Chris Brown showed up on a Cal Poly message board in 2010. For most of last year, he was the team’s starting quarterback. By Owen Main

Tomorrow is Wednesday. It’s also the first Wednesday in February and happens to be national signing day for high school athletes who will play a fall sport in college next season.

Like lots of fans, signing day always piques my interest. It’s like the first day of a Major League Baseball season, when everything seems fresh and all fan-bases might have a good argument about how good they might be in the future.

Signing day is probably the most important day in college sports. Unlike the sports themselves though, fans have to wait sometimes years before finding out how great any signing day actually was. If I was less lazy or had less than one six month-old, I’d probably do some kind of analysis about a signing day from three years ago at a given university — perhaps like the Cal Poly football team.

At Cal Poly, fans should also be on the look-out for a list of volleyball and men’s and women’s soccer signees, along with football. I’ll try to post some videos tomorrow of the players who decide to sign in all of these sports.

No matter who signs where, tomorrow is one of the few days in sports that is really about all my favorite cliches. College sports fans will begin, in the best cases, a four-year journey watching an 18 year-old develop in whatever sport they play. For a day at least, all you see is upside.

As we await the first wave of the BCS standings, the college football season thus far has not disappointed.  Every week there is something new to talk about and that is what makes this sport great. That being said, everyone has to be wondering and analyzing who will get the initial number one and two rankings when the season ends ultimately setting up a meeting of the two teams in the championship game. Thankfully this is the last season without any sort of playoff system.

Could this be the year a non SEC team wins the title in college football? By John Martinez Pavliga (Flickr: IMG_0020), via Wikimedia Commons

For the last three years, Alabama and Oregon have been two of the the so called “face” organizations of college football, with Alabama winning three of the last four titles and Oregon being known for their high powered offensive attack. I believe when its all said and done, Alabama and Oregon should be playing for the BCS National Championship. Of course neither one of them would be able to lose a game but seeing the way both have been playing, it’s unlikely that either will. I love watching the dominance that the SEC has been putting on college football but not all people agree. This might finally be the year where the title game matchup is what everyone has wanted all along, Oregon against Alabama. They look to be on a collision course to meet there and hopefully they do.

By the Numbers:

* Despite giving up 42 points to Texas A&M, Alabama is giving up an average of just 11.3 points per game.

* Oregon is averaging 56.8 points per game.

* Oregon averages 324 rushing yards per game.

* Alabama allows only 87.2 yards per game

* Alabama’s average margin of victory is over 26 points per game.

* Oregon’s average margin of victory is 43 points per game.

The Big East looks to be the first truly dying conference, with Syracuse and Pittsburgh signing on the dotted line last week to join the ACC (Atlantic Coast Conference).  Reports also have come out in the past few days that Connecticut and Rutgers will follow suit.  If this were to happen, it would transform the ACC into the first 16-team super-conference.  The Big East would then be left in shambles, and there is a good chance that TCU, who was slated to join the Big East next season, will be looking to back out of that obligation at some point in the near future.  Look for TCU to jump back to non-BCS league play by most likely joining either the Mountain West Conference or Conference USA.

What was the Pac 10 and now is the Pac 12, has been looking to become the Pac 16 by the end of the year.  Colorado and Utah joined the ranks this season from the Big 12 and the Mountain West Conference respectively.  Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech were looking to join the party and create a new Pac 16.  However, late last night Pac 12 commissioner Larry Scott announced that the Pac 12 would not be expanding any further at this point in time.  That doesn’t mean that the Pac 12 won’t explore the possibility at season’s end.  The reports are that Texas nixed any deal, given the fact that they refused to share any revenue created from their new “Longhorn Network” TV deal.

I believe the eventual destiny of the Pac 12 is to in fact add Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State, and when this destiny is eventually fulfilled, the mass exodus from the Big 12 and the conference’s dissolving entirely will commence.  Given the idea that they could lose these four teams, Nebraska has already left the conference this season for the Big 10, and Texas A&M has already made a tentative deal to join the SEC next season, the Big 12 would then be left a rotting carcass. 

