"They (sic) are certain schools that will NEVER win a national title in college football. Ever. Like Duke. Duke will never win a national title in football. Neither will Baylor. Nor will Maryland. (UPDATE: Except that they already did. Well, that won't happen again, I tell you!) Nor will Northwestern. The national title in college football is basically a shared rotation between a dozen or so schools, with Auburn sneaking in a title every half-decade when it doesn't get caught buying coke and hookers for its players. "
Besides the obvious fact that Duke won't be winning any national titles ever, Magary has a good argument. There really are only about a dozen schools that could win the title in a given year, and the sport has more parity and opportunity than ever. So I decided to try and figure out which schools have to be considered in the national championship rotation, because I'm a boring human being that really doesn't want to study for the LSAT today.
If you aren't in the mix for a conference title anymore, regardless of your school's tradition or history, then there's no way you can be considered for the rotation. This sounds obvious, but it eliminates emotional perceptions of contendership. Tennessee is one of five SEC schools with a national title in the BCS era, has the fourth largest stadium in college football (and possibly the greatest stadium in the world) but they have not won the SEC since 1998 and won't be winning it anytime soon, eliminating them from the rotation. Michigan and Notre Dame are in the same class, and Ohio State might be on their way if the NCAA drops Thor's Hammer on them. And even if a school hasn't won it all (Virginia Tech, Wisconsin, Boise State), if they're consistently in the mix they get consideration. Starting with the SEC (as God intended), let's break down the championship rotation by conference.
SEC:
In the Rotation: Alabama, Auburn, Florida, LSU
Could get there: Tennessee, Georgia, Arkansas
The SEC is easily the strongest league. LSU and Florida have two titles in the BCS era, Auburn has one and a separate undefeated season in 2004 where they were screwed out of the title game, and Alabama has one.
It's easy to say Tennessee and Georgia aren't Rotation programs because they haven't won the SEC in the last five years. The fact is, those programs just aren't what they were, and a lot of that is because of the four programs ahead of them in the conference. Tennessee has won a BCS title, and Georgia has been a consistently top program during the modern era. Arkansas is rising, but won't get there anytime soon. South Carolina has a championship coach and is always competitive, but competitive is as good as they're ever going to get in this conference, last year notwithstanding. Ole Miss has a great game coach that can't recruit. Mississippi State plays Alabama, Auburn, and LSU every year. Kentucky and Vanderbilt have combined for two wins against Tennessee, a non-rotation school, in my 26 years upon this earth. As great as this conference is, only four schools make the rotation from it.
ACC:
In the Rotation: None
Could get there: Virginia Tech, Florida State, Miami
Florida State dropped out of the rotation because they couldn't get rid of a coach that stopped hacking it about ten years ago. Like Tennessee and Georgia, they have the resources to return to the rotation, but they are not there at this time. Miami is also obviously a threat, but they've been too busy graduating players and having a reputable program to actually stay competitive. Both schools have BCS titles, and both schools send a ton of players to the NFL, but coaching has hurt them in the present-era.
Virginia Tech has done the most to make the rotation, but they always lose a game early in the season when they schedule real opposition in the non-conference portion of the schedule. It's hard to be considered for the rotation when you aren't beating that level of opposition given the opportunity. Even one time will do. Maryland upgraded their coach, but it's way too early to tell if they'll climb because of it. No other school merits discussion in this predominantly basketball conference.
Big Ten (12)
Before I begin, the conference naming shenanigans drive me insane. The Big Ten has 12 teams, and the Big 12 has 10 teams? Aren't these supposed to be athletic associations of institutions of higher learning? The leaders can't even count to 12?
In the Rotation: None
Could get there: most of the teams not coached by Ron Zook
I know this sounds blasphemous, but hear me out. Ohio State is about to get slammed with an assload of sanctions and won't compete for a title for a long time, so their status in the rotation has been reduced to pending at best. Wisconsin is occasionally good, but they can't consistently keep rotation-caliber talent (I like their coach though). To their credit, they lost a BCS bowl to a non-BCS school (TCU), much like Alabama did a few years ago the season before they won the title (Utah), so maybe that bodes well for them this season. I kinda doubt it. Michigan State is a one-hit wonder that has perennially sucked my entire life (thanks for beating Ohio State in 1998 though, that was pretty clutch). Michigan hired the worst possible coach for Big Ten football, but they'll be back in the rotation before long (re: Alabama). Nebraska hasn't been in the rotation discussion for a long time, but maybe they'll be helped by a change of scenery. I'm afraid their degree of difficulty actually went up by the move to the Big Ten, but at least they don't have to beat Texas or Oklahoma (or sometimes both) just to get to the title game anymore. Penn State has the same problem Florida State does, only with less talent. Illinois is coached by Ron Zook. Iowa tries to kill their players in practice, so good luck with recruiting. Minnesota, Indiana, Purdue, and Northwestern? Get outta here.
