Settling Conference Scores

Last week’s 13th edition of the ACC/Big 10 challenge was just one of many such challenges spread across the world of college basketball throughout the month of December. While most of the teams focus on the individual games themselves and not as much on winning the challenge as a conference, there is no doubt that conference bragging rights are at stake. In the world of college basketball, it is just that, bragging rights. But if there were to be the same type of challenge played on the gridiron, the outcome could give a conference more than just the satisfaction of victory. In fact, it could be the way we finally get to a system that allows the BCS to truly determine a worthy national championship. Anyway, it comes down to the notion that the only way to reasonably determine which conferences are better than others is to put them on the field, with six teams from each conference hosting non-conference games. So lets say we have the Big Ten/ACC Challenge the first week. Right then and there instead of debating whether a 30-point win is enough against a weak opponent like UNLV, we can see for ourselves whether Wisconsin is better than, say, Virginia Tech. But even that wouldn’t be enough. You could pit the SEC against the Big East, the Pac-12 against the Big 12, and the Big Ten against the ACC and still find yourself in the position we are at today, stuck with two teams that many feel are the best two in the nation and a third out in Stillwater, Oklahoma that feels differently. So why not have another series of challenges the second week? In week two, pit the SEC against the Pac-12, the Big East against the ACC, and the Big Ten against the Big 12. But even though we could determine that the SEC and the Big 12 are better from top to bottom than the Big East and ACC, we could still be left with the dilemma we find ourselves in right now. So why not keep it going? Week three you pit the ACC and SEC, the Big Ten and Pac-12, and the Big East and Big 12. Same problem? Week four you could match up the Big 12 with the SEC, the Big Ten with the Big East, and the ACC and Pac-12. 4 weeks. 4 challenges. Figure out which is the best conference. No more argument. What is there to lose? Really the only thing that stands to disappear in this scenario is the irrelevant non-conference game. Sure you wont get an opportunity to see LSU try to put 75 up against Northwestern State or Oklahoma State attempt to throw up a triple digit score against Sam Houston State, but then again would you really miss it? If you are the average college football fan, I guarantee that the answer would be no. And while this wont necessarily avoid the debate, especially in terms of undefeated non-AQ teams, it will make it much more clear come time to set up a championship matchup. Enough with the computer projections, the comparisons of NFL draft picks (honestly, this is the worst argument in favor of SEC supremacy. Am I the only one who realizes that an NFL draft pick no longer plays in the conference they hailed from?), and enough with the entire concept of subjective national champions. I know that a playoff will never happen. Many people try to convince themselves that a playoff will eventually happen, but the reality is that as long as the bowl committees are in bed with the athletic departments at major universities, a college football playoff will never happen. Having non-conference games of consequence would totally change the landscape of college football. First of all, it would take the power of scheduling out of the hands of the teams themselves and into the hands of (at least supposedly) neutral arbitrators. And who wouldn’t want to see Stanford play Oklahoma State to open up the season? Who wouldn’t want to see a late November matchup of Alabama and Oklahoma? From the standpoint of the fan, these challenges would be a welcome respite from having to sit through analysis of Georgia Southern’s visit to Tuscaloosa with a game left in the season. The BCS often talks about how their system ensures that every game matters. But honestly does a game between LSU and Arkansas-Pine Bluff really matter? Pit power conferences against power conferences and then you can honestly say that each and every game matters. It is not a perfect system that I am proposing. The notion of using polls and hypothetical computer rankings to determine the participants in a national championship game is about as arbitrary as it gets in the world of big-time athletics. But it would help out a ton. It would give us a true picture of which conferences truly do reign supreme. It would allow us to point to specific games and specific statistics to argue for the best teams and best players in the vast world that is college football. And in time, it may even give us a true national champion. What do you have to lose?