It’s important to preface this opinion by stating that I don’t hate the New York Giants. I know- I should. I’m certainly not a fan, nor are they a team that I really pull for when they're on television. When flipping between non-Pats games on the Sunday Ticket, the Giants have never really been a big draw for me. Sure, Dallas-New York can be interesting, but in general, the Jets’ big brothers were just another insignificant team playing ball in the JV conference. I was always ambivalent toward the franchise, bouncing between not caring and passively hoping that they lose because of the influx of douchy Giants fans in Ann Arbor (times ten after the Super Bowl. Memo to the girl in Uggs that tried to talk smack to me on South U the day after the Super Bowl: the guy’s names are T-y-r-e-e and P-l-a-x-i-c-o, not Thomas and Plastica.) Anyways, setting aside the New Jersey supahfans, I was able to come to the realization that the Giants were a pretty likeable champion despite crushing my hopes and dreams. Plaxico may be an evil Sparty (who kept a ring off of my finger in 1999) but it’s tough to hate the guy. He works hard, plays hard, and played the Super Bowl in excruciating pain. I respect that. Eli Manning rebounded to play tremendously in the playoffs after nearly being run out of town by the aforementioned douchy fans. Ditto Coughlin. Since I can taste the vomit, I think the quick summation here is that the Giants were pretty easy to pull for if you were an impartial observer watching that game. They’ve reminded me more and more of the 2001 Patriots as I think of that specific year. (Although their antics at the parade were bush league.)
So what does this have to do with college football? Well, quite a bit. I was reading some articles on The Wolverine recently about spring ball, DickRod’s new offense and some of the adjustments being made. In general, I like what I’ve been hearing. But, even with all of the changes, it’s tough to muster up the enthusiasm that I’ve had for the bulk of my life coming in to a Michigan season. I don’t deny that I’m about as blind a homer as it gets when Michigan football is concerned. Blind faith and blue Kool-Aid are served heavily at tailgates in the fall. My expectations are generally sky high and when the season begins, I always can envision situations where Michigan is playing for the national title. But not this season. Don’t get me wrong, I still think this can be a very good team. The schedule is easy and even with the lack of experience under center and new system; a 9-3/8-4 season is easily doable. Yet, when 9-3 is your ceiling, a national title is unrealistic.
With that realization, I’ve now come to the place where most of the college football world lives- the land where playing in the BCS title game is just unreasonable. I’ve long been a fan of the bowl system. I reluctantly accepted the BCS because it did give us better games and as “real” a champion as the system would allow despite the butchering of the traditional Rose Bowl. The thought of college football playoffs and large scale change like that scared the crap out of me. I love the tradition and pageantry of college football, the things that are the essence of the game and make it such a great sport. Even after being left out of the title game two years ago, I didn't waver in this belief.
Until the New York Giants came along. See, the Giants finished 10-6, were an inconsistent team at best and were given little to no chance in the playoffs. In fact, when the Pats played in the Meadowlands in week 16, I was a little nervous about the game. I got the following message from a friend who is a Cowboy fan, laughing at my nerves:
Pats kill the overrated Giants, unless they start the practice squad.
Eeeeeeeeelllllllliiiiiii sucks.
The Giants gave the Pats a game and used the momentum to springboard three straight road wins in the playoffs as well as three straight wins against teams that were 14-2, 14-3 and 18-0. Probably the greatest and most improbable run in NFL history.
If the Giants were playing in the NCAA, their fans would’ve been looking forward to the Chic-Fil-A Bowl and ESPN would’ve been hyping Pats-Cowboys.
Now I understand that there is no direct comparison between the NFL playoffs and the NCAA. There are 4 times as many teams in division one football and the logistics of a playoff would be exclusionary anyways. A 10-6 college football equivalent would not make an NCAA playoff. I’d like to see some sort of hope though for teams coming into the season. Losing one or two games should not eliminate a team from contention. At the end of last season, USC was playing as well if not better than eventual champion 2-loss LSU and runner-up Ohio State. I’m still convinced that the 1998 Buckeyes were one of the greatest football teams of my lifetime. In the first four years of the BCS alone, I counted at least 14 teams that I would’ve given a 50/50 shot to beat the national champion that season (98: OSU, KState, Arizona, Florida; 99: Michigan, Alabama, Nebraska, KState; 00: Miami, Washington, Oregon State, VT; 01: Oregon, Colorado, Florida.) The case here isn’t that these teams were better than the champion; it’s that they didn’t have a chance to prove it based on a mathematical equation. Again, the 2007 Giants would’ve been watching the Pats-Cowboys Super Bowl in an NFL BCS system.
There has to be a line drawn somewhere, I’m just not sure where. I can think of nothing better though than DickRod’s 2 loss Wolverines coming on late in the season, fighting an epic battle in Columbus and using that as a springboard into run in the playoffs and a rematch with OSU on college football’s biggest stage. Perhaps an inexplicable escape by young Justin Feagin tossing up a prayer that Daryl Stonum catches with his helmet to set up a winning score? In that world, fans in Starkville, Fayetteville, Westwood, Eugene, Iowa City, and College Station have hope every year.
College football needs the New York Giants.
14 comments:
What the hell did you put in your Starbucks this morning? I couldnt disagree with you more. I am a firm believer in the you gotta win something to get into a playoff. Which is why I did and still do think that Michigan did not deserve a rematch against OSU two years ago. College football is awesome because EVERY GAME COUNTS. You cant lay an egg in Madison and expect to get where you want to go. The BCS doesn't always get it perfect, but we have yet to see a team in the NC game that didn't earn their way there. The NFL is set up perfectly to have THE ultimate playoff system, but they screw it all up with the stupid wildcards. Set the eight division winners against each other and go to town. No team that cant even win their division should EVER get the chance to win a championship. EVER!
