Column: Analyzing the young football season
Published Sept. 21, 2010
Three weeks into the college football season, what do we know about Missouri?
Both the offense and defense have looked great at times and have struggled at others. MU looked mediocre against Illinois, appeared invincible against McNeese State, yet almost sacrificed itself to San Diego State, prompting junior quarterback Blaine Gabbert after the game to say the team is seeking consistency over all else before starting conference play.
But how can a team achieve consistency when playing such weak opposition? On paper, we know the Tigers were better than San Diego State. Gabbert and Co. don’t need sports psychologists to tell them that.
Coach Gary Pinkel and his players were quick to praise the efforts of the Aztecs, and maybe San Diego State is an underrated team. But are they as good as, say, Kansas State? Unlikely.
And why would MU pay the Aztecs $800,000 just to come to Columbia? Were the Tigers expecting a hard-fought game, or an easy victory to increase the odds of making a bowl appearance?
These payouts cheapen the sport of college football, and fans are taking notice. Attendance generally increases once conference play comes around because the games actually mean something. Competing against perennially ranked programs also elevates fan enthusiasm. Sure, one or two victories out-of-conference may not look as good as a perfect 4-0, but playing quality opponents makes it easier for coaches to spot weaknesses and for players to maintain focus.
A loss early on may impact a team’s chances for reaching the national championship (although voters’ memories only tend to last a few weeks), but it in no way affects the school’s opportunity for winning its conference. And if a team like Missouri emerges from a Big 12 slate with only one or two losses, its preseason is irrelevant.
Alas, if only college football abided by tradition and reverted back to its old-school scheduling based on quality competition. In this new era of sports, schools do everything within their power to gain an extra buck or two, or million.
The increase in guaranteed payout games escalated in 2005, when the NCAA amended its bylaws to state that Football Bowl Subdivision teams could count one victory over Football Championship Subdivision (formerly Division 1-AA) schools per year toward the six needed for bowl eligibility. It used to be that FBS teams could only include one such win every four years. The increase in the number of bowls, and thus the number of teams needed to fill the bowls, accounted for the NCAA’s reasoning.
These payout games are good for the smaller schools, which bank a large paycheck and gain exposure through playing a nationally recognized program. But the positives dwindle for universities like Missouri. Top-tier programs like Penn State sell out 107,282 seats per home game, earning up to $4.5 million, according to The Daily Collegian of Penn State. When Missouri plays lesser competition, Memorial Stadium struggles to reach full capacity. I’m sure the financial benefit of playing an additional home game outweighs the money provided to the visiting school, but in MU’s case, I believe the gameday experience for the coaches, players and fans against tougher competition in the preseason can make up for whatever incentive that comes from playing San Diego State.