Can someone please explain to me WHY Jurich keeps always going "out west" hiring coaching staffs that have NO vested interest in UL, when there are very good coaches who lived and played in Louisville?
Why did TJ IMMEDIATELY without any hesitation go after a coach with huge question marks about his capability, (at least I had question marks about him), instead of at least looking at the coaching staffs like at FAU where you have guys like Howard Schnellenberger, Gary Nord and Johnny Frost who would have been a GREAT fit for UL, and guys who have galvanized the fan base instead of fracturing it?
I know that UL is looking for a DC and Frost is not anywhere close to being capable of taking over a position like that, but what about getting one of the best LB's the University of Louisville has ever had, back here to coach a DL or a LB corps that was pretty weak under the current position coaching staff?
In retrospect, TJ has made some great "temporary" hires for UL football, but has he really made the RIGHT hires? I love John L Smith, he is a great guy, and a good HC, Petrino is, and was, a phenominal offensive mind, but during their tenures not ONCE did UL look to "promote from within" or look to "groom" future asst coach's by bringing in guys who have close ties to not only the university but also the community.
I am just getting more and more confused why the ONLY coach'es UL EVER wants to talk to about positions at UL are always coach'es that have never lived, worked or coached east of the Mississippi river prior to coming to UL.
It just seems disingenuous to all of those who have given so much to the UL football program in the past to not even be considered for positions at the school and community where they gave so much.
Saturday, December 22, 2007
FAU's "Old Warrior" still undefeated
Howard Schnellenberger, the Phoenix of college football, once again resurrected in a bowl game last night orchestrating a bowl victory with fledgling Florida Atlantic University football team, and stayed undefeated in post-season bowl games by completely dominating Memphis in the R+L Carriers New Orleans bowl.
In Boca Raton, they very affectionately refer to Schnellenberger as the "Old Warrior". And it aptly applies.
FAU, with a coaching staff HEAVY of assistants from the University of Louisville, plays a very tough, physical brand of football, which for 10 years we UL fans saw and loved. An NFL pro-style offense, using 2-back sets and an attacking passing attack, with a very physical running style; and a base 4-3 defense with huge fundamental emphasis on TACKLING as opposed to hard-hits. And if FAU's practices are anything like they were at UL, you can bet that game performance is the "EASY" part of a players week.
Schnellenberger has proven that pro-style offense with a physical defense can win at EVERY level of collegiate competition. From winning national championships at Miami University and playing on the biggest stages in college football, to selling just the CONCEPT of football with zero players to recruits at FAU. Not too mention what all UL fans know he accomplished at UL.
But Schnellenberger is more than just a throwback style brand of football. The man himself is a complete anathema to EVERY college coach in the nation. Schnellenberger THRIVES on challenge. It is literally the lifeblood of his heart. This is a man that LEFT Miami University AFTER winning a national championship there to come to UL to try and build a program that was all but dropped from competitive play back in 1994. And then, decided, (after a disastrous stint at Oklahoma where the fans and alumni there NEVER understood him), to build from literally NOTHING a football program in the heart and on the figurative doorsteps of the university where he won a national championship many years ago.
In an era of college football where we see coach's changing jobs every other year for ever increasing exhorbitant amounts of cash, where "loyalty" and "support of the coach" is DEMANDED of the fan base to support a head coach, REGARDLESS of the product they put on the field or their ever-wandering eye, here you have a coach that has a longer tenure at the schools he has been affiliated with than 90% of all the coaching staffs out there, but at the same time has taken positions that most former HC's would consider an INSULT, or a joke, if even mentioned as a job opportunity!
We praise HC's like Bobby Bowden and Joe Paterno for staying with their respective universities so long; but would either of even THOSE guys have walked away from Miami after winning a national championship, NOT to take higher paying job, or a more prestigious job, but to breath life into a program at UL that had barely seen any success playing at the top level of college football? And NOT for money! Let's face it, had it been about money, Schnellenberger might even have been MICHIGAN'S number 1 pick at this point in his career, and even at his age. Because Schnellenberger could have stayed at Miami and won at least several MORE national championships there. And would be making a ton more dollars than he is right now at FAU.
As UL fans we owe a lot to Schnellenberger, and through that I was cheering as loud as I could last night for the FAU Owls to bring home their first bowl victory in their first bowl game ever, for a HC that I think deserves to at least be considered for nomination into the college football HOF.
In Boca Raton, they very affectionately refer to Schnellenberger as the "Old Warrior". And it aptly applies.
FAU, with a coaching staff HEAVY of assistants from the University of Louisville, plays a very tough, physical brand of football, which for 10 years we UL fans saw and loved. An NFL pro-style offense, using 2-back sets and an attacking passing attack, with a very physical running style; and a base 4-3 defense with huge fundamental emphasis on TACKLING as opposed to hard-hits. And if FAU's practices are anything like they were at UL, you can bet that game performance is the "EASY" part of a players week.
Schnellenberger has proven that pro-style offense with a physical defense can win at EVERY level of collegiate competition. From winning national championships at Miami University and playing on the biggest stages in college football, to selling just the CONCEPT of football with zero players to recruits at FAU. Not too mention what all UL fans know he accomplished at UL.
But Schnellenberger is more than just a throwback style brand of football. The man himself is a complete anathema to EVERY college coach in the nation. Schnellenberger THRIVES on challenge. It is literally the lifeblood of his heart. This is a man that LEFT Miami University AFTER winning a national championship there to come to UL to try and build a program that was all but dropped from competitive play back in 1994. And then, decided, (after a disastrous stint at Oklahoma where the fans and alumni there NEVER understood him), to build from literally NOTHING a football program in the heart and on the figurative doorsteps of the university where he won a national championship many years ago.
In an era of college football where we see coach's changing jobs every other year for ever increasing exhorbitant amounts of cash, where "loyalty" and "support of the coach" is DEMANDED of the fan base to support a head coach, REGARDLESS of the product they put on the field or their ever-wandering eye, here you have a coach that has a longer tenure at the schools he has been affiliated with than 90% of all the coaching staffs out there, but at the same time has taken positions that most former HC's would consider an INSULT, or a joke, if even mentioned as a job opportunity!
We praise HC's like Bobby Bowden and Joe Paterno for staying with their respective universities so long; but would either of even THOSE guys have walked away from Miami after winning a national championship, NOT to take higher paying job, or a more prestigious job, but to breath life into a program at UL that had barely seen any success playing at the top level of college football? And NOT for money! Let's face it, had it been about money, Schnellenberger might even have been MICHIGAN'S number 1 pick at this point in his career, and even at his age. Because Schnellenberger could have stayed at Miami and won at least several MORE national championships there. And would be making a ton more dollars than he is right now at FAU.
As UL fans we owe a lot to Schnellenberger, and through that I was cheering as loud as I could last night for the FAU Owls to bring home their first bowl victory in their first bowl game ever, for a HC that I think deserves to at least be considered for nomination into the college football HOF.
Thursday, December 20, 2007
Louisville signs 8 JUCO football recruits...
'Tis the season...the season of scrambling to fix holes and find quick fixes for all of those teams sitting at home this holiday season and not running through practices and drills getting ready for their post-season bowl games.
