C
CollegeFootballNews.com
Nick Saban and the SEC recently argued for a more level playing field and parity among what schools can provide for their athletes. But why are we having any serious conversations about equity in a sport with a rich history of exclusionary practices? Wouldn't it just be better to acknowledge that all of this is about winning?
The 2011 Alabama Crimson Tide were undeserving and unworthy champions.
Most anyone who watched that Alabama team would either look at you sideways or laugh you out of the room for such a statement. Yet if you're to believe Nick Saban's comments about a level playing field, then you're left with no other reasonable conclusion. No matter what platitudes you may have learned from your Pop Warner or Little League coach, the purpose of sport is to win and the '11 Tide failed to beat their biggest rival and did not win the conference or division as a result.
Any reasonable argument about a level playing field among the Power Five conference must first begin with the conversation that the SEC has been one of the leaders in creating an uneven playing field for the vast majority of American schools. Putting aside the "separate but equal" principles that apply to the Group of Five vs. Power Five, the SEC marketing machine has created a conference which basically wrote its own ticket during the BCS process, but one year into a Playoff that saw Alabama get mauled by the eventual National Champion and sudden changes are required?
Saban and Alabama didn't seem to mind the concept of an uneven playing field back in 2011 when they used the idea of "tougher SEC schedules" to see their November loss to LSU all but negated as they leapfrogged conference and division winners with similar records and more hardware. Oklahoma State had one loss, won their conference and knocked off several very worth opponents on their way to an impressive regular season. In a world where Saban's level playing field among all Power Five conferences exists, Oklahoma State would have played in the title game, regardless of their perception among the media.
A level playing field is just that. If you're constantly moving and changing the ground underneath you, the concept of level has to be thrown out the window. If you need proof of that, look no further than Saban's continuing remarks about parity for players. Saban and the SEC were staunch supporters of an autonomy provided to the Power Five institutions. The purpose of that autonomy was to provide the larger schools with more power over what they could and couldn't do, how far this autonomy will extend is a matter of time and leadership.
While one must recognize that Saban couched some of his comments within the context of the Power Five, it is equally as important to recognize that Saban's comments about parity among athletes seems a little weird considering that the Power Five actively sought the ability to provide more to their athletes because they could. They wanted their own rules and deregulations. Simply put, you can't use a micro example when it suits one purpose and then switch over to a macro lens when you're championing a different cause like tuition and stipends.
The world of college football is basically an uneven playing field. SEC partnerships with ESPN provide their conference and players with unprecedented exposure and year-round recruiting, but chances are good that nobody at ESPN or the SEC would drop the deal because of that fact. Can anyone quantitatively explain how satellite camps provide any more of an edge than, say, an eight-game conference schedule when the total number of teams in that conference is fourteen? To be fair to Saban because this piece seems directed at him, he has championed the move to a nine-game schedule. All of that is beside the point, however. The SEC doesn't seem to be as interested in equity when it comes to conference scheduling.
More proof of this can be found in the SEC's scheduling. Alabama and Florida have met in the SEC Championship games a total of seven times since the game first started in 1992. Due to the expansion and new SEC scheduling policies, the Tide and Gators will not play each other again in the regular season until 2021. In today's modern game, it's hard to envision a scenario where Oklahoma could avoid Texasfor seven years and still receive a fair shake on their "body of work." If we're being brutally honest, these types of finicky things were lobbed like SEC-emblazoned grenades during bowl season in the BCS era.
Current Mountain West school administrators can still picture some of the arguments used against them during the BCS era. At a time when things were actually supposed to be level, the Power Five schools found a way to say it needed to be a different type of level. So the rules were changed and now once-proud mid-majors like Marshall, Boise State, and Fresno State all compete for the opportunity to be offered up as tribute to a Power Five school in a New Year's Day bowl. It's become a dystopian nightmare straight out of the Hunger Games for many of these fans and administrators at universities proper think nothing of it.
The facts would suggest that this sport has never been about a level playing field. Not now and not then. While all of this may seem like whining, the truth of that matter is that most mid-major fans have accepted the inevitable changes. Having a seat at the table is always better than eating with the kids and right now the Group of Five have that chance. For the fan of the mid-major, it's mostly about equitable distribution of television rights and the hope that a rising tide floats all boats.
For the better part of the last quarter century, this sport has been about consolidation of power and expansion of autonomous rights. Whether it's been the Bowl Coalition, Bowl Alliance, BCS, or the eventual College Football Playoff, commissioners, admins, and kingmakers have all sought different ways to create easier paths to revenue and championships. If you're a college football purist, you'll remember that the Bowl Coalition consisted of five members, too. On a sarcastic side note, how long until they whittle this thing down to five total teams?
