 |
| Bullwinkle leads Wossamotta U to gridiron glory. Alley...OOP!! |
--Darrell Royal, 1963 (on back James Saxon).
Interrupting the Top 5 series (I literally hear hearts breaking everywhere) to complain...err...consider modern college football's current state. Its something like two weeks until our first college football weekend, so it seemed like as good a time as any to discuss the state of the game.
Well, to be clear, I'm not going to talk about the "state of the game": conference realignment, the money, recruiting, amateurism, coaching contracts, and the like. Plenty of others have written in depth about those issues. Texas Monthly covered the cesspool that is Professional College Football in this recent article. Instead, I'm going to discuss the actual game itself. I'd like to at least bring up some changes, or return to the "old ways," in at least a limited way I think could reinvigorate the game.
Admittedly, from one perspective the game hardly needs help. That fat $5.6 billion playoff haul doesn't happen because no one watches college football, you know. (And I can't stop myself, but can anyone really still seriously utter the phrases "student-athletes" and "the institutions" and "amateurism" about college football anymore without sounding like the old Tobacco Institute's "there is no reliable scientific evidence that cigarette smoking causes cancer" screed?). No, college football has entered a Golden Age, popularity-wise. So in one respect, they'd be crazy to change the on-field product. But spectacular success doesn't always last forever. Signed, Enron. Its change or die out here in the real world. By contrasting the modern game with the game as it was played when it developed such a huge following, I'll consider some things that I think drag it down, $5.6 billion notwithstanding.
But before throwing stones, let's start on a positive note. I really enjoy college football, especially my favorite teams, the Texas Longhorns and LSU Tigers. I wouldn't write this much about it otherwise. I like the traditions, passed on through families and friends through the years. If you went to LSU or if family went there, for example, you're always a Tiger fan. There's no changing teams every season. I enjoy that many programs inspire an rooting community that spans entire regions, especially the south, so that even if you didn't actually attend the school, you take them on as your team. I like the historic rivalries, so much deeper and more intense than pro football. Auburn-Alabama. Michigan-Ohio State. Texas-Oklahoma. USC-UCLA. Army-Navy. These form an annual opportunity to renew long traditions. One of conference "realignment's worst aspects has been its ending some fantastic long-time rivalries like Texas-Texas A&M and Nebraska-Oklahoma. (No Kansas and Missouri, yours doesn't count as a real rivalry). And I appreciate the in-game experience, such as the bands, cheerleaders, chants, and singing the alma mater.
When the home team does well and there's an exciting game, the atmosphere can become electric as the fans root on their team. My dad took us to a lot of college football games growing up. Generally, we'd go watch the Houston Cougars play in the Astrodome. I remember watching a few Texas vs. Rice games at Rice Stadium, and can still picture the Texas band and cheerleaders marching into the Stadium before the 1968 game (my first). The official game stats said only 6,500 people attended, which seems unimaginable today. They have to move that game to Reliant Stadium now so that all the Houston-area Texas exes can actually go see a Texas game once every other year. Its so fun actually going to a college football game. My uncle was a college football coach, and I remember going to see a few of his games. We'd get great seats, then generally attend an alumni party afterwards. Its fun at other games to tailgate before the game, then celebrate after. Nothing beats the fun of going from tailgate to tailgate at Tiger Stadium in Baton Rouge, or the Grove at Ole Miss, or even watching tailgating on the sailboats that dock right next to Husky Stadium at the University of Washington campus in Seattle. And nothing beats the electricity in the air in those stadiums, or some of the other legendary college football venues.
I enjoy watching games on TV, especially today with the improved cameras and coverage. You can rewind and watch plays over, or hit pause while you refill. Really good announcers can add to the game's drama, to the point where their names become synonymous with college football. Even now I can still hear such standouts as Keith Jackson, Bud Wilkinson, Ron Franklin, Frank Fallon, Lindsay Nelson, Chris Schenkel, and definitely not Brent "They're roommates AND best friends" Musberger. And I vividly remember so many fantastic, riveting, dramatic games. The 2005 National Championship (Texas vs. USC). The 1969 Great Shootout (Texas vs. Arkansas). The 1984 Orange Bowl (Nebraska vs. Miami). The 2003 National Championship game (Ohio State vs. Miami with the ridiculous phantom pass interference call on Miami-you stole that trophy Jim Tressel).
I've mostly enjoyed watching college football evolve. Compared to the 1960s, today's players are far more skilled, talented, bigger, faster, better coached, and simply play the game better. Injury care has become so advanced. Players routinely come back quickly from injuries that would have ruined careers several generations ago. The game itself has attracted so many intellectually gifted tacticians that it has become incredibly more sophisticated than the old Big 10 "three yards and a cloud of dust" games. In fact, college football has become far more innovative than the NFL. The spread, the pistol, the read option, timing offenses, linebackers "spying" on quarterbacks or running backs...all these innovations started in college and have found their way to the NFL in some form or fashion.
Some innovations have made the game a little less interesting, though. I'll still spend as many Saturdays as I can watching college football (and as many bowl games as I can). But in many ways, current college football has become somewhat frustrating to watch.