For the first time in 10 years, UL is sitting at home this season, even though the did reach .500 with a 6-6 record to become bowl eligible. But based on the team play this season, it would have been a perverse sense of justice if UL had gone to a bowl game.
Instead, Kragthorpe and remaining coaches have been scrambling to sign as many JUCO players as they can to fill some holes, to hopefully get UL back to a bowl game next season.
To be sure, UL has found numbers in the JUCO ranks, which they believe will help next season. But the truth is, JUCO transfers are at best a 50-50 shot at being impact players, and even less of a chance of being impact players their first eligible season.
Oh, I have no problem with UL getting JUCO's. UL has a very good history with them. No, I just prefer to err on the side of caution, rather than put the moniker of "UL IS BACK" on the team just yet.
But since it is the holiday season, let me put my wishes to song, in the spirit of the holiday season:
Oh come all UL faithful, hopeful but regretful, oh come ye, oh come ye to JUCO relief!
Come and be thankful, thankful for signing some talent.
Talent that will help us, talent that will help us, talent that will help us...
or so we think!
For the first time in 10 years, UL is sitting at home this season, even though the did reach .500 with a 6-6 record to become bowl eligible. But based on the team play this season, it would have been a perverse sense of justice if UL had gone to a bowl game.
Instead, Kragthorpe and remaining coaches have been scrambling to sign as many JUCO players as they can to fill some holes, to hopefully get UL back to a bowl game next season.
To be sure, UL has found numbers in the JUCO ranks, which they believe will help next season. But the truth is, JUCO transfers are at best a 50-50 shot at being impact players, and even less of a chance of being impact players their first eligible season.
Oh, I have no problem with UL getting JUCO's. UL has a very good history with them. No, I just prefer to err on the side of caution, rather than put the moniker of "UL IS BACK" on the team just yet.
But since it is the holiday season, let me put my wishes to song, in the spirit of the holiday season:
Oh come all UL faithful, hopeful but regretful, oh come ye, oh come ye to JUCO relief!
Come and be thankful, thankful for signing some talent.
Talent that will help us, talent that will help us, talent that will help us...
or so we think!
MLB is taken to task by.....PETE ROSE?...
This week, Pete Rose, an icon to many major league baseball fans, and a pariah of the MLB front offices; made statements about the recent release of the Mitchell Report and the subsequent "outing" of many MLB players who were named in the report for taking steroids, HGH and other performance enhancing drugs.
Pete Rose, in a statement the other day said that players who have used steroids or other PED's are "making a mockery" of baseball.
Yes, this is Pete Rose talking. The current and still leader in MLB history for career hits, the leader of the 1970's "Big Red Machine" that won several World Series, AND the SAME Pete Rose that was banned for life from the sport for gambling on baseball.
Honestly, I actually think that Pete Rose is actually right and has a point. I als think Rose has been given the shaft by MLB for years, and I think he SHOULD be given a pardon and be allowed to be voted on for HOF membership. But come on, Pete Rose talking about how players using drugs makes a mockery of baseball? That is just laughable at best. What Pete Rose SHOULD be saying, is to tell those very same players, (guys like Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, Miguel Tejada, among others), that what they NEED to do is fess up, come clean, and ask for forgiveness.
The problem that EVERYONE had with Pete Rose, is exactly the SAME problem many fans have with sterioid and PED users in baseball. That being that, in spite of evidence to the contrary, they all want to deny everything. Ya' know what? THAT pisses fans off and alienates them from the players faster than anything else. But if those same players were to come out, admit they did use those drugs, but did not know what the consequences of those drugs were, (let's face it, back when these guys were accused of taking the drugs, we really did not know what they would or could do...nor even how dangerous they were.)
Look we all make mistakes, we all have used bad judgement. But at least Pettitte is showing SOME type of honor about his involvement, and is looking more and more the pitiable victim than a blatant cheater. That is the lesson that Pete Rose apparently has not learned.
Fans will forgive players, we WANT to forgive players, but we do NOT want to be made out to be dupes and look like idiots. The "court of public opinion" is what is at stake here, because none of the drugs used are criminal acts. So the ONLY risk these players will be taking is the risk that some fans will never forgive them. But you know what? MOST fans will. If given the chance. And that is something that Rose never really "got". Let's hope that the players named in the Mitchell report do learn that lesson.
Pete Rose, in a statement the other day said that players who have used steroids or other PED's are "making a mockery" of baseball.
Yes, this is Pete Rose talking. The current and still leader in MLB history for career hits, the leader of the 1970's "Big Red Machine" that won several World Series, AND the SAME Pete Rose that was banned for life from the sport for gambling on baseball.
Honestly, I actually think that Pete Rose is actually right and has a point. I als think Rose has been given the shaft by MLB for years, and I think he SHOULD be given a pardon and be allowed to be voted on for HOF membership. But come on, Pete Rose talking about how players using drugs makes a mockery of baseball? That is just laughable at best. What Pete Rose SHOULD be saying, is to tell those very same players, (guys like Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, Miguel Tejada, among others), that what they NEED to do is fess up, come clean, and ask for forgiveness.
The problem that EVERYONE had with Pete Rose, is exactly the SAME problem many fans have with sterioid and PED users in baseball. That being that, in spite of evidence to the contrary, they all want to deny everything. Ya' know what? THAT pisses fans off and alienates them from the players faster than anything else. But if those same players were to come out, admit they did use those drugs, but did not know what the consequences of those drugs were, (let's face it, back when these guys were accused of taking the drugs, we really did not know what they would or could do...nor even how dangerous they were.)
Look we all make mistakes, we all have used bad judgement. But at least Pettitte is showing SOME type of honor about his involvement, and is looking more and more the pitiable victim than a blatant cheater. That is the lesson that Pete Rose apparently has not learned.
Fans will forgive players, we WANT to forgive players, but we do NOT want to be made out to be dupes and look like idiots. The "court of public opinion" is what is at stake here, because none of the drugs used are criminal acts. So the ONLY risk these players will be taking is the risk that some fans will never forgive them. But you know what? MOST fans will. If given the chance. And that is something that Rose never really "got". Let's hope that the players named in the Mitchell report do learn that lesson.
Friday, December 14, 2007
Mitchell report nothing new, only confirming....
After literally sitting down and reading nearly 75% of the Mitchell report last night, (yeah, I REALLY did download and read about 300 of the 409 pages of it...I am either sick and deranged or completely insane...well, I guess a case can be made for all 3), nothing in this report is in any way revelation or new from what most of us suspected. Most of the information presented is either 2nd hand, 1st person statements, or circumstantial evidence. So, what is the big deal? This report, (even though it concentrates only on Major League Baseball), for the first time ever, has confirmed and quantified just how insidious and pervasive the abuse of drugs is in all sports at every level. Something all of us knew, but chose to ignore. We can no longer afford to ignore it.
Sure, several of the names mentioned might surprise us, but I do not care at ALL about the names of the individuals, which so many in the media seem to be focused on, as the overall message this report sends. And that message is not only shocking in its scope but also very telling about the culture we have created for our athletes and sports.
