Losing season may be good for 'Dogs

THE FRESNO STATE Bulldogs are a great football team.

Their non-conference schedule is unparalleled by any team from a non-BCS conference, as has their history of going to bowl games in the last few years.

I could go on, but I wouldn’t have many recent items else to work with.

Unpleasant truths aside, the Bulldogs are a great team.

Anyone looking from the outside — those who thought up ESPN’s bottom 10 certain weeks this season — might think the ‘Dogs struggled from impotent offense and marshmallow defense certain weeks this season.

All things considered, I still stand by Brandstater and the rest of the team.

Well, the rest of the team.

The team is great and that’s the basic, irrefutable assumption I’m working with.

But if the team is so great, why are they coming off a losing season for the first time since I was in seventh grade and basically the worst losing streak in school history?

And how can they be great when they haven’t won the WAC conference since before I entered high school?

Because we got national exposure doing it.

To understand my point, you have to realize that college football teams basically exist to create widespread, preferably national, exposure for the team. Each expense that goes to the football program is explainable as a public relations expense.

When the ‘Dogs all but beat USC, they make ESPN instant classics.

When the ‘Dogs beat postseason Virginia on smurf turf, they make underdog victories.

When the ‘Dogs face tougher schedules than any other program from a non-BCS conference, they get a nice Wikipedia entry.

The successes of the Bulldogs’ football team all come from the fact that they’re the underdogs.

A BCS schedule without a BCS conference, a No. 1 ranked team against one they should stomp handily but don’t, an overtime victory against a team who thinks they should crush us into the ground.

Those are good stories, and they got us a lot of positive press.

If we were nationally ranked every year, we would be one of those second-tier teams people might expect to win. That would take all the fun out of it.

There won’t be phenomenal victories from out of the blue: victories against ranked teams won’t be as exciting because everyone will expect them.

And we won’t make headlines. Did you hear about the big game last week between the teams ranked in the middle 10s? Neither did I, they happen all the time. There are no headlines.

If we retain our underdog status, every time we face and beat a ranked school or at least put up a fight, there are headlines.

The only way to keep national exposure without making a serious PAC-10 bid, losing our underdog status is to flounder. Horribly.

Since successfully failing, national exposure criticized everything about us. To justify the criticism, they referenced notable wins as far back as the UCLA bowl victory.

Every story I read, and I read a lot, remind a widespread audience of just how good we were and was almost sympathetic.

We made headlines with failure and because it’s a turnaround year, these headlines can’t hurt us in the long run.

Because our team found its groove halfway through the season once the mediocre teams from our conference schedule kicked in, we’ll be back in shape for next year.

Next year’s stories will be about how we came off of a losing season to stellar victories.

There will be analysis on how we pulled off a turnaround so quickly and maybe a few articles on how we’re back in shape.

Maybe we’ll get another Sports Illustrated cover. Any coach whose team lost a game will tell the media it’s not all about winning.

Pat Hill told the media the team with the worst streak in school history would win the rest of the season. This was a pretty big news story.

I think Pat Hill understands what’s important besides winning.

Comment on this story in the Opinion forum >>