Last week, in these very pages, my colleague Will Van Wazer lied to you. Despite all evidence to the contrary, Will argued that college football is superior to its professional brethren. But fear not, loyal readers, for I am here to right the wrong and set the record straight - professional football is without a doubt better than college football, and I can prove it.
It all comes down to parity and playoffs: Professional football has them and college doesn't. I know recently BCS-busters like Utah, Boise State and TCU have made headlines, but they are the exception rather than the rule. College football is monopolized to the point that several schools have attempted to bring the issue to Congress to increase parity in the sport. Since the creation of the BCS in 1998, 12 of the 13 champions have started the season ranked in the top 10 of the preseason polls. The 13th, LSU in 2003, started the year ranked at a lowly 16th position. Why bother playing the games at all if 110 out of the 120 division 1 college football teams don't have any chance at winning the championship before the games even begin? How can anyone defend a sport that eliminates more than 90 percent of its teams before they even strap on the pads just because some coaches didn't write their name on a poll in August?
And name me another sport that can have two national champions, like college football did in 2003 with LSU winning the BCS title and USC taking the AP Poll. No sport should let computers decide its champion and risk such a controversy. That would be as if the Saints won the Super Bowl at the end of last season but the writers at ESPN decided the Colts were more worthy and gave Indianapolis the trophy. The nation would erupt in riots and the entire national government would be at risk - or at least a lot of blogs would get fired up. Champions should be decided on the field, not by some computers.
College football can produce some great rivalry games, but for every Ohio State versus Michigan nail-biter in November, there are 10 games like week one's Oregon-New Mexico 72-0 thriller. The first two to three weeks of every college football season see big-time programs pay little schools hundreds of thousands of dollars to come get the snot knocked out of them on national television. The minute someone can successfully convince me San Jose State has any business sharing the field with No. 1-ranked Alabama, I'll mow Scott Stadium with my toenail clippers. I'm not arguing that college football can't be fun or entertaining, but at some points it's just painful to watch. Until it undergoes a serious reorganization process, there is no way it is better than pro football.
Whatever college football lacks in parity, professional football makes up for in abundance. From 2003-09, every NFL season has seen at least one team go from 5-11 or worse to make the playoffs the next season. Additionally, almost every year, at least five or so teams make the playoffs after missing it the year before - last season saw six such cases. In the NFC South alone, since the division's creation in 2002, the team that finishes last has gone on to win the division the following year. In college football, that would be the equivalent of Vanderbilt winning the SEC this year - the Commodores are 1-2, and somehow I don't see them knocking off Florida or Alabama anytime soon.
This parity is even possible in the pro game because the players are simply better. The NFL has 32 teams and about 1,696 players. Division 1 college football has 120 teams and upwards of 125 players on each team. That's almost 15,000 football players, of which only 1.7 percent are drafted. If less than two out of every 100 college football players are good enough to make it to the pros, how can college football be better? Even some Heisman trophy winners - presumably the best of the best in college football - can't hack it in the NFL. Want proof? Look all the way down the Houston Texans depth chart, and there at the bottom, if you squint your eyes, you might be able to see Matt Leinart's name.
For the record, pro football can be very romantic in its own right. I counter your Byron Leftwich story with Emmitt Smith playing with a dislocated shoulder and leading the Cowboys to a division title against the Giants in 1993. And yes, although we do have some players like Ricky Williams who may not have their entire heart in the game, we also have guys like Ronnie Lott who had his own pinky cut off so he could keep playing. And while you're bragging about a dinky little celebration in Harrisburg, please allow me to show the estimated 800,000 people who crammed Canal Street to watch the Saints' Super Bowl parade last year.
Let's be realistic: The NFL is just flat-out better. I know for sentimental purposes some people may like college football more, but it's really an inferior game. Saturday afternoons on campus are definitely spectacles in their own right, but when it comes down to it, pro football is better where it counts: on the field and in the league offices. Professional football is better-run and produces a better product - ergo, it is simply better. Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I hereby rest my case.
Of course, I reserve the right to completely change my opinion if there's a lockout next year.
Read More
Virginia football prepares for pivotal contest against North Carolina
By Ryan Weiner | 6 hours agoNeeding to keep pace in the race for a bowl game berth, the Cavaliers host a favorable matchup.
Men’s soccer set for ACC regular season finale against No. 5 Pittsburgh
By Mofeoluwa Akande and Ben Istvan | 6 hours agoThe Cavaliers upset a top-10 Pittsburgh team on the road two years ago — they will look to do it again Friday night.
REIMS: Virginia can still make a bowl game
By Casey Reims | 10 hours agoThe Cavaliers have all the pieces in place to win, even with a difficult schedule ahead.