What many media outlets are seeming to completely overlook, or at least are not reporting as being highly disturbing, is the overwhelming depth that MLB has had with regard to steroid, HGH, and other performance enhancing drugs, (referred to in this blog as PED for brevity). According to this report, of the 30 or so teams in MLB not a SINGLE team in the entire league was left untouched by the use of PED's by players. And at EVERY level, EVERYONE knew about it. If this were an NCAA football or basketball program where money in FedEx packages where being sent to athletes, EVERY fan in the nation would be up in arms for the NCAA to issue the "death penalty" to that program for lack of institutional control. It is obvious that in MLB, when it comes to PED use there is NO institutional control at all, and by not having control, condoning such activity.
IMHO, there are several major issues with the use of PED's by athletes.
1) First and foremost for me is the lack of outrage by the fans of baseball. The "integrity of the game" is NOT the issue. The issue is that what this behavior says is that it absolutely "legitimizes" for every 8-18 year old out there, that it is "ok" to junk up as long as you do it for your sport, because you can make millions of dollars at it. Or win Olympic gold medals and national praise, (see Marion Jones for exhibit 1A). You may not agree, but I defy you to argue that point. Where are those sanctimonious MADD people over THIS issue, or other groups like them, huh? So much for this whole "war on drugs" issue. "Don't do pot or crack, Johnny those drugs can kill you! But it's ok to use PED's, because that just makes you bigger and stronger." And do NOT give me that crap that these are not "dangerous" drugs. Just this YEAR we already know of one football player and one former pro wrestler who respectively died of leukemia and of suicide and all evidence suggested that steroids played a role in their deaths. Not even to mention the VERY well publicized account of former NFL player Lyle Alzado who just before his death let the world know that his cancer could be directly linked to his steroid use, which he did not know at the time was deadly. How can any parent sit in the stands and say, "Hey, all athletes are doing are taking PED's. It does not make any difference, so who cares?", while at the same time telling their CHILDREN not to smoke pot? Parents of kids who play sports are hypocrits and enablers of this behavior as well, unless they take a stand.
2) This report is literally just the tip of the iceberg. I completely agree with Mitchell that should not take any punitive action against the players mentioned even those currently still playing, like expunging records, or HOF induction...because the issue is even DEEPER than that. As the report noted not a single team in MLB was uneffected by this, so if you only punish those mentioned in the report, based on pretty much circumstantial evidence, how do you go after and deal with those guys who have NOT been mentioned or implicated? If MLB just throws those 20 or so active players under the bus, they are doing NOTHING to address the problem. Only placating the media at best.
3) Selig said that this report was a "call to action", well, if the action taken is anything LESS than the action taken regarding gambling, (i.e. one violation and you are banned from baseball for life), then maybe they SHOULD cancel the entire season next year! If for no other reason that hypocracy.
4) This issue is FAR worse than ANYTHING gambling could do, and far worse that anything Pete Rose did. What Rose did was a SINGLE individual, what the Black Sox did was a singular team and event. The use of performance enhancing drugs effects EVERY team, and I still believe better than 60% of ALL current players today. That is epidemic levels.
The use of PED's goes FAR beyond Major League Baseball. This IS a "drug abuse" issue at the very core. And we, as fans, as coach's, as franchise owners, as MEDIA reporters, are ALL to blame for creating a culture that says it is OK to take drugs, as long as you just THINK it helps you play the game better. I do not want to get into the debate of whether taking PED's does or does not enhance an athlete's skill or talent. The point is they BELIEVE it does, whether that is true or not. You can argue about whether it does or not, that is completely a moot point. The fact is, as I stated, the ATHLETE believes it does. And is that not the essence of "addiction"? That you MUST take a drug to "keep that high", or more accurately in this case, "keep or gain that edge". The use of PED's is, IMHO, 100% equal to the use of crack or powder cocaine or even heroine. Drug abuse is drug abuse whether you are smoking crack or injecting yourself with HGH, if you believe you MUST have it, because you can not perform without it. And in the case of PED's, the pressure of athletes to compete, by being bigger, stronger, faster, is breeding a culture of addicts.
There are legitimate medical reasons for athletes taking steroids, as I said. I get that. But it is the abuse of that legitimate use that is the insidious part of the culture in sports that we have all been enablers to. Yet, there is NOT the public outrage over the use of PED's. And nothing like there is over the use of even something like marijuana. Think about it, suppose that your son or daughter playing a HS sport started to believe that smoking pot would give them a greater advantage to playing their sport. REGARDLESS of whether it was true or not. If they believe it will give them the edge, would you allow them to take it? Would it be "ok" for our professional athletes to do it? Again, do NOT give me that crap about how pot is WORSE than PED's. I have already given you several examples that these drugs when used to excessive levels WILL be deadly. THAT is scientific fact.
It seems that the media, MLB, and even many fans want to punish the "few" who were caught, instead of addressing the real problem, and facing the problem for what it really is. That problem can be stated very simply.
THE USE OF PERFORMANCE ENHANCING DRUGS IS DRUG ABUSE.
And we need to address it as such.
Sure, several of the names mentioned might surprise us, but I do not care at ALL about the names of the individuals, which so many in the media seem to be focused on, as the overall message this report sends. And that message is not only shocking in its scope but also very telling about the culture we have created for our athletes and sports.
What many media outlets are seeming to completely overlook, or at least are not reporting as being highly disturbing, is the overwhelming depth that MLB has had with regard to steroid, HGH, and other performance enhancing drugs, (referred to in this blog as PED for brevity). According to this report, of the 30 or so teams in MLB not a SINGLE team in the entire league was left untouched by the use of PED's by players. And at EVERY level, EVERYONE knew about it. If this were an NCAA football or basketball program where money in FedEx packages where being sent to athletes, EVERY fan in the nation would be up in arms for the NCAA to issue the "death penalty" to that program for lack of institutional control. It is obvious that in MLB, when it comes to PED use there is NO institutional control at all, and by not having control, condoning such activity.
IMHO, there are several major issues with the use of PED's by athletes.
1) First and foremost for me is the lack of outrage by the fans of baseball. The "integrity of the game" is NOT the issue. The issue is that what this behavior says is that it absolutely "legitimizes" for every 8-18 year old out there, that it is "ok" to junk up as long as you do it for your sport, because you can make millions of dollars at it. Or win Olympic gold medals and national praise, (see Marion Jones for exhibit 1A). You may not agree, but I defy you to argue that point. Where are those sanctimonious MADD people over THIS issue, or other groups like them, huh? So much for this whole "war on drugs" issue. "Don't do pot or crack, Johnny those drugs can kill you! But it's ok to use PED's, because that just makes you bigger and stronger." And do NOT give me that crap that these are not "dangerous" drugs. Just this YEAR we already know of one football player and one former pro wrestler who respectively died of leukemia and of suicide and all evidence suggested that steroids played a role in their deaths. Not even to mention the VERY well publicized account of former NFL player Lyle Alzado who just before his death let the world know that his cancer could be directly linked to his steroid use, which he did not know at the time was deadly. How can any parent sit in the stands and say, "Hey, all athletes are doing are taking PED's. It does not make any difference, so who cares?", while at the same time telling their CHILDREN not to smoke pot? Parents of kids who play sports are hypocrits and enablers of this behavior as well, unless they take a stand.