The Big 12 would then be left with five schools that would be searching for new homes:  Kansas, Kansas State, Missouri, Baylor, and Iowa State.  I believe the current 12-team Big 10 would then absorb Big 12 leftovers:  Kansas, Kansas State, Missouri and Iowa State to become the new Big 16, and Baylor will be left on the outside looking in.  It is reasonable to say that the only chance a school like Baylor would have to join the Big 10 is if Missouri joined the SEC (Southeastern Conference), which is also a rumor being floated. 

So where is this high-stakes game of musical chairs going to end up when the music stops?  If the end result is four 16-team super-conferences of and if my math is correct, that adds up to 64 teams.  There are currently 68 teams in the FBS (Football Bowl Subdivision), 66 in the 6 “BCS” conferences, and independents Notre Dame and BYU.  So what four teams will be left out?  And what slots would be left if the 16-team ACC and Pac 16 would be created?  And will Notre Dame finally be forced to join a conference?

The SEC currently has 12 teams, divisions of East and West containing six each.  With Texas A&M most likely joining the West division next season, that leaves one more spot open in the West and two spots open in the East.  The obvious suitors for those three spots are:  Missouri from the Big 12, some other remaining Big 12 school (although there has been no formal or informal news the SEC is interested in any other Big 12 schools other than Texas A&M and possibly Missouri at this point), and Big East fall-outs West Virginia, South Florida, Louisville or Cincinnati. 

Even with the current news of the SEC possibly turning their noses up at West Virginia, I believe West Virginia joining the East division and Missouri or Cincinnati joining the West division are the best possible choices for the SEC to be able to expand its footprint.  The final spot in the East would then come down to a tug-of-war between:  a rising Cincinnati team (if Missouri takes the other spot in the West) that won back to back Big East titles in 2008 and 2009 and recieved automatic bids to BCS bowl games, a Louisville program that has underachieved vastly in the past five years, and a rising South Florida Program that has recently had multiple players selected in the early rounds of the NFL draft.  If I was a betting man (and I am) and had to pick them in order of possibility from most to least likely, I would bet on Cincinnati as the engine, South Florida as the passenger car, and Louisville as the kaboose. 

All of this being considered, four of these five programs could be left standing there when the music stops:  Notre Dame, BYU, South Florida, Louisville or Baylor. 

Notre Dame has the largest nation-wide fan base and a lucrative TV deal with NBC.  They have always been independent and I believe even with all this madness, they have no feasible reason to change anything. 

BYU also has a good national following, is enjoying its first season of independence, and worst case scenario could always re-join the Mountain West Conference, where they have flourished in years past. 

South Florida has overachieved in the past decade from where the program’s overall tradition of winning was in years past, but joining Conference USA or even the Sun Belt Conference would not destroy their program.  They would simply become a powerful non-BCS program like TCU or Boise State, who would benefit from a weaker schedule and could find their way into a BCS bowl if they go undefeated in a season.  This would be more than entirely possible given the distinct advantage of their talent versus the rest of that currently performing in Conference USA or the Sun Belt Conference.

Louisville would most likely join Conference USA, as even though it isn’t a BCS conference, it is closely comparable to the Big East talent-wise, as Conference USA has slowly become the best non-BCS conference right next to the Mountain West Conference, and the Big East has without a doubt become the worst BCS conference.  Louisville would be challenged by teams like Houston, East Carolina, Central Florida and Tulsa the same way they were by Connecticut, Pittsburgh, Syracuse and Rutgers. 

Baylor realistically would have the most options if they are left out of the super-conference shuffle, due to Baylor being a private school.  Baylor could go ‘Notre Dame’ and become a completely independent private school as far as football is concerned, or join either the Mountain West Conference or Conference USA.  Of those two conferences, the Mountain West would be more viable, due to less travel distance on a week to week basis because of Baylor’s proximity to the other teams in the conference.

