USA TODAY International Edition
Speed kills
Up- tempo styles not necessarily translating to surefire success on the field,
4B
The Bowl Championship Series title race was reshaped last week. In a 26- 20 loss to Stanford that wasn’t particularly close until the end, Oregon’s national title hopes were all but extinguished — and an old perception was reignited, with implications that might reach further than Eugene and last longer than this season.
When it comes to college football, impression can be everything. That supposedly will change next year with the advent of the College Football Playoff. But will it?
When the newly minted selection committee meets for the first time today in Washington, D. C., the members won’t be evaluating teams or considering what happened Thursday. “It’s to get acquainted, get oriented, get to know each other,” said Bill Hancock, the College Football Playoff’s executive director. Since their work doesn’t begin until next season, it’s left to everyone else to obsess over the current BCS race and extrapolate to a four- team playoff.
Start, then, with the meaning of Oregon’s hard fall. It wasn’t so much the loss, to a top- five opponent on the road, that damaged the Ducks, and perhaps others like them. It was how it happened. On a big, national stage, Oregon was bullied by a more physical opponent. The flashy, fast Ducks went down, again, to what Arkansas coach Bret Bielema has christened “Normal American Football.” The kind played by Stanford in removing Oregon from the national title picture in each of the last two seasons. The same kind played on another big stage over the weekend, when Alabama outslugged LSU.
“I like this kind of football,” Tide coach Nick Saban said last week, before his team’s 38- 17 victory. “I guess this is more the kind of football we grew up with.”
It’s worth wondering: What kind of football did the selection committee members grow up with?
The committee will be charged with considering objective factors, including conference championships, strength of schedule, head- to- head competition and common opponents, and subjective factors such as the effect of injuries. But each member also will bring his or her own idea of what makes good football. Southern California athletics director Pat Haden, for example, recently told USA TODAY Sports he will value road wins in tough environments. Who knows what others will think is most important?
The panel is filled with bright people who know the game, but it is essentially a cut- down version of the polls, a reduction from 100- plus voters to 13. Hopefully the committee members will be smarter, or at least better prepared after deep, serious research. They’ll be expected to shed biases at the door. But if anything, the selection process will be more subjective than the BCS formula — and more susceptible to opinion of what makes good football.
There’s an idea out there that Oregon, for all its success running the hurry- up spread offense, is unprepared or unable to slug it out with bigger, stronger teams. Though reinforced by the losses the last two years, the analysis is flawed. Stanford has some sort of mojo going against the Ducks. The physical style gives them plenty of trouble. But the Ducks present all sorts of problems to those opponents, too. The loss had at least as much to do with a knee injury to Heisman Trophy hopeful Marcus Mariota, which severely limited Oregon’s offensive options, and to self- inflicted wounds. Those changed the game and allowed Stanford, with the lead, to grind away.
Still, perception becomes reality. Oregon fell only to No. 6 in the BCS standings. But if chaos occurs in the next few weeks, how will the loss be viewed as voters consider whether to move the Ducks up the rankings? And could it affect, say, Baylor?
The Bears, No. 5 in the BCS standings, play anything but Normal American Football. Where the Alabama- LSU game was played almost exclusively in the middle of the field, between the hash marks, Baylor’s offense stretches opponents quite literally from sideline to sideline, leading to frequent one- on- one mismatches and big plays.
But much of Baylor’s résumé is built on a soft schedule. A 41- 12 victory against Oklahoma on Thursday was impressive, but the Sooners are not playing elite football. Given the Bears’ rapid rise from the Big 12 cellar, no one seems to know what to make of them — and the default is to revert to long- held convictions.
Buttressed by the Stanford- Oregon result, a commentator on ESPN’s
College GameDay posited that Baylor would not be able to succeed in the SEC. Never mind that Texas A& M and Missouri have shredded the idea in the last two seasons. Or that Auburn, which spreads out defenses and plays as fast as anybody, is three years removed from a national championship ( vs. Oregon in a grinder) and after returning to the offense is currently a surprising 9- 1. When a conference wins seven national titles in a row, its strength takes on mythical status. Perception does not change easily. It’s why Ohio State can be undefeated but still be mostly disregarded because of the notion that the Big Ten is of inferior quality.
Fair or not, the notion that fast football is fun but frivolous could shape the future of the postseason, this season and maybe beyond.