FoxPerez
09-05-2011, 11:58 PM
From The Daily Six Shooter (http://bit.ly/pM9X1J) at PlaymakerOnline.com (http://www.playmakeronline.com)
I really thought this weekend was going to be different. I really thought that with actual games being played and teams starting to keep score and records starting to accumulate that the shift of the college football world’s attention would change after a crazy offseason centering around networks and conferences. But that was not to be as late breaking news yesterday revealed that the Pac 12 is once again considering an expansion that would include four Big 12 teams: Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, and Texas Tech.
At first this was dismissed because people thought that the Longhorn Network wouldn’t be able to remain if such a move was made, but now it seems that the ESPN-UT venture could be altered to fit the Pac 12′s television deals. A revision of the network could split it up into two separate regions with one covering the Longhorns and Red Raiders while the other covered the Sooners and the Cowboys.
The fundamental problem with such a plan is that it’s based on the false premise that the Texas-Tech rivalry is equivalent to the OU-OSU rivalry. The two aren’t equal. Of course, the equivalent for Texas would be A&M but, as we covered last week, they bailed out of a possible joint venture with the Horns. The new Pac 16 with those four schools added would rival what the SEC puts out as far as power football programs. It would also make the baseball, volleyball, swimming and diving, and soccer seasons all the more exciting.
But then you have to start wondering what the scheduling would be like? Each eight team division would play a full slate against each other. That’s seven games. You couldn’t play half of the other division’s teams in two year rotations because that would take up a full schedule, all in conference. No warm up games or possible inter-conference matchups would be possible. You’d have to play two teams from the other division every season and it would take a full eight years before you got through a home-and-home series with all of them.
On the other hand, to play no pre-conference game would be a gamble that could pay off in making the rich richer. Only power conference teams could be ranked and no outsiders would be able to challenge them because there wouldn’t be space on the schedule. It’s taken years upon years for Boise State and TCU to break into consistent top rankings and neither has still had a shot at a national title. And then the BCS got away with matching the two up in a bowl game so that they couldn’t get a chance to upset the other schools from the power conference to prove that they actually belonged in the national championship discussion.
Sadly, it’s a path that leads to the very antithesis of what sports are supposed to be all about on a fundamental basis. Even if there isn’t equality in money, talent, TV exposure and everything else, at least everyone gets their shot and every game matters. In the age of the super conference, there not just be games that don’t matter, but schools and entire leagues that don’t either.
I really thought this weekend was going to be different. I really thought that with actual games being played and teams starting to keep score and records starting to accumulate that the shift of the college football world’s attention would change after a crazy offseason centering around networks and conferences. But that was not to be as late breaking news yesterday revealed that the Pac 12 is once again considering an expansion that would include four Big 12 teams: Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, and Texas Tech.
At first this was dismissed because people thought that the Longhorn Network wouldn’t be able to remain if such a move was made, but now it seems that the ESPN-UT venture could be altered to fit the Pac 12′s television deals. A revision of the network could split it up into two separate regions with one covering the Longhorns and Red Raiders while the other covered the Sooners and the Cowboys.
The fundamental problem with such a plan is that it’s based on the false premise that the Texas-Tech rivalry is equivalent to the OU-OSU rivalry. The two aren’t equal. Of course, the equivalent for Texas would be A&M but, as we covered last week, they bailed out of a possible joint venture with the Horns. The new Pac 16 with those four schools added would rival what the SEC puts out as far as power football programs. It would also make the baseball, volleyball, swimming and diving, and soccer seasons all the more exciting.
But then you have to start wondering what the scheduling would be like? Each eight team division would play a full slate against each other. That’s seven games. You couldn’t play half of the other division’s teams in two year rotations because that would take up a full schedule, all in conference. No warm up games or possible inter-conference matchups would be possible. You’d have to play two teams from the other division every season and it would take a full eight years before you got through a home-and-home series with all of them.
On the other hand, to play no pre-conference game would be a gamble that could pay off in making the rich richer. Only power conference teams could be ranked and no outsiders would be able to challenge them because there wouldn’t be space on the schedule. It’s taken years upon years for Boise State and TCU to break into consistent top rankings and neither has still had a shot at a national title. And then the BCS got away with matching the two up in a bowl game so that they couldn’t get a chance to upset the other schools from the power conference to prove that they actually belonged in the national championship discussion.
Sadly, it’s a path that leads to the very antithesis of what sports are supposed to be all about on a fundamental basis. Even if there isn’t equality in money, talent, TV exposure and everything else, at least everyone gets their shot and every game matters. In the age of the super conference, there not just be games that don’t matter, but schools and entire leagues that don’t either.