Recent BCS championship contenders TCU and Boise State would also be left out, but if TCU joined the MWC with Baylor, they both would be a good challenge for Boise State in that conference, as the conference would then have 3 schools perpetually in the top 50, something it has never been able to boast.

The bottom line of all these possible scenarios falls back on one key fact  – a permanent landscape that will rule for decades to come most likely won’t be set for at least another two or three seasons.  A high-risk game of chicken (is there any other kind?) will be played over the next few years by conference commissioners that will have to dawn the power-broker hat, as these executives will without a doubt earn their salary and then some.  But once the paint dries on the new conference monstrosities, I believe the most salient advance for the game itself that will result from this re-structure will be the ever-closer advancing towards a playoff system to decide a champion – something the vast majority of college football fans have insatiably craved for decades. 

Four super-conference champions playing out a football final four in pursuit of the crystal ball would be beyond compelling.  And with all the hectic changes that are taking place and will continue to in the near future, it is, by the day, becoming all that much more safe to say that you can’t rule out any possibility. 

What if I could, as a fan, interview anyone in the sports world, ask them any question, and get a real, truthful, insightful answer. I wouldn’t have to publish it. I’d just want to know. As a fan. If you think you have their answers, please tell me.

My interview questions for Phil Jackson:

Who was more fun to coach – Shaq or MJ?

Kobe or Michael – and why?

Seriously, what happened to the Lakers this year?

My questions for Lakers’ GM Mitch Kupchak:

What really happened with the Ariza deal? Was there a problem with him that was never publicized? Did Kobe push hard for Ron? Would you do it differently if you could?

Would you rather have a slightly mentally unstable Artest or the Artest we saw all year?

For Frank McCourt:

What the hell?

For Stu Lantz:

Tell me one Chick Hearn story nobody has ever heard before.

For Tommy Lasorda and Vin Scully:

When did you know McCourt was going to be a failure as the Dodgers’ owner?

For Bud Selig:

How much did you really know about steroids throughout the 90’s?

What did you really think would happen with Frank McCourt? When did you know he wasn’t the guy?

For Mark Cuban:

Will you please buy the Dodgers already?!

For David Stern:

Did you make Jordan retire because of gambling?

Who wins in a fight- Prokerov or Cuban?

For EVERY major college basketball and football coach:

Who was paid to go to your school and how much?

For EVERY Major League Baseball player who played between 1980 and now:

How much performance enhancing drugs did you use and for how long?

There are so many questions that could be asked, I could have sat here for hours and hours writing them. I’ll leave it there for now and ask you the question: WHAT WOULD YOU ASK?

Is it a byproduct of the popularity and success of ‘spread offenses?’ Pace allows for more offensive snaps per contest and does have a valid point as far as being able to ‘take the game’ to your opponent. The more you snap the more you score. And the faster you snap, the better the chances you have to score against a vulnerable defense. This much is all true and has been proven between the lines, time and time again.

This past season, the Cal defense became so dysfunctional and struggled for so much oxygen, that they actually and admittedly faked an injury to slow down Chip Kelly’s light-speed Oregon attack. In a game that seemingly has seen it all, you have to admit that’s a first.

Is it a byproduct of the ever-snowballing electronic age? Everything now has an easier way, a faster way, and ultimately, a more efficient way. Face time is a thing of the past and intricate signaling systems have taken over (see also: iphone).

It is amazing to me that this dynamic is now generally accepted as the norm, and is almost foreign to a guy who last suited up no more than just over a decade ago. I can only imagine what the old-timers of the 50’s and 60’s must think?

Some offensive coordination even implements gigantic signs facing the field with a four-square of seemingly random depictions (photo). This form of play-calling apparently is only exercised a small percentage of the time, in an effort to throw off the defensive geniuses of the opponent even further. Ten-word code has effectively become a picture of Scott Van Pelt.

It seems to me the college game is becoming micro-managed by coaches more than is necessary. In today’s game, a player without his coach has become the equivalent of a blind dog in a meat locker – anxious and rudderless. I would be surprised if your average underclassmen would be able to tie his shoes, master the dorm stairwell quickly and navigate to his first class without a series of on-going hand-signals from graduate assistants around campus (including a collection of dummy signals to divert the looky-loos of course).

