Paridy or Futility?

Over the last few years, there has been some talk about futility in some of the sports leagues, most notably the NFL, NCAA, and NBA. I’m sticking with football for this argument, because I think there are other factors for the NBA thought, but that’s for another posting. Anyways, the basic argument is that talent is diluted, the teams aren’t as good, and the quality of the sport is diminished. People gripe that there are too many bad teams and not enough good ones. Let’s take a closer look at the leagues this year, shall we?

NFL

As of the end of Week 10, there are three teams I would consider truly elite: New Orleans, Indy, and Minnesota, with New England and Cincy lurking close behind. As of now, there are 11 teams (about 1/3 of the league) at either 5-4 or 4-5, and 6 others (not counting New England) at 6-3. That’s nearly 2/3 of the league at close to .500 or better. While I see that there are fewer great teams, it seems like the competition is strong. And while I sometimes hear that teams aren’t as good cause they don’t score, true fans of the sport can appreciate good defense, too. Competition, and the idea that any team can win (the Giants and Steelers both won Super Bowls from the 6 seed), is good for the league.

Now, the law of averages says that if there are 3 great teams, we should have about 3 really bad teams. This year, we seem to have a high number, with Detroit, Cleveland, St. Louis, Oakland, Kansas City, and Tampa Bay pulling up the caboose. That may seem high, but I think we may be looking at an exception to the rule due to an unforeseen factor: bad management. Detroit, Cleveland, and Oakland have been horribly run for at least 5 years, so in reality, should have turned things around somewhat by now. St. Louis is in the midst of an ownership change, which also factors in, and they had a competitive team not long ago, so are in the natural turnaround phase. Same can be said for Tampa Bay. KC also had a nice stretch of competitiveness, and while have been declining, have a good ownership and fan base that will turn that team around. For my money, the statistically bad teams are TB, KC, and St. Louis, and they should be bad. The others… well, they need new management.

NCAA

Again, I hear the argument… every team except the top three suck. I’m not gonna lie, I bought into this argument until a few weeks ago. Then I thought about it a little further. Consider this… athletes across all sports, not just football, are getting bigger, faster, and stronger, starting at the high school level, and even before. Random side note, my best friend coached LeBron at a basketball camp when he was a sophomore, and said he would have been the #1 pick as a junior coming out of high school.

Anyways, this means that the “lesser” recruits from high school, who traditionally went to second and third tier schools, are making those teams a lot better. It’s not like the great teams have gotten worse. USC was sending a ton of good players to the NFL not long ago, and Florida is one of the best college teams in a very long time (shoot me, I hate the Gators). It’s also why you’re seeing more and more upsets from so-called second tier schools, e.g., Appalachian State over Michigan (best D-II school for a few years, though DOES NOT EXCUSE THAT PITIFUL LOSS), Boise St. over Oklahoma, Utah over whoever they beat the other year (don’t feel like Googling that right now), Iowa starting out 8-0 this year, USC getting beat by Pac 10 schools consistently.

Related to that, we’re seeing some of the traditional powers falling from the ranks, e.g., Michigan, Notre Dame, Florida State, Wisconsin, UCLA, Colorado, Georgia, Miami. While some of those teams are coming back, they aren’t producing strong years like they used to. Even your random “we’re competitive sometimes” schools have had a rough go lately, most notably the entire ACC. I think if you couple that with some of this “redistribution” of good athletes, if you will, then you get what we have now… teams like Pitt #9, Utah #21, BYU #22, Houston #24, rather than teams from more major conferences.

Obviously, this is holding true at the top as well, with TCU #4, Cincinnati #5, and Boise St. #6. This is the main reason the BCS is outdated and dumb. The teams from these “lesser” conferences are catching up, and it’s going to stay that way. We’re seeing it in college hoops, and have been since Gonzaga became a national power. It’s inevitable that football follows that path, and conferences like the WAC become more like majors, just like the WCC and MVC have in basketball. It’s time for college football to stop pretending it’s about the academics and tradition, and catch up with the times. It’s about money, period. It’s about television contracts, bowl tie-ins, etc. A college football tourney would bring in more cash, more interest, and maintain the debate about who is better than who. Use the BCS to set up your ranks, take the top 8 or 16, and let’s rock. Think there wouldn’t be debate about who was the 8th best team or 16th best team, like the 1-2 thing now?

Alas, we aren’t going to see this anytime soon, so for now, I agree with a modest proposal that has been thrown out by many sportswriters and broadcasters: scrap the preseason rankings. Let me keep this simple. What would be happening if the preseason ranks weren’t Florida, Texas, Alabama 1-2-3, but TCU, Cincy, Boise St. 1-2-3? Just wondering…
So for those out there who think the competition sucks, think again. It’s as good as it’s always been. Is the casual fan going to get excited about a BYU v. Clemson matchup? Probably not. But just cause it’s not Wisconsin v. Georgia, doesn’t mean it’s not good football. So pull up a chair, learn about a new school, and stop bitching about futility.

P.S. Random prediction – Georgia Tech will win their BCS bowl, and play for the BCS championship within the next two years.