Like every good Dawg fan, I fought the urge to go straight from the stadium to hang myself from the rope attached to the Chapel bell, that same feeling I'd had so many Saturdays in the Goff and Donnan years. And yes, Gator fans, visor-flavored humble pie burns all the more on the way down. All the credit to South Carolina. We got outplayed and outcoached on our own hallowed sod. Click clack, indeed. And Spurrier has every right to point out that each of the other members of the SEC East has now beaten the Dawgs in their last meeting. That's right. 0-5 against 5 different division opponents. Sobering.
As for our performance against the Cocks, lots of blame to go around, but at least those most conspicuously culpable for the offensive bedshitting, Bobo and Stafford, are man enough to recognize and admit it. Our drives created more blueballs than a Bob Jones Academy prom night. Losing Kelin Johnson for the second half didn't help, but the real problem defensively was with the front seven. I'd like to see what Martinez has to say about us playing so soft and waiting for them to bring the fight to us instead of the other way around. Still, there were some flashes of the unexpected electricity the Dawgs showed us in the opener. Mikey and Massaquoi had some solid moments, and Moreno especially keeps me excited for the rest of the season. Keep feeding him the ball wide. I don't want to just thinkshon or hopeshon. I need to Knowshon, dammit.
Nobody was predicting undefeated. Flush that turd. Let's get better.
Sunday, September 09, 2007
A little too familiar...
Saturday, September 08, 2007
Old News
With Lou Holtz getting me all fired up for Week 2, I hate to use my front-mounted eyes to look backward, but refusing to trust highlights to tell the whole story, I wanted to know for myself how Appalachian State pulled off their historic victory in the largest of all gridiron cathedrals. Thanks to the magic of DVR and a 2-hour syncopated replay on the once-and-again-named SportSouth channel Thursday night, I can honestly say it was indeed a sincere triumph on the part of David, not a choke on the part of Goliath. Lengthy recap after the fold.
Michigan takes the opening kickoff and drives it quickly to the endzone. Running back Mike Hart impressively hammering 46 of the 66-yard march, including the profitable last 4.
Appalachian State answers back even quicker. Quarterback Armanti Edwards hits the sure-handed Dexter Jackson in stride as he boldly slashed across the middle, turning it up and leaving all Wolverine defenders in the dust on his way to a 68-yard touchdown.
The teams then trade 3-down possessions. When Michigan would go for the longball, quarterback Chad Henne would leave it short, allowing Mountaineer defenders to close the separation that wideout Mario Manningham had created. The undersized Mountaineer front seven attack the ball with shark-like frenzy, pressuring Henne to trash passes before he can even attempt to go through his reads. Nevertheless, Michigan methodically moves the ball on their third possession, scoring their second TD with 3:16 left in the first quarter.
App State counters with pinpoint precision in downfield blocking and backs blazing to the point of attack. Receiver Hans Batichon scampers in with Edwards’ pass from 9 yards out, tying it with 13:35 left in the second quarter.
The Mountaineer defense continues the intensity, forcing 3 and out, and allowing their offense to start the next drive 13 yards into Michigan territory. They capitalize with another inside slash pattern, Jackson taking it in untouched for his second score. 21-14 ’Neers with 9:47 in the half.
On the ensuing drive, App State takes over on downs after Michigan fails to convert 4th and 5 from the Mountaineer 35. It was correct for Michigan head coach Lloyd Carr to go for it there, but incorrect to try for a long pass instead of giving it to Hart behind the All-American left side of the line in order to move the chains.
The ’Neers respond by ripping off blistering gainers straight up the center of the field. Edwards takes it himself the last 6 yards, diving through danger and across the goal line to go up 28-14, 2:15 before halftime.
Michigan follows with a solid drive, moving it 66 yards with relatively short passes, but App State stands firm in the red zone, forcing Michigan to settle for a field goal on 4th down from the 5 yard line. 28-17 in favor of the overachieving underdogs at the intermission.
Mountaineers get the ball first in the third quarter, but on the second play from scrimmage, Michigan defensive back Morgan Trent intercepts, giving the Wolverines a short field of 40 yards. Hart is conspicuously absent from the action, and a couple of Henne bullets slip through fingers. Jason Gingell’s second field goal of the day cuts the lead to 8.
App State moves it well on the next drive, adeptly reacting to Michigan blitz packages. Freshman receiver Brian Quick drops a certain touchdown pass right in his gut, and Mountaineer kicker Julian Rauch boots the lead back to 11. 31-20 App State, about midway through the 3rd quarter.
Hart still out, on the next drive, running back Brandon Minor coughs up the football. App State recovers in Michigan territory, but they cannot move the chains. Rauch plunks a 46-yard attempt off the right upright.
Now Michigan is unable to convert on 3rd down. Four plays after Michigan’s punt, Edwards fumbles, giving Michigan just 31 yards to paydirt. The Maize and Blue pick up a first down at the 15. Hart returns to the game, bowling straight into the endzone on the last of three consecutive carries. Down 5 with 24 seconds left in the third, Carr opts to go for 2. Henne bobbles the snap, picks it up moving forward, but the App State defense slams him short at the 1.
The Mountaineers sputter on the ensuing drive and leg a punt that ends up netting all of 8 yards after a facemask tacks 15 onto the end of an already solid Michigan return. App State sends the D back out with the ball at their own 34. After back to back Hart rushes of 7 yards each, it looks like Michigan would at long last take back the lead, but App State DB Leonard Love picks off an ill-advised Henne pass at the 15, taking it back 26 yards to the 41. There is 12:23 left in the game.
After three plays yield no yardage for the Mountaineers, Michigan fair-catches a punt, back at their 24 yard line. The Wolverines are able to reverse field position, but they fail again passing on 4th down, this time at the App State 33.
The Michigan defense shows some fire on the ensuing series, sacking Edwards on both 2nd and 3rd down.
The first play after the punt, Hart singlehandedly evades the entire App State secondary on an electrifying, otherworldly 54-yard touchdown run, bursting through tackles, reversing his field, stopping and starting, breaking ankles all the way to a 1-point lead. Understandably winded, Hart sits out the failed 2-point try, in which Minor stumbles to the ground after receiving the handoff. 32-31 Michigan, 4:31 to go.
Mountaineer dreams continue to fade as Michigan intercepts on the very next play from scrimmage.
The Wolverines drive to the App State 25, but a penalty for delay of game forces 3rd and 10 from the 30. A quick tackle after a short Henne pass sets up a 43-yard field goal attempt from the right hashmark. Perhaps motivated by the memory of his dropped touchdown earlier, Mountaineer freshman Brian Quick leaps skyward behind the line. At the absolute peak of the perfectly timed jump, Quick’s hand deflects the Gingell kick, and the ball rolls to a stop in the endzone for a touchback. The Michigan lead remains at the slimmest of margins, 32-31 with 1:37 left in the game.
On the next play, Edwards keeps for 18 yards. Two plays later, he finds T.J. Courman for 20 yards. Then Batichon for 6 yards. Then Jackson for 5. The ball on the Michigan 29, Edwards scrambles left, throws across his body, finding CoCo Hillary surging into the air and reaching behind his body to snatch the ball out of the air. Hillary then turns upfield and sprints for a 24-yard gain, setting up 1st and goal from the 5. Despite 30 seconds left on the clock, Appalachian State Head Coach Jerry Moore opts to kick on 1st down. The angle is tight from the left hash, but Rauch’s kick is true, and the scrappy Mountaineers retake the lead 34-32.
A new rule for this year has pushed kickoffs back to the 30 yard line, likely to provide better field position for the receiving team. Sure enough, Michigan returns the kick to the 34 yard line. 21 seconds left. 66 yards from the endzone. Henne’s first pass is incomplete. 15 seconds left. Possibly remembering previous underthrown attempts to Manningham, Henne puts as much air as possible under this one. Mountaineer defender Justin Woazeah is step for step with Manningham as the ball turns back toward earth. Each player has his hand on the other. At the last second, a burst of speed hurtles Manningham under the ball, and he catches it cleanly at the App State 20. A yellow flag comes out. The call could have gone either way. The referee says, “Pass interference on the defense.” The spectacular 46-yard pass stands.
Clock is stopped at 0:06 to move the chains. Michigan probably should have sent the FG team to the field while the refs discussed the penalty. They don't. Instead, Michigan calls timeout, potentially icing their own kicker. When the ball finally is snapped, App State’s Corey Lynch tears through the line, arms outstretched, slamming the ball backward immediately after it came off Gingell’s foot. Lynch picks it up himself, unnecessarily racing some 50 yards with it before being tackled after time expired. The faces of a hundred thousand eyewitnesses lose all expression, the collective karmic energy instantly drained from Ann Arbor in order to counterbalance the unprecedented celebration exploding on a Blue Ridge hilltop.
This game was no fluke. The speedy, confident, and determined Mountaineers executed beautifully, and many of the breaks actually went against them. Michigan won the turnover battle 3-2. The two blocked FGs certainly involved some luck on top of the outstanding effort, but it’s not unprecedented. Didn’t Florida have to win in similar fashion against South Carolina, who eventually finished 8-5, last year on their way to the National Title? App State had one of their FGs blocked, too, even if it was by the goalpost.
And Michigan didn’t play all that poorly. With the way App State was executing plays, it is doubtful any defense at any level of college football could have stopped them. Henne’s play wasn’t great, but Hart looked amazing, finishing with 188 yards and 3 touchdowns, and that was with limited play during much of the middle part of the game. It’s unclear why.
Carr is understandably under fire, but this was much more a great win than a horrible loss. I really don’t agree that Michigan wasn’t prepared. The only questions I have about Carr’s performance are why Hart sat so long, and why pass on the two fourth down attempts. I don’t think any of these questions really affected the outcome. One Carr decision that may have affected the outcome was going for 2 before the 4th quarter. Had they kicked the extra point there, they'd have been down 4, and could have kicked an XP after Hart's long touchdown to be up by 3. Instead, they try and fail their second 2-point attempt, and the 'Neers could win instead of just tie with a FG.
Had the last Michigan FG not been blocked, a real question would be why App State kicked on 1st down with 30 seconds to go. Sure you could fumble if you tried to get in the endzone or you could fumble the snap trying the FG, but if you put toe to leather and miss, you don’t get a second chance (or third chance or fourth chance), unless it’s blocked backward before it crosses the line of scrimmage and your team recovers, not that I know that rule for any particular reason. The downside of kicking early, especially with the new kickoff rule, damn near bit Coach Moore square in the booty meat.
What this game came down to was Appalachian State’s players simply playing their asses off. Speed, effort, and execution overcame whatever strength and size advantages Michigan may have had. It was a total team effort, epitomized by the last scoring drive with four straight completions to four different receivers. It was a fabulous game to watch, even knowing the eventual outcome. Congratulations to the boys from Boone. Now get out there and win your third title in a row!
Thursday, September 06, 2007
I feel like the guy who keeps giving money to a carnie.
Stewart Mandel, in between using his mailbag space to select questions that allow him to promote his own book (apparently with the blessing of his editors), has unleashed the single dumbest answer to a mailbag question. And seriously, this is a really hard thing to do.
