-term.
Why? As surviving Fiesta Bowl officials have already admitted, Junker junkets were legendary in lavishly treating university and conference officials with everything from strip clubs to golf matches with the great Jack Nicklaus. Without even going into Junker's personal spending or political arm-twisting and their probable illegal ramifications, the BCS is seriously tainted by the serious peddling of influence that occurred. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that Junker's touch of Croesus was not limited to school and conference officials. His "circle of influence" extended to politicians (who could possibly be voting on the integrity and validity of the BCS system) and members of the media (who could possibly be writing on or speaking about the integrity and validity of the BCS system).
Curiously enough, ESPN/ABC media personalities, most of whom are outspokenly pro-BCS bowl/pro-BCS conference homers, shouldn't be the focus of this facet of the investigation. After all, ESPN/ABC personnel are BCS buttboys and buttgals for the most part because ESPN/ABC have a vested interest in the health of the BCS system. It is the network conglomerate gaining the most from the existence of the unfair system. It is the network conglomerate with the big investment in broadcasting rights of the BCS for the foreseeable future. ESPN media personalities have their marching orders from superiors to prop up the flawed BCS institution. Advertising revenues and long-term investments are dependent upon its sanctity.
One would think the media targets of the BCS bowls would be those employed by non-BCS organizations. You hear some of them on local and national radio stations. You see some of them on local and national cable shows. You read some of them on local and national internet and print media sites. Is anybody untouchable? Perhaps the writer in Fargo, or the blogger in Missoula, or the radio guy in Albuquerque are not deemed worthy of lobbying. It's all about demographics and market size.
You can almost picture the elaborate bowl "hosting" that has taken place at some point in the past when a non-ESPN/ABC media personality launches into a monologue extolling the virtues of the BCS bowl system. It appears pretty transparent.
How does the BCS combat its most outspoken critics? They buy them off. Utah and TCU are incorporated into BCS conferences. Future superconferences will probably take care of the Boise States of the world still left in mid-major limboland. Does that make the system more fair? Not if bowl CEO's and committees are greasing all the cogs in the machine to dismiss all talk of a postseason playoff system in major college football.
Those who support a major college playoff system of some type (including President Obama and Senator Hatch) gain momentum from headlines that Junker's questionable activities created. If Congress investigates the disparity of revenues "earned" between BCS and non-BCS schools, who's to stop it from investigating the disparity of revenues "earned" between football factories like Texas and non-factories like Iowa State in the same conference? What can stop it? Perhaps receipts and taped conversations residing in the possession of men like John Junker, current or former BCS bowl CEO's and board members with something on certain politicians.
If bowls' activities in the off-season only involve lobbying efforts to influence political and media personnel, the bowl system is doomed. If there existed these payouts on such a scale in Phoenix, can anybody say bowls in cities with the morals of New Orleans, Miami, and Los Angeles are above suspicion? Food for thought.
No comments:
Post a Comment