2) This report is literally just the tip of the iceberg. I completely agree with Mitchell that should not take any punitive action against the players mentioned even those currently still playing, like expunging records, or HOF induction...because the issue is even DEEPER than that. As the report noted not a single team in MLB was uneffected by this, so if you only punish those mentioned in the report, based on pretty much circumstantial evidence, how do you go after and deal with those guys who have NOT been mentioned or implicated? If MLB just throws those 20 or so active players under the bus, they are doing NOTHING to address the problem. Only placating the media at best.
3) Selig said that this report was a "call to action", well, if the action taken is anything LESS than the action taken regarding gambling, (i.e. one violation and you are banned from baseball for life), then maybe they SHOULD cancel the entire season next year! If for no other reason that hypocracy.
4) This issue is FAR worse than ANYTHING gambling could do, and far worse that anything Pete Rose did. What Rose did was a SINGLE individual, what the Black Sox did was a singular team and event. The use of performance enhancing drugs effects EVERY team, and I still believe better than 60% of ALL current players today. That is epidemic levels.
The use of PED's goes FAR beyond Major League Baseball. This IS a "drug abuse" issue at the very core. And we, as fans, as coach's, as franchise owners, as MEDIA reporters, are ALL to blame for creating a culture that says it is OK to take drugs, as long as you just THINK it helps you play the game better. I do not want to get into the debate of whether taking PED's does or does not enhance an athlete's skill or talent. The point is they BELIEVE it does, whether that is true or not. You can argue about whether it does or not, that is completely a moot point. The fact is, as I stated, the ATHLETE believes it does. And is that not the essence of "addiction"? That you MUST take a drug to "keep that high", or more accurately in this case, "keep or gain that edge". The use of PED's is, IMHO, 100% equal to the use of crack or powder cocaine or even heroine. Drug abuse is drug abuse whether you are smoking crack or injecting yourself with HGH, if you believe you MUST have it, because you can not perform without it. And in the case of PED's, the pressure of athletes to compete, by being bigger, stronger, faster, is breeding a culture of addicts.
There are legitimate medical reasons for athletes taking steroids, as I said. I get that. But it is the abuse of that legitimate use that is the insidious part of the culture in sports that we have all been enablers to. Yet, there is NOT the public outrage over the use of PED's. And nothing like there is over the use of even something like marijuana. Think about it, suppose that your son or daughter playing a HS sport started to believe that smoking pot would give them a greater advantage to playing their sport. REGARDLESS of whether it was true or not. If they believe it will give them the edge, would you allow them to take it? Would it be "ok" for our professional athletes to do it? Again, do NOT give me that crap about how pot is WORSE than PED's. I have already given you several examples that these drugs when used to excessive levels WILL be deadly. THAT is scientific fact.
It seems that the media, MLB, and even many fans want to punish the "few" who were caught, instead of addressing the real problem, and facing the problem for what it really is. That problem can be stated very simply.
THE USE OF PERFORMANCE ENHANCING DRUGS IS DRUG ABUSE.
And we need to address it as such.
Wednesday, December 12, 2007
Petrino stikes again!.....
And the circus clown that is football coach Bobby Petrino is at it again. I have say, that if you are in the sports media business you have to LOVE this guy! Bobby Petrino gives you more fodder for copy than just about any high-profile coach today. And that is saying something, compared to the "colorful" characters and ethical fiber of guys like Nick Saban and Kelvin Sampson. When your actions make THOSE guys look good by comparison, you have begun setting a new high-water mark. This guy is more of a "drama queen" for the sports news than Britney Spears is for the paparazzi!
Petrino's abrubt and surprising resignation from the Atlanta Falcons just days after being given a large vote of confidence and show of support from Falcon's owner Arthur Blank, shows just how egocentric and fragile this guy's self-esteem really is.
No doubt that Petrino was given a very tough hand a few months after becoming the Falcon's HC. First the whole Vick fiasco which took away the best offensive weapon the Falcon's had; short-handed on NFL talent, then injuries then dissension and finally just outright mutiny by the players, left Petrino with absolutely nothing to work with.
But to leave the team under cover of deception with still 3 games remaining is FAR worse for Petrino, than it would have been had he tried to stick it out and finish the season. The reason is that without question, Petrino will now be labeled as a "quitter". And rightfully so. He quit the franchise, the fans, the players and most importantly, his boss who had faith in him. That is inexcusable, and Petrino's days as an NFL HC are completely ended, IMHO. What owner would take a chance on him now?
I have very little doubt, based on Petrino's past dalliances that he always wanted to be an SEC HC. To be literally worshiped by a rabid fan base that regardless of your ethics will not care what you as HC, or your players do, as long as you win. And win BIG!
If you do not think that being an HC in the SEC was Petrino's REALL "dream", then here are some very real past clues.
1) The first year as HC for UL, Petrino had a "secret" meeting with Auburn university to replace CURRENT HC, and his former boss Tommy Tuberville as Auburn's HC.
2) When the Auburn deal fell through, Petrino tried turning Louisville into "Auburn north", but instituting several pre-game ceremonies that Auburn had as their traditions. Hence the implementation of the now known, "Card March", which was based on Auburn pre-game walk by the players into the stadium.
3) The well publicized dance with LSU when Nick Saban scoffed and ran to the NFL Miami Dolphins.
There were indications from day one about his desire to be an SEC HC. But to walk away from the NFL, not only when he did, but HOW he did, just screams of a guy that has absolutely no clue about life, and has not only an over-inflated opinion of himself, but is a coward to boot.
Make no mistake, Bobby Petrino is a very, very good football offensive mind. And he WILL succeed at Arkansas, and his teams will be very strong and efficient. However, he has now proven to be something that no other HC has thought about being. A "quitter".
Petrino's abrubt and surprising resignation from the Atlanta Falcons just days after being given a large vote of confidence and show of support from Falcon's owner Arthur Blank, shows just how egocentric and fragile this guy's self-esteem really is.
No doubt that Petrino was given a very tough hand a few months after becoming the Falcon's HC. First the whole Vick fiasco which took away the best offensive weapon the Falcon's had; short-handed on NFL talent, then injuries then dissension and finally just outright mutiny by the players, left Petrino with absolutely nothing to work with.
But to leave the team under cover of deception with still 3 games remaining is FAR worse for Petrino, than it would have been had he tried to stick it out and finish the season. The reason is that without question, Petrino will now be labeled as a "quitter". And rightfully so. He quit the franchise, the fans, the players and most importantly, his boss who had faith in him. That is inexcusable, and Petrino's days as an NFL HC are completely ended, IMHO. What owner would take a chance on him now?
I have very little doubt, based on Petrino's past dalliances that he always wanted to be an SEC HC. To be literally worshiped by a rabid fan base that regardless of your ethics will not care what you as HC, or your players do, as long as you win. And win BIG!
