Reporting Boredom: Why 2008 CF has a Heightened Sense of Anticipation

College football is a fantastic sport, nothing comes close. Every facet, from the school bands, to the state pride, to even the mascots, creates a game in an environment that is second to none, and of sheer excitement! If you are an extreme college football fan, as am I, (proof being the fact that you are reading this article), you have been following college football in the media ever since the final seconds of the national championship last January. Among the most intriguing of articles are those pertaining to predictions, rankings, and individual team breakdowns. However, this off-season has created some articles pertaining to the sport that have not only been beaten-to-death, but filled with absolute absurdity. The following is my list of things that have been over-did and just plain discussed too much in the off-season.

3. Conference Strength

Conference superiority is only established by the individual season. Every article pertaining to how the SEC is the strongest and so-and-so is the weakest is based solely on the strength of the conference in the previous season. Where I have my own conclusions on the subject, I refuse to share those simply because I do not know which is the best conference, nor will anyone else until the season is actually played. I admit that it is interesting to see people’s opinions, which they are entitled to, but dragging on continual discussion of the strength of a particular conference is repetitive and boring. The strength of a conference can only truly be determined two ways: how the conference teams do against other teams in non-conference play during the regular season, and their final bowl record, both of which have not occurred for the 2008 season yet. Case in point is the Big 12 this time last year. Oklahoma and Texas were the only teams in the conference that got national recognition, again expected to dominate the Big 12. The other ten teams got minimal attention at best for the possibility of posing a threat to OU or Texas. No one thought at the start of the 2007 season that Missouri, though believed to be good (but not great), would end up rolling over almost everyone, actually be ranked #1 at a point in the season, and finish 12-2, and certainly no one thought that Kansas was going to be a national title contender, be ranked #2 at one time, and finish the season with a 12-1 record, including a BCS win. But now going in 2008, with the emergence of these two power houses, the continued success of OU and Texas, and what is hoped to be a golden season for Texas Tech, the Big 12 is knocking on the door of the SEC for the title of best conference (paraphrasing an article I recently read by a noted sports website).

2. Will Bobby Bowden and Joe Paterno retire, be forced to retire, or go on coaching after this season?

Every……single…..week…..this….year….readers have been exposed to articles posing these questions, and even website surveys consistently asking football fans of the world to help determine the answer. Constant exposure to this situation, especially with the poll that lets viewers decide their preferred outcome, is just like the influences of the general media to support McCain or Obama. I have a shot in the dark solution to this apparently ongoing, obviously college football threatening problem: let the two universities decide who coaches their team. Simple, basic, practical, insert whatever common sense word you like. Simply let the schools, the administration and the alumni, decide how long they want these coaches to go on in their program. This fascination with Bowden and Paterno, no disrespect intended for either coaching legend, is just like the world’s infatuation with celebrities like Brittany and Paris, both of which I look at through the lens of “who cares?”  I have no concern or stake whatsoever with how long these two men continue to walk the side lines of their current schools. When it comes to the school I support then I will have a local opinion, until then, just like I do not care that Brittany shaved off her hair or what idiot spent $10,000,000.00 to buy it, there is no reason for general readers to constantly see article headlines and surveys concerning the future of these two men. Now once they actually get fired or retire, then report on it, until then leave the speculation and the public opinion poll of their coaching tenures to the fans, administration, alumni, and players of the schools they serve.

1. “…………” is on the hot seat.

If “hot seat” meant being pressured to win with absolutely no connotation to being fired I would not mind, but, the fact is, when sports journalists write that a coach is on the “hot seat,” they suggest that these coaches must have success this year or be threatened with termination. Now I know that there are coaches who have to worry about this, but not every program in the country sets as high standards for their coaches to maintain as the USC’s and Alabama’s of the world. It is not the reporting that coach is on the “hot seat” that bothers me as much as the selections that these writers make. Over the course of this year I have read articles that have made the following conclusions about the following coaches being on the “hot seat.” One article suggested that San Diego State head coach Chuck Long is on the “hot seat.” If I am not mistaken, this will only be the third year he has coached the school. A worse example, one article said that Steve Kragthorpe is on the “hot seat.” The man has only coached at Louisville for one season! Apparently it is ok for Nick Saban to have a few years to turn Alabama around, but not for these coaches. Even worse, the biggest question mark choices (in my opinion) for the 2008 “hot seat” according to some journalists, Bobby Petrino (Arkansas), Rich Rodriguez (Michigan), and Mike Sherman (Texas A & M). Again, am I going absolutely insane, or have these coaches not even started yet? Are you telling me that you feel that these coaches have only the 2008 season to show some success and ability, or otherwise face the unemployment office in January? Yes, again I know that it has happened, but it so unlikely that these choices will get booted after one year considering their previous successes. Another article recently suggested that Mack Brown is on the “hot seat” this season. The reasoning is because he has had mediocre years and has not taken Texas back to a national championship since the 2005 season. Let me tell you something, Texas held onto Darrell Royal for 20 years, and only three of those years were national championship years, and still Royal is remembered as a great, if not the best, coach in Texas history. The same goes with Barry Switzer; only three years of his tenure were national championship years. A coach tries and tries, but even he knows that, even though they try, going to the national championship every year is practically impossible, just getting through each season unbeaten is a challenge in and of itself. I think most schools would love to have Mack Brown because I believe that they would take continual 10-win seasons and great bowl-game success year after year and never look back. To put Brown on the “hot seat” is absurd considering is continued success, put him there after he leads Texas to a couple of 6-6 seasons and then that may be justified. For the coaches that have not even started, the first season means nothing, let’s see after two or three what they can do, and if there is no improvement, then yes, the “hot seat” may be justified. Bottom line, if you are going to put a coach on the “hot seat” at least consider why you made that choice.

I must admit, maybe without these contributions the off season may have been stale, but we had enough team violations and injuries to keep us entertained this year. These are three things that writers can put rest, especially how only time will tell for all three.