The first weekend of the college football season always seems to
be something of an unveiling. After months of roundtable
discussions, we are given a couple of arbitrary polls used to
project how the balance of power in each conference rests.
It makes sense that there�s so much
uncertainty, considering how much more turnover and raw potential
there is on the average roster. After the first week of every
season, there are always a number of surprises across the country
that turn heads.
This year, it was then-No. 9 California�s
embarrassing 35-18 loss at then-No. 22 Tennessee. Heading into the
matchup, the Bears were poised to challenge the Trojans for the
Pac-10 championship and even compete for the national title. The
Heisman campaign for Marshawn Lynch was just starting to pick up
momentum. Meanwhile, Volunteers coach Phil Fulmer was rumored to be
on the hot seat in the offseason after a few
�down� years, at least by
Tennessee standards.
However, it�s just a wee bit early to bury Cal,
considering it has a host of mediocre Pac-10 teams it can feast on
to help fatten up its record before the year winds down.
It�s also premature to think Fulmer is out of
harm�s way already, because it�s
a coach�s conference record that usually leads to
his demise anyway.
What Cal�s loss has to make you think is that
it�s only a matter of time before the Pac-10
expands to a 12-team league, separating into two subdivisions, and
holds a conference championship.
Let me explain. If Tennessee lost that game, it would have
enough games against elite programs and a potential conference
title game to propel it into the national title picture even after
losing its first game. Cal doesn�t have that
luxury. Without a hard-hitting schedule and a conference title game
against another top team, Cal�s national title
hopes are virtually dead in week two.
Adding two more teams to the Pac-10 and a conference title game
would bring more money to each team, and would also raise the level
of competition.
As of right now, the Pac-10 and Big Ten are the only two BCS
conferences to award a conference title based solely on the regular
season. The SEC and the Big 12 have proven how financially
lucrative it can be to add a championship game, played by the
winners of the two subdivisions, in December on national
television. For just one more game a year, the conferences sign a
fat contract with CBS or ABC/ESPN.
But expanding a conference has also proven to increase the
competition and subsequently increase the talent level throughout
the conference.
With more talented programs, even the bottom feeders of a
conference have a chance to recruit top prospects. Look at
Vanderbilt: The Commodores are annually one of the worst programs
in the SEC, but they nabbed Jay Cutler because he had the chance to
play against the best in college and showcase his skills, even if
his team wasn�t winning more than five games.
The ACC is the latest conference to follow the trend, stealing
away Miami and Virginia Tech in the middle of the night to give it
a crop of programs that are absolutely loaded in talent. Once a
fading power in college football, the ACC is stronger than it ever
was in the early 1990s heyday of Florida State and Georgia
Tech.
There has been speculation for several years that the Pac-10 was
flirting with the idea of becoming the Pac-12, with north and south
divisions. For whatever reason, it hasn�t been
able to pull the trigger. I�d give Pac-10
Commissioner Tom Hansen the benefit of the doubt, except that his
track record hasn�t exactly been stellar. (Hansen
has orchestrated the bowl deals responsible for sending the No. 3
Pac-10 team to the Sun Bowl against the Big 10�s
No. 5, as well as the No. 4 Pac-10 team to the Vegas Bowl against
the Mountain West No. 1. No wonder the Pac-10 is losing California
recruits to programs on the other side of the country.)
So, who should Hansen consider adding to the mix? Fresno State
and Texas Christian University.
Imagine a Pac-12; USC, UCLA, California, Stanford, Fresno State
and TCU in the southern division. And you�d have
Oregon, OSU, Washington, WSU, Arizona and ASU in the northern
division.
This would increase the level of competition and garner more
money from a television deal, as well as give the Pac-10 a
recruiting base in the talent-rich Texas area.
There is a serious downside to this proposed expansion. It would
increase the football players� workload,
essentially turning their season into a 14-game saga when you
include the conference title and bowl game.
On the other hand, this wouldn�t stop the
Pac-10 administrators from swinging such a deal. When have they
ever cared about the welfare of their student-athletes?