In case you missed it, earlier this week in the Capital of the Universe - New York University in New York City - four very bright, well respected men publicly debated whether college football should be banned.
FoxSports.com national columnist Jason Whitlock joined former NFL defensive back and current NFL commentator Tim Green supporting college football's existence.
New Yorker columnist Malcolm Gladwell joined Pulitzer Prize-winning author, and noted friend of The Big Mac Blog, Buzz Bissinger in the argument that college football should be banned.
According to the above link, the crowd sided with Gladwell/Bissinger. Hmmm ... let's see ... the audience was comprised of New Yorkers in New York City, where there is almost no college football presence, and they sided with the intellectual types? Didn't see that coming. Why do I think an audience in Austin, Ann Arbor or Eugene may have felt differently?
All four of these men are accomplished, smart, good speakers, and passionate about what they do yet met for a pointless discussion. It was pointless because the economic framework around college football is too vast for it to ever be abolished. The concept of abolising college football may have theoritical merit, and includes valid points such as misplaced priorities. But to contemplate this scenario is akin to asking corporate America not to advertise Christmas until Dec. 1.
This sort of debate is reminscient of an old timer lamenting how much better life was before the internet, smart phones and video games. He may be right, but they exist. Deal with it. The discussion should not be whether eliminating college football is a good idea, but ways to improve what already exists rather than play in Never Land.
Bringing four bright people together to debate something as large, and flawed, as college football is noble idea. This type of discussion can be productive, but keep it real.
Facebook Mac Engel