College football is predictable in its volatility. It is stable in its lack of rock-solid certitude for all but a handful of teams in most seasons. This sport is unsurprising in how often it surprises, routine in its penchant for the grand plot twist.
Yet, even by those standards — even with decades upon decades serving as guides — this college football season has a strange quality to it.
As September ends and gives way to October, the possibility exists that we could travel eight years back in time, but that’s not the point which is trying to be advanced here. This commentary’s central aim is to underscore the notion that we don’t know where teams stand in relationship to each other. That’s a little bit different from the 2007 mantra: CHAOS, CHAOS, EVERYWHERE!
We might not get chaos in the next two months, because it really could be the case that Utah and California and Northwestern and Ole Miss are better than their competitors by considerable margins. If those teams prove to be superior, we’ll have less drama than many in the pundit class currently think. Whether we get chaos or not is beside the point; what’s worth thinking about — here and now — is that our bases for measurement aren’t very solid.
This is what happens when some teams stay the same in character but achieve different results; others stay the same and achieve the same results; others change in character and achieve different results; and still others change in character but take in the same results.
To continue reading this article by Matt Zemek at Bloguin, click here.
