Monday, November 28, 2005

Dan Shanoff: Pleased with his own poop

I've written before that if I were a to hit the lottery and be able to quit my job and blog full-time, I'd probably write a daily post about how Dan Shanoff's Daily Quickie is a steaming pile. Yes, I understand that he writes about a wide variety of topics, and his output is large. But at the same time, because he has to capture all the topics of the day, I feel he way too often writes about things he knows nothing about. And he also tends to harp on the same stupid pet ideas. And take stupid positions on things for whatever quasi-liberal/contrarian/intellectual snob reasons. And he never seems to mention how terrible his predictive abilities are. And I can go on.

Today's edition (link dead tomorrow, archives arent working well today or I'd link to them) is a particular crapfest.

First, he leads off with the story of Ryan Fitzpatrick, the Harvard kid playing for the Rams. Here's the thing: Shanoff has been on this kid's dick like Hatian herpes since before the draft. Fitzpatrick apparently tallied a perfect score on the Wonderlic test (even though it wasn't his first try and the test is able to be improved upon, but the identification qualities of the test relies on the initial attempt), and in Shanoff's brain that automatically meant he was the best QB evah. See if you can see what I'm getting at: Shanoff, a small, brainy man without all the physical talents at sports not played on an X-Box graduates from an elite/elitist private school with dreams of a sports meritocracy based on the mind. Along comes Ryan Fitzpatrick with a Haaaaa-vaaaad degree and this wonderful piece of paper that says he's smart. Shanoff writes before the draft how vaunted personnel genius Bill Belichick will probably draft him (see, he's really smart, and he'll want really smart people). Belichick instead drafts a USC backup quarterback. So yesterday, when I saw Fitzpatrick played relatively well against the worst team in the NFL for several years, I presumed that Shanoff woke up this morning to write with his 4AM coffee and added the cream from his pants.

Here's everything you need to know about Ryan Fitzpatrick: he's a backup quarterback who had a pretty good game playing in an offense that generates nice numbers against a terrible terrible terrible terrible terrible team.

Here's what the media world, especially Shanoff want you to know: He went to Harvard! He's smart! See what supposedly smart people can do!

Here's what the media world need to know: The rest of us don't give two shits about where you got your degree. The rest of us know that smart people come from all walks of life. The guy who finished first in my law school class went to undergrad at a commuter school a half step above community college. He's a damn genius. I personally have lived with two people who have turned down the opportunity to go to Harvard. A degree from Harvard doesn't make you automatically a genius. And every person I've known who has gone to Harvard will tell you the same thing. So why do people like Peter King, Dan Shanoff and other national media numbnuts feel it's important to bring up this? I'd guess most of their readership has a college degree. I'd guess most of their readership sides more with Will Hunting that the limpwrist dipshit in the Harvard bar. I got her number, how ya like them apples? Harvard isn't that big a deal. And it seems strange to me that the people who do make it out to be a big deal usually went to other private colleges (like Northwestern). Seems like a small way for them to feel better about their wasted tuition (since they now know they could've gotten just as good an education at a public school). Where you went to school is so... prissy. It just doesn't matter.

And for the record, I'd bet that Fitzpatrick would rather people talk about his ability on the field than the sheepskin he got.

Second, Shanoff continues to show his ass when talking about college football. Here's his ignant ass take:

The BCS' biggest imminent threat isn't runaway PCs, biased human pollsters or even more (or less) than two unbeaten teams. It's the agreement that forces the four BCS bowls to potentially choke down multi-loss duds like Colorado, Florida State or Georgia if they win their conference "title" games over worthier Texas, VA Tech and LSU.

OK dipshit. If Colorado beats Texas, chances are the Horns won't fall below 4th place in the BCS and would still get an at large berth. But more importantly, how would a team that blows it's conference title game on national TV against a supposedly inferior opponent "worthier" than the team that actually gave two shits enough to show up and play? And to me this was pretty blatantly obvious, but does anyone know why Georgia, with a win over LSU, would be less worthy than the LSU team who would have the same exact record and which would have lost to the Dawgs on a neutral field? I can see you knocking Colorado or FSU since neither team has played well in a month. But Georgia isn't anywhere near as bad.

Of course, mocking Georgia is par for the course for Shanoff (whose wife is a Florida grad and has semi-admitted biases there before). Picked Boise State to beat them, then said nothing after the shellacking. After Auburn beat Georgia, he proclaimedAuburn to be the best in the SEC, while at the same time saying Georgia is terrible. Logic, dude. If one team is really good, and they just barely beat another team, the team that barely lost isn't terrible.

Then there's this: In re Fresno State: "Enjoy that long slide back to obscurity." Nice of you to admit that you don't give a shit about a particular team.

Finally, his take on Notre Dame makes little sense:

Meanwhile, Notre Dame is a lock for the BCS, and despite being only the 6th- or 7th-best team, it's a lock to be the first overall "pick" by the Fiesta Bowl after the Rose automatically gets USC and Texas.

Is he saying that ND is the 6th or 7th best team out of the at-large possibilities? Because that would be a strange statement (Maybe Oregon, Ohio State, and then reaching for Auburn... who else?). If he just means 6th or 7th overall, well, so what? If he's suggesting that ND doesn't deserve a BCS berth, he should say why not, and who is more deserving and why. Oh, and as for consistency's sake, Shanoff is the guy who thought ND deserved to be ranked 10th in the country after the Pitt win, 5th after the second week. Now is he dogging the Irish? Someone make sense of this, please.

Shanoff's writing is frequent, and that should cut him some slack when it comes to quality. But his quality is usually poor. He's just another typical elitist who thinks his worldview is the only one that means anything. Having opinions is fine. Everyone has them. But when the most viewed website about sports in the country offers you a full page every day, unchecked by comments or published feedback, you should have an obligation to back up your opinions with facts. And beyond that, he should offer something interesting, rather than just more tired corporate Atlantic Seabord WFAN conventional wisdom.

Yes, too much of a rant, and I shouldn't give two shits about him.