The NCAA has long taken a harsh anti-gambling stance. They
\nhave a well-orchestrated \u201cDon\u2019t Bet on It\u201d campaign including a website
\n(DontBetOnIt.org). <\/p>\n

Yet, the phony organization has a $100 million gamble and
\nhas fixed the outcome to ensure they will not lose the money they anted. <\/span>The NCAA, in conjunction with their
\nmega-million dollar betting syndicate of six BCS conferences, college
\npresidents and the television networks, created the BCS 11 years ago. Topping
\nthe list of goals of the sweepstakes is to come up with a true national
\nchampionship game. <\/p>\n

The quandary is, ala ice skating, that the participants
\nare determined by a very subjective equation that consists of judges in two
\npolls and the computer average of six ranking systems. The compilation results
\nin a point system that ranks each team, with the top two meeting to determine a
\nchampion. <\/p>\n

However, the many imperfections of the method allows for
\nthe possibility that the NCAA could lose their bet. The winner of that alleged
\nchampionship game may not wind up with the most BCS points when the point
\nsystem was applied after the bowl games. <\/p>\n

The new calculations could produce a top ranked team that did
\nnot even participate in the BCS Championship game. We saw an example of that
\nwhen LSU earned a spot in this year\u2019s game, leapfrogging a Virginia Tech team
\nthat won and a Georgia squad that did not play because they already finished
\ntheir season. <\/p>\n

There are endless scenarios in which the victor of Ohio
\nState-LSU could also be leapfrogged. For example, LSU supporters point out that
\nboth of the Tigers losses were in overtime, hence their setbacks should be
\nweighted less. <\/p>\n

Okay, so what if the BCS Championship game also goes into
\novertime, should that victory be weighted less, allowing impressive bowl wins
\nby Virginia Tech, Oklahoma<\/st1:place><\/st1:State>, Georgia<\/st1:place><\/st1:country-region>,
\nUSC or Kansas<\/st1:place><\/st1:State> to bypass them? <\/p>\n

What if Hawaii<\/st1:place><\/st1:State>
\nstuns Georgia<\/st1:place><\/st1:country-region>
\nin impressive fashion? All of a sudden that sheds new light on their record and
\nvalidates them as the only undefeated team in the country. <\/p>\n

Well aware of the nightmare scenario, the NCAA has fixed
\nthe outcome. Coaches have as much right to vote their conscience as constituents
\ndo in Cuban elections. Regardless of who a coach believes should be No. 1
\nfollowing the postseason results, they are mandated to declare the winner of
\nthe BCS\u2019 gamble as champion. Is this not blatant shaving of the BCS\u2019s own point
\nsystem? <\/p>\n

In fact, the Bowl Championship Series Rankings are not
\neven recalculated following the bowls. A true final poll could reveal the BCS
\nlost their wager. No problem, the NCAA comes up with a point system then
\nmanipulates the ultimate outcome to guarantee there will be no undesired
\nresults. If a player does that, it\u2019s called point shaving. When the NCAA does
\nthe same thing, they call it the Bowl Championship Series. <\/span><\/p>\n

College athletes, visit the DontBetOnIt.org site.
\nRemember, when the NCAA informs you about all the evils of gambling and point
\nshaving, do as they say, not as they do. <\/p>\n

The author, Joe Duffy is CEO of OffshoreInsiders.com<\/a><\/span><\/b>.
\nMake sure you are happy with the outcome of the college football bowls by
\ngetting his GodsTips winning selections at OffshoreInsiders.com<\/a><\/span><\/b> <\/span> <\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

<\/body>
\n<\/html><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"