I have a big time problem with college football, and it came into focus for me yesterday. I was on my drive home and I was listening to a sports talk radio station on Sirius XM, and it was a conversation with a Univ. of Florida beat writer about Tim Tebow, and whether or not he would play. Let me be very clear, first and foremost, that guys like Tim Tebow are people who make sports bearable. If it was all Terrell Owens and Jerry Jones, sports wouldn't be fun. A "good guy" like Tebow is what makes sports interesting, and his dominance (and commitment) to College Football is really awesome.
But much like every mega-business in this country, that street is so one way it is insane. We hear stories about how much Urban Meyer (Florida's Head Coach) loves Tebow, and I don't doubt it given Tebow's remarkable track record as a person, but you have to think that it really ends there. The University of Florida, for example, would not stick their neck out for Tebow, neither would the Conference, the SEC, or the League in which they play, the NCAA. Why do I say this? Well, they already show their true colors, all of those organizations, by the way the players are compensated.
I understand the theory behind not paying college athletes, but it is just a theory. It is also like the theory that children should be smacked by parents when they do something wrong - I can see why, on the surface, that sorta makes sense. i wouldn't do it, and I think science and study has shown it doesn't work, but I understand how someone can postulate that it would work. Bad behavior followed by negative reinforcement could end the behavior. Check. Well, again, Psychological studies have shown that to be wrong, and improper. So back to college athletes, I can understand the notion that they should not be paid, that they are just college Amateurs, but the reality is, they are professional athletes being dragged along by their school.
Now the argument is that they recieve an eduction, which, I suppose is true. But the reality is, if Tim Tebow wanted to graduate with a degree in Psychology, his commitment to football would preclude him from a Research Assistant position, or a Teaching Assistant position - it would make his involvement in Social and Academic clubs, all integral parts to a Bachelor's Degree, nearly impossible. Tebow cannot be a student and an athlete, the setup is impossible. That is becoming even more true when we realize that most coaches flaunt and violate the rules around time allowed for practice each week, etc.
None of this is a revelation, and that isn't why I have a problem with college football. They are a lead-in, however.
College Sports have taken over colleges. Period. I think back to when colleges meant something, academically. John Quincy Adams was a hero at Harvard because he studied hard, made the most of his education, stayed out of trouble, and became an Academic, a Leader, and ultimately a President. Those were the standards. The reason a lot of these major schools exist now is to function as a Home Field for their sports teams. Much like every other ill we have in this country, we have elevated the Athletic over the Academic. Trust me, I love sports so much, and Sports were a huge part of my experience at UMass, but at the same time, I wish it lived side-by-side with Academics.
There is no interest by colleges like Florida to be known as an academic school - they may boast from time to time about a graduate who becomes an astronaut, but they are clearly an Athletic school, who hangs their hat, and their checkbook, by the wins and losses of their Football team.
Again, none of that is a revelation - but I got a bit queezy in my car yesterday when I heard this reporter, whose only job was follow around college kids, critique their on-field play, dismantle their skills and talents and flaws, and try to predict how their 19 year old minds would be working this upcoming Saturday. That kind of disection, I believe, should be compensated with pay. The fact that so many people (myself included, while at adidas), benefitted financially from the ups and downs of these kids, is what I really am starting to feel uneasy about.
But, the real issue, the thing that drives me the craziest, is that all of this success, all of this money, all of this greed, all of this excess, all of the things I mentioned above, is dictated by an insanely uneducated, and unprepared mass, known as "the writers."
The reality is, you are nothing in college Football and Basketball unless you are a ranked team. Your ranking is all that matters, it rules all. A writer in Louisville, KY, whose job is to critique kids just out of high school on their athletic prowess, will be part of the machinery that sits down and analyzes how good their hometown team is, but also is tasked to look at the macro level of things and determine how good the whole country is. This process is copied hundreds of times around the country, where people culminate in a Pre-Season poll, based purely on conjecture. "I think Univ. of Washington has a bad backfield, so they will be terrible. Notre Dame is on TV a lot, so they must be pretty good. Florida has Tebow, he is the best, they are the best," etc.
There is a science, in part, to this. But clearly, based on the number of "upsets" we have seen in College Football this far, with teams ranked in the top 5 losing to unranked opponents, the science of this all must be questioned. BUT NOBODY IS QUESTIONING IT!!!! People are just saying, "wow, #5 Georgia lost to unranked Valdosta State, what an amazing upset!" as if the ranking is set in stone, or if it is based on any kind of scientific/numerical reasoning. It isn't. It is based on a windbag who sits in his house in Seattle, WA, spending one day writing about the Seahawks, the next talking to Ichiro about 250 hits, and then the next maybe heading over to the "U" to talk to the head football coach about the health of a 3rd string 18 year old Tight End from Lincoln, NE.
Writers cannot possibly be asked to understand, nor sift through, the vast fields of data that are required to accurately predict the outcome of a college football season. Try to put this in Professional terms. If there were rankings, the Denver Broncos would have entered this season in the low to mid 20's in the NFL. As of now, they are 4-0, and if the season ended today, they would not have a shot at the Championship by the college model. They'd be on the outside looking in, wondering what they did wrong. The Championship would be the Giants and the Colts, which may be the right 2 teams, but don't we love sports because teams are allowed a shot at truly upsetting a team once or twice?
In the NFL, a 16 game season dictates seed, seed dictates home field or placement in the playoffs, the playoffs determine a winner. It is a normal trajectory, a fair and accurate determination of a winner. It is all backwards in College Football, specifically. Before the season starts, teams are seeded. They play out the year, attempting to hold their seed or move up. Seeds are based on speculation to start, then people have to negotiate the minefield of speculation v. actuality. What do you do when the #3 team loses by 10 to an unranked opponent? What takes precedence? The unranked opponent or the #3 seed? Which part is more remarkable?
The fact that the system is so screwed up is one thing, but the fact that millions of dollars in Apparel, Tickets, Network contracts, Television, etc are based on this monumental flaw really gets at me. It irks me. And what's worse, nobody cares. At all. This kind of thing effects me, it makes it hard for me to sit back and enjoy a game. I need context in sports. I cannot sit back and watch an individual event with pure enjoyment if I don't have a context. I cannot turn on the TV and enjoy a ping pong championship without googling the players and seeing what their story is. I can't watch the Olympics and think, "Bolt, cool, don't care about him at all, next event, please." I need a context, and when I dig deeper into the context of College Football, I am monumentally disappointed.
The best team in Sports, as measured by every kind of acceptable test, is the one that performs the best at the most critical moments. That is not the case in College Football, the reality is the team that wins the championship is a 3 fold process, 2 of which are remarkably stupid:
1. Which team Markets itself the best to recieve a high pre-season ranking. Without a high preseason ranking, you may kiss your season goodbye
2. Maintain the rank, at all costs. Only schedule a few hard games a year, tip the scales way in the favor of winnable games v. possible losses. Remember, a 1 day mistake against a team that writers have deemed as bad, even if they aren't, may ruin your chances.
3. Win the last game of the year, whichever it may be. (This one makes sense). But the reality is, there is no playoff, and all a team like USC needs to do, based on the fact that they have the Marketing taken care of, is beat cupcakes all year, and win a few, not many, a few, hard(ish) games during the season. They will then get 45 days to prepare for the only game that counts, the BCS Championship, and if they win it they are done for the year.
So, what I am trying to say is when I think about it like this, it makes me not want to watch college - but I will, because I care how these guys will impact some of the NFL teams they will play on. That really is all that keeps me interested at this point.
No comments:
Post a Comment