Whatever happened to banding together for the sake of comradery? Has this beneficial practice of the huddle been tossed-aside and is it on its way to being lost for good?

I can attest through my playing and coaching days, that the huddle was more than a gathering exercise thought a kin to the lunch line in the 3rd grade. There was communication shared, challenges dared and pitfalls ‘bewared.’ It was a rallying point on the proverbial battle-field that constantly reminded and re-injected the common goal.

Wandering up to the line of scrimmage after the ball-carrier has been tackled only to fake a quick snapping of the ball, and then turn to the teat of your position coach seems like a robotic and seemingly uninspired process.

Before it is completely dismissed as a thing of the past, it is paramount to remember what not only has gotten champions of past gridirons accolade and life-long memories, but will continue to get winners of future contests something to point to – something so bare-bones that it was undoubtedly attributive to ‘getting them there,’ the place that they will never forget.

Esprit de corps.

-Andrew Stevens

Greed is a byproduct of evil. It is a disease, not necessarily of biology, but of ego rising to totalitarian proportion. It is roundly defined as a level of selfishness that incorporates the oblivious with the addict.

Is tradition a proud and nostalgic comfort meal that is a reminder of what is right with the world? Or is it, in some cases, an inherited degeneracy, a gene that will eventually produce an abomination?

Alternate solutions are byproducts of good when they are transparently evident. The most logical and fair structures available to solve issues should always be considered and ultimately implemented, shouldn’t they?

When considering why there isn’t a playoff system in the highest division of college football, all of these dynamics have a seat at the table, and yet some voices seem to be heard more than others. The popularity of greenbacks is undoubtedly louder to the powers that be than the resonating voice of popular demand. This reality is arguably the most tragic and unfortunate situation in American sport today.

Admission of guilt comes in the form of diversion. Deviation from real solutions to an obvious problem is the favorite play that college presidents utilize in the game of the current lightning rod of college football – bowl system versus playoff system.

The excuses are like cards in a deck. They will be played, without difference, in the same order of priority over and over. It’s just too bad for them that this old trick is what is truly played out. It isn’t fooling anyone anymore, gentlemen.

They will lead you to believe that instituting a playoff system will erode the significance of the regular season. Is this what has happened in the NFL? Oh I’m sorry, is the NFL losing customers? Or is the NFL the biggest, most-watched sporting league in the United States, by far, without it even being close?

What these staunch fat-cats don’t realize is that the vast majority of college football fans operate at a pitch that is beyond belligerently diehard. They will view with the same intensity whether their hallowed program is playing a top ranked team in the nation or a consensus doormat. The love of the college football fan is unconditional, impartial and without waiver. To paint them, or the significance of their game schedule, they wait nine months for every year with finger-tapping anticipation as fickle is an insult to the intelligence of even the averagely rabid fan.

The college presidents will also lead you to believe that the learning experience of the student-athlete would be threatened with a playoff system, seeing as finals week would happen to fall during the elimination process within a December bracket.

First of all, if the student-athlete needs an entirely extensive amount of “cram time” to score outstanding on a final and achieve a passing grade, then let’s be honest, they probably aren’t cut out to be student-athletes anyway. They probably should have thought about study before they attended all those frat parties every weekend during the semester. It is widely known that procrastination is the downfall of any multitasker.

Second of all, and probably the most ‘slap-you-in-your-face’ obvious debunk of this supposed problem: If study hours are so important the week of finals, what happens on the week of mid-terms? Aren’t mid-terms smack-dab in the middle of the conference schedule? Heck, it might even fall on homecoming week! Are they skipping out on practice that week to make the grade? College presidents making this contention might as well cancel homecoming week for the sake of the bad study habits of the football team!

And of course, the ace of spades in this spin-cycle of a game; they will lead you to believe that the tradition of the bowls will be ruined. Herein lies the foremost smokescreen. College football has progressed. These fossils haven’t. This isn’t the age of only the dominant powerhouses whose logos and fight songs are household camouflage sustaining the upper crust of the caste system anymore. Parody has emerged.

