The Power 5 conferences have the capacity to play football safely this fall. Whether they will–yes or no–isn’t related entirely to COVID-19 … not by a longshot.
It’s not often that I change my mind after reaching a firm conclusion. But when it comes to whether Power 5 college teams should play football this fall, I’ve gone from “No way!” to “Why not?”
I changed my mind courtesy of expert opinion, but an expert opinion of a ‘certain kind–from a college football insider who has every reason to want to play this fall—Alabama’s Nick Saban.
Nick Saban: Players are a lot safer with us than they are running around at home. We have around a 2 percent positive ratio on our team since the Fourth of July. It’s a lot higher than that in society.
And (I’d add) it’s a lot safer than the default option—integrating non-playing athletes into the broader campus community.
Saban’s comments made to Sports Illustrated caused me to think about the landscape of college football–Power 5 football, mind you–not amateur football played at other levels, from youth to college. Football at places like Notre Dame, USC, and Florida State is different—hugely different.
At places like that, college football exists in a bubble. It is highly structured to the point of being regimented in time and accommodations, disciplined as anything you’ll find outside of the military, and supported with staff and funding found nowhere else in the panoply of higher education’s ‘extracurricular’ offerings. With those factors in mind, it’s easy to understand Saban’s logic.
And it’s why I believe Power 5 conferences and schools have the capacity (italics added for a reason) to organize and offer a safe environment for players to play this fall. Of course, any plan would mean playing in fan-less stadiums and playing against other Power 5 schools only. But even with those boundary conditions, the revenue generated from media rights would go a long way toward reducing budget carnage that will happen should the 2020 football season be canceled and much-required football revenue lost.
But have the capacity means the ability to, not something that necessarily exists currently. PAC-12 players, at least, think their conference doesn’t. And if Power 5 were to pursue a season, it would only make sense to elevate standards across the board so that all conferences and teams follow a standard protocol.
Getting to that outcome is a matter of wanting to–not whether it’s possible. It is. And for me, that’s a fly in the ointment. So far, the Power 5 conferences don’t want to.
Why? One apparent reason is COVID-19. But that’s a shiny object, too. Another reason is the players. Although players are significant stakeholders in the game, their voices have been generally ignored. Players want that changed. From even a casual review of published material (just do a Google search), it’s clear that many players want to play, and that they’re forging a shared platform and arguing their case. But when players organize and advance ideas about shared interests, that represents a major threat to the college football establishment.
So think about the situation politically. It’s better politically for college football powerbrokers to cancel the season, which would be a one-off, than to capitulate to players’ demands, which could very well change the political landscape of college football, and not just for one year.
On the face of it, it’s easy to call off the season because of COVID-19. But digging just a bit more deeply reveals another storyline.
And it’s why Nick Saban not only has a point; he’s right. The Power 5 has the capacity to play the 2020 season—should it choose to actualize that capacity. So far, the storyline is clear: two conferences said no. At issue now is whether that narrative will hold for the other conferences. If it doesn’t, it’s likely to be because the Southeastern Conference–the king of college football–decides to play. If it does–and the ACC and Big 12 follow suit, which I believe would happen–then the NCAA and the Power 5 will face a different type of crisis–a self-inflicted dilemma.
There’s more to this story than COVID-19. Lot’s more.
