Many BCS critics use the argument that most BCS institutions fund their athletic departments and receive fudning from state and federal sources. Only 25 of the 120 FBS athletic departments generate a profit for their institution. These revenue streams provide opportunity to hold these institutions accountable to the public interests.

For perspective, the average FBS institution subsidises athletics to the tune of $8 million above what they generate on their own. Over the entire FBS that is nearly a billion dollars nationally to support big time college athletics and big time coaches salaries funded by the universities from mostly tax payer revenue.

Accountability is a good thing. Could the day come when the BCS institutions decide that they could use less of it, especially in the financial areas? If that day comes they will need to learn to operate without those tax payer subsidies. That would typically mean budget cutbacks of nearly 12% for an athletic department with a budget of $65 million. Larger programs would feel less of an impact and 25 would feel no impact, as they already operate at a profit. Many smaller programs would simply be unable to compete.

If the big name schools really want to establish a clear definition of what makes them better than the rest profitability is the most direct measure that can be applied. If college is headed to a new  of elite programs this is the measure that should be used to determine who should be invited.

If you want to join our league, make a profit where you are and we will start talking.

The major issue is accountability. If the athletic departments are financially independent, then they are also less answerable to the institutions they represent. The board of directors and university presidents would still have control of hiring and firing AD's, but the cash would flow the other direction.

Competitive rewards would need to be built into the system to reward institutions whose athletes excell academically. (A larger required payback to the parent college for academically struggling athletic departments for example.)

These budget cutbacks could be phased in to reduce there initial impact. Once these institutions are freed of the rest of the NCAA they should command a far larger share of the marketable revenue streams for college sports and regain these set backs.