College Football: Major Football Powerhouses Should Play Spring Rival Games

Survival of the fittest, huh?

University presidents, athletic directors and conference commissioners kill off ancient rivalries, calling it progress. But the educated fan knows that the shifting alliances of tectonic conferences are a diversion to win TV markets in populated areas.

While both Bob Stoops' Oklahoma Sooners and Bo Pelini's Nebraska teams will keep eyes glued to the TV, it's not right to separate teams from traditional opponents. Why should Oklahoma and Nebraska die while Les Miles' LSU and Nick Saban's Crimson Tide still provide instant classics?

For the sake of progress, some of college football's most venerable sagas have paid a heavy price.

This Fall, the Border War (Kansas-Missouri) and the revered Texas-Texas A&M rivalry will not be coming to a theater near you.

But instead of whining and reminiscing about the past, college football has a chance to have a Big Bang. Not only can new rivalries be forged, but maybe another yarn about Nebraska-Oklahoma can be spun before 2020.

Obviously, dear reader, you know how sacred college rivalries are. And while we can all appreciate new foes, why lose the old ones?

As any monogamous fan can tell you, it doesn't matter who they play against. If the Aggies are facing Texas or are playing in Tuscaloosa, you can know that TAMU's 12th Man will always be there.

Need another example? Consider Washington State's fans. The team has been abysmal for nearly a decade, yet someone is always hoisting the Cougar flag come game day.

So here's the solution. Forget ditching the old rivalries. Keep them—and play them at a convenient time.

That's right—instead of your run-of-the-mill spring football game, do this.

Play your arch rival.

Now, you're likely experiencing one of two reactions. Firstly, you love it because rivalries that are 'dormant' go off again like Krakatoa!

On the other hand, there are a few drawbacks. For example, Spring games are meant to develop talent, not exploit players to injures. Imagine if Cam Newton would have gotten injured in Auburn's spring game two years ago. The season would leave all Tiger tails between their legs, and Gene Chizik might be out of work.

But there's no risk. The teams would limit physical contact, so each squad's most important players would be reserved for the season. The quarterback would not get sacked, and the special teams players would not be tackled.

This match (I like to call it an Exhibition Game) would be similar to those in college basketball. Unlike these opening games in the basketball season, the game would have no effect on a team's record. But it would impact both group's rankings for the fall and give parched fans concrete topics to debate during the dry months.

Now for the nitty-gritty inner workings.

Alas, even these aren't complex. The NCAA could grant teams a 16th practice to use as an Exhibition Game or use one of the current 15 practices for the Exhibition Game. For example, some teams could choose to still have a regular spring game or could just schedule different opponents each year.

It should be up to each university how to handle the situation, but the guys in suits (both those at colleges and ESPN) should still strongly consider the possibilities.

Have each team play a home-and-home series. Whether the deal lasts through just two games or indefinitely, the schools should decide what criteria would be best for them to follow. Having an Exhibition Game would be the Hollywood equivalent of having a movie sneak peek.

The rivalry aspect will bring more fans to the stands. Whether Fresno State plays Louisiana Tech in the Battle for the Bone, or Nebraska and Colorado renew their Big 12 annual series, home stadiums can charge a low enough fee so more people will come out to see the football game. As a result, both of the teams make a larger profit by not having to play at a neutral site.

But you caught me. Yes, the higher tier programs will get more coverage by larger networks such as ESPN. Nevertheless, interest would be generated at the local level for teams like Louisiana Tech and Fresno State. Both schools would make more money, and regional television networks will likely air their showdown.

Simply put, an Exhibition Game will consolidate student pride in a football program. Undergrads will be more inclined to attend home games. It also gives ESPN a more favorable product having teams like Miami and Notre Dame ready to battle before a live television audience.

Think of it. Miami and Oklahoma's legendary duels can live on annually instead of in the 1980s. Ohio State's Urban Meyer can play his 'dream job' Notre Dame with Brian Kelly in the offseason. Chip Kelly's Quack Attack would test Florida's defensive mettle in the Swamp or at Autzen Stadium!

You get it! Old rivalries can be restored and new series can be forged!

Ultimately, like a playoff, Exhibition Games are needed in college football. Not only does it gives the chance for schools to keep alive timeless gridiron feuds and raise interest for both powerhouse and powerless football programs, but universities have extra money from ESPN coverage to improve athletic facilities, offer financial aid and hire better teachers.

Rivalry games tend to focus on who loses, but in this writer's opinion, an Exhibition Game is a win for everybody.