Cinderella stories of only recent years past have taken the quantum leap in becoming major players. These programs are starting to arise on an annual basis. This competitiveness yells and screams for a fair template. Without it, you have nothing more than an ongoing Notre Dame hall pass–the “they aren’t in a conference, so there is no real way to judge them, but since they are ‘Notre Dame’ we will give them the benefit of the doubt” current state of affairs.

If Notre Dame finishes in the top 8 of the BCS with their ‘vaunted schedules’ (Western Michigan, Tulsa, Wake Forest, Army, Navy, Air Force, just to name a few) they receive an automatic BCS berth, even if they have two losses! That’s right. Two losses. It happened in 2000-2001 (a 9-2 Notre Dame team lost to Oregon State in the Fiesta Bowl, 41-9), in 2005-2006 (a 9-2 Notre Dame team lost to Ohio State in the Fiesta Bowl, 34-20) and in 2006-2007 (a 10-2 Notre Dame team lost to LSU in the Sugar Bowl, 41-14). Three strikes and you’re out.

Just this season, Michigan State finished 7th in the AP Poll with an 11-1 record and was not included in the BCS. Different rules for different people I suppose? I would imagine the President of Notre Dame has shared more splashes of scotch with BCS high-ups than the president of Boise State, TCU or even Michigan State for that matter. There is only one reason why this special deal is struck with Notre Dame. Money. They have more fans, so they will generate more money. That this exists in amateur athletics is absolutely disgusting.

All of this aside, the goal of this seemingly never-ending crusade is to reach a point where we are able to decide a champion on the field, like every single other high school, college or professional sport does. Having the annual fight for the crystal ball live within the spinning webs of computer code and the back-scratching voting practices of coaches only invites corruption.

The fundamental question becomes: would you rather give the gladiator the chance to slay the mighty lion himself, or would you rather have Caesar decide whether he gets the chance to with the whim of a thumb? We have seen how that screenplay has played out before.

The solution lies in a number of ways that differ from the current design. A basic tournament is the handyman’s way. Anywhere from a four to a sixteen-team, single elimination tournament would prove sufficient in many ways. A starting point could be to make the size of the bracket as large as the cut-off point of two-loss teams. We are a country of second chances. Third chances are few and far between–yes, even if you are ‘Irish lucky.’

An altering solution that doesn’t eliminate the current bowl structure as it stands would be the lawyer’s way. You add a clause for a post bowl season playoff, eliminating all unbeaten until one remains as the champion. If there was only one unbeaten left at the end, no need for the clause that particular year. If there were still let’s say, three remaining, you would pit the two lowest ranked against one another for the right to play the highest ranked the next and final week. In the case of this particular season it would have been easy–the winner of Auburn/Oregon will be unbeaten and TCU is still unbeaten. A week after the Auburn/Oregon game, you would have one final showdown involving the two remaining unbeatens, Auburn or Oregon versus TCU.

The bottom line remains evident to you college presidents. With some form of a playoff system you wouldn’t have to scrap your sacred bowl system that apparently is carved in stone next to the ten commandments. If you dissolve the BCS and implement a playoff system, yes, the elite programs in the top five to ten would not be a part of the bowl system. However, it would allow for a return the of the original purpose of the bowl system and preserve your traditional model, the classic matchups of conferences.

The classic Pac 10 vs. Big 10 Rose Bowl matchup could be assured, instead of having the BCS alter it, most recently in the past decade with Miami, Oklahoma, Texas and TCU. This year, for example, Stanford, USC or Washington could have matched up against Ohio State, Michigan State or Iowa – depending on how many of these teams the national championship bracket would include. These schools were all either 2nd, 3rd or 4th in their respective conferences. All of these fan-bases travel exceptionally well, therefore allowing the pageantry of the event to hold true. This model for re-instituting classic conference vs. conference matchups could revamp the entire bowl schedule without the BCS interfering.