The question:
I am so tired of hearing SEC fans say that "the second-best Pac-10 team beat the fourth-best SEC team" when Cal beat Tennessee. Is that all they got?--Joe, Sacramento
My initial response to reading this was: Well, it was a good win for the Cal program, but because Cal was ranked higher, favored by a touchdown and playing at home, the result doesn't tell us all that much. We know Cal is better than Tennessee this year, but the polls and members of the media already thought that. Move on. Unfortunately, that's not what Stewart Mandel thought:
Joe, Joe, Joe. So blissfully naïve. If there's two things I've learned during my time on this beat, it's that the SEC is positively, indisputably the greatest conference in the history of mankind, and little things like logic, facts and common sense have no bearing whatsoever on this distinction.
Here we go. When Stewart Mandel uses the words "logic, facts and common sense", you just know he's about to break out something hilariously stupid.
Tennessee beats Cal last year? Yet another feather in the SEC's cap. Cal beats Tennessee this year? Completely irrelevant.
Well, let's look at the circumstances regarding both. Tennessee was ranked 14 spots below Cal last year entering the matchup, and oddsmakers thought it was about an even matchup. Tennessee finished with the 5th best record in the SEC last year, while Cal shared the conference title with USC. When the team that people thought would be worse wins (and wins big), and when Team A finishes far below Team B in their respective conferences, but Team A pounds Team B, that provides some circumstantial evidence of the varying strengths of conferences. This year (and not that a national college football writer needs to be told this, but rosters turn over from year to year, meaning one team one year might be better than another, but the next year the comparison between the two could be reversed), the team that was favored and predicted to be better won. We can follow things the rest of the year. If Tennessee ends up winning the SEC and Cal ends up finishing 5th in the Pac-10, then this game might say something, but as of now, we can't tell much.
USC beats Auburn 23-0 in 2003? That wasn't one of Auburn's better teams. Auburn goes 12-0 the next year and gets left out of the BCS title game? A crime against humanity, seeing as the Tigers obviously would have beaten the Trojans.
Ahem, I guess a national college football writer does need to be told this, so I'll take it slowly. Because of things like "graduation" or "attrition" or "injuries" or "jumping to the pros" or "added experience" or "new talent", a team's roster in one year does not look exactly like a team's roster the next year. It is for this reason that teams play an entirely new schedule of teams each year, competing for conference and national titles each year, rather than just relying on what happened in the previous year. Team A can be much worse than Team B in one year, but the reverse can be true the following year. And is the first sarcastic response not actually true? In 2003, Auburn went 8-5, their worst record in the last 5 years. That actually wasn't one of Auburn's better teams, in terms of on-field performance. As for the response to the second question, it's a strawman argument I've not heard. The complaint Auburn fans had in 2004 wasn't so much as that they'd have beaten the Trojans, but that they deserved a chance to play in the national title game. A much more charitable view would be that "the Tigers obviously were more deserving than the Oklahoma team that crapped the bed in the Orange Bowl".
Big East champion Louisville comes within an offsides call of edging SEC champ Florida out of last year's BCS title game? Exhibit A why the whole system needs to be blown up.
I seriously have not heard a single person EVER make the argument Mandel makes regarding Louisville. Not once, and I live in the epicenter of the SEC. If people don't like the BCS system, Exhibit A in SEC land is that Oklahoma and not Auburn played in the title game in 2004-5. Exhibit B would have been if Michigan had been given a rematch with Ohio State over Florida. Nobody I've ever heard of has made an argument as to Louisville. And really, would anyone have made the argument that an unbeaten, #2 ranked team shouldn't have had a chance at a title because a 1-loss, #3 (or worse) ranked team should? Give us a name. Who made this argument?
The fact that Big East champion West Virginia beat SEC champion Georgia in the Sugar Bowl just a year earlier? Eh -- the Dawgs weren't up for that game.
Ctrl-V... Ahem, I guess a national college football writer does need to be told this, so I'll take it slowly. Because of things like "graduation" or "attrition" or "injuries" or "jumping to the pros" or "added experience" or "new talent", a team's roster in one year does not look exactly like a team's roster the next year. It is for this reason that teams play an entirely new schedule of teams each year, competing for conference and national titles each year, rather than just relying on what happened in the previous year. Team A can be much worse than Team B in one year, but the reverse can be true the following year. And further, just because Team A was better than Team B in one year, doesn't exactly mean that Team C is better than Team D in the next year. And finally, can we put the UGA-WVU game to rest? West Virginia entered the game ranked higher and with a much better record, and it still took a 3-0 turnover advantage (which WVU scored 14 points upon) to eke out a 3 point win. EDIT: I appear to have been wrong about the rankings for that game. WVU was underrated in that game and Georgia was favored, so this whole thing doesn't really work. Still, I don't see how it has anything to do with the relative merits of Florida and Louisville the next year.
Les Miles calls out USC's "soft" Pac-10 schedule? Well ... duh. But wouldn't that make SEC divisional champion Arkansas -- whom the Trojans beat 50-14 just a year earlier -- even softer? No, because Darren McFadden wasn't healthy, and he's obviously capable of producing 36 points on his own.
A few questions on this bit...
(A) How many SEC fans have to disavow Michigan grad, Ohio-bred, 3 years experience in the conference out of a 27 year career Les Miles before national writers stop tarring the SEC with his words?
(B) How, exactly is Arkansas part of USC's Pac-10 schedule?
(C) Again, you do realize that one year is different from the next, right?
(D) Do you honestly believe that the second best player in college football (according to voters for a silly trophy) wouldn't have affected the final score of a game?
(E) How little do you respect the brains of your readers?
Florida beating Ohio State like a rented mule in last year's title game? Indisputable confirmation that the Big Ten can't hold a candle to the SEC. The fact SEC teams lost their other two bowl games against Big Ten foes? Never happened.
Who made the argument that the Big Ten can't hold a candle to the SEC? Who was that?
"Honestly, we played a lot better teams than Ohio State this year," said Moss. "I could name four to five teams out of the SEC that would play the same game against them."
There they go again with that SEC chest-thumping.
But after what transpired Monday night, who's to argue?
This man gets paid to tell you what he thinks about college football. CNNsi's editors should be ashamed of themselves.
Wednesday, September 05, 2007
Two ESPN Programming Notes
I need to be quicker about things, because they get stale quickly.
1. Saturday night's SportsCenter offered a quick lesson on how editing decisions can be completely unfair. The University of Georgia played Oklahoma State on Saturday, and going into the day this game was one of the "bigger" games, mainly because there were few games between larger conference teams. ESPN chose to show one "highlight" of the game, immediately after showing clips of 2 touchdowns for Alabama defeating a 1-AA opponent. The only "highlight" they showed of the game: Reshad Jones shoving an Oklahoma State player and then getting escorted to the sideline. Full time of highlight: 10 seconds. Did the highlight let you know who won the game? No, in fact, it probably made someone who merely caught a glance think that Oklahoma State won. Did the highlight show an important moment of the game? No, because at the point of said shove, the score had just become 35-14. Five plays later Georgia intercepted a pass. Said penalty had no effect on the score or outcome. The player who was shoved was not injured on the play. Jones wasn't even ejected from the contest (though there was a Notre Dame player ejected for punching on Saturday in their game with Georgia Tech - surprisingly, that play wasn't shown on the SportsCenter I saw). So to recap, in one of the few games where a Top-15 team played a BCS-conference opponent, in one of the few good performances for a good team against a good opponent, on the world's most viewed sports highlight show on that day, ESPN decided the only thing its viewers deserved to see about the game was a mental mistake that had zero effect on the game but made the team that won look bad. Let me be clear: I'm not saying "conspiracy"; I'm saying that there are completely incompetent people chopping highlights and writing copy in Bristol.
2. But it's not just ESPN's employees that deserve scorn. It's also those to whom ESPN provides a readily visible forum. Take Sunday morning's The Sports Reporters. One might think, were one hoping to actually book pundits who would know what they're talking about, that guest reporters on the show would have some form of expertise in a particular field likely to be covered in that week's show. For example, if it's Masters' week, and it's pretty clear that at least one segment would be devoted to covering the golf tournament, the show might want to have on someone who knows a lot about golf. Or in the middle of March, the show probably wants to have on writers who cover college basketball. Or, perhaps, on the opening weekend of College Football, they might want to have some writers who actually cover college football, like Tony Barnhart of the AJC, Pete Thamel of the New York Times, or, hell, even Stewart Mandel or one of the other SI college football guys. No, you would be thinking incorrectly. The guests on Sunday were William C. Rhoden of the New York Times, Roy S. Johnson of Mens Fitness Magazine, and Bob Ryan of the Boston Globe. None of these men is anything close to an expert on college football.
But that's not why I'm writing about it. It's the opening statement William C. Rhoden made at the beginning of the show that bothered me. Rhoden expressed outrage at the fact that Serena Williams and Venus Williams were on track to play one another in a semifinal on Friday. His line: Venus and Serena should only meet in the US Open in PRIME TIME and in THE FINAL (he accentuated on those lines). He offered no reasons why seeds should be set up with a final pairing the Williams sisters. Basically, if I understand him right, he's saying one thing: that Venus and Serena Williams should never be seeded anything but #1 and #2 in the tournament. Serena Williams was, actually, seeded 8th. Venus Williams was seeded 12th. Was this a wrongdoing by the seed? Should Serena have been seeded #1? Well, she's actually ranked (entering the tournament) #9 in the world, and Venus Williams was ranked 14th in the world entering the tournament. So both were actually seeded ABOVE their ranking. And if there's anything clear about womens' tennis, it's this: neither of them is deserving of the top seed in the tournament. Justine Henin was far and away #1 in the rankings, points chase and money list. The gap in money (the closest the Williams sisters are to her) between Henin and either Williams sister was more than 50%. Serena was beaten twice by Henin this year in Grand Slam events. There is no reasonable argument for either of them to have been ranked #1. None. Henin is the best player in womens' tennis right now and absolutely deserved the top seed. Venus and Serena are both very good tennis players, but neither is prolific enough on tour to merit a top seed. Venus and Serena have combined for 4 victories (2 each) on tour this year, and in fact, those 4 wins are the only appearances by either in a final of a tournament. Henin has won 6 tournaments this year (and finished second at a seventh). Jelena Jankovic (third seed, and Venus' opponent in the quarterfinals) won 4 tournaments and finished second at 3 others. Svetlana Kuznetsova (fourth seed) made the finals of 5 tournaments, and won the last WTA event before the US Open. Ana Ivanovic (fifth seed) made 4 finals, winning 2 tournaments. Anna Chakvetadze (sixth seed) won 4 tournaments this year. Perhaps one could argue that Maria Sharapova was undeserving as the second seed, but she was the defending champion. And now that Henin has, for a third time, dispatched Serena (in straight sets), will William C. Rhoden say anything? What possible objective reason could Rhoden have for saying the Williams sisters deserve special treatment? What axe does he have to grind? Does the New York Times or ESPN have a problem with Rhoden stating an opinion that has no reasonable basis to support it, and leaves the reader with but one impression (I don't even have to say it)? Does William C. Rhoden have contempt for his readers and audience, or at least believe they are dumb enough to buy his ill-founded arguments?
I believe the ESPN ombudswoman has a very difficult job.
