If we do have college football this fall — a very uncertain prospect at this point — the Big Ten will play conference games alone. That decision came down on Thursday afternoon. The ACC and Pac-12 could be next, leaving the SEC and Big 12 in a position to do the same thing.
An obvious — and necessary — question has flooded in from readers after the Big Ten news hit the wires: Why do a conference-only schedule?
A more precise question: Why insist on 100-percent conference games and not at least allow one nonconference game with a short travel distance?
Why not allow Iowa to play Iowa State?
Why not allow BYU to play Utah?
Why not allow Colorado State to play Colorado or Notre Dame to play Wisconsin?
The Big Ten and other Power Five conferences all involve conference games with commutes much, MUCH longer than the ones mentioned above. Why not at least allow one nonconference game with minimal travel distance?
I agree.
A nine-plus-one plan — in which every team can play one nonconference game which is geographically convenient — makes more objective sense than 10 conference games. You won’t get an argument from me there.
However: The idea that there is no logical basis for playing a conference-only schedule is an overreach.
There IS a clear logic. It might not be the BEST logic, but it is clear and — moreover — contains a certain degree of realism. It’s not satisfying, but it’s defensible.
We live in a reality where there is no commissioner of college sports. We have known for some time that college football in particular has very little if any streamlined governance. This is, after all, how you get an environment in which some conferences (SEC, ACC) have eight conference games in a regular season, while others (Pac-12, Big 12, Big Ten) have nine.
This is how you get a situation in which some conferences have 14 teams, others 12, and others 10.
This is how you get a landscape in which bowl games are played in Southern cities, not Northern ones, and in which various other competitive imbalances exist.
College football has been imbalanced and irregular throughout its messy history… so why should that change now in a pandemic?
Keep in mind that college football — in its lack of streamlined egalitarianism — now has to deal with different states, different localities, and a woefully inadequate federal response to the pandemic. Coordination between and among various officials and leaders is hard enough to come by as it is; given the poor performance of government at various levels, and given the generally negative trajectory of national events in recent months relative to COVID-19, it is hard to expect a lot of leaders and power structures right now.
It’s a total mess.
You think college football is going to get it right, and come up with plans which satisfy everyone?
A conference-only schedule is not the best plan conferences could have come up with under the circumstances. Not playing Iowa-Iowa State and instead having a Rutgers-Indiana game is foolish. Same goes for not having Colorado State-Colorado but having a Washington-Arizona game on the schedule.
Yet, the explanation for why conference-only schedules are emerging from the complexities and problems posed by COVID-19 is not THAT hard to figure out.
Conferences and their personnel want to have the best chance of controlling activity and streamlining their policies and procedures. Having only conference games takes away layers of complexity in terms of working with other conferences, less familiar teams (except for rivalry games, of course), and trying to negotiate how to handle any adverse situations which might arise.
Yes: It IS a failure of leadership that we have come to this point. It is a failure of leadership that the Power Five conferences feel they can’t have an Iowa-Iowa State game — a game a local community counts on, a game with minimal travel involved — because bureaucratic complexity is something few leaders want to deal with.
This is a failure. It is a failure seen on much more important levels in federal and state governments right now. It is a failure created by exhaustion and an unwillingness to focus first on policy. It’s so much easier to focus on substance-free elements such as identity politics or electability.
Yet, this is where our political and administrative culture exist right now. We shouldn’t be surprised. This is the reality of our country in realms beyond college football. We shouldn’t expect college football to somehow rise above everything and lead the country.
This is a flawed and incomplete plan, yes… because everything else surrounding college football is dysfunctional.