If you do not think that being an HC in the SEC was Petrino's REALL "dream", then here are some very real past clues.
1) The first year as HC for UL, Petrino had a "secret" meeting with Auburn university to replace CURRENT HC, and his former boss Tommy Tuberville as Auburn's HC.
2) When the Auburn deal fell through, Petrino tried turning Louisville into "Auburn north", but instituting several pre-game ceremonies that Auburn had as their traditions. Hence the implementation of the now known, "Card March", which was based on Auburn pre-game walk by the players into the stadium.
3) The well publicized dance with LSU when Nick Saban scoffed and ran to the NFL Miami Dolphins.
There were indications from day one about his desire to be an SEC HC. But to walk away from the NFL, not only when he did, but HOW he did, just screams of a guy that has absolutely no clue about life, and has not only an over-inflated opinion of himself, but is a coward to boot.
Make no mistake, Bobby Petrino is a very, very good football offensive mind. And he WILL succeed at Arkansas, and his teams will be very strong and efficient. However, he has now proven to be something that no other HC has thought about being. A "quitter".
Thursday, December 6, 2007
A different alternative to the BCS debacle....
A couple of days ago I wrote that I believe there is a REAL solution to the entire BCS/post-season bowl/regular season integrity debate. But before laying that out, I wanted to lay out the two sides of the debate about the whole issue of the BCS vs Playoff.
We all know the arguments for and against a playoff format. BCS proponents talk about retaining the integrity of the bowl system, about how the regular season IS the playoffs, and post season debate about who should be playing in the championship game keeps the sport front page sporting news. The university presidents talk about how the preparation and games in a playoff would hurt the students academics and artificially lengthen their seasons. Playoff proponents talk about how the current system is unjust, and does not reflect any type of true winner, and how the system is designed to be all about conferences gobbling up as much as they can in dollars from the bowl system to create incredible financial gaps between the "haves" and "have nots".
We know all of those, we have heard all SORTS of comprising solutions. But one. And that one is not even MY idea. It comes from, of all sources, the ORIGINATOR of the whole BCS system, and the orchestrator of the SEC's dominance of post-season bowl berths. None other than Roy Kramer.
His idea was that the whole concept of Division I-A football, (NOW stupidly called the Football Bowl Subdivision, (FBS)), had two major flaws.
At first thought you might think, HELL NO! No WAY that would work. So did I....at first. But the more I thought about it, the more I not only liked the idea, (no, I LOVED the idea), and I began to figure out how such a machine might work, keeping in mind such things as traditional rivalries, traditional affiliations, post-season bowl games, regular season integrity and importance, length of regular season, other sports (like basketball and other olympic sports, although by no means does this mean that the schools MUST participate in equally distributed sports offerings, nor even necessarily mean that schools that do not participate in certain sports be forced out or in), and even how the makeup of this conference might change if a school is failing in such areas as minimum attendance figures, academic progress, even probation or NCAA sanctions for impropriety acts by a member institution.
To keep things as brief as possible for this blog entry, I will only deal today with the top-level issue. What that conference makeup might look like, how it might work, and how it is setup and managed. The other issues I will deal with either if there is enough interest, or maybe bring this whole issue back up during the "dog days" of summer.
For now, here is a first pass at how this "Super-80" conference would be structured.
The conference could be setup with 8 regions with 2 divisions per region and 5 schools/teams in each division. This sets up the members for not only a very balanced scheduling pattern, but also a very flexible one, even more so than they have today. And in every way, puts MORE emphasis on the importance of the regular season, than it does on the post season actually. Which you will see in a moment. (Although, I have thought about 10 regions of 8 teams with 2 divisions, that has interesting dynamics also.)
First, how does the scheduling work? With each region being split into 8 regions with 10 teams each, in sports such as football, every school in that region would play each other for a total of 9 "regional" football games, and then 3 "out of region" football dates to schedule. In each region, and at the end of the regular season, the two top teams in each "division" of each "region" would play in "regional" championship game, (not a bowl game, but like the conference championship games today that the ACC, SEC and B-12 have), to determine the 8 "regional" champions. Those 8 "regional" champions then would play in 4 major bowl games, (in this case, the Rose, Fiesta, Sugar and Orange) bowls; keeping in mind the "integrity" of the bowl games and their traditions. (For example, in the new makeup, two of the new "regions" could be made up almost entirely of the existing members from both the PAC-10 and the Big-10 and those two regional winners would ALWAYS play in the Rose bowl.)
Now, here is the interesting part. We literally COULD end things right there and actually go BACK to the old pre-BCS way of determining the national champions. That being by using the AP and/or Coach's poll for the champion. What is interesting about that, is that the ONLY controversy then would be who of the top 4 is the #1 team in the nation. And if at some point down the road, this "Super 80 conference" decided it WANTED to play two more games to determine the national champion in football, it could do so. A two game playoff, is FAR more easy to put in place and attain "buy in" than any other type of compromise situation.
But what about the money distribution and the other post-season bowl games? What about all of those other bowl games out there, who plays in those? You could STILL have those! BUT, ALL of the money from every bowl game that the Super-80 conference plays in, all gets pooled into a pot and distributed to all members in the conference, with bonus to those teams that are top 16, top 8 and top 4 at the end of the bowl post-season. (again, this is too long to discuss in this one blog, so we can do that some other time.)
But what about the other "money" sports like basketball? Ah, even MORE cool, IMHO than football. With 10 teams in each region, basketball would play a true "round-robin" 18 game regional schedule, and then follow a post-season playoff format to determine the Super-80 conference champion. (Guess what? This just might end up being bigger than the NCAA tournament, even though you could STILL play that. And the money would stay in the conference.) But again, another discussion too long for this single blog entry.
So, what would this Super-80 conference look like? What schools would make up that conference? As I noted, some of the schools might be in flux, but here is my take on one possible makeup of schools, while trying to retain as MANY of the "traditional" rivalries and geographical interest as possible. (you may have to scroll down quite a bit to see the table, because this blog forum does not handle html table tags very well. My apologies.)
Again, this is just the tip of the iceberg of the discussion. And I only wanted to put this out there for posterity and comment. There are MANY questions and considerations about such a proposal, and believe me, since I first heard about this over 10 years ago, I have thought of a lot of them, and thought through them. As this blog goes forward, I will try to come back to this topic, if there is interest, and address those. For now, that's the idea.
We all know the arguments for and against a playoff format. BCS proponents talk about retaining the integrity of the bowl system, about how the regular season IS the playoffs, and post season debate about who should be playing in the championship game keeps the sport front page sporting news. The university presidents talk about how the preparation and games in a playoff would hurt the students academics and artificially lengthen their seasons. Playoff proponents talk about how the current system is unjust, and does not reflect any type of true winner, and how the system is designed to be all about conferences gobbling up as much as they can in dollars from the bowl system to create incredible financial gaps between the "haves" and "have nots".
We know all of those, we have heard all SORTS of comprising solutions. But one. And that one is not even MY idea. It comes from, of all sources, the ORIGINATOR of the whole BCS system, and the orchestrator of the SEC's dominance of post-season bowl berths. None other than Roy Kramer.