Flick the Button
1. Inside Man: Watched this a while ago but forgot to include it last time. Decent heist movie, but not spectacular. I like Clive Owen in everything I've seen him in, and he's fine here. Washington has played this character a few times before, so there's nothing new here. Foster takes a nice turn as a realistic, female Winston Wolf. For the most part, Spike Lee gets out of his own way (though the video game clip is an unwelcome slip, and something I'm pretty sure he'd done before almost identically in Clockers). The best I can say about this is that it's clean, if not anything to get all that excited about. Not generous enough to get above You're Fired.
2. 300: Nicely campy and beautiful. Yes, some of the dialogue is unintentionally hilarious. I would've been much happier without any of the cockrock soundtrack in some parts. But it's about what I expected of it. Goofy slomo fight sequences amid a backdrop of beautiful CGI. It's not the greatest thing I've ever seen, but I liked it enough to give it a dull set of Steak Knives. That said, I have a feeling I'm in the minority on it. I get the sense that people either think this is the biggest piece of crap ever or think it's the greatest thing ever.
3. Disturbia: Another clean thriller, but I've seen Rear Window before, so this was nothing new. In fact, it was kind of boring. LeBoef is a bit likable, and David Morse is properly creepy. There's just not much that isn't what was expected. I shrug at it. You're Fired.
4. Hot Fuzz: Tony the Tiger Grrrreat. Hilarious and quick. Excellently paced and written. One of my favorite movies of the year so far. See it. Cadillac.
5. The Fountain: I've never seen an 85 minute movie that's 80 minutes too long before. This should've been a short film. Some of the shots are breathtaking. Some of the shots are repeated 9 times. I get it. I didn't like it. You're fired.
6. Zodiac: The opposite of The Fountain. Here's a movie that almost hits 3 hours, but I would've been fine with another 45 minutes. It's not so much a movie that breaks new ground, as the unsolved mystery - obsession theme has been around a while. But the careful, perfectionist filmmaking works so well with the subject. I can see how some critics might view some of the red herring scenes as something that could be cut to make the movie shorter, but I thought they were some of the most important. Well acted, exceptionally directed. A welcome return to form for Fincher. Steak Knives.
Something I Meant to Write About
A few months ago, I wanted to write about the Chris Benoit family murder-suicide. I'm not a big wrestling fan, but I definitely had about a 3-6 month run where I followed it. And Benoit was one of my favorite performers, mainly because he didn't seem so character-ish. He was just kind of a guy that could do cool looking things. He didn't rely on charisma or looks (he really couldn't). Seemed to me like he was one of the few wrestlers who was real. Of the matches that I remember actually watching, there are probably 3, and Benoit was probably involved in 2 of them. The murder-suicide was just terribly sad.
But there was one thing that always kept in my mind right after the details of the crimes came out. While a lot of the coverage focused on his doctor and ilicit use of steroids or human growth hormone (thinking the murders occurred as a result of "roid rage"), I had a sneaking suspicion that his mental problems that led to the crimes may have had more to do with repeated and frequent concussions than steroid usage.
It hasn't had the big expose that it probably deserves, but the correlation between concussions and mental illness among NFL veterans is a story. Andre Waters commits suicide at 44. Ted Johnson battles depression and has early onset of Alzheimer's Disease at 34. Mike Webster died at 50 after suffering from dementia, amnesia and depression. Terry Long commits suicide at 45, having suffered from chronic traumatic encephalopathy ("punch-drunk syndrome"). Justin Strzelczyk leads police on a 37-mile high speed chase at 100 miles an hour, leading to a fiery wreck that cost him his life, with no alcohol in his system, after being diagnosed with depression, psychoses and manic behavior. Head injuries and concussions may have affected all of them.
And now there's Chris Benoit. This morning, I read the same sort of study was done on Chris Benoit's brain after his suicide, and there are similarities. Similar early-onset Alzheimer's. Multiple concussions in his medical history.
Concussions are an unknown area. We just don't know how bad they are. And it's terrible that there may be other athletes and former athletes who suffer from the effects of concussions, and whose mental health has been endangered.
Tuesday, September 04, 2007
Gameday Recap
Week 1
September 1, 2007
Blacksburg, Va - East Carolina vs. Virginia Tech
A whole new year begins. For the newcomers, here's what I wrote last year about why I do this:
Why do I do this? The show wields a lot of power in college football. The sport is broadly spread out, so much so that nobody can really be an expert on all 119 teams. A filter is necessary, and ESPN pretty much is all there is. Coverage on Gameday sets the tone for how teams are perceived, and there is a direct correlation between favorable coverage and poll position. This show may affect who gets to play for the national title. For that, I think the pundits on the show need to be held accountable for how they present the teams and games. So I watch and repeat what they say.
So away we go.
General thoughts: ESPN wasn't in an easy spot in terms of covering VT with respect to the tragedy last Spring, but it was also a spot ESPN chose - and clearly chose how to cover. While I sense ESPN felt they had to cover the school a certain way, it's also hard not to feel some sense of exploitation. I don't know how it should've been covered. I know I felt uncomfortable after a while the first time watching it through. I also got the sense that a lot of the fans in the background would've preferred to have the coverage be about the game and less about the tragedy.
Anyway, my job is to focus on the pundits on the show.
- Opening segment is all about coping and healing.
- Person on the street interviews - several are about how they're all starting to move on. One wonders how ESPN coming and bringing it all up again helps that.
- Corso: "I know it's ironic, but I'm not so sure anybody in the country could have handled that tragedy as well as these people..." How this is ironic is beyond me. Also, I get that he wants to say that Blacksburg is a good, strong community, but I'm also pretty sure that a lot of college towns would've responded well to a tragedy like that. Lots of college towns have. Huntington, WV, for one. Herbstreit responds with "there's no doubt about that."
- Herbstreit takes a shot at the national media for promoting the idea that students transfer from VT. Unsure where that comes from.
- KH: VT fans have been waiting for this moment as a chance to move on. Is ESPN's coverage hindering that? Sometimes I think these guys could have a better sense of their own role in the stories.
- Seven minutes into coverage, and the first football-related sentence: CF says VT is pretty good and that ECU was a bowl team.
- KH: VT is "absolutely a national championship caliber football team..." also that we won't find out how good VT is against ECU, but rather the next week at LSU.
- LC: VT's special teams make them "#1 in my mind for a shot at [the MNC]".
- KH: the "Game of the Day" is Tennessee-Cal, which is also the game he happens to be covering.
- KH: DeSean Jackson is "one of the frontrunners for the Heisman Trophy"
- LC: "It won't matter who is playing QB for the Irish today" because ND has a good tight end. Prescient analysis, sort of. Indeed, it didn't matter who was playing QB because none could handle the defense.
- Fowler calls the University of Georgia "Uhhgahh" to my great disappointment. Three years running now. Say it with me "YOU-GEE-A". You don't call the University of Virginia "Uhh-vahh" and you don't call the University of California at Los Angeles "Uck-Lah". Ass.
- KH: takes a shot at Wisconsin's scheduling, Fowler laughs along. "Actually going outside of 1-AA and playing a Pac-10 team." Just because I'm a pedant, I "actually" checked Wisconsin's schedule. Number of OOC games against 1-AA opponents since 1995: 3. Number of OOC games against Pac-10 teams since 1995: 5 (not including WSU on Saturday). DO NOT TRUST THESE PEOPLE TO GIVE YOU ACCURATE INFORMATION. TRUST THEM TO GIVE YOU CONVENTIONAL WISDOM THAT IS OFTEN INACCURATE.
- CF: expects a blowout in the USC-Idaho game, asks how many times the USC punter will be employed. The answer: He punted twice.
- KH: Arizona-BYU is interesting, Arizona could pull upset because John Beck isn't at BYU anymore. (They didn't)
- Desmond Howard is chatting online in the Gameday bus. He's wearing a tie and dress shirt. Remember this. He also looks like he might be faking the typing.
- Fowler says Appalachian State is a "good" 1-AA team, but when Herbstreit smarmily says "so are you giving them a chance today?" Fowler demurs. "Chad Henne could set a record today if they keep him in the game."
- KH: Michigan is on a mission this year, and it starts against "poor old Appalachian State". It'll be interesting how they cover this next week. They did not give any respect to ASU.
- LC: "Jim" Laurinitis is the best defensive player in the nation. Let's see how many other players over the course of the year are the best.
- Fowler is in midseason form for annoying me with pronunciation. First appearance of "Joap-uh" instead of Joe-Pah.
- CF: What's the deal with these Big Ten openers! And airplane food too!
- Corso gives his annual sermon on how important it is to schedule cupcakes. Herbstreit baked cupcakes.
- KH: ADs and Coaches want easy wins, but players want tough games.
- KH: Teams like Michigan, Ohio State, Alabama "have no business playing 1-AA teams". Prescient analysis, though not the intended way.
- Herbstreit's point is that teams should schedule one good opponent, one second tier opponent, and a couple of cupcakes. OK, if we take him at his word... why is he badmouthing so many programs today? Might some of those teams that play cupcakes today be playing good/second tier opponents in the coming weeks? Incomplete analysis.
- Fowler says cupcake schedules are bad and should be avoided for "the good of the sport and not just the bottom line". Is this really the argument he wants to make? Was Gameday traveling to USC for a game against a weak Nebraska team instead of traveling to one of two SEC matchups between ranked opponents "for the good of the sport and not just the bottom line"? Does Shelley Smith cover human interest stories only about USC players "for the good of the sport and not just the bottom line"?
- New coaches in the ACC. Fowler says NC State actually wasn't playing a cupcake in UCF - good call there.
- WIRED with Randy Shannon! The return of the most worthless, least informative segment of the show. Although at one point you could hear a police siren on the practice field. And it was Miami, not Illinois.
- KH says 8 wins is a good year for Miami, doesn't buy their offense.
- LC, in traditional defend-the-coach position, says (a) Shannon's under pressure because Coker went 60-15, and (b) 6 wins is a great year for Shannon.
- Decent coverage of BC-Wake. Surprisingly game-focused. First time all day they've actually talked for more than a second about injuries, returning starters, etc.
- KH: Best QB in ACC is Matt Ryan.
- KH: Admits he was way slow to buy into Wake. Picks them, incorrectly. Can't win for losing.
- CF: Duke's best chance to win this year was vs. UConn. They didn't. "Could stretch to 30".
- More man on the street interviews at VT.
- Frank Beamer joins the set. Less than 90 minutes to kickoff. Perhaps had he been with his team and staff instead, they might've moved the ball a little on ECU.
- Interview is almost entirely not-football-related, though Beamer tries to turn it to football.
- Gillette Game Face returns. No face paint.
- Talk about Florida.
- Segment on speed conditioning at Florida. Sounds like Wendy Nix reporting. Not exactly a technical report (mainly boils down to "training to get fast means running"), but at least it's about the sport, instead of most of the BS that their segments cover.
- Desmond Howard is now on the fake field wearing shorts and a t-shirt and dragging a weight sled. Demonstrates quickness drills. Relatively interesting and useful.
- Herbstreit has to sooth his own ego, by chiming in that Desmond Howard played in the Big 10 and looked pretty fast. Clearly referring to his atrocious puffery of Ohio State last year and the onslaught of coverage about how fast Florida was after they annihilated the Buckeyes.
- Fowler adds to that that "We were all shocked... the whole world" at how slow OSU was. First off, that's not true. There were quite a few fans who thought Florida would have better speed last year. Second, a lot of the "whole world" thought that way because Chris Fowler and Kirk Herbstreit had been telling them for 4 months how much better than everyone else Ohio State was. You guys are complicit!
