Sunday, November 18, 2007
I'm as Mad as Hell, and I'm Not Going to Take it Anymore
You know what makes me mad? College football arguments.
They're stupid, they begin every season like clockwork around this time, and nothing is ever solved. Not only that, but the same tired arguments are made every year:
The "My Conference is Better Than Your Conference" Argument.
This argument is mind-numbing. Pac-10 fans think their conference is the best. Southerners think the SEC is the best. Everyone clowns the Big 10 for being weak. Folks, all of the six power conferences are about the same. They all have good teams, (are there ANY great teams this year? I can't find one) they all have bad teams, and they all have a lot of average teams.
The SEC has more above-average teams than most conferences, so if you held a gun to my head, I guess I would call it the best conference, but it isn't nearly as strong as most would have you believe. If it were, then teams like Alabama wouldn't be losing to below .5oo teams from the Sun Belt Conference.
The Big Ten isn't as weak as its detractors say it is either. No, the conference isn't as strong as it was in the 90s, but are Ohio State, Illinois, and Wisconsin really that much worse then Arizona State, USC, and Oregon? Does Northwestern really suck that much more than Washington State sucks?
The "This Team Deserves to Play in the Title Game More than That Team" Argument.
Stupid, stupid argument. Lets look at three one-loss teams: Arizona State, Ohio State, and Missouri. Who is most "deserving?" Each has played average to below-average schedule, each has lost to a team thas proven to be good, but not great, each has looked dominant at times, weak at others. What about Kansas? Where do they fit in? West Virginia? Its just a jumbled mess, and you can argue about it till you're blue in the face and there will never be any resolution. The bottom line is we need a playoff and this year proves that more than any other.
The Strength of Schedule Argument
This is really a derivative of the previous argument, but it deserves to be handled individually.
Lets just say this once and for all: Everyone, EVERYONE, schedules non-conference patsies. The system, where one loss is devastating and two losses are fatal, gives teams incentive to do so. There are also no exibition games, so teams write checks to in-state cupcakes to come catch a beat-down.
The conference schedule set in stone. So you cannot fault a team for having a weak conference schedule. Kansas' conference schedule is a joke (they miss Oklahoma and Texas) but you know what? There is nothing they can do about it.
The Heisman Argument
Pisses me off to no end. Is Tim Tebow the front-runner because Dennis Dixon got hurt? Or did Dixon's injury, and the subsequent collapse by the Ducks immediately afterward, actually help his cause in that it showed his value to the team? What about Darren McFadden? He was second in the balloting last year, and even more valuable this year, yet he is rarely mentioned. And GODDAMMIT WHAT ABOUT CHASE DANIEL??
Oh, one more thing: No, all of these arguments are not good for the sport. If I hear one more BCS proponent say that, I am going to throw my TV through a window.