His idea was that the whole concept of Division I-A football, (NOW stupidly called the Football Bowl Subdivision, (FBS)), had two major flaws.
- It was divisive among the 'top' power conferences causing them to not work together
- It was incredibly TOO large
At first thought you might think, HELL NO! No WAY that would work. So did I....at first. But the more I thought about it, the more I not only liked the idea, (no, I LOVED the idea), and I began to figure out how such a machine might work, keeping in mind such things as traditional rivalries, traditional affiliations, post-season bowl games, regular season integrity and importance, length of regular season, other sports (like basketball and other olympic sports, although by no means does this mean that the schools MUST participate in equally distributed sports offerings, nor even necessarily mean that schools that do not participate in certain sports be forced out or in), and even how the makeup of this conference might change if a school is failing in such areas as minimum attendance figures, academic progress, even probation or NCAA sanctions for impropriety acts by a member institution.
To keep things as brief as possible for this blog entry, I will only deal today with the top-level issue. What that conference makeup might look like, how it might work, and how it is setup and managed. The other issues I will deal with either if there is enough interest, or maybe bring this whole issue back up during the "dog days" of summer.
For now, here is a first pass at how this "Super-80" conference would be structured.
The conference could be setup with 8 regions with 2 divisions per region and 5 schools/teams in each division. This sets up the members for not only a very balanced scheduling pattern, but also a very flexible one, even more so than they have today. And in every way, puts MORE emphasis on the importance of the regular season, than it does on the post season actually. Which you will see in a moment. (Although, I have thought about 10 regions of 8 teams with 2 divisions, that has interesting dynamics also.)
First, how does the scheduling work? With each region being split into 8 regions with 10 teams each, in sports such as football, every school in that region would play each other for a total of 9 "regional" football games, and then 3 "out of region" football dates to schedule. In each region, and at the end of the regular season, the two top teams in each "division" of each "region" would play in "regional" championship game, (not a bowl game, but like the conference championship games today that the ACC, SEC and B-12 have), to determine the 8 "regional" champions. Those 8 "regional" champions then would play in 4 major bowl games, (in this case, the Rose, Fiesta, Sugar and Orange) bowls; keeping in mind the "integrity" of the bowl games and their traditions. (For example, in the new makeup, two of the new "regions" could be made up almost entirely of the existing members from both the PAC-10 and the Big-10 and those two regional winners would ALWAYS play in the Rose bowl.)
Now, here is the interesting part. We literally COULD end things right there and actually go BACK to the old pre-BCS way of determining the national champions. That being by using the AP and/or Coach's poll for the champion. What is interesting about that, is that the ONLY controversy then would be who of the top 4 is the #1 team in the nation. And if at some point down the road, this "Super 80 conference" decided it WANTED to play two more games to determine the national champion in football, it could do so. A two game playoff, is FAR more easy to put in place and attain "buy in" than any other type of compromise situation.
But what about the money distribution and the other post-season bowl games? What about all of those other bowl games out there, who plays in those? You could STILL have those! BUT, ALL of the money from every bowl game that the Super-80 conference plays in, all gets pooled into a pot and distributed to all members in the conference, with bonus to those teams that are top 16, top 8 and top 4 at the end of the bowl post-season. (again, this is too long to discuss in this one blog, so we can do that some other time.)
But what about the other "money" sports like basketball? Ah, even MORE cool, IMHO than football. With 10 teams in each region, basketball would play a true "round-robin" 18 game regional schedule, and then follow a post-season playoff format to determine the Super-80 conference champion. (Guess what? This just might end up being bigger than the NCAA tournament, even though you could STILL play that. And the money would stay in the conference.) But again, another discussion too long for this single blog entry.
So, what would this Super-80 conference look like? What schools would make up that conference? As I noted, some of the schools might be in flux, but here is my take on one possible makeup of schools, while trying to retain as MANY of the "traditional" rivalries and geographical interest as possible. (you may have to scroll down quite a bit to see the table, because this blog forum does not handle html table tags very well. My apologies.)
| Region One | Region Two | Region Three | Region Four |
| A Division | A Division | A Division | A Division |
| Syracuse | Memphis | UNC | Miami |
| Boston College | Louisville | Duke | South Florida |
| Notre Dame | Tennessee | Wake Forest | Central Florida |
| Navy | Kentucky | East Carolina | FSU |
| Rutgers | Vanderbilt | NC State | Florida |
| B Division | B Division | B Division | B Division |
| Virgina Tech | West Virginia | Clemson | Auburn |
| Maryland | Marshall | S. Carolina | Alabama |
| Army | Cincinnati | Georgia Tech | Ole Miss |
| Virginia | Penn State | Georgia | Miss State |
| UConn | Pittsburgh | MTSU/WKU | Southern Miss |
| Next four regions | |||
| Region Five | Region Six | Region Seven | Region Eight |
| A Division | A Division | A Division | A Division |
| Indiana | Iowa | Texas | Washington |
| Purdue | Iowa St. | Texas Tech | Washington St. |
| Ohio State | Kansas | Texas A&M | Oregon |
| Michigan | Kansas St. | TCU | Oregon St. |
| Michigan St. | Nebraska | Houston | Stanford |
| B Division | B Division | B Division | B Division |
| Illinois | Oklahoma | Colorado | Southern Cal |
| Northwestern | Oklahoma St. | Colorado St. | UCLA |
| Wisconsin | Arkansas | BYU | Arizona |
| Minnesota | LSU | Utah | Arizona St. |
| Missouri | Tulane | Air Force | California |
Again, this is just the tip of the iceberg of the discussion. And I only wanted to put this out there for posterity and comment. There are MANY questions and considerations about such a proposal, and believe me, since I first heard about this over 10 years ago, I have thought of a lot of them, and thought through them. As this blog goes forward, I will try to come back to this topic, if there is interest, and address those. For now, that's the idea.
Detroit Tigers team to beat in AL Central in 08?
As if the AL Central was not ALREADY tough enough, the Detroit Tigers just upped the ante on both the Twins and the Indians.
1 season removed from their World Series appearance, the Tigers completed a HUGE deal with the Marlins in an 8 player trade that will not only put them solidly as the #1 favorite to win the AL Central next season, but also will give Tigers fans a major reason to expect to contend for both the AL pennant and the possibly a World Series championship.
The Tigers trade deal included sending very talented Cameron Maybin and Andrew Miller, along with 4 other prospects to Florida in exchange for BOTH left-handed hard throwing Donte' Willis and power hitter Miquel Cabrera who led the Marlins last year in HR's, (34), and was 2nd on the team in batting percentage, (.320).
The Red Sox are taking their time though in looking to acquire Santana from the Twins. If the Twins lose Santana, the Twins, IMHO, will have no shot at even getting 2nd place in the AL Central, much less winning it. But if the BoSox get Santana, and after re-signing Mike Lowell, you have to think that the Sox are the odds-on favorite to win the AL, even if the Tigers make a serious run at them.
The Dodgers just scored big in their quest for the NL West title by picking up Andru Jones from the Atlanta Braves. This will be a huge shot in the arm for a club that hand good pitching but suffered down the stretch to get runs across the plate with runners in scoring position.