- Fowler says Florida "for the first time ever" is playing a team from 1-AA. OK. All caps on now because this is just utterly stupid. FLORIDA IS NOT PLAYING A 1-AA TEAM FOR THE "FIRST TIME EVER". IT IS THE FIRST TIME IN FOUR, YES, COUNT THEM, FOUR FREAKING GAMES, THAT FLORIDA HAS PLAYED A 1-AA TEAM. FLORIDA PLAYED WESTERN CAROLINA ON NOVEMBER 18, 2006. FOUR WHOLE GAMES AGO!!!!!!!!!!!! Florida also played 1-AA teams in 2003 (FAMU), 1998 (Citadel), 1996 (Georgia Southern), 1990 (Furman), 1988 (Montana State), 1986 (Georgia Southern), 1983 (Indiana State), and 1982 (West Texas A&M) and that's as far back as I went. GELHEADS: UNLESS YOU'VE FACT-CHECKED A STATEMENT, DON'T SAY IT. EDIT: This might even be worse than I thought. Western Kentucky isn't even a 1-AA team anymore. They're a Provisional 1-A team, playing 6 1-A opponents this year. They'll be a member of the Sun Belt in a few years. So Fowler is wrong about (a) Florida even playing a 1-AA opponent and (b) they've never done that before. Nice work.
- Pat Forde, who should know better, fails to correct and restates that it's Florida's first 1-AA opponent.
- LC: Florida won a lot of games close last year, lost a lot of talent. Corso thinks Florida won't win the SEC or MNC because of lack of experience for fourth quarters.
- KH: Buys into the idea that Tebow is perfect for Meyer's system. "Florida will have the best offense in the SEC". Herbstreit thinks it'll actually depend on whether the defense can "gel" - and speaking of that, the HD cameras do not help Herbstreit look better. Greasy and bronzed. The Lady walked by while this was on and thought Herbstreit looked like a gay porn star with that fake tan.
- No plans to change anything about Michael Vick at VT.
- Segue to Notre Dame quarterbacks, somehow.
- Charlie Weis's press conference gets clips shown (unlike 110+ other coaches), but for some reason the arrogant, jackass, "I'm smarter than you"-type comments aren't shown. Interesting editorial decision.
- Mark May brought on to talk about Notre Dame. May provides reasonable, intelligent analysis on why Georgia Tech is simply better than ND today - and that ND will struggle offensively. He was 100% correct about this game, so give him some credit.
- Herbstreit thinks Demetrius Jones will get the nod at Notre Dame. Only 4 days after bloggers wrote about it.
- KH thinks there might be some CRAZY formations and schemes for Notre Dame on offense and Notre Dame wins, though outplayed.
- Corso thinks Mark May stole all his material, because he also mentions how GT's offense will confuse the new ND QBs.
- Fowler reminds us that two excellent punters will be in the ND-GT game.
- Desmond Howard is back in the bus, back in his shirt and tie. Were some of these segments pre-taped? It didn't look like it. Here it definitely looks like Desmond was faking the typing.
- More VT person on the street interviews.
- Tom Rinaldi is on set to lead into his gauze-lens piece on VT.
- This was the segment that I felt bordered on exploitation.
- Auburn-Kansas State. Brief discussion.
- Georgia-Oklahoma State. Also very brief.
- KH: All the talk about Oklahoma State playing well will fire up Georgia. No mention about how he had just talked about Oklahoma State playing well.
- Corso thinks Mississippi will lose to Memphis.
- Fowler thought Troy might play well at Arkansas.
- Nick Saban talk.
- Wendy Nix does a short interview segment on Nick Saban. Asks some good questions, and Saban answers them like a very very well trained interviewee.
- Wins in Saban's first season? Corso says 9. Herbstreit also says 9.
- Fowler tells us that Sean Glennon (VT QB) wants to make an impact like the Yankees after 9/11 and the Saints after Katrina. Neither team won a title.
- More VT tragedy talk.
- Fowler tosses to Tirico, who tosses to Erin Andrews, who looks hot and talks about the Lunchpail and the defense. Erin tosses back to Tirico, who talks to Bill Curry and Todd Blackledge. More tragedy talk, little football talk.
- Fowler has said "Emotions continue to build" about 5 times so far.
- Some Wisconsin-Washington State talk. Corso tells us for the third time today that he used to coach in the Big Ten. Corso thinks WSU covers but loses and Herbstreit seems to think the same thing.
- Google Earth provides Herbstreit's itinerary from VT to California.
- Some Tennessee-Cal talk. Review of last year's game with interviews with Cal players (but barely any Tennessee players, oddly).
- Herbstreit shows us how Ainge will grip the ball with a broken pinky. Amazing - news that is actually useful to viewers and fact-based/technical.
- Corso: Tennessee needs to run the ball to stay in it. "Cal... Please!!!" Herbstreit points out that Corso whiffed on picking Cal last year to play in the title game.
- Fowler rubs it in a little that Corso picked Cal.
- They flip over to Desmond, who looks like he's still fake typing. He offers a couple of brief comments about Cal's receivers, and says something about a blogger. Not that I don't appreciate the effort, but this segment feels kind of boardroom-imposed "we need to use the internet to connect with people, like blogs and stuff". Doesn't feel organic, and these little bits also seem to be too short to actually cover football's world online. Maybe they'll refine this bit.
- More VT tragedy talk.
- USC coverage.
- Fowler reminds us that the last 5 preseason #1 teams have gotten to the BCS title game, though 4 lost. Remember that every time someone says early polls don't matter.
- Shelley Smith, stunningly, has a semi-in-depth report on USC, this time on John David Booty. At what point will they become self-referential and note that Shelley Smith's coverage is parody.
- Bruce Feldman phones in to give some local coverage of the game. I personally like the idea of bringing in other writers who might have some actual information.
- That said, Feldman passes along a story about how USC's defensive coordinator related a story about how Vandals conquered Rome but were crushed by the Trojans. This is not historically accurate. The Vandals' defeats were at the hands of the Byzantine Empire, the Ostrogoths and the Moors, all in the 5th century AD. The Homeric Troy that the USC Trojans are akin to was around in approximately 1300 BC, nearly 2 millenia beforehand. Wikipedia, Google. These are your friends, journalists. Also: might not be a good idea to rely on football coaches for history lessons. Football schemes, most certainly.
- Corso thinks USC stumbles on the road in the Pac-10, because in the past they've lost on the road too.
- Pontiac Game Changer: LC - Eddie Royal, KH - Matthew Stafford, CF - Cody Hawkins. Fowler picks his alma mater. Herbstreit gets the best pick this week.
- Saturday Stupid Selections: LC - WSU to cover, Oklahoma State to cover. KH - Colorado State, WSU to cover, Wake Forest, Notre Dame. Corso picked a lot better this week.
- Live, in stadium VT tragedy coverage. That was a really short moment of silence. We never had one that short in homeroom in high school.
- Live tragedy coverage, tribute video.
- Finally, the team comes out and I get the sense that a whole lot of Hokie fans just want to pay attention to a football game. Maybe I'm wrong. Seems to me that the fans are ready for the game to get there already.
- Corso puts the Hokie head on.
- Seriously, when the crowd goes crazy for Enter Sandman, you can't tell me that all of the tragedy coverage was a little overdone by ESPN. Perhaps they didn't have an alternative. I don't know. I think they probably could've talked about the Virginia Tech game at least a little.
Sunday, September 02, 2007
Thursday, August 30, 2007
Champions' League Draw - First Impressions
I am making an effort to return to my roots a bit here and do some soccer coverage, even during football season...
Followed the draw today for the group stages of the Champions' League. Here are my first impressions:
Easiest Route for Top Seed to Knockout Round:
If AEK turns around the result against Sevilla, this category is Arsenal's without a rival. If Sevilla's result holds, it probably still is Arsenal (Sevilla are going to have trouble keeping it together after the Puerta tragedy). Other relatively clear routes are there for Liverpool and Inter Milan.
Toughest Route for Top Seed to Knockout Round:
The two Spanish giants. Barcelona get should've-been-a-top-seed Lyon, German champion Stuttgart and a resurgent Rangers team (killing people in Scotland now and hungry for CL football). Real have losable games against Werder Bremen and Lazio, and Olympiakos is not an easy place to travel to.
Easiest Group Top to Bottom:
I think it's Group G or H. Inter aren't as good as their Calciopoli-watered-down title last year. PSV are middle-of-the-pack 2 seeds. CSKA could surprise, but wouldn't in other groups. For the reasons Arsenal have an easy route above, H is easy too.
Toughest Group Top to Bottom:
Lots of choices here. Real and Barce's groups are tough, with exceptionally good 3rd seeded teams (Lazio and Stuttgart, respectively). Another group that draws my attention is Group D. Milan are defending titlists, Celtic and Benfica have lots of experience at winning games in the Champions' League, and Shakhtar Donetsk is probably as good this year as many of the 3rd seeds.
Most Likely Group to Hold Form:
Probably Group F. Man U and Roma are a good bit better than Sporting and Dinamo Kyiv (though either could put in a scare on any given Wednesday. If Sevilla hold on against AEK, Group H will have the top 2 advance.
Most Likely Upsets (bottom 2 pool team advancing):
Celtic and Shakhtar are as likely as Benfica to advance, in my mind. All three of those teams are about equal. Watch out for CSKA Moscow in Group G - it's hard to play in Russia in cold weather, and that group isn't loaded with the greatest top seeds. I wouldn't be stunned to see Schalke 04 take a slot away from Valencia either, as Valencia are off track right now.
Dodgiest Road Games:
Liverpool at Besiktas; the Real-Lazio Fascist-off; Any match in Ukraine or Russia in December.
Wait, Where are...:
Kanu mentioned it already, but it's quite possible that the best team in Europe this year isn't in the Champions' League. Bayern Munich look fantastic. Also missing is Juventus, who might put together a fine run in Italy. Only PSV from Holland? Time for Feyenoord and Ajax to return to prominence. I also would like to see champions of some lesser leagues get back in the mix of things - like IFK Gothenborg of Sweden, Anderlecht of Belgium, or FK Austria or Wien. I'm not sure if I personally like that England, Spain, Italy and Germany make up half the field. I never minded giving other clubs a prominent showcase.
Monday, August 27, 2007
Dead Horse
I know a lot of bloggers have signed on to the concept of not bashing other conferences or getting involved in pissing contests. That's fine. I agree to that as well.
However, I haven't forgotten, and I won't soon forget, the elitist, borderline-racist snobbery of Big Ten Commissioner Jim Delany, as evidenced in his letter to Big Ten and College Football fans after his conference champion's embarrassing performance in the BCG National Championship Game. The exact language:
"I love speed and the SEC has great speed, especially on the defensive line, but there are appropriate balances when mixing academics and athletics."
The Wizard of Odds (an excellent college football blog) posts today that perhaps Delany has been vidnicated by the fact that few Big Ten recruits from this season have failed to meet initial eligibility requirements, while significantly more SEC recruits have failed to meet initial eligibility requirements and/or to receive admission into the University.
Unfortunately, this isn't vindication at all. In fact, it merely draws more clearly how wrongheaded and offensive Delany's comments were.
First off, there are a couple of logical flaws at play here. Let's take this one by one.