To begin, the high scores have made some games seem like an intramural coed flag football game. What's wrong with high scores? Its just not real football. "Real football" involves a contest of two sides of the ball, offense and defense, each of which play under neutral rules, each of which have approximately the same chance of success. Two offenses competing with one another to see which one can run through toothless defenses early and often enough to outscore the other does not make for great football. Great football involves not just great offenses, but great defenses. The University of Texas' successful goal line stand against the Alabama Crimson Tide (led by Joe Namath) at the end of the 1965 Orange Bowl was one of the most riveting moments in college football history. Great defense can make for great games. Or put it another way. Did anyone watch the atrocity that was the 2011 Alamo Bowl? RGIII's coming out party. Baylor 67, Washington 56. I watched that entire game, mouth nearly agape at the absolute lack of defense. All throughout college football, scores have inflated worse than the Argentine Peso. The Big 12 really has become a flag football league. Baylor beat West Virginia 70-64 last year. That's just not football, people. Even the SEC, with its stubborn rushing football emphasis, has seen higher scores. South Carolina beat Tennessee last year 38-35. Even the Big 10 is blowing it out. Ohio State beat Indiana 52-49 last year, in a non-overtime game. Is this football or basketball?
Several factors create these inflated scores. And overtime isn't one of them. Initially, rule changes have refined (or, I would say "distorted") the game to encourage passing and high scores. You basically can't touch a receiver five yards beyond the line of scrimmage. Where Jerry Gray and Tommy Casanova could basically mug a receiver all the way down the field until the ball was in the air, defensive backs today can't touch them five yards beyond the line of scrimmage. Receivers run unimpeded through the secondary, like the vonTrapp children frolicking with Maria on that mountain. When they catch the ball, defenders can't blow them up either, Jack Tatum style. So they don't fear the huge hit anymore that might have made them shy off of catching some passes. Nor can you touch a quarterback. That's really only a slight exaggeration. Previously, defensive rushers would smash a QB even after throwing a pass, just to make it hurt and make him think about the pain the next time he'd drop back. Now, there's little consequence if your line can keep the QB clean long enough to get the pass off. Offenses can shift literally at will before coming set. The modern backfield looks like Rockefeller Center at Christmas with all the movement. Finally, blocking rules have become more liberalized, allowing linemen to put their hands on defenders and move them in a direction (as opposed to the old "forearms up" 60s and 70s techniques). Because referees have a hard time seeing everything down in the trenches in much detail, this means that semi-legalized holding occurs on every passing play. All this means that the passing game has a much higher productivity than in the 1960s and 70s, resulting in moving the ball downfield in a shorter time frame (keep in mind, the clock stops after an incomplete pass, which is why the old UH Cougar "run and shoot" teams played games that routinely exceeded 4 hours).
Add to that the fact that these kids play football year round in 7 on 7 leagues, where all they do is throw the ball. And, since the Texas UIL has rescinded its old rule that banned high school players from attending summer football camps, they receive specialized passing instruction during the off-season. (I look to Texas as a bellwether, as its players so dominate the college ranks along with California and Florida). High school coaches have introduced relatively skilled passing offenses at the high school level as well, so QBs and receivers come to major college programs with passing game skills light years ahead of their 1960s and 70s counterparts.
Defenses simply have not adjusted as quickly. Stopping the passing game involves two objectives: pressure and coverage. If you can't do one, you better do the other really well. If you can't do either, you better hope the QB can't make his throws. In the 1960s and 70s, that was often the case. The QBs and receivers just didn't spend as much time working on the passing game, and as coaches emphasized running anyway, they lacked much incentive to do so. Now, QBs will lead summer passing drills with their receivers, without coaching or supervision. Vince Young, for example, famously challenged his teammates at the end of the 2004 season to participate in organized summer workouts with the invitation of "whoever wants to beat Ohio State [UT's second opponent in the upcoming 2005 season] come with me." It worked.
Another development leading to score inflation involves the no huddle, "tempo" offenses. This is and always has been totally legal. No rule requires the offense to huddle before every play so they can contemplate life or what to get Millie and Jimmy for an engagement present ("Well, candlesticks always make a nice gift"). This gives the offense the opportunity to run more plays, cross the field more quickly, prevent the defense from making specialized adjustments (which, admittedly, was something that did not happen in the 60s and 70s, but neither did offenses substitute as frequently in those days), and keeps the defense from regrouping and catching its wind. You may say the offense doesn't get to rest either, but playing defense is more physically demanding than offense. Its more demanding to hit than to get hit, and its more demanding having to react and quickly make up ground than to sprint when you already know where you're going. Probably more importantly, it increases injury risk all around, as tired players who haven't recovered from the last play can't as easily use proper technique, which invariably is when injuries occur. I'm no Nick Saban fan, but the man knows the game, and he's warned about the tempo offenses increasing injury risks. Tempo offenses also can lead to video game style play, not to mention poor, sloppy play as players on both sides struggle to get set and coordinate adjustments before the snap. Its often not a pretty sight to behold. Unless you're a fan of inadvertent 12 men on the field penalties as huge defensive linemen can't get off the field before the next snap.