1 season removed from their World Series appearance, the Tigers completed a HUGE deal with the Marlins in an 8 player trade that will not only put them solidly as the #1 favorite to win the AL Central next season, but also will give Tigers fans a major reason to expect to contend for both the AL pennant and the possibly a World Series championship.
The Tigers trade deal included sending very talented Cameron Maybin and Andrew Miller, along with 4 other prospects to Florida in exchange for BOTH left-handed hard throwing Donte' Willis and power hitter Miquel Cabrera who led the Marlins last year in HR's, (34), and was 2nd on the team in batting percentage, (.320).
The Red Sox are taking their time though in looking to acquire Santana from the Twins. If the Twins lose Santana, the Twins, IMHO, will have no shot at even getting 2nd place in the AL Central, much less winning it. But if the BoSox get Santana, and after re-signing Mike Lowell, you have to think that the Sox are the odds-on favorite to win the AL, even if the Tigers make a serious run at them.
The Dodgers just scored big in their quest for the NL West title by picking up Andru Jones from the Atlanta Braves. This will be a huge shot in the arm for a club that hand good pitching but suffered down the stretch to get runs across the plate with runners in scoring position.
Tuesday, December 4, 2007
BCS bowls...what to watch, and not watch.....
I admit it...I am a college football junkie. I am sure there are many of you out there. With the regular season behind us, and no games this weekend, I am sure many of us want to rend clothing, cry, and anything we can do as an excuse from going to the mall. Yes, is that time of year that is the most stress-filled part of our collective American culture and existence. I am talking about the Thanksgiving-Christmas-New Years holidays.
Yes, that time of year when all thoughts turn to....alcohol, sugar and caffeine. When you put large groups of people you hardly know into small spaces, get them all honked up on a buzzed laced, sugar rush, drunk high and expect them to get along. Like THAT is gonna happen......NOT! That type of comaraderie ONLY happens in the confines of your home team's stadium.
BUT, we have a solution fellow junkies! We do NOT need a self-help group. Why? Because we have 32 post-season bowl games to get us through. We can take refuge in our "man cave's" and bask in the warm glow of TV radiation, while we blissfully listen to the sound of bone crushing hits and QB's that bark out signals the way that a mall shopper does when grabbing that last Elmo. BTW, it is perfectly legitimate to be a woman and have a "man cave" for sports. I know several that do. Man cave's are gender neutral, but they all must have the same ambiance to them. You know what I mean. That dank, dark, musty smell that can only come from socks and spilled beer. It just gives you that "warm, fuzzy" feeling. Of course that could be just mold....but I digress.
Having said all of that though, I have to say, in all my 30 years of watching post season bowl games, NONE of them leave me as flat and disinterested as the BCS championship game this year. LSU vs Ohio State. Color me UN-impressed and completely bored.
There is no interest there are at all for me. And even though that game will be the only spoting event played on a Monday night in January, I will probably not watch it. Oh, I'll look up the stats and the score the next day, feign surprise about the winner and shock about the poor officiating. But the bottom line is, I just simply could NOT care less about that game. It is not even in my top 5 bowl games to watch this season. Maybe not in the top 10!
But there are a few that are absolutely "must watch" games, IMHO. As we get closer to the start of the games, I will add some detail, but for now, here are a few that I will NOT be missing regardless.
1) Hawai'i vs Georgia. This is going to be a VERY fun game. As good as UGa is, the speed of the Rainbow Warriors and that oddball passing attack will not be stopped. This game could be the highest scoring game of the post-season bowls. I expect this will be a video game score. And a LOT of fun to watch.
2) UCF vs Miss State. If you have not seen the RB for UCF this season, then you have missed something special. Kevin Smith is not only the leading rusher AND the leading scorer in the nation, but also now holds the all-time rushing yards in a season. The kid is just a phenom, and the best player you have never heard of. Too bad the Heisman voters have never heard of him either.
3) Southern Miss vs Cincinnati. This is a personal favorite of mine this season. It might not be a great game, but a great story. Two old conference foes going back at it in a bowl game.
4) Indiana vs Oklahoma State. How can this NOT be a 'must watch' game. With all that this IU team has struggled with to get to 7 wins and reach a bowl game, which was the goal of their coach who passed away over the summer, and their adopted 'MOM', who is their coach's widow. This may be the best "story" bowl game to watch.
5) Utah vs Navy. The big interest here is that with UL looking for a DC, one of the possible candidates for that position could be the Utes DC, Gary Anderson. And wouldn't that be interesting seeing as he is basically 2-0 vs Kragthorpe, as well as having beaten UL at PJCS this season.
I have other matchups and games to go over, but I am running out of time right now. I'll review some games in depth as they get closer. Like that Dec 20th matchup between Utah and Navy.
Yes, that time of year when all thoughts turn to....alcohol, sugar and caffeine. When you put large groups of people you hardly know into small spaces, get them all honked up on a buzzed laced, sugar rush, drunk high and expect them to get along. Like THAT is gonna happen......NOT! That type of comaraderie ONLY happens in the confines of your home team's stadium.
BUT, we have a solution fellow junkies! We do NOT need a self-help group. Why? Because we have 32 post-season bowl games to get us through. We can take refuge in our "man cave's" and bask in the warm glow of TV radiation, while we blissfully listen to the sound of bone crushing hits and QB's that bark out signals the way that a mall shopper does when grabbing that last Elmo. BTW, it is perfectly legitimate to be a woman and have a "man cave" for sports. I know several that do. Man cave's are gender neutral, but they all must have the same ambiance to them. You know what I mean. That dank, dark, musty smell that can only come from socks and spilled beer. It just gives you that "warm, fuzzy" feeling. Of course that could be just mold....but I digress.
Having said all of that though, I have to say, in all my 30 years of watching post season bowl games, NONE of them leave me as flat and disinterested as the BCS championship game this year. LSU vs Ohio State. Color me UN-impressed and completely bored.
There is no interest there are at all for me. And even though that game will be the only spoting event played on a Monday night in January, I will probably not watch it. Oh, I'll look up the stats and the score the next day, feign surprise about the winner and shock about the poor officiating. But the bottom line is, I just simply could NOT care less about that game. It is not even in my top 5 bowl games to watch this season. Maybe not in the top 10!
But there are a few that are absolutely "must watch" games, IMHO. As we get closer to the start of the games, I will add some detail, but for now, here are a few that I will NOT be missing regardless.
1) Hawai'i vs Georgia. This is going to be a VERY fun game. As good as UGa is, the speed of the Rainbow Warriors and that oddball passing attack will not be stopped. This game could be the highest scoring game of the post-season bowls. I expect this will be a video game score. And a LOT of fun to watch.
2) UCF vs Miss State. If you have not seen the RB for UCF this season, then you have missed something special. Kevin Smith is not only the leading rusher AND the leading scorer in the nation, but also now holds the all-time rushing yards in a season. The kid is just a phenom, and the best player you have never heard of. Too bad the Heisman voters have never heard of him either.
3) Southern Miss vs Cincinnati. This is a personal favorite of mine this season. It might not be a great game, but a great story. Two old conference foes going back at it in a bowl game.