1. Speed on the field has little to do with academic standards (or at least meeting NCAA initial eligibility).
As an anonymous commenter pointed out at The Wizard of Odds' post, none of the players on the field in the BCS National Championship Game was ineligible. Every one of those players had to meet initial eligibility requirements, obtain admission to the university, and remain academically eligible. If one team had more speed or talent than the other, it wasn't because one team suffered from increased eligibility requirements while the other did not. Florida's eligible players were faster and more talented than Ohio State's eligible players.
2. The failure of several SEC schools to enroll all of their recruited players this recruiting season has nothing to do with on-field comparisons.
The harm resulting from a player failing to meet initial eligibility requirements or obtain admission to a university is felt by that very university. If players are not admitted or can't meet initial eligibility requirements, it follows, necessarily, that those players aren't on the team, and therefore can't help that team in terms of speed and talent. Florida wasn't faster than Ohio State because of certain players who failed to gain acceptance and eligibility, because those players weren't on the field. So the fact that several SEC recruits failed to matriculate serves no purpose to support Delany's argument - because those who fail to matriculate aren't involved in the comparison of on-field abilities at all.
3. A small number of players failing to matriculate does not directly mean that there are increased academic standards.
Taking Delany's words for what they are, it's either a completely illogical argument (Big Ten players aren't as fast/good as SEC players because the SEC players are more often ineligible, but if they're ineligible how are they playing?), or it's simply an unfounded assertion that Big Ten eligibility and admission requirements are more rigid than SEC eligibility and admission requirements.
Let's take a look at that latter proposition. The evidence provided by The Wizard of Odds may actually work against that. Assume that the NCAA initial eligibility requirements are a baseline for all schools. Certain schools may require incoming recruits to meet higher standards than that, and gain admission. Merely passing the clearinghouse isn't enough at a lot of places. However, when a school increases the requirements above the NCAA baseline, wouldn't it follow that certain recruits wouldn't meet those increased standards? The fact that players are failing to matriculate may actually be evidence that the schools have increased admission/eligibility requirements. The fact that players are matriculating isn't evidence that the standards for admission/eligibility are higher. That fact that recruits are matriculating may be that standards for admission/eligibility are merely at the baseline (against the argument), or it may be that the schools are self-selecting players that are already known to meet increased standards. Either way, however, small raw numbers of players failing to meet eligibility/admission requirements does not directly mean there are increased standards. It may mean a number of things, most notably, that Big Ten schools take fewer risks on players who may or may not meet eligibility or admission requirements. But this more conservative approach does not equal academic superiority - if a school takes a risk and the player is eligible, he meets the standards; if a school takes a risk and the player isn't eligible, he's not at the school, so it doesn't matter, academically.
4. Delany's argument must, necessarily, only serve to insult eligible and admitted players at SEC schools.
The only reasonable implication from Delany's statement is that players who were eligible and admitted at SEC schools would not be eligible and admitted at Big Ten schools. There are no other reasonable interpretations. Delany provides no evidence to support this claim. The suggestion that the SEC fails to enroll far more recruits than the Big Ten is a null argument (if they aren't eligible at SEC schools, they aren't eligible at SEC schools, so they wouldn't be properly comparable).
What other evidence is there for this statement? When we can only look at players who actually did enroll, we're left with few opportunities to compare academic standards. Perhaps we could compare the use of Junior College transfers, prep school delayed-initial-enrollment recruits, or partial qualifiers? The flaw in comparing those is the assumption that any of those recruits are necessarily less academically qualified. If the NCAA and the school finds that a JUCO transfer has met initial eligibility and admission requirements, why should we interpret that as an academic failing on the student' s part? How can we presume poor academic qualifications in a person who meets requirements?
The only way to objectively prove Delany's assertion is to provide examples of recruits who failed to meet increased standards of Big Ten schools, but then did meet lower standards of SEC schools. I have not seen such information.
Without objective proof, Delany's claim that the Big Ten recruits a higher caliber of athlete is simply ad hominem against those current SEC players who have met initial eligibility and admission requirements.
With that, I'll gladly provide some similar ad hominem, showing what the supposed increased admission standards of Big Ten schools has led to:
HERE
HERE
HERE
HERE
HERE
HERE
HERE
HERE (some dropped, others not)
HERE
HERE
HERE
HERE
HERE
HERE
HERE
HERE
HERE
HERE
HERE
HERE
HERE
HERE
HERE
HERE
HERE
HERE
HERE
HERE
HERE
HERE
HERE
HERE
HERE
HERE
HERE
HERE
HERE
HERE
HERE
HERE
HERE
and of course, HERE
Intellectual Honesty Disclaimers:
----- Illegal or reckless behavior does not equate academic failure. I recognize this.
----- I also recognize that all conferences have their share of illegal or reckless conduct among their players. However, other conferences' commissioners aren't claiming superiority and calling into question another conference's players' faculties.
----- To the extent that the argument about schools failing to get their recruits admitted and eligible is actually about recruiting rankings and not a particular school's academic stature, I don't think anyone disputes the rankings' failings. Recruiting rankings that rate signed players rather than enrolled players are little better than meaningless.
Actually, I think I'd like to get into this topic a little deeper - on the "risk" issue. The raw numbers of SEC recruits who have failed to gain admission or eligibility provides strong evidence, but not conclusive proof, that SEC programs take risks on and sign players whose academic abilities might not meet standards. The few Big Ten recruits who suffered the same fate also provides strong evidence of, but not conclusive proof, that those programs don't take such risks. [I say evidence of, not proof, because there could very well be other reasons - such as the possibility that certain Big Ten programs actually have lower academic standards than some SEC programs.]
My thought on this is simple: why are any programs uncomfortable with the "risk" of offering a scholarship to a player who might not gain admission or eligibility, but whose abilities are strong? The risk, for the most part, isn't on the program, but rather the individual. Think of it this way: Player A is an exceptional athlete, marginal student. Elite U knows Player A would benefit their team significantly. Elite U offers him a scholarship. At that point, two things can happen, and neither is of Elite U's doing: (a) Player A meets the eligibility requirements and gains admission; or (b) Player A doesn't meet eligibility requirements or doesn't gain admission. If (a), then there's no issue regarding the academic reputation of the school - Player A met the requirements. If (b), then there's no issue regarding the academic reputation of the school - Player A didn't get in, so he's no blight. Either way, signing a risky player shouldn't affect a school's reputation. Now, once a player is enrolled, then keeping the player's eligibility is important - but that's also something that the program may have an ability to affect. Taking this a half-step further, I think there's an issue about the role of "hope" in taking these risks. When a recruit fails to gain admission/eligibility, that failure is on the recruit's shoulders - not the school's. No matter how elevated a particular school's standards are, that school relies on the recruits to do what needs to be done to gain admission. I think there's something kind of OK with offering a marginal kid a scholarship with the hope that he gets his act together (naturally, there are some situations that are special or where it's virtually impossible). There are way too many success stories about kids who were supposedly marginal students, or partial qualifiers, or something like that, who, once they get out of their home community, have structured rules and mentors to guide them and are given the opportunities to succeed, end up graduating and succeeding. Taking a risk on a particularly talented athlete has two outcomes. If the kid doesn't make it, there's no stain on the reputation of the school (as the kid never made it there), and the only downside is that the program may have to play catchup on signing other kids in the future (basically, reshuffling scholarships for future signing days). If the kid does make it, he's still no stain on the reputation of the school (unless the school fails the student once he's actually there - and in that case the school earns the stain), the program benefits by the player's abilities, and the opportunity is there for the supposedly marginal student to turn into a good student and productive member of the university community. To me, the positives significantly outweigh the negatives. So I don't really know why some programs don't take risks on marginal academic recruits. Note: I think character concerns are a different story - my thoughts on this above are limited solely to academic concerns.
If you couldn't already tell, too much of this post is thanks to the peerless archives of the inimitable EDSBS.
Friday, August 24, 2007
Early Bowl Projections = Not Smart.
So CNNsi has put out its Bowl Projections, based upon its own rankings of teams. It seems like they've attempted to use the BCS rules in filling out the slots, but I think they did it kind of wrong.
Here's their setup:
BCSNCG: #1 USC vs. #2 LSU
Rose: Michigan (Big 10 Champ) vs. Rutgers (At-Large)
Fiesta: Texas (Big XII Champ) vs. Wisconsin (At-Large)
Sugar: Florida (At-Large) vs. Oklahoma (At-Large)
Orange: Va. Tech (ACC Champ) vs. West Va. (Big East Champ).
Their only rule, it seems, in selecting At-Large teams is that they had to be in the Top 14 of their rankings. It also seems like they've abided by the BCS rule that no more than 2 teams from any particular conference may be selected to play in BCS games.
Here's where they go wrong: the order of selection.
I'll assume for the sake of argument that CNNsi's rankings are fine.
The way the BCS works is as follows:
STEP ONE
#1 and #2 in the BCS rankings are automatically slotted in the BCSNCG.
So far, CNNsi is fine, placing USC and LSU in the BCSNCG.
STEP TWO
Conference Champions not selected to play in the BCSNCG are assigned to the Bowl that conference is traditionally aligned with. Big 10 and Pac 10 to Rose. SEC to Sugar. Big XII to Fiesta. ACC to Orange.
CNNsi gets this almost exactly right, but it's hard to say perfectly. They slot Michigan in the Rose, Texas in the Fiesta, and Virginia Tech in the Orange. The problem is that they also appear to slot West Virginia in the Orange as Big East Champ. The Big East Champ is not automatically slotted in the Orange Bowl. Now, it may be that the Orange Bowl can select West Virginia to play, and they are eligible for the BCS because they are conference champs, but the fact is that West Virginia as Big East Champs is treated just like any At-Large selection (only the Mountaineers are required to get picked by some bowl).
STEP THREE
Here's where it gets complicated, and it seems to me that CNNsi screwed up. Let's break this down a little.
(A) ORDER OF NON-CONFERENCE-TIE-IN SELECTIONS.
The order of selecting teams rotates from year to year, and also depends on the selections of conference champions to play in the BCSNCG. The order in 2008 is:
1. Bowl that would have received #1 team because of conference tie-in.
2. Bowl that would have received #2 team because of conference tie-in.
3. Orange Bowl
4. Fiesta Bowl
5. Sugar Bowl
So, assuming USC and LSU are #1 and #2 respectively, the order of at-large, non-conference-tie-in choices would be:
1. Rose
2. Sugar
3. Orange
4. Fiesta
5. Sugar
(B) TEAMS AVAILABLE TO BE SELECTED.
CNNsi states that the team must be in the top 14 to be selected by a BCS bowl. This somewhat aligns with BCS rules, but it doesn't go all the way. There are teams that MUST be selected, and teams that CAN be selected, and there are further limitations on that.
Assuming the conference champions CNNsi has chosen, and assuming that their Top 14 teams mirror the BCS rankings, here's how things would end up:
MUST GET PICKED
West Virginia - by virtue of winning the Big East
Florida - by virtue of finishing #3 in the BCS but not winning their conference title.
CAN GET PICKED
Louisville
Oklahoma
Wisconsin
Ohio State
Rutgers
Arkansas
Penn State
CANNOT GET PICKED
Everyone else
Now, there's a secondary BCS rule that comes into play right here. No more than 2 teams from any particular conference can be selected to play in BCS games in a single year. This cuts down the possible selections significantly.