Big 12 (10):
In the Rotation: Texas, Oklahoma
Could get there: Oklahoma State
Texas and Oklahoma are always going to be good, and one of them will always win the Big 12. Still, this conference manages to remain interesting. Texas A&M has great fans, a good coach, and tries really hard (and fails really hard). Texas Tech has to fire the one coach that might have ever won there because he handled the wrong kid's concussion poorly. Kansas State has the same problem Penn State has and Florida State had (their coach is the only coach to ever win there, so they're unfirable, only now they're old and can't possibly maintain a rotation-level program). Kansas is a basketball school that fired a successful football coach for player abuse. Oklahoma State has quietly become the third best program in the conference but is best known for a coach that once exclaimed: "I'm a man! I'm 40!" in a press conference. Missouri has become a hotbed for successful quarterbacks, which makes them a danger to Texas and Oklahoma in games, but not a good program overall. Iowa State and Baylor are awful.
Big East: None
Could get there: None
This conference basically serves as a minor league that major programs poach coaching talent from. It might as well not even be a BCS conference. Appalachian State would be an above average program in this conference, and I'm only semi-joking. UConn, Cincinnati, and Louisville have all had noteworthy programs in recent times. The head coaches responsible now work at Maryland, Notre Dame, and Arkansas, respectively.
Pac-10:
Contenders: USC, Oregon
Could get there: California, Washington, Utah
This is Oregon's conference to lose. They have the best coach in college football, which should help them get the type of talent they haven't historically had. They almost won a title this year playing an Auburn team that at any given point in the game had 8 of the top 10 players on the field. I believe this will change. For these reasons I believe Oregon will be the strongest program in the country over the next five years.
That said, USC has been a perennial contender for far too long to leave the rotation yet. In spite of the fact that they're dealing with sanctions, young people want to play there. People outside of the sports writing community, the state of Tennessee, and Al Davis, love USC's coach. California is the default number 3 program, and they're always good, never great. Stanford had a great run last year but their coach is gone. Washington has jumped from doormat to competitive. Arizona State has a national championship coach and a better chance to get top talent than the most similar situation in the country to theirs, South Carolina. New arrival Utah is the school with the best chance to enter the rotation out of the outsiders. Colorado has to be mentioned only because they won a title in the nineties, and because they used to have a female kicker.
Other:
Rotation: Boise State
Could get there: Notre Dame (cringe)
Boise State has built a gaudy record in the terrible WAC, but they've backed it up in nonconference and bowl play. Their move to the Mountain West should have helped them take their program to the next level, but the Pac-10 adding Utah made their move a lateral one at best, as they switch from having one hard conference game (BYU) to having...one hard conference game (TCU). The real shame is that those four schools, along with Hawaii, Fresno State, UTEP, and maybe traditionally independent Air Force, couldn't have formed some sort of outsider superfriends conference that would have legitimized all of their programs. They could have called it the Big West or something.
And Notre Dame hasn't been relevant in a long time. That place eats coaches up and spits them out. It's where dreams go to die.
So that's it: nine schools are in the championship rotation as of right now. Eleven or twelve more could get there based on tradition or resources, but can't be considered there right now. So Magary was right, there is a rotation, and if your team isn't in it, it's kind of a stupid sport. But if your team is in it, I can imagine nothing better.
Note: I purposely mentioned no coaches by name (well, besides Ron Zook, but he doesn't really count) in a post that, in essence, is almost entirely about coaches. I hate the way coaches are revered in this sport, it's probably the worst thing about it. They're just old overpaid guys doing a job we'd all do given the opportunity. Much like a CEO, they provide an identifiable face for an organization, take an inordinate amount of credit for success, an inordinate amount of blame for failure, and an inordinate amount of money for either.
No comments:
Post a Comment