Heisman Future in Jeopardy
04/08/99 12:25 EDT
NEW YORK - In the wake of a startling pronouncement by superstar running back James Jackson yesterday, officials of the Downtown Athletic Club have convened for talks on the future of the Heisman Trophy. "We want to assure the public that we are making every effort to preserve the integrity and longevity of the Heisman Trophy award" said club president Theodore "Wally" McFadden. "Our award has been an integral part of college football for over 60 years, and we hope to ensure that this relationship continues indefinitely".

Jackson, hailed as the second coming of Christ by many Miami fans, was quoted yesterday after practice on the Coral Gables campus as saying "If I'm not in the running for the Heisman, they might as well do away with the award."

When asked for specific strategies that the Downtown Athletic Club might pursue in order to meet Jackson's demands, McFadden refused to elaborate, saying only "(We will) do whatever we have to do. Obviously, we always try to accomodate the University of Miami and its players to the utmost. I think that our record reflects that." McFadden was of course referring to the club's policy of trying to hand the award to undeserving candidates from Miami, the most recent example being 1992 when the award was 'given' to Gino Torreta.

Other club officials, who wished to remain anonymous, disclosed some of the plans that have been discussed. One plan would have the club automatically add 1,000 points to Jackson's tally for next year, while another would have the Heisman ballots distributed to all 32 Miami Hurricane season ticket holders. One club official conceded that these options might not be enough, given the possibilities that Jackson could get injured before the season, underperform, or even lose his job as the starter.

"There's even a good chance that Najeh Davenport will be the starter at U.M. this year, so that really puts us in a bind" said the unnamed source. "We may be forced to simply move the award ceremony up to June or July of this year, thereby avoiding some of the risks that are inherent in the game."

Since beginning of 1995 season, we're

Here's the breakdown:

If a full fledged playoff was in place, that number would be reduced from 22 to ONE.

We had a season that was disappointing in some respects, losing three close games, marred by some quarterback controversy, losing to a team we never should have lost to, and losing to our biggest rival at home. And of course there were ups too, lots of great memories. But the season ended with thousands of Hokie fans celebrating in Nashville in the cold rain, and thousands of others watching on TV. People on this board have watched the tape of that game many times already and are saving it forever.

It is extremely likely that if there was a playoff last year, we either wouldn't have qualified or else we would have lost early. Sure, a miracle might have happened. But most likely our season would have ended on a December day with a loss to a top 10 team.

Do you really think that people would be saving that game forever? Even if we pulled off a big upset against a top 10 team in the first round, we would only have been able to savor that for a week before facing another game and most likely losing. Unless we pulled off that big miracle and won it all, the vast majority of years the final taste in our mouths would have been the bitter taste of defeat. And that's what we would have to chew on all winter.

I guess if you sit at home and watch the tournament on TV it would be quite a spectacle. And that's what you would have to do. I don't have the money, time, or leave from work to take multiple consecutive weekends off and make road trips in the busy December/January time frame. As it is now it is very difficult for me to squeeze in my Christmas visit to my parents in New Hampshire, and a bowl trip, every year, both in terms of time, money, and ability to take off work. I'm sure many others are in the same boat.

The great thing about a football season is the journey, not the destination. The partying and tailgating and cheering and arguing and cursing and weeping and gobbler-shaking and drinking and second-guessing and travelling. The experience itself is what counts and that would be cheapened by some type of multi-tiered playoff at the end. All because someone feels that the experience is somehow diminished because in some years there are questions about whether the best team really won the championship. (As if the best team always wins in every sport that does have a playoff).

There wouldn't be nearly as many long term coaches like Paterno, Bowden, and yes Beamer if there was a playoff system. The vast majority of any coach's season would end in a loss in a playoff game; if it is a close loss there would be second guessing. Coaches would start being recycled as fast as pro coaches, with only a select few having long term job security (and only then if they would win the Tourna-playoff championship at least every 4 or 5 years).

We have heard the rumors of the future 64 team 1-A football division.

Well, the 63 team Division 1A is here.

For the first time in history, the 62 BCS conference schools (+ ND = 63) do not have to play non-BCS schools in bowl games. The 63 teams have 32 bowl bids locked up, all against other BCS teams. Plus, de facto they have 2 BCS at-large bids (see, e.g., snub of BYU and Tulane). So that is 34 bids for 63 teams. Finally, the Music City and Oahu pit BCS teams v. Open, so there is a 35th and 36th bowl slot for the 6-5 BCS team without a pre-set tie. 36 bowl bids for 63 teams, all against one another.

What about the other leagues. Here's the bowl lineup:

Liberty: C-USA 1 v. MWC 1
Las Vegas: MWC 2 v. WAC 1
Mobile: C-USA 2 v. WAC 2
Motor City: MAC 1 v. Open
Humanitarian: C-USA 3 v. BW 1

All of the non-BCS teams will be playing against one another. We won't have a shot against any BCS team. Oh, perhaps a 37th BCS team standing at 6-5 will play in the Motor City (a la Ole Miss in 1997). But by and large, for the first time ever, the BCS leagues and the non-BCS teams have their own separate postseasons.

Yes, non-BCS schools do play BCS leagues non-conference. So what? So do 1-AA schools. In effect, it's like the BCS leagues got together and said, "Yes, you can play non-BCS teams non-conference, and it will count in the 6 win requirement for bowl eligibility. But you won't have to play them in a bowl game."

With conferences and individual schools now negotiating their own TV deals, there is virtually nothing that ties the BCS schools to the non-BCS schools.

The ONLY tie between the BCS schools and the non-BCS schools is the fact that the BCS pays the non-BCS teams $100,000 each per year for the right to snub non-BCS conference champs. Theoretically, the top 6 criteria for BCS at-large participation is also a tie between the BCS teams and the non-BCS teams, but rare is the year that that will come into play. Oh, and I guess the polls don't formally split the 63 teams from the other 51 -- a Tulane can still finish in the Top 10 in the AP or coaches poll with a good season.