Now, the options for at-large picks are:
Florida (mandatory)
West Virginia (mandatory)
Oklahoma
Louisville OR Rutgers (not both)
Wisconsin OR Ohio State OR Penn State (no more than one)
Arkansas is now ineligible.
So now we know the 5 options for the non-conference-tie-in bowls. Let's see if we can project how the selection would happen.
PICK ONE - ROSE BOWL
The Rose Bowl would have the first choice of all these teams, to replace #1 USC and face Big Ten Champ Michigan. The only limitation as to which team it can pick is this: it cannot pick Florida unless the Sugar Bowl consents to letting them (the BCS has a rule saying the first choice bowl can't choose another team from the conference of the #2 team unless the bowl that would have received that #2 team consents). Let's assume that the Sugar Bowl won't consent to letting the #3 team slip out of their hands (and a safe assumption because the Sugar Bowl ends up with the last pick, so they'll want at least one big draw). Let's also assume that the Rose Bowl won't pick another Big 10 team to play Michigan.
So they can choose West Virginia, Oklahoma, Rutgers or Louisville.
By CNNsi's rankings, WVU is 4th, Louisville is 5th, Oklahoma is 9th and Rutgers is 12th (Michigan is 6th). For some reason, CNNsi picks Rutgers to play in this game.
Objectively, I think you can make an argumentthat Oklahoma would be the biggest draw (largest fan base). The best team would be WVU (assuming CNNsi's rankings). For CNNsi to choose Rutgers to play in this game (as the third best team in its conference and selected ahead of the two teams that finished higher), seems to be a great stretch. Were I selecting, under the assumptions CNNsi has made, I think Oklahoma would probably end up the choice, but just barely over West Virginia. Rutgers would not be in the equation.
Better Prediction: Michigan vs. Oklahoma
PICK TWO: SUGAR BOWL (First Choice)
No doubt that the Sugar Bowl would choose #3 Florida. CNNsi is correct on this choice.
PICK THREE: ORANGE BOWL
The Orange Bowl has no limitation on choices as to who should play against Virginia Tech. Further, since no other ACC teams are listed, they don't have conference matchup issues like the Rose Bowl. The following teams can be picked:
West Virginia
Louisville OR Rutgers
Wisconsin OR Ohio State OR Penn State
WVU is still ranked #4, Louisville is #5, Wisconsin is #10, Ohio State is #11, Rutgers is #12, and Penn State is #14.
Probably, WVU is the choice here. They're ranked ahead of Louisville, and the Cardinals had played there just last year. There may be a temptation to grab one of the Big 10 teams and their legion of fans, but the gap in quality of teams is probably too great to pass up one of the Big East teams.
Therefore, CNNsi is probably correct that WVU is the pick, but it should be clear that this is a "choice" and not a mandatory conference-tie-in.
PICK FOUR: FIESTA BOWL
Texas is tied in as Big XII champ. The Fiesta can then choose any of the following teams to play the Longhorns:
Louisville (#5) OR Rutgers (#12)
Wisconsin (#10) OR Ohio State (#11) OR Penn State (#14)
Sexiness vs. fanbase. Any of the Big Ten teams would travel better, but Louisville is objectively the best team left. It'd probably be left to how big the gap is between Louisville and the 3 Big Ten teams (i.e., if Louisville is 11-1, and Wisconsin's the best of them at 9-3, Louisville is probably the choice, but if Louisville is 11-1 and Wisconsin is 10-2, it's probably a closer call). Of all of the BCS bowls, the Fiesta is probably the least concerned with ticket sales, believe it or not. University of Phoenix Stadium is the smallest BCS locale by a good margin (only 63,000 unless expanded as it is for BCS title games). And with Texas already rolling in, it's probably unlikely that they'd have trouble selling out the place even with Louisville.
One could argue either way, so we will.
Option A: #8 Texas vs. #5 Louisville
Option B: #8 Texas vs. #10 Wisconsin
PICK FIVE: SUGAR BOWL
The final pick goes to the Sugar Bowl to pair someone against Florida. The choice for the Sugar depends largely on the choice of the Fiesta.
If the Fiesta chooses Louisville, the Sugar can choose between Wisconsin, Ohio State and Penn State.
If the Fiesta chooses Wisconsin, the Sugar can choose between Louisville and Rutgers.
It's probably a safe assumption that the Sugar will take whichever team the Fiesta didn't.
Option A: #3 Florida vs. #5 Louisville
Option B: #3 Florida vs. #10 Wisconsin.
So there you have it, a full analysis of the BCS selection. Basically, CNNsi screws up when it chooses a #12, third-in-their-conference Rutgers team to be the first team taken off the board by the Rose Bowl. Under the scenario CNNsi laid out, it's highly unlikely that the BCS bowls would consider Rutgers at all. The only advantage Rutgers has is the New York TV market. Rutgers does not have a sizable traveling fanbase. Rutgers is not geographically proximate to any of the bowls. And Rutgers wouldn't have the "they deserve it" argument behind them, having finished behind several other teams. There's just no justification for placing them in that bowl, aside from favoritism towards the local team closest to CNNsi's location. And that's poor punditry.
Friday, August 17, 2007
Gregg Here's a Nurse, Part XVIII
Shorter Gregg Easterbrook:
I have sympathy for those who have to lie in beds they've made.
Wednesday, August 15, 2007
Let's Ask Bristol (if you want terrible analysis)
ESPN has their "Power 16" list of the top college football teams up, as based upon voting by their particular experts. Georgia is at #11, which is probably too high in my opinion. But the reasons some of the experts give are just ree-damn-dick-a-loss.
Todd Blackledge on Pass Offense
QB Matthew Stafford took his lumps (7 TDs, 13 INTs) last year as a freshman. But he has a big, accurate arm and surprising mobility. Question is: Who will be his safety valve? Senior Sean Bailey is speedy, but he has only 36 career catches and is coming off a knee injury.
In re Stafford, very conventional analysis. As to the receivers, Georgia probably has one of the deepest corps it's had in years. Kris Durham is listed as the 7th or 8th received, and he had a lot of plays last year. No mention of Massaquoi, Kenneth Harris, Mikey Henderson, AJ Bryant, Tony Wilson?
Bill Curry on Run Offense
The Dawgs have lots of backs but no stud. Kregg Lumpkin is a slasher, not a home run threat. And, while Thomas Brown can break into the secondary and run away from DBs, he's coming off a knee injury. No matter who's back there, Stafford is going to face stacked fronts.
First sentence OK. I don't think of Lumpkin as a slasher at all. He's a pounder just not with a massive, Jerome Bettis-type body. No mention of Knowshon Moreno. The last sentence I disagree with. I think Georgia's passing game will be much improved over last year, and will especially require defenses to respect the deep ball. I don't necessarily believe the way to beat Georgia this year is "stack the box". Also, mandatory conflict of interest statement: really, ESPN, are you going to ask a guy who coached 3 rivals of UGA and who has never held back his contempt for the program for advice on UGA?
Rod Gilmore on Pass Defense
Asher Allen and Prince Miller are small (5'10" and 5'8", respectively) but scrappy CBs. They're fast enough to cover. Just not sure yet if they'll be able to tackle anyone.
Asher Allen and Prince Miller are both currently listed as backups to Thomas Flowers and Bryan Evans. Also, I'm not really sure where he gets the evidence that they're "scrappy" and "fast enough" or that they'd have trouble tackling opponents. Neither has had a ton of playing time.
Chris Spielman on Run Defense
Both DTs -- 6'3", 292-pound Jeff Owens and 6'5", 315-pound Kade Weston -- command double-teams. That should allow new starting DEs Roderick Battle and Marcus Howard to work one-on-ones and become backfield pests. Combined, they had only 2 TFLs last year.
Probably too favorable analysis. Owens and Weston have promise, but I think it's a little bit of a stretch to say they command double teams so far. I hope he's right, but this seems a bit optimistic.
Desmond Howard on Special Teams
Henderson can flat-out fly, and he's one of the few guys who can legitimately take it to the house at any time. Just have to wonder if a guy who's 5'10", 150 pounds and playing a bigger role on offense will hold up back there.
To Desmond Howard, "Special Teams" doesn't mean field goal kicking, punting or coverage. It's just the return guy. Also, it should be said that Desmond Howard was 5'10, not much bigger than 150 pounds the year he won the Heisman Trophy. Just sayin'.
Jim Donnan on Coaching
Mark Richt is a terrific special-teams coach, but he relies too much on field goals. And while he did an underrated job bringing along Stafford, he needs the QB to take a monster step in red zone efficiency this year.
REALLY! ESPN thinks it's a good idea to ask the guy who got fired to comment on his replacement? Seriously!!! And it takes some nerve for him to knock red zone efficiency and field goals. I don't recall Georgia being a scoring machine during his years. Points per game under Donnan = 26.6. Points per game under Richt: = 28.2. Nerve. (Also, arguably, the jockeying of QBs in the middle of the season messed with Stafford more than helped him along, and it may have cost us against Vandy and UK. That's the crazy thing about this whole piece - even when they're complimentary, they get it wrong.)
Brad Edwards on Schedule
A 2-0 start would vault Georgia toward the top of the polls, but the Tennessee game is huge. It's Georgia's first big SEC road test, and the Dawgs lost at home to the Vols last year, 51-33. Now they have to win in Knoxville.
Yes, they have to win in Knoxville... which is exactly what they've done the last three times they've traveled there. Brad Edwards normally has the numbers behind what he writes, but this is just lazy. Nothing on OOC games, nothing on SEC west rotation. Just weak.
So there's your expert analysis. Two guys with clear conflicts of interest (and I've always sensed that Blackledge didn't much care for Georgia, either). One guy who didn't even look at the depth chart.
These guys are supposed to know more than we do. To have more inside information. To be a filter, getting to us what we need to know. Awesome job.
This little thing right here is reason enough to hate national coverage of college football.
ULTIMATE EDSBS LIVE!!! MEME
Gimme a f'n siren... Here's my attempt to answer all of the EDSBS Live!!! questions since they've been doing it. When they ask for something about "my team", I'll respond for UGA reluctantly, but my real response will be in reference to college football media coverage.
Naturally, this is going to be long, so it's below the fold...
August 14:
1. Favorite Sportswriter (Big Media): I used to like Tim Tucker back when he was really just interesting quirks and numbers. But I'm not even sure if he even has a column anymore - and all I can remember from him for the last few years are some Reillyesque human interest stories. I'd give props to Phil Mushnick for his recent crusade against Joe Morgan (but he's not really into college football, is he?). But really, isn't Barnhart the correct answer here?
2. Favorite Broadcaster: For TV, the guy who shuts up the most wins. So, I'll give it to the time the CBC broadcast CFL games without announcers. If I have to choose one... well, Ron Franklin's an obvious pick. Brad Nessler's pretty good, but kind of plastic. This question would be a lot easier if "least" were inserted at the front. I'll catch hell for it, but were he not affiliated with his current school, I guess I'd pick Wes Durham. Calls a clean game, doesn't dumb things down, and you always know what is happening on the field, even if you can't see it. So basically, the opposite of Larry Munson (who is fine for adding color, but is totally useless if you can't see what's happening).
