As Virginia Tech occasioned to assert itself, while it appeared not having to exert itself, it brings to question why is the 2nd best team in the ACC (arguably 1st) playing an SEC team considered to be in the bottom half of its conference. At one time, conference superiority operated in cycles.
Now we live in a ‘flat world‘, where media, information, and resources are at our immediate disposal. This is of eminence with college football because of recruiting and how pecuniary benefits are accommodated.
Is it simply a product of marketing, or the indelible relationship the SEC has formed with ESPN and CBS, that the SEC uses to place its mark on the consumers? Wins and losses isn’t even the focus of discussion. Last year the SEC embarrassed the ACC in the bowl match-ups, which the ACC has returned the favor this year (Clemson beating Kentucky, VT dominating Tennessee).
The Big East, meanwhile, having to play in bowl games with names that invariably are swallowed by the abyss of mediocrity, is 12-4 since 2006. The International Bowl (which they have yet to lose) features an exciting and thrilling game with a very formidable mid-level MAC team. And not to mention their perennial battles in the Papajohns.com Bowl (vs a CUSA 3rd alternate) and the Mieneke Car Care Bowl.
Should the Big East be playing in better bowl games?
The bowl committee selects the ideal matchups they want to see, and because of the foundation the SEC has laid with CBS and ESPN, and the unmatched fervor of its fan base, the conference will forever be appropriated to play in the big-money bowl games by the bowl committees who garner selection from what they see and hear in the MSM. Being awarded benefits that are allocated throughout the conference making the conference as a whole more and more powerful. And such remunerary avocations are seemingly perpetual, therefore expanding the gap of public recognition, perception, and recruiting, between the rest of the domain of college football conferences. As of yet there is nothing to bridge this gap.
Some may decipher this invective to be wrought with Communist jargon. But COLLEGE Football arose from the University educational infrastructure. The main emphasis of the students is to learn, educate themselves, on how to produce in the free-market economy which persists in the USA today. And until its constituents are treated as venture capitalist who’s primary concern is to create capital, then the NCAA aristocracy must be oblige to engender equal opportunities to the avail of its students. How can equal opportunity be realized when the NCAA is allowing a blatant biased towards one entity hoarding unfair advantages to the expense of its fellow subordinating entities?
Yes there is competition between universities to enroll students, so one may ask how is competition between football conferences any different? Well, until football is acknowledged as being a course to be enrolled in, and not merely a recreation, when the efforts of the students’ fully devoted to football are recognized as maintaining enrollment status, and proper credit is given, then should the NCAA allow for free-market competition between the conferences.
But they’d rather ignore all of this and just stay silent on the issue and pretend all is right with the world.
Imagine the NCAAF having no conference affiliation, or at least having the six BCS (plus Boise, TCU, Utah, BYU) conferences merge into one majestic super conference. Every week the schedule would be a walking reverie for even the casual fan. The legal boundaries would be much less foggy and fringed-upon. But I digress.
Other more relevant stuff
Perhaps some New Year’s Day plays to come. Don’t really see anything worthy of consideration though. I’ve said before, no need to force the issue.
Fret not for I am a gambler, and a gambler must always have action, or he is no gambler.