The sport has rarely been about a level field and that's okay. However twisted you may find the journey of the sport into the modern era, you cannot deny the sport's popularity and marketability. Using an amoral lens, an argument that whatever they've been doing is working and should continue could be made. I'm not going to make that argument, but it could be made and probably has been.
It is worth mentioning that this issue is not exclusive to the SEC. There are geniuses paid to find these loopholes. The satellite camp debate is largely focused on the Big Ten's footprint in SEC country, so the Midwest employs geniuses, too. The plan to close this loophole is the SEC's response. Should the SEC find a way to eliminate the satellite camp loophole, some genius will find another loophole that will be exploited until we "level that playing field."
This debate isn't about equity, it's about supremacy. It doesn't matter if you're talking about the relegation of half the nation's teams into the catchall Group of Five or SEC schools wanting everyone to play by equal rules with different scheduling practices, someone is always trying to find a way to win. Someone is trying to find a way to get ahead and cut off advancement opportunities to their closest competitors. It's a common business practice and it's perfectly acceptable there and here. The more exclusive of a tournament you have, the more eyes want to watch. This is basic sporting premise, which is why you have to qualify for things like the Olympics and the World Cup.
All of this brings us full circle to the 2011 Crimson Tide. The Tide weren't the most deserving or worthy team in 2011. In fact, the basic idea of competitive spirit negates any argument someone could make on their behalf. They had a job to do and they didn't do it, it's usually pretty simple in sports. Somehow or another, college football has found a way to be the only major sport that has failed to reward division winners over non-division/conference winners on multiple different occasions, some of them at the expense of the sport's highest level. That's not level at all.
But you would be a fool to deny the dominance of that Alabama team and their worthiness claim to the throne. Their work in the title game against the undisputed regular season champ was nothing short of dominant. They avenged their only loss and did so in one of the most authoritative performances the sport has ever seen. Alabama could have beaten any team in the nation that night and they beat the champs. That means they were the champs. You know how the story goes.
Saban is lobbying for supremacy because you don't get paid $7m a year to create more opportunities for people to beat your team. A level playing field is the furthest thing from Saban's desire and that's perfectly fine. The sport would do better to acknowledge the imperfections that make it so marketable, it would surely be more reasonable than having someone like Kirk Herbstreit go on a BCS special and trash a game they're in charge of airing. Anything would be more reasonable than this on-going discussion about equity in a sport built on the childlike philosophy of "look at me, not them."
Unless, of course, Saban wants to cough up that 2011 title his team deservedly won.
Fresno State, Barkboard.com's Josh Webb...
The 2011 Alabama Crimson Tide were undeserving and unworthy champions.
Most anyone who watched that Alabama team would either look at you sideways or laugh you out of the room for such a statement. Yet if you're to believe Nick Saban's comments about a level playing field, then you're left with no other reasonable conclusion. No matter what platitudes you may have learned from your Pop Warner or Little League coach, the purpose of sport is to win and the '11 Tide failed to beat their biggest rival and did not win the conference or division as a result.
Any reasonable argument about a level playing field among the Power Five conference must first begin with the conversation that the SEC has been one of the leaders in creating an uneven playing field for the vast majority of American schools. Putting aside the "separate but equal" principles that apply to the Group of Five vs. Power Five, the SEC marketing machine has created a conference which basically wrote its own ticket during the BCS process, but one year into a Playoff that saw Alabama get mauled by the eventual National Champion and sudden changes are required?
Saban and Alabama didn't seem to mind the concept of an uneven playing field back in 2011 when they used the idea of "tougher SEC schedules" to see their November loss to LSU all but negated as they leapfrogged conference and division winners with similar records and more hardware. Oklahoma State had one loss, won their conference and knocked off several very worth opponents on their way to an impressive regular season. In a world where Saban's level playing field among all Power Five conferences exists, Oklahoma State would have played in the title game, regardless of their perception among the media.
A level playing field is just that. If you're constantly moving and changing the ground underneath you, the concept of level has to be thrown out the window. If you need proof of that, look no further than Saban's continuing remarks about parity for players. Saban and the SEC were staunch supporters of an autonomy provided to the Power Five institutions. The purpose of that autonomy was to provide the larger schools with more power over what they could and couldn't do, how far this autonomy will extend is a matter of time and leadership.
While one must recognize that Saban couched some of his comments within the context of the Power Five, it is equally as important to recognize that Saban's comments about parity among athletes seems a little weird considering that the Power Five actively sought the ability to provide more to their athletes because they could. They wanted their own rules and deregulations. Simply put, you can't use a micro example when it suits one purpose and then switch over to a macro lens when you're championing a different cause like tuition and stipends.