Passing game dominance has led inexorably to the running game withering on the vine. Though SEC teams still often boast strong running games (Alabama, notably), elsewhere the running game has reversed roles with the passing game as something you do to give the receivers a play off. Or, more accurately, to keep the defensive line from rushing the passer every single play without having to stay at home and at least respect the run. Think of the great college football games over the years, and many have involved dominating running performances. Yes, three yards and a cloud of dust may have lacked a certain pizazz, but what about watching Johnny Rodgers running against Oklahoma in the legendary 1971 game? Herschel Walker destroying SEC defenses in the 1980s? Earl Campbell running through SWC defenders during the 1970s? Rushing football is and should always be the essence of football. You line your guys up against my guys, and try and stop me. Force on force. I like watching the aerial acrobatics and so forth as well, but rushing football is man on man. All these rule changes and other developments have made rushing football just so passé.
The clock stopping after every first down feeds into the scoring frenzy as well. In the pros, the clock keeps running. But in college, a first down stops the clock until the chains are set. That allows more time for offenses to score and to get set. The stupid ridiculous overtime rules also feed the scoring problem. Starting from the 25 yard line and each team gets to try their hand? Why not just go to a carnival and take turns shooting at clown figures for a prize? Eliminating special teams in overtime means you're not really playing the game of football anymore. You're engaged in some kind of football-like skills exhibition, where its pretty difficult not to score. Unless you like the fact that teams often combine to score far more points in the "overtime" than the actual game itself.
Getting away just a bit from the scoring aspect, the modern game exhibits some other characteristics I could live without. The celebration rules have gone way too far. Take off your helmet and its a personal foul. Exhibit the slightest emotion after a touchdown, and its a 15 yard penalty if you're lucky, because the new rules allow the refs to nullify the score if they feel its aggravated. Hey, folks, this isn't cricket. Nor do I like watching a bunch of Spocks coldly and robotically going up and down the field. Not everyone should be Bart Starr. After all, its a game. Not a board meeting. The Fun Bunch went too far, as did Chad "not Ochocinco any more" Johnson's ridiculous antics. But all of us fans in the stands are partying like its 1999 after a score. Its not bad sportsmanship to let the players at least exhibit some happiness when they score. And some of the new uniforms look like Alice In Wonderland costumes. I'm looking at you Oregon. And Maryland.
Returning to more technicalities, I'd like to see the hash marks moved to the NFL spots. That means closer to the middle of the field. Players today are faster, bigger, quicker, and more violent. They simply "get to the edge" more quickly than 40 years ago. The modern college hash marks effectively take away one side of the field, because any play to the near side is destined to become slop as the defenders can quickly get to the edge. One reason the NFL game became a little more wide open was that the defenses had to defend the entire field. I realize this complaint seems to conflict with my earlier anti-scoring diatribe, because it would open up more field for offenses to exploit. But if you reinstated the more traditional passing rules, moving the hash marks in at the same time would encourage more rushing and see a more interesting field-wide game.
Ok, ping ponging around here. Next on the list: can we get rid of the running on to the field through smoke, and non-stop PA chatter that drowns out the band, and the Godzillatron scoreboards? I know we live in a video game/ADD world and bigger is better, but why must college football be just like a Miami Heat game? I don't need to hear the 15th Taco Bell commercial of the game. I need to hear the band playing the Texas fight song.
In fairness, let me acknowledge one modern development that has really helped the game. The instant replay rule. The officials review nearly every play. They do so quickly, efficiently, and the game mostly does not slow down as a result. This process significantly eliminates the botched calls that have plagued football since its inception. College replay works far better than the pros, where only few plays are reviewed, the replay process frequently fails to reverse blown calls, and takes much more time to complete. Here's one area where the college game has it all over the pros. See, I'm not a total football Luddite.
Having run through all that, here's how I would "save" college football. Other than reforming the hypocritical and parasitic institutions that run it. I'd change three things. First, I'd restore defensive holding rules to their 1970s format. This would allow defenders to hit receivers 10 yards from the line of scrimmage. It would require receivers to work harder to get open, and shut down some of the four wide sets that turn football into a video game. Second, I'd allow the defense to substitute on every play. The referee would not spot the ball until the defense had an adequate opportunity to substitute. So the play clock wouldn't start until that happened. I'd limit this to five seconds though, and this wouldn't apply during the last two minutes of a half. Finally, I'd have the game clock continue to run after the offense makes a first down (unless the ball carrier goes out of bounds on the play). This would institute the NFL rule. All the other stuff I've complained about, I'd leave intact on the grounds that I'm a grouchy old man and will just have to deal with the times.
OK, that is all. Hope everyone enjoys another great college football season. Hook 'em Horns! Geaux Tigers!!
NEXT-the Top 5's return. Ugh. Oh, well, the next one is Top 5 First Ladies. That may not be so bad. Hint. None of the Top 5 are named "Michelle." Sorry to disappoint.
No comments:
Post a Comment