WASHINGTON – The mob on top of kicker Hunter Lawrence after his field goal put the University of Texas in college football's national title game was just the start of a burgeoning dog pile on the Bowl Championship Series.

Building upon growing frustration among football fans, a House Energy and Commerce subcommittee will vote today on a bill that could help start a college football playoff system and fulfill the dreams of millions who want a new way to determine the top team in the land.

It will be too late for the national title hopes of TCU and other underdogs, which were dashed by Lawrence's last-second kick to give Texas the Big 12 Conference crown and a chance to play for the national championship.

But Rep. Joe Barton, R-Arlington, hopes his bill will increase the pressure to change what he calls the "false and deceptive" ways of one of the nation's most popular and profitable sports enterprises.

"The BCS isn't about having an open, fair competition," Barton said. "It is about maximizing profits for the elite BCS schools. It is a cartel."

The BCS, which started in 1998, was supposed to end college football confusion after years of controversial polls and split national titles. The BCS brought in a computer formula and deemed that the top two teams would compete at the end of the year, with the winner being crowned national champion.

But the format has proved to be an even greater lightning rod for criticism. Large, tradition-rich schools and conferences receive the bulk of the BCS's multimillion-dollar payouts. And critics say schools outside power conferences, such as TCU, Boise State and Utah, have little or no chance to play in what Barton calls the so-called championship game, even when they dominate all their opponents.

Barton's bill wouldn't necessarily revolutionize college football. It would prohibit "promotion, marketing and advertising of any post-season NCAA Division I football game as a national championship game unless such game is the culmination of a fair and equitable playoff system."

But even this early vote could chip away at an institution that has firmly rejected any dissolution of the college bowl system. At the least, the bill has caused enough consternation – and hope – to stir up hundreds of thousands of lobbying dollars in Washington.

This year, lobbyists were paid $70,000 by the BCS, $250,000 by the Atlantic Coast Conference and $10,000 by the Football Bowl Association, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. The Mountain West Conference, which TCU and Utah play in, and Boise State University paid lobbyists $250,000 and $140,000, respectively, to promote their schools' interests.

BCS officials and lobbyists are adamant that the bowl system works and that this year's national championship game between Texas and Alabama will produce a worthy and genuine champion. Further, they wonder why Congress would deal with such an inconsequential matter as college football.

"Outside of this subcommittee, it is hard to imagine that there is any real desire in Congress to touch this," said BCS Executive Director Bill Hancock. "With everything going on in the country, most members think this is the last thing Congress should be dealing with."

Barton chafes at questions about whether Congress should devote attention to the BCS. He notes that college football is a big-money industry, and his committee oversees interstate commerce and fair-trade practices.

President Barack Obama has expressed a desire for a college football playoff system, though he hasn't weighed in on Barton's bill. It's unclear whether the bill has much chance in Congress, and even Barton says reforming college football will be a long process.

Some of the bill's supporters caution that the legislation should serve mainly to grab the attention of the BCS and university presidents. Rep. John Carter, R-Round Rock, said the NCAA, not Congress, should create a playoff.

"But maybe Congress should have a heavy hand in it," said Carter, one of the bill's co-sponsors.

And those who encourage Congress' intervention point to implications beyond the football field. BCS bowls have payouts of nearly $20 million. That money can be used to fund scholarships, professorships and building projects. The exposure from appearing in a BCS bowl can increase applications and strengthen alumni networks.

"No one is saying this is Afghanistan or health care," said Matt Sanderson, spokesman for a political action committee that promotes the playoff system. "But college football is a more than $1 billion business, and it matters when championship invitations are handed out arbitrarily."

Barton likes to note that for all of TCU's recent success, the Horned Frogs have received less bowl money than Big 12 member Baylor in the last four years – and Baylor hasn't played in a bowl game since 1994.

"There is either something very right about that or something very wrong," Barton said. "And I would say it is wrong."

Barton and his supporters are not just the small-conference bunch, either. Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Austin, is another of the bill's co-sponsors and a Longhorns fan, too. McCaul spokesman Mike Rosen said the congressman is still committed to changing the BCS, despite Texas benefiting from the setup this year.

"He's not a fair-weather fan of a playoff system," Rosen said.

But is McCaul so generous to offer that TCU should be playing in the national title game instead of UT?

"I'm not going to go there," Rosen said with a chuckle.

Rep. Joe Barton's bill wouldn't force a change in college football's national championship. But it would prevent the Bowl Championship Series from marketing a postseason game as a "national championship" match-up unless it is the result of a playoff system. Arguments for and against the bill:

PRO

• The BCS is unfair to certain schools and conferences.

• Congress must get involved because of the big money associated with college football bowl games.

CON

• The BCS has been effective in matching up a championship game and is constantly adjusting to offer chances to more conferences.

• Congress has more important matters to address.

WHAT'S NEXT

A House subcommittee will discuss the bill and vote on it today. After that, it moves to the full committee.