4) Indiana vs Oklahoma State. How can this NOT be a 'must watch' game. With all that this IU team has struggled with to get to 7 wins and reach a bowl game, which was the goal of their coach who passed away over the summer, and their adopted 'MOM', who is their coach's widow. This may be the best "story" bowl game to watch.
5) Utah vs Navy. The big interest here is that with UL looking for a DC, one of the possible candidates for that position could be the Utes DC, Gary Anderson. And wouldn't that be interesting seeing as he is basically 2-0 vs Kragthorpe, as well as having beaten UL at PJCS this season.
I have other matchups and games to go over, but I am running out of time right now. I'll review some games in depth as they get closer. Like that Dec 20th matchup between Utah and Navy.
Sunday, December 2, 2007
the Big East busts, and the BCS should be next
We now have the THE perfect storm and the perfect nightmare for the BCS folks. We went into this week with no teams from the top 6 conferences being undefeated, however, no one was questioning the legitimacy of the teams sitting in the top two spots. Missouri and WVU. But with both of those teams losing, one getting throttled by a very good Oklahoma team for the second time in the season and the other pulling one of the greatest choke jobs you will ever see; the BCS standings and who plays for the BCS championship is completely turned upside down.
First, let's talk about WVU and their loss. WVU losing to Pitt did more to hurt the Big East than they did to themselves. WVU will still go to a BCS bowl game, and will likely be able to put themselves back on track and win that game. But the damage they did the Big East by losing to Pitt, IN MORGANTOWN, after being a 4 TD favorite and on national TV, will once again bring back all of the talk about the Big East not being "deserving" of an automatic bid to BCS games. All of those detractors will start coming out of the woodwork again. It was not even important that WVU WIN the BCS champ game, but to GET to it would have completely solidified and legitimzed the BE as both deserving and as a conference that truly is one of the elite. If you want proof of that, look to the ACC where since the expansion there, all but ONE season two former Big East teams have played for the ACC title. And this year was no exception. Former Big East teams have completely DOMINATED the ACC since that expansion, proving just how tough the Big East truly was....and still is. But that will not get noticed.
As for the BCS nightmare, well, the biggest single problem(s), they have are the two teams sitting the #4 and #5 spots in the Nov 25th BCS poll. Those two teams are Georgia and Kansas. With both Mizzou and WVU losing, ONE of those teams will almost positively move into that BCS #2 spot. Not by virtue of what they did on the field, but by what someone else did not do. But that alone is not the issue. The issue is, how can a team play for the BCS championship game, when NEITHER of those two teams were "good enough" to even attempt to play for their CONFERENCE championship, much less win their conference.
But here is the REAL problem that the "playoff proponents" have and that the BCS apologist always point to. In a playoff system it is ALSO possible that a non-conference champion could be playing for a national title. Unless, of course, you only include the conference champs. But then you have as big a mess as before, with bickering as to one conference being "deserving" while another one is not. I do think there is a solution to this, but it would not make ANYONE happy. And believe it or not the orchestator of the BCS, Kramer, is the one that had the answer, IMHO. A SINGLE 80 team conference. I will put a blog entry up about that some day. But for now, just know that a playoff would not solve this dilemma entirely. To prove that, look at the FCS, (formerly Div I-AA), championships where 3 of the top #1 seeds are out of the playoffs, and are NOT competing for the FCS title.
That is the BCS nightmare they have to face. The problem is, can Va Tech, who is the ACC champ, and sitting in the #6 spot of the BCS, over take both Georgia and Kansas to play for the BCS champ title? At least that way with Ohio State and Va-Tech, you would have two teams that WON their conferences!
If the BCS puts either Georgia or Kansas in the BCS title game, we will hear the biggest uproar for some type of playoff system than we have ever heard before. Not to mention it will be a DOG of a TV game to watch. Who would watch it, other than the fans of those teams?
Add to that, that the AP poll will almost 100% assuredly pick a different team as the #1 team in the nation and we will once again, have a split national championship. Something that the BCS was created to alleviate.
This season is the biggest nightmare for the BCS since it was created. And now the BCS apologists are going to have to come up with yet ANOTHER "tweak" to the system to try and make it work.
First, let's talk about WVU and their loss. WVU losing to Pitt did more to hurt the Big East than they did to themselves. WVU will still go to a BCS bowl game, and will likely be able to put themselves back on track and win that game. But the damage they did the Big East by losing to Pitt, IN MORGANTOWN, after being a 4 TD favorite and on national TV, will once again bring back all of the talk about the Big East not being "deserving" of an automatic bid to BCS games. All of those detractors will start coming out of the woodwork again. It was not even important that WVU WIN the BCS champ game, but to GET to it would have completely solidified and legitimzed the BE as both deserving and as a conference that truly is one of the elite. If you want proof of that, look to the ACC where since the expansion there, all but ONE season two former Big East teams have played for the ACC title. And this year was no exception. Former Big East teams have completely DOMINATED the ACC since that expansion, proving just how tough the Big East truly was....and still is. But that will not get noticed.
As for the BCS nightmare, well, the biggest single problem(s), they have are the two teams sitting the #4 and #5 spots in the Nov 25th BCS poll. Those two teams are Georgia and Kansas. With both Mizzou and WVU losing, ONE of those teams will almost positively move into that BCS #2 spot. Not by virtue of what they did on the field, but by what someone else did not do. But that alone is not the issue. The issue is, how can a team play for the BCS championship game, when NEITHER of those two teams were "good enough" to even attempt to play for their CONFERENCE championship, much less win their conference.
But here is the REAL problem that the "playoff proponents" have and that the BCS apologist always point to. In a playoff system it is ALSO possible that a non-conference champion could be playing for a national title. Unless, of course, you only include the conference champs. But then you have as big a mess as before, with bickering as to one conference being "deserving" while another one is not. I do think there is a solution to this, but it would not make ANYONE happy. And believe it or not the orchestator of the BCS, Kramer, is the one that had the answer, IMHO. A SINGLE 80 team conference. I will put a blog entry up about that some day. But for now, just know that a playoff would not solve this dilemma entirely. To prove that, look at the FCS, (formerly Div I-AA), championships where 3 of the top #1 seeds are out of the playoffs, and are NOT competing for the FCS title.
That is the BCS nightmare they have to face. The problem is, can Va Tech, who is the ACC champ, and sitting in the #6 spot of the BCS, over take both Georgia and Kansas to play for the BCS champ title? At least that way with Ohio State and Va-Tech, you would have two teams that WON their conferences!
If the BCS puts either Georgia or Kansas in the BCS title game, we will hear the biggest uproar for some type of playoff system than we have ever heard before. Not to mention it will be a DOG of a TV game to watch. Who would watch it, other than the fans of those teams?
Add to that, that the AP poll will almost 100% assuredly pick a different team as the #1 team in the nation and we will once again, have a split national championship. Something that the BCS was created to alleviate.
This season is the biggest nightmare for the BCS since it was created. And now the BCS apologists are going to have to come up with yet ANOTHER "tweak" to the system to try and make it work.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)