Don't Worry About MAC Football Ever Playing For The National Championship

by Matt Sussman on Dec 6, 2011 9:45 AM CST in MAC Football

SBN's own Bill Connelly did some BCS alternative ruminations earlier today, all of them trying to fix a broken system that is geared toward historically powerful college football sports teams, and not other ones. It's not really a battle between haves and have-nots; it's more like a class struggle between haves and other haves. It is pretty amusing to see the wealthiest athletic programs argue over a system that benefits them more than they realize, quibbling over minor details.

But in their brainstorming about possible ways to determine the ultimate champion, he reviews the old methods as well as potential new systems such as the "plus one" and the conventional bracket playoff. Some of these would include a MAC team. Some wouldn't — provided they weren't one of the top eight teams, which they never are. Even if Ball State had gone undefeated through the MAC Championship, they might've gone into the top ten. But a MAC team has never been in the top 10 entering their bowl game; three times a team finished exactly 10th (Miami in 1974 and 2003, Marshall in 1999).

It remains without a doubt that even though Marshall went undefeated in '99, the '03 RedHawks team was a top-five team. No doubt in my mind. Their lone loss was to Iowa, who also finished in the top 20, but essentially bore through everyone else they faced, from Northwestern to Cincinnati (then in C-USA) to ranked BGSU (twice) to Louisville in the GMAC Bowl. Remember that this was the year USC and LSU had the split national championship. Much was up for grabs, and perhaps this is the selective memory taking over but I think they could've played any one of them rather well, perhaps even won.

But the 2003 Miami teams are anomalies. They come around once every 10, 20, 30 years in the league. There has never been, in my opinion, a Greatest Team Of All Time that frequented the hustle belt. It might happen in the future, but to become great you not only need skill players on offense, but a defense that is not only sound fundamentally, but big strong, and about 20 players deep. This is what truly separates an SEC team from a MAC team: it's not speed (although they are faster) but sheer depth. The system is set up so that the best players choose the best teams, and the rest filters down into the lower conferences.

Three things make MAC football great: 1) the small handful of September upsets, 2) the MAC Championship and 3) seeing the stars go to the NFL and succeed. That is the list. Bowls are nice, but it entirely feels like a bonus round, as it should be, rather than the reward. Here's one shot to beat a team perceived to be of similar stature and strength. Go get 'em. If the season ended annually with having the MAC championship go into a packed 80,000-seat stadium and lose to a top five team by 30 points, it'd rightly diminish the entire season. This conference already artificially pads the winning records of historically strong teams. Why further that with a playoff system?

NCAA basketball and other sports are different. Not only with narrower talent margins, but the design of the game enables for more upsets. You can get on a "run" in basketball thanks to hot 3-point shooting and because of the length of the game (40 minutes). Football games are an additional clock hour long, 20 game minutes longer, and are won by having more strength and attrition. Scheming can help but nobody's been able to "trick" a team like LSU for 60 minutes. In the event an upset does occur, which may happen one out of 10 times? Ain't no way they'd pass through the second round.

It does not disturb me in the least that Power Conference Team A made the championship game while Power Conference Team B plays in a lesser bowl game. It's not fair? College football is not fair and it has nothing to do with the system they use to select the teams, but the method by which the teams select the players, coaches and TV contracts. Until that changes — and holding your breath for this to happen may result in asphyxia — let's not try to revamp a system that accounts for anomalies.

Tweet Comment 10 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

BCS should only invite conference champions

+1 at large or independent

by fracas on Dec 6, 2011 11:07 AM CST reply actions

I disagree with a lot of this piece..

First off, you’re right that as it stands right now, MAC teams would not usually be competitive in a playoff system (although I disagree that it would necessarily be a 30 point loss every time). I still think the team’s fans in the playoffs would be very excited every time.

Also, a berth in the playoffs is a much, much bigger reward than the Godaddy.com or Little Caesar’s Bowl, and so I think that generates extra interest in the MACCG. Even if we’re delusional when we think we can hang in the playoffs, that doesn’t make the interest any less sincere.

But more important than all of this is the boon in recruiting that I think would follow. No, we would never catch . But remember the interest and attendance boost that came from the competitive teams we had in the early 2000s? Even if getting playoff bids just created the illusion that we were in the mix nationally, that’s enough to create attendance bumps at the top of the conference and potentially build up a few programs. Sure, we’d probably never ever win a national title, but wouldn’t you rather have some of us competing for better recruits and drawing 25 or 30,000?

by WMUpilot on Dec 6, 2011 2:20 PM CST reply actions

I don’t know why it cut off my sentence there, but it should read “No, we would never catch (insert big conference here)”.

by WMUpilot on Dec 6, 2011 2:22 PM CST up reply actions

The standard recruiting pitch to play in the MAC stands to be:

You’ll get more playing time than in the [Big Conference]
You’ll play one or two [Big Conference] games a year
Lots of MAC players go onto the NFL

I don’t follow how regular season MAC attendance would increase in a playoff system, esp. if that game is routinely at a neutral/away stadium.