Ultimately, I believe the paramount question is: if the current BCS system compromises the classic conference champion versus conference champion matchup, like the Rose Bowl, by almost annually having the Pac 10 or Big 10 champion in the BCS championship game–then what is the downside of having the same dynamic exist, with a playoff system for the elite, and getting to design the bowl season to satisfy your hunger for classic tradition? The answer seems almost ridiculously simple to me.

With an eight-team playoff, for example, you could cut the bottom four bowls that currently exist. I’m sure we would all really miss the GoDaddy.com Bowl, the Little Caesar’s Bowl, the BBVA Compass Bowl and the Beef O’Brady’s Bowl.

Having to at least recognize a certain amount of counterpoint, a playoff system might slightly downplay the bowl system and create a country-club culture for the elite–but let’s be honest and forthcoming college presidents, isn’t that right up your alley? This seems like a small price to pay to assure that it is ultimately played out on the field, and there are no corruptible factors when deciding a champion.

Making the encompassing culture wholesome and about something more than money should be what amateur athletics is really all about, shouldn’t it? What kind of example are you setting, college presidents, as figures to look up to for these young men and women involved in college athletics? Aren’t things like greed the antithesis of what should be gained from being a part of a higher institution?

It’s no wonder your student athletes, exposed or not, are constantly subscribing to the black-eye of amateur athletics: taking money and goods for their services in secret. They are learning from you, college presidents, that it is greed and money that is important and not what it is all about and always has been at its core–being part of something greater than yourself.

We all should be confident that there will come a day when the greed will be curbed and ‘tradition’ will be moved slightly aside for the sake of logic and equality. We all know how the screenplay unfolds. The obvious solution can not longer be denied. Dissent leads to revolt. Revolt leads to change. There will come that day. The king dies and the populous prevails, just like every other good versus evil plot is played out.

-Andrew Stevens

Earlier this week, I saw a bowl game on television. I was flipping through and saw it for a minute on ESPN. I think it was the Compass Bowl. It wasn’t a BCS bowl game and it was after the first of the year, so I figured it was ESPN re-playing an old bowl game from sometime in December. Sitting here on January 7th, a week into the new year, I realize that I was the fool. I always thought the majority of bowl games were supposed to be played on New Years’ Day. This year there were six.

The “big” games were supposed to happen after the first day of the year. This year, the Fight Hunger Bowl, the Godaddy.com Bowl, and the BBVA Compass Bowl were all played during the week after New Years Day. The National Championship Game will be played on the 10th of January. And the schools will make significantly more money than if they’d competed against each other on New Years Day.

To spread out all these bowl games over the course of six weeks from the beginning of December through January 10 is bad for the game and bad for fans who would love to watch some of these great matchups.

As a sports fan, I was at-first embarrassed that I haven’t watched even half of any bowl game this year. In my teens, I would wake up on New Years Day and park in front of the TV. Even if the hustle and bustle of the holidays didn’t allow me to watch pre-New Years bowls, I was able to sit and take in a solid three to four very good college football games. It was my time to watch good football and afterward I could go on with my life.

With only six bowls on New Years Day this year, there is no longer any reason to get excited for the bevvy of games that used to be there. Flipping channels while on the couch is no longer an option. There is just one game at a time and if it isn’t a great one, the viewer is left with the choice to watch a bad game or find something better to do. So far this year, I’ve found better things to do.

Instead of competing which other games on other stations- a competition they could win, bowl games have begun to try to compete with the rest of my life.

My point is this- When the final tally is made, I might watch the BCS Championship game this Monday. If there is nothing better to do and if the game stays competitive, I’ll probably try to watch it. But for me, who is a married 29-year old with a job and a disposable income (are you listening bowl sponsors?), the movement toward having one bowl game each night for the better part of a month and a half causes me to *gasp* not watch any football at all. In the end, the games competing with the rest of my life might conclude with my life winning and a sports fan like me not watching any of the bowl games. And the amazing thing is, I’m not as disappointed about it as I thought I might be.       –Owen Main