Ball dropped on rivalries

As the college football season gets underway, Labor Day weekend is filled with interesting and intriguing matchups.

We will have: Clemson vs. Alabama, Missouri vs. Illinois, Tennessee vs. UCLA. Then there is Boston College vs. Kent State, Hofstra vs. Connecticut (last night), and Fresno State vs. Rutgers. Huh?

Some of those matchups - made-for-television affairs - make sense. They're big nonconference tilts and genuinely interesting.

Others seem made under duress by schools that couldn't find opponents. Of the game with Western Athletic Conference power Fresno State, Rutgers coach Greg Schiano said, "It wasn't my idea. But we couldn't find anyone else."

BC would have made sense, but it didn't work out. Or UConn, but that didn't work out, either.

College football in the East is hardly the religious experience it is in the South and elsewhere. Rutgers, BC, and UConn haven't been consistently good enough or popular enough to create a television frenzy.

And Eastern and New England college football could use a booster shot in terms of interest. So, why not BC-Rutgers? Why not BC-UConn in a traditional opening weekend matchup?

"Things didn't work out," BC athletic director Gene DeFilippo said about a game against Rutgers. When asked about a BC-UConn game, DeFilippo was more direct. "No," he said.

Forget the fact that UConn coach Randy Edsall has openly campaigned for a game against BC. "Love to do it," said Edsall. "The two schools in New England [that] play 1-A [FBS - Football Bowl Subdivision] football. We could play the opening weekend every year, wish each other luck, and go our separate ways."

"I'd love to do that," said BC coach Jeff Jagodzinski.

"Not while I'm the AD," DeFilippo said with a laugh.

The bad karma that flowed from BC's defection from the Big East remains, which could be the reason BC will play Kent State, Central Florida, and Rhode Island as three of its four nonconference games (Notre Dame is the other).

At one time, the theory at BC was why give the Huskies - a fledgling 1-A school competing with BC for New England players - a boost by recognizing them. Had BC remained in the Big East, the schools would have been forced to play each other every year.

Now they don't play each other at all and it doesn't make any sense. Other "bitter" rivals such as Louisville-Kentucky, Iowa-Iowa State, Georgia-Georgia Tech, and Florida-Florida State face each other every year and somehow manage to compete in their own leagues.

UConn has established itself as a legitimate major program, with facilities equal to - if not better than - BC's.

BC has no geographically close rival on its schedule, although the Eagles are trying to make something work with Syracuse.

Playing such Football Championship Subdivision (FCS, formerly Division 1-AA) schools as Maine, UMass, or Rhode Island once a year is fine because for minimal financial payment - URI will receive $200,000 this season for coming to BC - the Eagles get a home game and (most likely) a victory.

But Kent State? Central Florida? Sorry, that just doesn't do it. What it should do is provide BC with a victory, although there are no guarantees. But in terms of interest? Forget about it.

The reality is that Rutgers and UConn have gotten too good and BC would prefer to play some team it should beat.

If BC wants to be the best, it should play the best - or at least the best that makes the most sense. UConn and Rutgers make sense.

Playing UConn or Rutgers could evolve into a nice, interesting way to open the season each year and it would be a boost for New England and Eastern football.

That it won't happen any time soon is a shame.