Lee's Legacy
To Bowl or Not To Bowl?
By Ben Griggs
Date: 11/16/2000
Well, we're closing in on the end of another great college football season. This year, like every other year, there is a controversy evolving around which teams should play in the BCS championship game. Though the BCS was invented to determine an undisputed champion, the disputes persist.
Generally, college football fans fall into two categories. The 'old school' group consists of those who like the bowl system, and don't want to dispose of the old rivalries like the Big Ten/Pac 10 Rose Bowl classic. The 'competitors' are those who want an undisputed national champion, and are generally in favor of some kind of playoff system.
OK, call me old school, but not for the above reason. I simply don't think the need to have an undisputed champion is a very strong argument. What's wrong with just admitting that the top 10 schools in the country are too close to call (especially in Florida - where hand counts are proceeding as you read), and that they're all great in their own right. "But that's un-American!", you say, "heck, it's downright socialist! Share the wealth? No clear number one? This can't be! Winning the Championship is what it's all about!".
True.
Maybe that's one of the problems with sports in this country. The leagues too closely mirror an economic system where there are few winners and even fewer gracious winners. In the pros, increased speed and quality of play are marred by various arrests and contract disputes. We as college football fans like to pretend that we're immune to all of that. We think that because our players don't hold out that we're somehow better than the big-business, greedy professionals. But are we? Is anybody?
We've become so obsessed with winning that our coaches are willing to place their jobs and reputations on the line to sign and keep the most talented players. We're willing to rob the student athletes of what should be their first priority in college: education. Clem Haskins did as much when he arranged for a tutor to write papers for numerous Minnesota basketball players, effectively depriving them of the skills they will need when their basketball careers come to an end. So enamoured with the elusive championship are we that hordes of otherwise reasonable Hoosiers continue to complain about the firing of Bob Knight, despite the years of overwhelming evidence of improper and embarrassing conduct in several areas.
Even more scary is the level to which this obsession has reached. I'm reminded of the 80's buzz phrase "trickle-down" when I think of how the attitudes of the paid athletes have now fallen all of the way down to little league competitions. Parents of children who are supposed to be learning about sportsmanship and exercise are now verbally and physically attacking coaches and other parents. In the case of a children's hockey game earlier this year, a parent was beaten to death by another parent supporting the opposing team.
Where are our priorities? Has the 'winner take all' nature of the capitalist system so affected our sub-conscience that we're willing to gamble a young man's future in order to advance our own? Do we become so enraged in defeat that beating another human being seems like a viable course of action?
Conversely, my spirits lift when I think of the name Lee Brush. Who's Lee Brush, you ask? To me, Lee Brush is the face of college football. He played safety for the Purdue football team from 1994-1997. Brush wasn't fast like Deon Sanders, and he didn't dish out hits as hard as Rod Woodson. Lee knew that he would probably never play in the NFL. However, he left his heart and soul on the field during every game. He started his senior year, and was elated to have the chance to play in the Alamo Bowl in 1997, after never before experiencing a winning season in college. I spoke to him once, after Purdue's massive 9-3 upset of Michigan in 1996. It was immediately following the
game, while the fans were storming the field. I passed in front of Brush (surprised to
notice that he wasn't much bigger than I was) and told him "great game". He lowered
his eyes from the sky and took time our from his elation to thank me for coming.
Now that's football.
I ask again: is it really that important to have an undisputed national champion? Shouldn't the coaches and kids who come out of the year with the best executed game plans be rewarded with a nationally televised game against a top-ranked opponent to end it? Can't we just be happy with the opportunity to argue about the #1 team in the country until the next great season kicks off? While some may disagree, I think these are the things that make college football great, not the existance of an undisputed champion.
Ben Griggs is the Editor of Big Ten Report.
Ben Griggs' article is reprinted with without dissent from Rivals.com
UPDATE: 2009
Good folks @ goboilers.com -
I happened upon an old article of mine on your website while browsing around one day ... ok, you got me, I was doing a vanity search. Anyway, I was pleasantly surprised to see that this story from my days contributing to rivals.com was captured and at one time displayed on your site. It really took me back to the days of Brush, Dicken, Alford and Colvin. Days when Tiller was new and the spread was tearing up the Big Ten for the first time. I still look up to Brush and players like him who have no delusions of post-college play, yet give it their all game-in and game-out. To have illustrated his legacy on your site - for whatever period of time it was linked to - is an honor. Thanks for that, and for the memories.
-- Ben Griggs
Back to the Lee Page