I could seriously write a 10,000 word dissertaion on my playoff philosophy. The NHL and NBA are awful, MLB is the closest to having it right, and the NFL could make it right the easiest, but the last thing we need is a team that loses at home to Stanford to have a shot at being called the best team in the land.
Yes, I can see why votes and computer math would be a good way to determine a champion.
When a 10-6 team ends my 19-0, then Stanford's bitch can beat LSU's ass.
The wild-card put the Tigers in the World Series.
I'm not saying they cant beat them, I'm saying to don't deserve the chance to. But thanks for not pointing out the glaring obvious mistake in my reasoning in that USC won the Pac-10, so they should have a shot at it, despite losing to Stanford.
In my mind, they should go back to the old bowl method. It was flawed, but it was better than the BCS, and better than a playoff.
Should you choose to keep arguing, i will have to break out larger font and boldness, so be prepared....
K-state????? blahahahahaah your such a homer! Try rooting for a good team, go dawgs!!!!
Georgia sucks. Rocky Top pwns them.
Good post. Although my hatred of the Giants has run deep for years (aside from my brief obsession with the Yankees was far-fetched), the comparison is good. But 9-3/8-4 record for UofM this year I think is stretching a bit, and this is why I think so:
with the loss of Henne (who was mediocre at best) and Mallett, the QB spot is in question and highly inexperienced, esp. since Terrell Pryor (the next Dennis Dixon?) left off for OSU. Sure, David Cone seems like a sure fit, with a decent high school career (coming out a three-star rating sure isn't bad), but since he hasn't played much more than a couple downs, and that was way back on OCT. 27th, his experience here shakes me a bit.
Stephen Threet had an even better H.S. career in Adrian and, on the plus side, he's a four-star ranking who lived close to A2, giving him a bit more familiarity with the program...maybe. But, since he didn't even get into a game last year b/c of transfer status, I don't think DickRod would start him off with no experience. I could be wrong though.
I am excited, however, to see how the TE and WR positions are played out, since McGuffie has been brought in (OMG6FTVERTICAL!!), and I can't wait to see what Boubakar will do in his tenure at the CB position. Next Charles Woodson? Hopefully. Anyways, it'll be an interesting season, and with this somewhat lax schedule, maybe a 9-4 IS possible.
Sorry, couldn't disagree more. Were the Giants the best team of 2007, or did they just not lose in the playoffs? I like that college football awards a team that is season-long, the best. The NFL doesn't, and as a consequence it will always be #2 to the hardcore college football fans, such as me. College football still gives you Boise State, it just doesn't give you the Giants. And I think that's OK.
The Giants beat the best team. Did LSU?
And Tiger Woods lost this weekend, so he's not the best in the world then, right?
No, he just didnt win a tournament, which is what a playoff is. A tournament. But DP- I pose a question- why not let all 32 teams play in the tournament? So when a 7-9 team comes out and wins the whole damn thing we can all say, well, they are the best, right?
Tiger wins when it counts. The Giants won when it counts. They won AT a 14-2, 14-3 and against an 18-0 team. What else could they have done? Sure, it's a tournament, but what is a better way to select a champion? Certainly not by vote. The body of work over the course of the season qualified the teams for the playoffs. In the playoffs, everyone was 0-0 and the Giants finished 4-0.
Probably the best argument I've heard for the current system, but why is the magic number 12? Why not just the division winners (8) or all 32 teams? You dont even need to add any time to the playoffs, just take out that stupid week off, and the first one to 5-0 wins it. I still think you either have to win something to get in (your division) or have a 5 week 32 team free-for-all.
Because by allowing the Wild Card format, you adjust for stronger teams being left out in favor of lesser teams who won their division. A great example is 2005. The Pats won the AFC East at 10-6 and hosted the Jaguars who were a 12-4 Wild Card team. The Jaguars were not penalized for being in the same division as the 14-2 Colts, yet the Patriots were rewarded for "winning something" (AFC East) and got to play the game in Gillette despite Jacksonville's superior record.
The NFL system is the best. I agree that the NHL and NBA are a joke. About half the teams are getting in. In the NFL, you allow the division winners as well as 2 wild cards, which gives some leeway for very good teams who have another great team within their division. There is an adequate reward for winning the division- home field- as well as an immeasurable reward for the two teams with the best record in each conference- the first round bye. In this situation, teams like the Patriots, Cowboys and Packers had an advantage over the Giants, yet NY was still able to compete for and win the title.
Did LSU not win when it counted? I think the Tiger Woods analogy is the best, though what about the Marlins when they won the World Series twice? Or the Cardinals in 2006? The season's best team doesn't always win the season ending tournament. College football is captivating because it rewards the entire season's success, and therefore every game literally matters.
What about the Marlins and Cardinals? They won playoff SERIES. That further cements them as the best team. Beating a squad 4 out of 7? You deserve it.
College football rewards fancy names and media publicity. LSU won the game that counted, but why did LSU get to play in that game instead of USC? Oklahoma? They were VOTED into that game. That is atrocious. Every game matters in the NFL, as well. Missing out on the playoffs by one game? How is that different than college football? Had Erik Ainge not thrown a horrid pick, LSU isn't there. What about Hawaii? They were 12-0 at the time. If every game literally mattered, then what's the argument there? With a playoff, they would've been able to prove themselves against the big boys (and gotten smoked.) Boise State in 2006? Same thing.
The NFL system is head and shoulders above all. So long as arbitrary votes and preseason polls are able to influence the "champion," college football will be but a farce compared to its big brother.
Post a Comment