3. Simple change in coverage that would make things better: Some competing network puts on a pregame show opposite Gameday, and that show is modeled almost entirely on Sky Sports News: 60% of the screen showing information, constant injury and weather updates, first hand interviews, zero personality stories. Like you wouldn't watch that.
4. Sexiest Blogger: Great framing. Why not ask about the smartest character on The Hills, or most virginal contestant on Rock of Love? I don't even know where to start on this. So I won't.
August 7:
1. Question Marks for my team: For the Dawgs, you'd think O-Line (and you're right), but I'm more worried about the defensive backs. Could be trouble. For the media: will Gameday continue the trend of cross-promotion at the expense of objective journalism? Will the daily CFB Live show cause Gameday to be a rehashing and repeating of previously run topics/clips?
2. Player our team cannot lose this year: Dawgs - might think I'm crazy, but it's Fernando Velasco, the senior center. Seriously. Media - SMQ.
3. Preseason Shopping List: TiVo HD Dual Tuner. Comcast's DVR is driving me crazy. I just won't be able to do Gameday Recaps with that crappy box and remote.
4. Something that gets me almost as fired up as college football: Books about mountain climbing. Highbrow/Lowbrow comedy classics that first time you see it. Cold beer.
July 31:
1. Best road trip destination: Ole Miss this past year was solid, but I doubt anything will top the New Orleans/LSU trip in Fall '98 (Quincy Carter's "One Shining Moment"). Hurricanes on Bourbon Street, outrageous drunkenness in Red Stick, the single worst smelling vehicle I've ever been in. I'd say Georgia-Florida in '97 was at least second, but I cannot for the life of me remember a single detail of the entire weekend (including where I even stayed) before or after Edwards turned it upfield to clinch.
2. Road Trip I want to take the most: Got a lot of ideas on this one... How about a Wisconsin weekend with Madison on Saturday and Lambeau on Sunday? What about Louisville with a side trip to Churchill Downs? But the one I've always watched and I'd love to see in person: Army-Navy in Philadelphia.
3. Essential Road Gadget: Ex Officio Give-n-Go Boxers. Your balls will thank me.
4. Most impressive road performance: Hmmmm... not too great history here. Perhaps the 11 hour train from Oxford to Edinburgh, during which I vomited for 8 of them (hot scotch and coke from a bowl for several hours right before departure), but then rallied to drink on Grassmarket Street? Maybe pulling the "Drink around the world" trick from France to Mexico at Epcot? Pretty weak, overall.
July 24:
1. Adopt an underdog (player or team): I'm going with Idaho. Getting jobbed by Dennis Erickson deserves something, doesn't it? Also, App State against Michigan.
2. Underdog I hope falls flat: I'm not sure I get this question. If it's a traditional underdog that some people are talking up this year, it's simple: South Carolina.
3. Favorite underdog player of all time: In time, I've got a feeling that Verron Haynes will become a favorite underdog for most Georgia fans. Perhaps it's odd how a lot of recent big plays for the Dawgs have come from underdog-type players, like Haynes and Michael Johnson.
4. Biggest sexual upset: The fact that the night I introduced myself to my eventual wife I was wearing bright white slacks with embroidered nautical symbols and anchors. That's Nova over Georgetown right there.
July 17:
1. Game I'd sacrifice my firstborn to the Gods for this year: To win, Georgia-Florida. This will be the answer until people stop using the phrase "Florida's won X out of Y in the series" and start using the phrase "Georgia's won X out of Y in the series."
2. Game not involving my team I'd sacrifice something to see: I've got a feeling Michigan-Wisconsin in Madison would be fun as hell and it'll be important too. But there is a correct, non-obvious answer here: Thanksgiving weekend, Boise State at Hawaii. Like you wouldn't want to roll up on that one.
3. College Football Gods: Darren McFadden is Brahma, the Creator. Jake Long is Vishnu, the Protector. Glenn Dorsey is Siva, the destroyer.
4. Sexiest God/Goddess: Got to go with the Celtic Goddess Brigid, who for some reason has a following in Haiti, where she's described thusly: "Maman Brigitte may be characterised as a hard working, hard cursing woman who can swear a blue streak and enjoys a special drink made of rum laced with 21 hot peppers." Awesome.
July 10:
1. Three worst coaches: Zook, Morriss, Mangino. Three coaches with at least 5 years tenure, below .500 winning percentage, all have winning percentages far below the traditional winning percentage for their respective schools.
2. Offensive or defensive scheme I hate the most: Modified West Coast Offense. 5 yard out, 5 yard out, 5 yard out. Games take 6 hours to play. The entire scheme is predicated on the idea to make the other team miss a tackle. It's a loud admission that you don't have the ability to overpower another team. I hate it.
3. Playoff/system preference: Shit or get off the pot. Either go back to conference tie-ins where bowl committees chose teams based solely on economics and champions are decided in Locke's Natural State, or go to a completely objective won/loss system. As long as coaches and writers who aren't paying attention and have inherent biases aren't involved, I'd be for it.
4. New crush for the season: I always have trouble with the "sexy" questions. I guess I'll go with the most beautiful girl in the... room. Rachel Blanchard
July 3:
1. What do I know about the ACC: I get a sense that there's a continuing trend of ACC teams playing toward the middle. I see UNC as improved. NC State should be a lot better. Wake and Georgia Tech should be worse. FSU better. Miami underrated, but not great. Duke will suck, but I don't see another team better than 9-3 or worse than 5-7.
2. UGA's worst multi-year starter: Greg Bright drove me nuts back when I was starting college, but there's no way I could not say Quincy Carter after 2000 in Columbia. F him in his cokehole.
3. Something nice about the ACC: Ralph Friedgen is a fantastic coach and deserves to be considered among the best in the country. Maryland simply isn't a football school. He's been able to create winners there, and not just off the back of a couple of players or a quirky system.
4. Most mediocre performance: So many to choose from! Wrecking a car from falling asleep (no alcohol) at the wheel the night of Junior Prom is high mediocrity.
June 26:
1. Most undervalued team: I typically think this team is overrated, and normally lazy pundits look at schedules and returning starters, so I expected them to be listed a lot, but I haven't seen them anywhere. Iowa. They miss Ohio State and Michigan. The OOC is weak. The way last year ended offered some off-season motivation. I could see them 11-1 and top 10, easy.
2. Underrated coach and announcer: Believe it or not, I honestly think Dennis Erickson is underrated. 2 National Titles, 4 conference titles, and a top 15 active winning percentage, to me, means he's objectively a top coach, but he's rarely thought of that way. Also, I think Phil Fulmer's gotten to the point where he's underrated. Wins don't lie, and he's got a ton of them. I don't think any announcer is underrated, because "not being completely horrible" is equivalent to sainthood in that profession.
3. Advice I've been given and undervauled and wished I hadn't: "Take your vacation time. If you don't, you're not earning your full compensation."
4. Undervalued sexual asset: words.
June 19:
1. Paradise for UGA: 1980, before my Dawg Mitzvah. 2002 could've been...
2. Gameday Utopia: I arrive before the parking lot is full. It's quiet and a little chilly (cold enough for a pullover that'll get removed by 10:30. The only sound is the pitter patter of flip flopped feet of a shacking girl on the walk of shame. Thought it was early? Wrong. I unwrap a Chic-fil-a biscuit. Not undercooked, as they're wont to. I read the newspaper, scanning the high school scores. Then, the silence is punctured with the crisp crack of a frigid cheap tallboy. The next 4 hours are filled with discussion about the day's games and exactly how many nugget trays I could eat in a single 24 hour day. 7 beers killed, but not wavering. Arrive at seats just as the trumpet blares. Mistake free football is played - especially clock management. I feel the nerves that things will fall apart at exactly 3 points during the game, but it never comes to pass. Leave hoarse and happy. Drink a gallon of gatorade and eat half a ton of chicken fingers. Sleep without worry.
3. Perfect game, situation and score: After 8 weeks of eking out wins against inferior opposition but remaining undefeated, #5 Georgia is a TD underdog to #1 Florida. 21-0 at the end of the first quarter. 38-0 at the half. 45-3 at the end of the third. 59-3 final. Florida turns the ball over 6 times in their own half. Florida receivers drop 11 passes. Basically, everything that had gone their way over the last 2 decades gets turned on its head. A stunned national media elevates Georgia to #1. Brogen's and the Jacksonville Landing burn to the ground.
4. Favorite book/show/movie in re Hawaii: Magnum's the easy pick. Lost is probably my favorite current show, but it's just filmed there without reference to being in Hawaii. If I can't pick that, I'll go with a tie between From Here to Eternity and Saved By The Bell: Hawaiian Style.
June 12:
1. Big XII winner: I've got a weird feeling that the South is going to look like the SEC East this year, with 4-5 teams all at 5-3 in conference and every single team with at least one scalp against a good team. I could see some weird tiebreaker coming into play, and, seriously, 5 different teams winning it. Looking at the schedule, Oklahoma and maybe Texas Tech have the most favorable home/away/North teams. I'll go with the Raiders to be weird. In the North, screw it, I'm going with Kansas State. They'll have a lot of tiebreaker advantages because of their schedule against the North. I'm not buying Nebraska. K-State vs. Taco Tech? I'll go with the 'Cats.
2. Winner of Big XII play for BCS title? I doubt it. I see a lot of teams beating each other up. I actually think the Big XII will be better than it has been in recent years (step up in abilities for Okie State, A&M, Missouri, Kansas, Kansas State), but that'll just lead to tougher games for supposedly elite teams - and random losses. The conference will be better for it though.
3. $500K to move to Nebraska: I'd do it for less than that, but to make me stay it'd take repeat payments. Also, it'd depend on what I'd be doing. Insurance Adjuster? $300K per year minimum. Athletic Director in Lincoln? $100,000 per year. Blogger? $100K per year.
4. Sexiest Big XII mascot: I'd say Kansas, because of the phrase "naked as a jaybird", but the mascot's nose looks far too much like a dick. I'll go with Kansas State - because cougars are Wildcats.
June 5:
1. Do I care about Notre Dame: A little, just not what I'm supposed to. I'm Irish Catholic. I was born up North. I have an Uncle who graduated from Notre Dame. But I've never been all that fired up about them. Natural response to something when people tell me I'm supposed to like a certain thing is to go the other way. It's hard to separate what I think of them from the massive promotional support system. I guess objectively, I care some. But not anywhere near as much as someone in a conference room in Bristol, CT thinks I should.
2. Grief ND fans endure proportional to crimes: Please. Undeserved worth draws undeserved criticism. This question is akin to "Does Paris Hilton deserve to be hounded by papparazzi?" Were the Irish just another program, they wouldn't deserve criticism and attention. But they reap the benefits (bowls, poll fluffing, easier recruiting, $$$$$$$$$), so don't cry about it.
3. What do I like about ND: The fact they've never beaten UGA. Sugar Bowl 1980. How they occasionally beat GT. How good an example they are for why the current system of popularity-based polling should be completely scrapped.
