College Football 2007: Parity?
| 13
|
by JMFlyer1454
This never seemed to be the case in college football. Every year teams had to reload and could only depend on recruiting where, in most cases, players were only on the field for a maximum of 4 years. Recruits went to big name schools to win a national championship, be recognized, and get drafted. Schools at the top of most recruits list would be: Florida State, Miami, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Texas, Michigan, Ohio State, Notre Dame, USC, Florida, LSU, Auburn, Georgia, and Tennessee. I think most people would agree that these are usually the schools that almost every year will be extremely competitive. They will win 9+ games. They go to major bowls. In fact, the last team to win a National Championship that isn't in that list is Alabama in 1992 (a team that I consider including anyway). There are a combined 65 National Championships between Notre Dame (13), USC (11), Oklahoma (9), Ohio State (7), Michigan (7), Miami (5), Nebraska (5), Texas (4), and Tennessee (4). Recruits wanted to be a part of the tradition. But it seems that within the last few years, things have changed. Perhaps only slightly. Perhaps only for a short time. But they have.
I can't remember another college season that had so many upsets within the first 3 weeks. It seems that outside of the top 5 or 6 teams, anything could happen. I think we can all agree that USC, LSU, Oklahoma, Florida, West Virginia, and maybe Cal are the best teams in the college game this year. There's a chance 3 of them go undefeated. But outside of those 5 or 6 teams, who else has made a statement? The Big Ten is having a horrendous year. Ohio State, Penn State, and Wisconsin have all struggled the past 2 weeks even though they all won. Texas has been shaky. Rutgers has played well but against weak competition...but at least they actually looked good against them. It seems that teams are in the top 15 this week by default; they are undefeated where as others are not. Are South Carolina, Oregon, and Clemson really strong enough to be in the top 15? We actually had a team enter the pole this week after being on a bye (South Florida at 23).
Recently teams like Utah (2004 season, 2005 Fiesta Bowl) and Boise State (2006 season, 2007 Fiesta Bowl) have proven that teams from weaker conferences can not only hang with the big boys, but beat them. Could Tulane have competed in 1998-1999 season, when they finished 12-0? Or in the 2003-2004 season when Miami (Ohio), Boise State, and TCU all had only one loss? There has also been the rejuvenation of the Big East, recently as 3 years ago seen as a disgrace to the BCS. Entering this year, 3 teams (West Virginia, Louisville, Rutgers) were seen as very strong. Now 3 weeks in, 2 other teams look like season long contenders for a top 25 ranking as well (South Florida and Cincinnati). Smaller and "weaker" conferences may not be as weak as they once were.
Is the recruiting gap closing? Is it the leveling of coaching philosophies? It's hard to definitively tell right now because this has only been happening for a few years. But I'd venture to say that it could be both. The big schools do not have the recruiting edge any more as smaller schools are beginning to bring the same things to the table: competition and exposure.
Could it just be a down year across the board? Sure. Some may not even see it as a down year. In reality there is only one team (Hawaii) in the top 25 that doesn't belong to a BCS conference. Its more that mediocre major conference teams are more present than ever. Maybe its just their year. Or maybe parity is being integrated into college football.
Like I said it's probably too early to call. And we'll probably see 10 major conference schools in the BCS games. But this year has been different after only 3 weeks. Historically average teams are playing well this year. It's a nice change to usually predictable college scene.
