Is it Good for Nebraska to be the Face of the BCS?
4 comments so far
July 22, 2009 by
The recent Orrin Hatch/Harvey Perlman Capitol Hill face-off was a fairly predictable affair. Hatch ranted and raved about Utah getting left out of the national championship game and Perlman defended the status quo in college football. Aside from how you feel about the arguments for a playoff, it’s strange to see Nebraska become so strongly associated with the current system.
I haven’t seen the data but I suspect if you polled a group of casual or even hardcore college football fans you’d find that most of them would like to see a playoff. That means making the argument against a playoff puts you at odds with most people. Some might say that’s bad public relations.
On the other hand, there’s the thought that any publicity is good publicity. Nebraska is portrayed as the powerful big conference school that’s working to exclude the smaller conference schools. That’s not necessarily a bad image to have considering that Utah’s won thirteen more games than Nebraska over the last six seasons. And would any recruit really hold it against Nebraska (or any BCS school) for excluding the Mountain West from the postseason? It seems pretty unlikely.
So while all of this theater may seem unflattering to BCS schools in general and Nebraska in particular, there’s probably no real downside for Nebraska that Perlman was the voice of the BCS. If anything, he further promotes Nebraska as a major brand in college football.
We’d all like to tune it out and see our Congressional leaders find something more important to spend their time on. But at least Husker fans can feel comfortable that it won’t hurt the Big Red.
Did you enjoy this article?
Get Husker news by email
Follow us on Twitter
Related Stories: BCS
Post a comment
iggy Jul 22 09
actually I'm perfectly content watching elected officials bicker about trivial things like this. I means they have less time to screw important stuff up!
In the grand scheme of things, Perlman is toeing the party line becuase to do anything else at this time would be far more damaging to Nebraska's rep than following along could ever be. I don't think we want to be the first BCS conference school to break ranks and admit that the system is unfair and recommend ways to rectify it.
That being said as a Nebraskan who considers himself a hard worker and a fair handed judge of reality, it bothers me that we are basically forced to go against what would be the Nebraska way in this instance. The Nebraska way would be the exact opposite of what is good for the BCS. I think we all know that, and don't be surprised if most CFB fans realize that as well.
That being said TO should find a way to schedule the Utes in the next couple of years for a home and home. If he does Bo better find a way to win both in a Biblical sort of fashion. Maybe that would help put this BCS non BCS malarkey into perspective.
AustinHusker Jul 22 09
I have to agree with both of you. Any PR is good PR, or just about any. But is sure doesnt feel like the Nebraska way.
And the fact that I am an animate playoff fan. BCS be damned.
bnahusker Jul 22 09
Utah blah blah blah. Mt. West blah blah blah.Not fair blah blah blah.
When the non-BCS schools help to create an equal share of the revenue, then they can cry that they aren't getting the benefits of participation.
That Nebraska is a focal point at this time is fine and possibly an asset for the BCS. The fan support, tradition and following from a small population state shows that if the Utahs, BSUs and BYUs of the play and beat the quality teams that they need to, and help to generate $$$$, they will earn their seat at the table.
As far as playoffs go, I could be swayed if someone could show me a way to achieve a fair tourney with 119 schools and 12-13 conferences to appease.
Another great post by BRN.
Thanks Steve!
GBR!
Bob
Dogham Jul 24 09
Any playoff must be done at home sites, not just at southern schools. Let Florida come play Nebraska in Lincoln the 2nd Saturday in December. 'nuff said.