4. Sleep with a leprechaun?: No. Not into dudes, and there aren't female leprechauns.
May 29:
1. OMG What's HoTT?: Perception of the SEC among sportswriters. I sense a lot more "best ever" descriptions attached to the SEC this year than in many. A lot of national writers I think felt totally scooped by Florida last year, and right on time (translate: late to the party), they decide to jump in with hyperbole. And it's probably wrongheaded. CNNsi has 6 SEC teams in their top 20. The early coaches poll has 9 getting votes. I think the SEC is tough as hell, but I also know that polls inevitably drop teams that lose games. In the SEC, these teams will play one another, and someone has to lose. I'm readily awaiting the columns mid season (after everyone in the SEC has a loss or 2) that wonder why the SEC isn't quite as strong as they though because there isn't a dominant team (and without the intrusion of y'know, logic).
2. OMG soooo NoT HoTT?: Wake Forest. They return a whole lot of talent but aren't getting much stick. It's not like the ACC got that much better overnight. I don't know whether they'll win the conference again, but it wouldn't surprise me to see them back in a bowl and the Top 25. Also, I wrote above about Iowa. Don't understand why they're not getting much publicity.
3. Hot Boomlet: Iowa ends up hyped big by the end of the year. Arizona pulls a big upset and gets into the Pac-10's third best bowl.
4. Trend for 2007: Red Bull and other energy drinks fall out of favor. I've got a feeling that these drinks won't age well - and the people who were 18-23 when they originally came out are getting older. Red Bull and Vodka will be as easily mocked as an 18 year old male ordering an Amaretto Sour. If it's not already.
May 22:
1. Big program that deserves the awe: I don't care much for awe. I guess the best way I can answer this is by saying the big program that pisses me off the least for receiving awe is Michigan.
2. Big program that has caused me the most personal anguish: Florida. 1995 alone gets them this spot. If you'd asked me this question in 1998, I might've said Tennessee.
3. Little program I wish was big: Any of the Florida schools- FIU, FAU, UCF, USF. Dilute the talent down there. Also, if Memphis were more of a perennial power, I think it'd hurt Tennessee and several of the SEC West schools, and it wouldn't hurt UGA all that much.
4. Overrated Hottie: Jessica Simpson's never done much for me. I like women smart-strong-independent, not fake-strong-independent. Never much cared for Jennifer Aniston either. Can't really separate her from her loathsome character on Friends.
May 15:
1. Favorite play/scheme/thing that goes boom: If it worked better, I'd like that goal line run that UGA sometimes rons with the FB lined up just behind the tackle and even with the QB. But it rarely works. So I'll go with the play I appreciated the most in flag football: the inside shovel pass.
2. Favorite football movie: Football is probably the worst sport when it comes to movies. I suppose I think Varsity Blues was entertaining, if ridiculous. Little Giants had that awesome play, the "Annexation of Puerto Rico".
3. Am I blitzing: early, but not often. If you can get the jump on the opposing team's line in the first quarter and shake the confidence of the QB, it can have a great impact (not just risk rattling him, he'll feel like he has to rush his throws the rest of the game). But I wouldn't blitz much in the second half. Fewer risks unless absolutely necessary.
4. Most suggestive football term: There are hundreds. I'm personal to "spread 'em out wide, but pound it right up the middle".
May 8:
1. Worst team I've ever seen: 1998 Kent State. They went 0-11 and were annihilated 56-3 by a Jim Donnan Georgia team. One of the few instances where Georgia didn't play to the level of the opponent, because it was physically impossible for Georgia to play as bad as that Kent team.
2. Team I'd wish football anthrax on: You might expect me to say Florida, but I'd rather beat them hard, fair and square. I might have said Auburn, but since the fanbase whines more than anyone, terrible misfortune would simply spread. I thought about Georgia Tech, but that'd just make us look bad because of a worse OOC schedule. I'll just go with the team from Knoxville.
3. Worst player/play I've ever seen: September 9, 2000. The first, second, third, fourth and fifth interceptions thrown by Quincy Carter.
4. Worst song to make love to: OK, here's something embarassing... I was making a mix CD of mood tunes. I found a somewhat recognizable Massive Attack song. Slow groove. Moody, seemed right. Slapped it on there. Of course, when I finally get around to playing it, the Lady chimes in with "Isn't this the theme from 'House'?" Indeed it was. Things stopped right there, as she couldn't control her laughter. Alternate answer: The Kidz Bop version of Since U Been Gone.
May 1:
1. Sportswriter that most gets under my skin: If just college football, Stewart Mandel. If not, Scoop Jackson.
2. Sportswriter I like that some unfairly bash/underrate: I like Clay Travis and wish he had a broader audience. Not too many people bash him though.
3. One writer who doesn't cover sports who would become one: I cackle to think of how Chuck Pahlaniuk would cover college football.
4. Lovin' Song: Trainspotting by Primal Scream is pretty great. Big Poppa by Biggie usually gets a laugh, but it's never failed.
April 24:
1. Best Pre-1990 team: The talent on the '86 team might've been even better, but I'll take the '87 Miami national champs. Steve Walsh, The Blades Brothers, Bubba McDowell... even the punter was a stud: Jeff Feagles. And the icing on the cake: Irvin. They beat then-ranked #10 Arkansas, in Fayetteville, 51-7. Beat Prime Time in Tallahassee. Shut out a top 10 Notre Dame team. Beat top-ranked and totally roided Oklahoma (with the Boz) in the Orange Bowl. Pretty impressive season. One of the few 1980s teams to get through a challenging schedule unscathed with some badass wins.
2. Favorite Pre-1990 player: Herschel is Herschel, enough said. But I remember liking how Terry Hoage played, a lot.
3. Remove one aspect of the modern game/coverage: TV timeouts. I'm not too upset with commercials during games when the clock and game is stopped anyway. It's TV's insertion into the game that bothers me.
4. Favorite Retro Babe: Myrna Loy. Nora Charles is the ideal woman: hilarious, kinda hot, willing to get ass over ears wasted with you, and can solve mysteries.
April 17:
1. Sleeper player of the season: For UGA, it's got to be Sean Bailey, because nobody remembers him. Wouldn't surprise me if he tears up a few early games, then draws more safety coverage, and Mo Massaquoi explodes the second half.
2. Incoming freshman/early enroll that can help: If you count JUCOs and Redshirts, then pick one of Haverkamp, Davis, and Sturdivant. If just true frosh: Sturdivant's your boy.
3. Tailgate the Spring Game: Nope. Had to help the Lady travel (pregnant 6 months). Saw some of it on TV though. Mark Richt was doing play-by-play, which should let you know how important it really was.
4. News anchor reporter I'd bang: I'd bang Debbie Matenopolous with a hammer in the face. For the other meaning, I'd go with two choices. (a) CNN's blog girl Abbi Tatton. (b) 60 Minutes II's Lara Logan. Lara Logan in a war zone in a flack jacket = fantastic.
April 10:
1. Sketchiest Football Player Ever: I take sketchy to mean "you know something's fishy, but it's never public", so guys like Marcus Vick don't count. Quincy Carter fits that description. I'd also add Onterrio Smith, because it takes a large amount of sketchiness to get kicked out of Tennessee for bad behavior and then go on to get caught with a fake-dick drug test circumventor.
2. Sketchoid Program: Everyone's dirty but my team, right? Those mid/late-90s Nebraska teams were really sketchy, but I think Alabama's probably got the all-time title wrapped up on this one.
3. Sketchy Family Member?: Yes, but it's not polite to point that out. Who am I kidding? The guy just filled up half the first page with pictures of ThunderCats. Sketchy (and awesome)enough?
4. How am I gay: At every party my roommates and I threw in law school, I made sure to play George Michael's "Father Figure" on the stereo. It was always a hit, if to nobody but me.
April 3:
1. Favorite Sporting Freak: In terms of freaking out, there's Lee Elia, Lou Pinella, Bobby Cox, Earl Weaver, and the best ever, Jim Mora. In terms of being totally eccentric and loving it, I don't know if anyone will ever top Shaq. Seriously, he's a freak and it's awesome.
2. Is it harder to be weird now?: Yes, but not because of the public eye looming larger. It's because it takes more and more insanity to be considered weird now. I find myself shrugging off things that are completely insane.
3. Biggest oddball currently in action: In college football, I think Hal Mumme tops Mike Leach.
4. What would my eccentricity be?: I'd respond to all inane sideline reporter/press conference questions entirely in rhyming verse a la Tobias Funke.
March 27:
1. Favorite sports broadcasting widget: The first down line. It's hard to watch football on TV without it.
2. Something I'd like obliterated from the face of TV: I'll avoid the gratuitous ESPN bashing on this question. What I really hate is the in-game shot of a celebrity promoting a TV show on the network. I don't want to see Mandy Patinkin in the 4th row of the Super Bowl so CBS can tell us that "an all new Criminal Minds is up right after the trophy ceremony." I hate this so so so so so much.
3. Celebrity who would make the worst color commentator: Can it get worse than Craig James and Rod Gilmore? Robin Williams? Rosie O'Donnell? Bill O'Reilly?
4. Antisocial behavior I fantasize about indulging: So there are some kids that park outside my house and roll back into nearby woods to smoke weed or screw around. Didn't bother me for a while, but this summer it's been terrible. All hours of the day and night. They block my driveway and wife's car. Litter in my yard. The woods area used to be a good place to walk Murphy, but now there's blunt wrappers and empty beer cans and broken bottles everywhere. Eventually the police caught some kids, and it's subsided. But before the cops caught them, I always wanted to let the air out of their tires and fuck up the rest of their cars. Never did it because of reciprocity, but it was the first time I ever really wanted to fuck with someone's car.
March 20:
1. Favorite NFL Draft pick I saw play that's not obvious: Thought David Irons to Atlanta in the 6th round was a nice pick. Fred Bennett in the 4th wasn't a bad pick either.
2. Radioactive Do Not Touch Pick: I've got little faith in Brady Quinn at #22, but my choice here is Ted Ginn at #9. I think he'll have an injury-filled, so-so career.
3. Favorite College Stud with no success in the Pros: Breaks my heart, but it's Robert Edwards. I don't understand why he doesn't own ESPN now. He should've sued the crap out of them after that ridiculous sand football BS.
4. Big Draft Board of Life, I was: as a sophomore, Kiper had me pegged as a can't miss prospect, but for some reason I slipped to the 5th round. People in the know then thought I was underrated and a steal, if only the right program could motivate me. Nobody did though. I was out of the game quickly. Total bust.
March 13:
1. What don't I know about football: Too much, but most importantly, how much it hurts, physically.
2. What do I pretend to know more about than I really do: Everything football related. I honestly have little knowledge.
3. Something I could lecture on: Professional sports systems of player allocation (law journal note), movement of professional sports franchises, Arrested Development, the connection between the growth of the game of soccer and shipping routes.
4. Offseason Resolution: TOO LATE! By August 2007, I will be fully capable of using a Baby Bjorn to carry my daughter to a football game.
March 6:
I actually tried calling in on this one and had answers ready... I posted them HERE.
February 27:
1. Prediction for next season pulled from ass: Navy will beat Notre Dame for the first time since 1963.
2. Shameshag: I'm terrible for saying this... Chris McKendry.
3. Tweak one thing about college football: This question has been repeated, sort of. Competitor to College Gameday.
4. Hire one coach, Fire one coach: If I could hire one guy for UGA (assuming Richt becomes unavailable), I'd hire Paul Johnson. If I could fire one guy at another school, I'd fire Urban Meyer, to be replaced by the gay sounding intern from The Tonight Show and Celebrity Fit Club.
5. Sweaters with Ties: Not for me. I'm not much of a sweater guy at all.
