So I was thinking about this, the coming expansion, and what OAM talked about the regular season as a gauntlet, both for those in the mix (the vast minority) and those watching from the outside.
And I think what killed that was this: At some point, our opinions started to harden, and we really stopped caring about the beautiful latticework that was a season.
By this I mean, if you look back to the early BCS, the main things that popped were the controversies and the near misses. As in, people talk about some UCLA game in ... 1998 I think, that knocked them out. We talk about the K-State team that slipped up. Nebraska losing to Colorado and going over Oregon. Ohio State surviving and surviving as talking heads said "Iowa and USC are probably better." The title game was very much the product of a journey.
But somewhere along the way it became more ... ordained for lack of a better word. What happened in the title game was just the way it was supposed to be. It was and always will be unfortunately tied in with the SEC vs. the world dynamic that resulted. It wasn't exactly that we knew how it would end, but that when it was ended, it was quickly wrapped up into something that was supposed to happen. Some team would make a run, some SEC team would back in, that SEC team would win, and we'd talk about the fraud that made it to face them and how a team (2008 Oklahoma, 2010 Oregon, 2006 OSU, 2012 Notre Dame) was always a bit of a paper Tiger.
When we look back at 2006 Florida, what's considered most interesting tends to be that defense that came alive, that group that made a great OSU offense look lost and wanting, the idea their excellence had been obscured by the gauntlet they came through. And when that's the case, it's little wonder we want more big stage games.
What could be interesting about 2006 Florida is Karl Dorrell and Eric McNeal swung a national title. It's Jarvis Moss, it's a secret important USC-ND game the week before the UCLA upset.
We became a people so focused on point making that we (we being the wider populace) forgot how to appreciate the breadth of a season, or maybe we never did. And when every season gets reduced in such a way to the concentrated part at the end, people want more of that, even if it dilutes what they took for granted.
Very well stated.
And I believe it goes beyond that as well. The nationalization of the sport, the 24/7 new cycle, the focus on the endgame which has fostered the endless debates about relative conference strength-- they've not only caused us to miss out, or deliberately pass over, that latticework of the regular season. They've also caused many of us to forget that the game itself is supposed to be the important thing. The individual struggles of offensive lineman against defensive lineman, of wide receiver against defensive back, of quarterback against the blitzing linebacker, of each coach strategizing against the other-- the things that happen in between the white lines, on the field of play-- those are what is supposed to be important. It's supposed to be entertainment. It's supposed to be fun. It's supposed to be the entire point of the thing.
But many of us have somehow lost that along the way. We ignore the individual games, and the games within those games. We focus on the big picture, and on the postseason, instead of enjoying each game by itself. We've lost our ability to live in the moment and simply enjoy the game, the way many of us enjoyed playing it when we were kids.
I'm certainly not saying this has happened to everyone on this message board, or every fan of college football. Personally, I try to stay in the moment and enjoy the individual moments of the games themselves. But it's sometimes difficult, with all of the noise, all of the chatter, so very focused on the things that I don't believe should matter nearly as much.
It wasn't always this way. College football used to be a far more regional sport. Winning football games, beating your rivals, winning the conference, getting to a "good bowl"-- those used to be the goals for teams, and coaches, and fans. But the sport slowly, and perhaps inevitably, shifted to a far more national focus. Now, simply winning a game and defeating your opponent isn't enough. We're forced to worry about whether it was "pretty" enough to impress the voters, or the selection committee. We have to worry whether Ohio State or OU look more dominant, and compare their common opponents and perform all sorts of other mental gymnastics.
The focus has shifted so far from regional to national, to the point where we're actually talking about whether or not Georgia wanted to play in the SEC's traditional New Year's Day bowl, because they were disappointed about being left out of the CFP.
I'm not against OAM's posed suggestion of going back to the MNCs. It reminds me of a time when college football was more fun to follow. I just don't see any realistic path back in that direction. So I have to wonder, is there anything that can be done within the current framework, to get back some of the old "rah rah" feelings from decades ago? Is it perhaps time to revert to the idea of true student athletes instead of NFL-wannabe athletes that have no interest in school? Are we as fans willing to accept the sharp decline in the quality of player, and quality of play, that would likely bring about?
Just my $0.02 this morning.
