http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1177192/index.htm
The argument: The BCS exists because it continues to put money into the powerful peoples hands.
The purpose: The authors’ purpose is to bring to light some of the unknown and appalling facts of the BCS system. The authors strive to make readers aware of some of the behind-the-scenes deals performed by the BCS.
The audience: The audience is sports fans who have the power to appeal to their legislators to do something about the BCS. This article comes in the wake of recent lawsuits against the BCS for anti-trust violations.
The goal: The authors advocate for changing the BCS. They hope that by making this information available to fans, it will help facilitate change in the college football playoff system.
How they do it: The authors use logos throughout the article to make their point. For example, at one point the author describes why schools put up with the unfair BCS system. He then expels evidence about the amount in bonuses athletic directors and coaches receive from their BCS wins. This logical development allows the reader to understand that the schools put up with the BCS because those in power receive hefty bonuses from BCS wins.
Another piece of rhetoric the authors use is ethos. The author uses multiple quotes from athletic directors, conference commissioners and former IRS employees.
The evidence is very relevant to the discussion on the BCS. By using official school data, conference data, and bowl data, the authors present a nice argument with sufficient evidence to support it.
The evidence, as far as I can tell, is very accurate. The majority of the evidence comes from a heavily researched book that the authors just published.
Because of the quality of evidence presented in the article, I feel that the article is persuasive. Certainly, the playoff debate has been very prevalent in college football in recent years; however it has lacked sufficient supporting evidence. This article takes a big step towards providing that evidence.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1177192/index.htm
The argument: The BCS exists because it continues to put money into the powerful peoples hands.
The purpose: The authors’ purpose is to bring to light some of the unknown and appalling facts of the BCS system. The authors strive to make readers aware of some of the behind-the-scenes deals performed by the BCS.
The audience: The audience is sports fans who have the power to appeal to their legislators to do something about the BCS. This article comes in the wake of recent lawsuits against the BCS for anti-trust violations.
The goal: The authors advocate for changing the BCS. They hope that by making this information available to fans, it will help facilitate change in the college football playoff system.
How they do it: The authors use logos throughout the article to make their point. For example, at one point the author describes why schools put up with the unfair BCS system. He then expels evidence about the amount in bonuses athletic directors and coaches receive from their BCS wins. This logical development allows the reader to understand that the schools put up with the BCS because those in power receive hefty bonuses from BCS wins.
Another piece of rhetoric the authors use is ethos. The author uses multiple quotes from athletic directors, conference commissioners and former IRS employees.
The evidence is very relevant to the discussion on the BCS. By using official school data, conference data, and bowl data, the authors present a nice argument with sufficient evidence to support it.
The evidence, as far as I can tell, is very accurate. The majority of the evidence comes from a heavily researched book that the authors just published.
Because of the quality of evidence presented in the article, I feel that the article is persuasive. Certainly, the playoff debate has been very prevalent in college football in recent years; however it has lacked sufficient supporting evidence. This article takes a big step towards providing that evidence.
