How fickle we are. Last week the BCS was crap, this week it’s gold. Whatever happens, let’s try to remember one thing about the BCS:

It can’t be "unfair" to VT. It’s a mathematical formula in which only 25% of the result is affected by human subjectivity. By the way, that human subjectivity factor says we should be playing for the MNC. Numbers and formulas don’t care if you are a perennial power, or if you are respected by the viewing public. To my knowledge, the BCS computes the numbers for each team out there the same. Even though it’s "owned" by Roy Kramer, the BCS doesn’t care if you are in the ACC, Big Ten, SEC, or the Big East.

If VT comes up short in the BCS, we will have ourselves to blame. If Nebraska should leapfrog us, it will be our fault. Either it will be because we didn’t win by enough in the games we were supposed to win, or we shouldn’t have played the OOC opponents we played.

Don’t get me wrong. I’m not defending the BCS. Any system besides a true playoff will always have flaws and be subject to controversy. However, it’s the system set forth by the college football gods and we have to live and play by it. We knew the rules going in and if we don’t measure up, then it will be our own doing.

Before you say, "But the rules are new this year and we didn’t really know…", save it. When Jim Weaver came out and said that he had no regrets about scheduling JMU, then all "buts" go out the window. I have also heard of no plans to not schedule them again in four years.

If the result of the BCS is something we don’t like, we can’t say it singled out VT for an injustice. Just like every other team, VT will have put forth its case and the BCS will give us the result in a cool, mathematical fashion.

Unfeeling? Yes. Unfair? No.

Blissful Ignorance

You know, when I didn’t know so much about the ins and outs of Tech football and the BCS, I had a lot more fun. It was so much easier back in the days when you just showed up to the games and cheered. You didn’t have to worry about beating someone by 30 points. You only cared if you won or lost. Now I have to worry about Massey, Sagarin, Dunkel, et al. Something tells me that if I didn’t know who they were or what they did, I’d be a much happier man. Instead, I have to worry about how some west coast newspaper’s computer rates my team.

Anymore it’s hard to enjoy the games because of worry over the stupid BCS. I remember watching the Pittsburgh game and thinking that last year, we would have been overjoyed to win that game. This year we didn’t win by enough. That is not what college football is about, but Roy is doing his best to make it so. Heck, I felt the euphoria of the WVU game for all of one day until the BCS "projections" came out and told me that it wasn’t good enough.

Wasn’t good enough.

One of the best, most exciting college football games I have ever witnessed and it wasn’t good enough. That’s a real shame.

As we go further into the season and the wins pile up, the bad press is starting to dissipate a little. Every now and then, we’ll still come across a non-believer that will want to fill us in with his insight on the Big Least, or Blacksburg’s status as the Mayberry of college football. Every time one of these guys comes out with something new - or recycled - it seems that some misguided Hokie is determined to "set this guy straight" with an e-mail campaign.

Save your energy for cheering on Saturday.

These sports "journalists" are writing about us because we’re popular, we’re hot (thanks, ESPN), and we’re an easy target. Think of us as the Pamela Anderson of college football. Before you tradition-rich old-timers have a coronary, just let me have my fun. And then think about the analogy a little bit. It works. Pam’s popular, she’s hot, and she’s about the easiest target in America for disrespect. Those sportswriters aren’t writing about Kent and Bowling Green anymore than the supermarket rags are writing about Anson Williams and Jerry Mathers.*

The way we need to approach it is like the celebrities do when the National Enquirer or some other publication of that ilk runs them down with some bogus story. We need to either ignore it, or toughen up a little, read it and laugh at it. Giving them attention just gives them more ammo for the next story. Don’t do it.

One needs to look no further than our own message board to see the effect of our recent success on our fan base. It’s growing at an alarming rate. It’s like bringing in a large number of inexperienced troops to fight a war. Not all of them are trained properly and one or two gung ho rookies can make the battle-tested among the Hokie faithful look pretty bad.

The thing the Hokie veterans of the 4-7, 5-6, and 2-8-1 wars must remember is that these guys haven’t seen the tough, lean times. You also have to remember that if Tech has another 6-5 season somewhere down the road, these new "fans" just might go AWOL. It’s part of being a team with burgeoning popularity. Let’s use these guys to take us to the next level. If they stick around long enough, then chances are that some of the Hokie experience will rub off on them. If they choose to abandon ship, we really haven’t lost that much.

For years, Hokies - including myself - have complained that the big boys of college football wouldn’t schedule Tech. If they did want to schedule the Hokies, it would be on less than favorable terms to Tech, something that we turn down. Some chalked this up to fear on the big name school’s part (a feeling I do not share) to face Tech on even terms. The more realistic Hokies said it was an economic decision on the other school’s part, but we still complained bitterly that these schools weren’t giving Tech a fair shake.

It’s time to take a look in the mirror. Is Tech becoming one of these "big schools" that won’t give the little guy a chance? Before you say "Never!", let’s take a look.

As I was perusing the Future Schedules page on HokieCentral the other day, I remembered that Jim Weaver had scheduled Marshall to a 2-for-NONE over the next few years. Not even a 1-for-none, or a 2-for-1. Two games at Lane Stadium, none in return in Huntington. Ouch.

I can hear it now. "Marshall’s not that good". "Marshall is a small-time school in a weak conference". "We are doing Marshall a favor by even playing them". Gee, that sounds really familiar. It seems to me that every argument that we could give for not playing Marshall on even terms has been given by the fans of big schools for not playing us straight up.

The situations are not identical, but the situations of the two schools are eerily similar. Marshall:

• plays in a weak conference
• beats most of their opponents senseless
• has a small stadium and couldn’t give a "bigger" team a guarantee that would even approach the revenue from a home game
• plays in a small town that isn’t easy to get to (compared to bigger schools)
• is fighting for respect on a national level and finally getting some (ranked in the top 12 in the polls)

One could even go so far to say that Marshall is a VT, Jr. So we should cut them some slack and play them straight up, right? Wrong. I think Jim Weaver did the right thing for VT. He is going to have to pay for a big stadium expansion, BE admittance fees, and the running of the VT athletic department. It’s a business.

Now, back to my original point. As I said, I think we’re doing the right thing with Marshall. Why should we ever play there if we don’t have to? Only now I’ll be keeping that in mind the next time I read about Penn State refusing to play us in a home-and-home. I hope you do, too.

*By the way, Anson Williams played Potsie on Happy Days and Jerry Mathers was the Beaver.