Nick Daschel at Buster Sports recently posted this interview with ESPN radio personality Colin Cowherd. Now, I didn't realize Cowherd grew up a Huskies fan, but I swear, everything I hear out of his mouth about the Huskies makes my blood boil.
Essentially, Daschel's first question asks whether the Washington Huskies will be able to regain their prominence. In short, Cowherd says no. However, he backs it up with some interesting demographic statistics that have nothing if not a little truth to them.
First, Bob Condotta of the Seattle Times pointed out that recapturing what they once were is an ambiguous statement.
Recapturing 1991, while nice, isn't in the cards. However, recapturing the spirit of the Don James era (what was it, 25 years of winning seasons?) is perfectly attainable.
Cowherd's first argument, that the city has a small African-American population, is completely nonsensical. While there may or may not be truth to racial demographics, it seems odd that it is used as an excuse for why Washington can't rise again.
Let's not forget, UW was one of the few schools to give a young African-American man a chance at quarterback when no one else would. His name was Warren Moon.
Let's also not forget that while the African-American population is apparently low, there is a large Samoan community here in Seattle. Last time I checked there were some pretty darn good Samoan football players out there.
I just disagree with the idea of a racial argument when it comes to sports. It makes mountains out of molehills. No less, there are oftentimes hundreds or thousands of points one could use to refute any one argument.
Cowherd's second argument is much more rational. He says that ESPN has changed the landscape of college football, and while the powers of 20 years ago are down (he includes Washington), the hot weather schools are creating a monopoly.
His argument is that now that any team can get on TV, kids are going to want to play where it is warm.
Let's be honest, I'd rather play somewhere where it was warm, or rather not where it was cold and snowing.
It's a good argument, but I'd also point out with scholarship limitations and whatnot, all the players can't go south and play.
USC definitely benefits from a warm-weather atmosphere in the Pac-10, but it also benefits from a huge metropolitan area. Warm weather only goes so far; the Arizona schools have warm weather, so why don't the recruits flock there as well?
Seattle is a beautiful city, and it operates as the only major metropolitan area in the Northwest. This is a huge advantage for drawing in players, warm weather or not. (I'd also make the claim there are far worse weather spots to play college football in the country.)
When UW is rolling, there is no reason to discount them as a destination for top players. Not only is the campus beautiful and the stadium one of the best venues in the country, it's a big enough city that it is easily accessible by any form of transportation you can think of.
Now, I'm not saying UW will be prominent in any way over the coming years, but that doesn't discount the potential the school has.
The Northwest of this country is somewhat forgotten, but it is hardly a barren wasteland and has tons to offer. Not only that, ask any Seattleite, and you'll find some of the most loyal fans for their local teams.
The city is aching for the Huskies to come back.
Coach Steve Sarkisian has a good foundation to work with. The players may not be there, but there are huge recruiting draws for the school.
There are plenty of talented young players on the team; they just need to be pointed in a direction, which the old staff didn't do.
Cowherd ends his answer by saying that Troy has had better athletes than the UW over the last five years. While that may be true, what a parting shot from a guy who apparently grew up a Husky fan.
No comments:
Post a Comment