Congress' hearing on the BCS was foolish, inane

	Big 12 Commissioner Kevin Weiberg (left), the BCS coordinator, and the Big Ten's Jim Delany (right) were forced to endure a Congressional hearing Wednesday. AP
	MAILBAG Have questions or feedback? E-mail Mark Beech. Your name: Your e-mail address: Your home town: Enter your question:

Our government has plenty to worry about, including such weighty issues as illegal immigration, taxes and a war on the other side of the world (not necessarily in that order). In my book, that -- along with making the laws of the land -- seems like pretty close to a full plate. Washington, however, can be a town with its priorities out of whack, and several members of Congress proved it Wednesday by convening a House Subcommittee to discuss the great national crisis posed by ... the Bowl Championship Series.

Now, I know stuff like this isn't unprecedented, especially this year when we've already had hearings on the steroid policies of the NFL, NBA, NHL and Major League Baseball. Our government has always taken more than a fan's interest in sports. After all, state commissions govern the sport of boxing, and Congress has granted MLB an exception to anti-trust laws since 1922 -- a privilege it gives to none of the other professional leagues (something the Supreme Court has called an "anomaly," by the way). There is something ridiculous, though, about holding hearings about the BCS.

Just check out this earth-shaking excerpt from near the top of the story that ran yesterday right here on SI.com:

When House Subcommittee on Commerce Trade and Consumer Protections Chairman Cliff Stearns (R-Fla.), pointed out that lower divisions have playoffs for football, BCS coordinator Kevin Weiberg said: "It certainly, congressman, is possible to have a playoff at the Division I-A level, as well. We have not chosen to go down that path."

Even for Washington, the level of inanity on display here is stunning. What exactly then was the purpose of the hearing? There wasn't one. The committee members made it clear that they weren't interested in pursuing any sort of legislation in the matter. Of course they're not, because they know they can't.

Rep. Joe Barton (R-Texas), who is a playoff proponent, said he hoped the hearing "causes discussion." I hate to burst your bubble, Rep. Barton, but if you don't think this matter is discussed, perhaps you should read a sports page or listen to a radio once in a while. By now, just about every college football fan knows the arguments for and against a playoff. Personally, I prefer the old system, where the bowl matchups were based on tradition and voters selected the national champion, and so I oppose both the BCS and a playoff. That's not, however, why this hearing ticks me off.

As usual, the only thing these esteemed windbags were worried about doing was pandering, and doing so on our time and with our money. The idea of a playoff for Division I-A is a popular one, and for one day, at least, it was discussed in the halls of Congress. The lawmakers presiding over the discussion will now retreat to their mahogany offices and congratulate themselves (and each other) for putting on a good show.

However, they did little more than make themselves look hopelessly out of touch. That's hard to do, especially when you're dealing with the BCS.