It’s Time for the WAC to Sit Down and Shut Up

Will somebody tell the WAC to go away?

The far-flung league (that Tulsa-Hawaii rivalry is starting to heat up, isn’t it?) that has overdosed on teams (the last time we checked, there were 16; who said more is better, especially when it includes San Jose State and UTEP?) won’t quit tugging on the sleeve of the big boy of college football: the Bowl Alliance.

The WAC thinks it plays on the same field as the SEC, Big East, ACC, Big 12 and Notre Dame--the entities that make up the Bowl Alliance along with CBS and ABC--so it feels it should have a better chance to play for the national championship. That’s a key the Bowl Alliance holds, but it doesn’t think the WAC--which plays a brand of backyard football where quarterbacks are king, defensive backs are jesters and 52-48 scores are expected--belongs in its neighborhood. But like a pesky phone solicitor, the WAC won’t go away.

The WAC’s beef for better access began last season, when 13-1 and fifth-ranked BYU was bypassed in favor of lower-ranked teams (Penn State and Nebraska) for at-large spots in the Orange and Fiesta bowls--two of the three Alliance bowls. The other Alliance bowl is the Sugar, which was committed to pitting the No. 1 (Florida State) and No. 2 (Florida) teams last season. That meant the Cougars had to settle for a spot in the Cotton Bowl, which had a payout of $2 million, as opposed to going to the Orange or Fiesta and cashing an $8.5 million check. The WAC also got its nose tweaked when Wyoming didn’t go to a bowl despite going 10-2 and ranking 22nd.

To end the injustice and quit denying everyone the WAC football the league thinks you want to watch, the league wants to strike a deal with the Bowl Alliance. The conference, which would like the NCAA to take control of postseason games, wants a guaranteed spot in an Alliance bowl if its champ ranks 12th or higher in the final AP poll. The Alliance wants to reserve a space if the WAC winner is sixth or higher. The discrepancy and a lack of common ground has caused some kicking and screaming in many WAC locales, as well as--of all places--Washington, D.C. That’s right. Several senators recently chimed in on the WAC-Alliance tiff, claiming an antitrust violation may be taking place with schools in collusion with the bowls to exclude other schools. The U.S. Justice Department and Federal Trade Commission may investigate. The WAC may sue. Seriously.

That the senators hail from Wyoming, Utah and Kentucky (home of Conference USA member Louisville, which has felt unsatisfied with its postseason destination in the past) comes as no surprise.

The Bowl Alliance, which will add the Rose Bowl, Big Ten and Pac-10 after the 1997 season and become the Super Alliance, tried to give the WAC some hush money--$2 million per year--to go away, but the WAC didn’t want to sell its option to compete for a national title. Didn’t it vie for the title last year? If BYU had been ranked No. 1 or No. 2 after last season, it would have competed in the Sugar Bowl for the national title after receiving one of the Alliance’s two at-large tickets. Remember, the at-large slots can be filled by any I-A team. That includes BYU, Colorado State and the rest of the WAC. The other six Alliance slots are committed to teams in the Big 12, Big East, ACC, SEC or Notre Dame--as long as the participants have at least eight victories vs. Division I-A teams.

Can you blame representatives of the Orange and Fiesta bowls for making an economic decision by saying no to BYU? They knew Nebraska and Penn State fans would travel better than BYU followers. That may not be fair, but it is smart--and it is reality.

The non-Alliance bowls aren’t exempt from this penny-wise philosophy. The Copper Bowl punched Wyoming in the gut while embracing 8-3 Utah. Why? The Utes travel in packs, while the Cowboys . . . well, let’s just say it can be hard to leave Laramie. Take it from former Wyoming coach Joe Tiller: “The weather in the fall is clear and still, which means the snow’s still coming down and it’s clear up to your butt.”