Benevolent despot, Hustle Belt — SBN's MAC blog

by Matt Sussman on Dec 6, 2011 2:45 PM CST up reply actions

Attendance in the lower conferences IMO is greatly affected by the fact that we don’t “play for anything” on a national level. This doesn’t bother me because I love my alma mater and games are only as important as you perceive them anyway, so playing for a MAC Championship is great, to me. But there’s a reason good mid-majors can draw packed houses in other sports while the MAC struggles to ever sell out in football conference games even when championships are on the line. Conference games have added meaning to casual fans when national tournament berths are on the line. It doesn’t seem to bother fans all that much in, say, basketball, that their mid-major has virtually no shot of actually winning the thing.

Regular season attendance for the lower-tier MAC teams? Probably unaffected.

by WMUpilot on Dec 6, 2011 3:34 PM CST up reply actions

Attendance suffering is another topic I'd love to get into

But I think the main reason is that the nonconference games they get at home are usually very underwhelming (FCS teams) and then weather is certainly a factor.

The MAC Championship should be the thing everybody wants to win. Would NIU-EMU have been more widely attended if not just the MAC Championship appearance was on the line, but also a trip to, say, get crushed by Alabama in the first round of a hypothetical playoff?

Benevolent despot, Hustle Belt — SBN's MAC blog

by Matt Sussman on Dec 6, 2011 3:51 PM CST up reply actions

I disagree with a lot of this post as well

1) The once in a lifetime team, Boise, Utah, TCU, Hawaii, Miami…get a chance to win it all, right now they never get to prove it. I really hate the (big time school) didn’t play hard in the bowl game because they didn’t care, a playoff takes our conference best game, and plays a game with meaning so no excuses for a major team when it loses.

2) I have attended games in Auburn, Tennessee, and I’m headed to Georgia to watch my team get slaughtered and maimed for money in front of 80k fans who are too bored to even care. If I win my conference why wouldn’t I want to go to a playoff game with a chance to play spoiler.

3) A playoff makes the MAC Championship even more important, when Buffalo went to the MAC, I skipped Detroit because I knew win or lose we’d get Toronto as a bowl game. If the game was for entrance to the playoffs, I’d think I would have more urgency to give Buffalo the home field advantage in Detroit, cause the win would mean so much more.

4) As said extra recruiting pitch as an easy way into the playoffs, vs crawling through the major conferences, which might also help us retain coaches.

5) Finally, I think a tournament discourages the Florida scheduling model, usually 2 mac schools, FSU and a FCS school as their non-conference games all at home, except FSU. If S-O-S has a greater impact on who gets an at-large tournament bid, I think we’d see less pay for loss games,which would create more competitive games and records for MAC teams, which would help us in recruiting and fan support.

Kent State, Temple, Akron too, they can't do it like we do.
Falcons, Bobcats and Redhawks talk a lot can't back it up.

by bull_trojan on Dec 6, 2011 4:11 PM CST reply actions

But to Counter-Point Myself

I think the MAC and MAC fans need to work on us before we look to the top of the country. We cannot rely on individual schools to get better and then pull everyone up, as we know if a school gets dominant they will most likely leave for a better or lateral conference.

As a league we have access to some very good recruiting areas, and due to realignment we may be the most traditional league in terms of distance (not including UMass). Instead of playing SEC games or B1G games in NFL stadiums, or even ESPN games on Tuesday nights, I’d like to see some focus on getting fans to travel with their teams.

I have been to Athens, the Glass and Rubber Bowls, the Linc, UB stadium of course, DeKalb, and they are all unique and fun environments, the conference needs to promote that part of the game, which would also help us when it comes to Bowl selection.

Kent State, Temple, Akron too, they can't do it like we do.
Falcons, Bobcats and Redhawks talk a lot can't back it up.

by bull_trojan on Dec 6, 2011 4:18 PM CST up reply actions

So there would be fewer games against Big Conference Teams

Or rather the Oklahomas and Floridas … maybe Purdue and UConn would still come calling. Would that improve or decrease the pitch in terms of playing Big Conference teams?

Benevolent despot, Hustle Belt — SBN's MAC blog

by Matt Sussman on Dec 6, 2011 6:33 PM CST up reply actions