NU’s Perlman praised for defending BCS

LINCOLN — Bill Hancock sat a few feet behind Harvey Perlman, witnessing exactly what he was told could happen in one of these Senate subcommittee hearings.

Like a bulldog, Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, on Tuesday attacked the Bowl Championship Series, as Perlman, the raw meat in the show, was cast as BCS defender.

Still, Hancock said Perlman was calm and rational in what everyone knew was going to be a tough setting.

“He stood in there under a barrage of fairly unfriendly comments and questions,’’ said Hancock, the BCS administrator. “When I’ve talked to people from around the country the last few days, everyone has commented on how comfortable Harvey appeared.

“When we first went to Congress, an old Washington guy said, ‘Bill, you will not win. It’s their home game, under their rules and with their referees.’ So you hope to get your point across and do it calmly and do it succinctly, and that’s what Harvey did.’’

Locally and regionally, Perlman is best known for his role as chancellor of the University of Nebraska-Lincoln.

But in national college football circles, Perlman may now be better known as the face of the BCS. On July 1, he took over as chairman of the Presidential Oversight Committee for the BCS — just in time for an appearance before the Senate subcommittee.

In the days that followed Tuesday’s hearing, there were some follow-up interviews, including a 10-minute spot with ESPN’s “Mike and Mike in the Morning.”

“The chair of any group takes on more responsibility than the others in terms of being a public face,’’ Hancock said. “It’s true of the chairman of the Division I Basketball Committee, it’s true of the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, it’s true of the chairman of the BCS Presidential Oversight Committee.

“It goes with the territory. If you’re a leader, like Harvey is, you understand that’s part of the job.’’

Perlman knew there could be days like Tuesday way back when the Big 12 board first asked him to represent it on the BCS. He understood its ability to be both “controversial and nationally visible’’ because of the interest level and money involved with college football, not to mention differing opinions on the need for a playoff.

He also knew what he was in for as he defended the fairness and legality of the BCS. Hatch called it an arrogant monopoly that violated anti-trust laws.

“I testified before Sen. Hatch four or five years ago, so I knew the circumstances,’’ Perlman said. “We generally knew what Sen. Hatch’s position was. I was not particularly surprised by any questions that he asked.’’

Reaction varied, but Perlman’s name was always in the mix.

Kelly Bartling of UNL communications said mid- and late-week interview requests for Perlman were maybe fewer than expected, likely because people already know his position. Perlman tried to handle those he could despite being at a conference in Santa Fe, N.M.

Perlman said he had a few e-mails from others associated with the BCS, “thanking me for doing it.’’

For a lawyer, Perlman said it was exciting to appear in the Senate hearing room. But he sat alone for two hours as the rest of the BCS contingent — Hancock, Big 12 Commissioner Dan Beebe and a lobbyist — could only watch from behind.

The morning of the hearing, Beebe said the group met to go over matters and give opinions. But he said Perlman always has a command of the issues.

“In my judgment, he knocked the ball out of the park with the way he responded to the questioning,’’ Beebe said.

Along with Hatch, the hearing included testimony from University of Utah President Michael Young. Utah’s obvious beef stemmed from the Utes going undefeated last season but being denied a spot in the BCS championship game.

The day after the hearing, Young issued a statement in which the Mountain West Conference, of which Utah is a member, announced it had agreed to a BCS television deal, putting the playoff issue on hold for at least a while.

Perlman can maybe slide out from the forefront as the matter quiets temporarily.

“We hope so,’’ he said. “Until 2014, things seem to be reasonably stable, but who knows?

“If the Department of Justice decides to launch an investigation, we’ll deal with that. It’s just hard for us to see where such an investigation leads or what basis of such an investigation might be.’’

Contact the writer:

444-1042, rich.kaipust@owh.com