The world of college football is basically an uneven playing field. SEC partnerships with ESPN provide their conference and players with unprecedented exposure and year-round recruiting, but chances are good that nobody at ESPN or the SEC would drop the deal because of that fact. Can anyone quantitatively explain how satellite camps provide any more of an edge than, say, an eight-game conference schedule when the total number of teams in that conference is fourteen? To be fair to Saban because this piece seems directed at him, he has championed the move to a nine-game schedule. All of that is beside the point, however. The SEC doesn't seem to be as interested in equity when it comes to conference scheduling.
More proof of this can be found in the SEC's scheduling. Alabama and Florida have met in the SEC Championship games a total of seven times since the game first started in 1992. Due to the expansion and new SEC scheduling policies, the Tide and Gators will not play each other again in the regular season until 2021. In today's modern game, it's hard to envision a scenario where Oklahoma could avoid Texasfor seven years and still receive a fair shake on their "body of work." If we're being brutally honest, these types of finicky things were lobbed like SEC-emblazoned grenades during bowl season in the BCS era.
Current Mountain West school administrators can still picture some of the arguments used against them during the BCS era. At a time when things were actually supposed to be level, the Power Five schools found a way to say it needed to be a different type of level. So the rules were changed and now once-proud mid-majors like Marshall, Boise State, and Fresno State all compete for the opportunity to be offered up as tribute to a Power Five school in a New Year's Day bowl. It's become a dystopian nightmare straight out of the Hunger Games for many of these fans and administrators at universities proper think nothing of it.
The facts would suggest that this sport has never been about a level playing field. Not now and not then. While all of this may seem like whining, the truth of that matter is that most mid-major fans have accepted the inevitable changes. Having a seat at the table is always better than eating with the kids and right now the Group of Five have that chance. For the fan of the mid-major, it's mostly about equitable distribution of television rights and the hope that a rising tide floats all boats.
For the better part of the last quarter century, this sport has been about consolidation of power and expansion of autonomous rights. Whether it's been the Bowl Coalition, Bowl Alliance, BCS, or the eventual College Football Playoff, commissioners, admins, and kingmakers have all sought different ways to create easier paths to revenue and championships. If you're a college football purist, you'll remember that the Bowl Coalition consisted of five members, too. On a sarcastic side note, how long until they whittle this thing down to five total teams?
The sport has rarely been about a level field and that's okay. However twisted you may find the journey of the sport into the modern era, you cannot deny the sport's popularity and marketability. Using an amoral lens, an argument that whatever they've been doing is working and should continue could be made. I'm not going to make that argument, but it could be made and probably has been.
It is worth mentioning that this issue is not exclusive to the SEC. There are geniuses paid to find these loopholes. The satellite camp debate is largely focused on the Big Ten's footprint in SEC country, so the Midwest employs geniuses, too. The plan to close this loophole is the SEC's response. Should the SEC find a way to eliminate the satellite camp loophole, some genius will find another loophole that will be exploited until we "level that playing field."
This debate isn't about equity, it's about supremacy. It doesn't matter if you're talking about the relegation of half the nation's teams into the catchall Group of Five or SEC schools wanting everyone to play by equal rules with different scheduling practices, someone is always trying to find a way to win. Someone is trying to find a way to get ahead and cut off advancement opportunities to their closest competitors. It's a common business practice and it's perfectly acceptable there and here. The more exclusive of a tournament you have, the more eyes want to watch. This is basic sporting premise, which is why you have to qualify for things like the Olympics and the World Cup.
All of this brings us full circle to the 2011 Crimson Tide. The Tide weren't the most deserving or worthy team in 2011. In fact, the basic idea of competitive spirit negates any argument someone could make on their behalf. They had a job to do and they didn't do it, it's usually pretty simple in sports. Somehow or another, college football has found a way to be the only major sport that has failed to reward division winners over non-division/conference winners on multiple different occasions, some of them at the expense of the sport's highest level. That's not level at all.
But you would be a fool to deny the dominance of that Alabama team and their worthiness claim to the throne. Their work in the title game against the undisputed regular season champ was nothing short of dominant. They avenged their only loss and did so in one of the most authoritative performances the sport has ever seen. Alabama could have beaten any team in the nation that night and they beat the champs. That means they were the champs. You know how the story goes.
Saban is lobbying for supremacy because you don't get paid $7m a year to create more opportunities for people to beat your team. A level playing field is the furthest thing from Saban's desire and that's perfectly fine. The sport would do better to acknowledge the imperfections that make it so marketable, it would surely be more reasonable than having someone like Kirk Herbstreit go on a BCS special and trash a game they're in charge of airing. Anything would be more reasonable than this on-going discussion about equity in a sport built on the childlike philosophy of "look at me, not them."
Unless, of course, Saban wants to cough up that 2011 title his team deservedly won.
Fresno State, Barkboard.com's Josh Webb...
