According to this report on the ESPN website, non-BCS conferences are receiving a record payout from the BCS Bowls with the Mountain West leading the way. The major driver behind the record payout was TCU and Boise State obtaining a BCS berth, a first in history. Reports show that the Mountain West will receive $9.8 million, while the WAC will receive $7.8 million. The remaining $6.4 million will be split 3 ways between Conference USA, the MAC and the Sun Belt Conference.

Keep in mind that the Mountain West splits all monies collected from bowl visits equally amongst the 9 institutions. Also the Mountain West played in 4 other bowl games, but the payouts for those affiliated games are less than 10 percent of the payout for a BCS game. Furthermore, each team uses this payout to cover costs for playing in the bowl. So in some cases, such as TCU playing the in the Poinsettia Bowl last year, it may end up costing the team more to play in the game than what they receive in revenue from participating. When all is said and done the Mountain West may see revenue in the ballpark of $9 million and split it 9 ways, leaving TCU with just $1 million in revenue from this bowl season.

The reason I bring this up is there is clearly an ongoing debate whether congress should get involved in the BCS. I absolutely agree that our government has a number of things that I agree are more important like the ongoing war effort, healthcare, etc. But keep in mind the BCS involves the distribution of revenue to academic institutions both public and private. These funds make it easier for athletic programs to survive on their own without taking money from the general fund of each school. Why does that matter? Because for public institutions, these funds that run the school come from taxpayers of those states.

Making the point more plainly, the major beneficiaries of the BCS tend to be the SEC and the Big Ten. This year, their bounty was $22.2 million, $12.4 million more than the Mountain West. Even the conferences that only sent 1 team received $17.7 million, $7.9 million more than the Mountain West. But for a second consider that the Big Ten will dwarf the MAC by nearly $20 million. And that does not take into account the excess money that the Big Ten gets from their other numerous bowl ties while the MAC pays out of their pocket to attend fewer, less recognized games. (Click here to see bowl payouts - sorry for using Wikipedia, but it was the only family friendly source I could find that verified the payout of each bowl.)

The issue of money centers on states like Wyoming, New Mexico, Nevada and Utah where their in-state institutions reside outside of the big money BCS conferences. It also happens to make up the core of the Mountain West conference. These 4 states reside next to states like Arizona, Nebraska and Kansas that are seeing large disparities in revenues because of ties to the Big XII and Pac-10. When you look at a state like Nevada that is still feeling the brunt of a recession, having an extra $2-4 million in their budget would do wonders for the school and taxpayers.

So next time you hear a group like the Playoff Action Committee, or hear Representative Joe Barton of Texas speak, or Orrin Hatch of Utah share his disdain for the current BCS system, know that this is a major part of the issue. When people say that congress has better things to do with their time than fixing college football, I would agree with them if it was merely about how we determine the NCAA football champion. But the bigger issue that these people are trying to tell congress has more to do with academic and athletic budgets than college football. And maybe this is an important issue that does indeed necessitate congressional action.