We were treated this past weekend with another classic Colts/Patriots game. These two franchises have set the bar of excellence in the past 12 years, and we can look forward every season, and sometimes postseason, and they never disappoint.
This season, just like last season, the Patriots had a 17-point lead going into the 4th quarter. This year, however, Bill Belichick decided to punt the ball when up by three points instead of going for it in his own territory. We didn't hear much about that, but that was clearly an admission that he made a mistake last year leading to the Colts' eventual comeback.
Manning drove the Colts down the field on Sunday, into field goal range with a chance to tie the game and send it to overtime. Instead of going for the tie, however, Manning kept the foot on the pedal going for the win on the road. Most of the time, as a Colts fan, we see this end up in our favor. Every once in a while, however, and mostly against the Patriots, it ends badly. This week, it ended badly for Manning and the Colts.
That play, though, where Manning went for it and threw the interception, begins the argument for him as the best quarterback of our generation. No other quarterback, including Brady, has the combination of skill and drive that Manning has. Favre had the drive (though I'd argue it isn't there this year). No one has the skill. Brady would have knelt on the ball and gone for the tie. And thus, begins the argument, because every time Brady beats Manning, we hear again how Tom Brady is the best quarterback in the NFL. I plan on outlining the truth.
If you go entirely on Super Bowl wins, Tom Brady is the best quarterback of our generation. Of course, if you go on Super Bowl wins, Doug Williams was better than Dan Marino. Let's make Super Bowl wins a part of the equation, not the entire deal. Brady has three, Manning has one. Point in Brady's favor.
That's where it ends, though. When all is said and done, Peyton Manning will have most of the important records in NFL history. He has started every game he has been a part of in the NFL. Thus, he is more durable than Tom Brady. Manning, until 2006, never had a defense to support him. He had always been responsible for leading the offense to victory. Brady, on the other hand, played on a team built around defense. All Brady had to do was not make mistakes. In fact, when you look at 2008 and 2009, when the Patriots' defense was not as good, Brady couldn't get it done. Even with Randy Moss to throw to, he couldn't get it done.
Statistically, it's not even close. Again, as long as Manning has the drive to keep going, he will hold all of the records in the book eventually. Brady, on the other hand, didn't start putting up great numbers until he had the most explosive receiver of our generation at his disposal. Notice this year, with all of the injuries the Colts are dealing with, Peyton Manning is still putting up the numbers. He doesn't have his #3 or #4 receiver, he doesn't have his #1 running back and he doesn't have the best tight end in the league. Yet, the numbers keep coming.
So where did the myth of "Brady the Great" get started, you ask? The answer lies with Ben Rothlisberger. Both quarterbacks started their careers with Super Bowl victories. Neither had to be the star on their respective teams in order to get a ring. They both just needed not to screw it up. So, since they were champions right out of the gate, they were proclaimed as the best quarterbacks in the league. Rothlisberger doesn't even come close to passsing the eye test, yet the media wanted to proclaim his as a "great" quarterback because his team won a Super Bowl champion early in his career. Peyton Manning, on the other hand, started his career on a team that went 1-15 the year before he came into the league. His first season, he had nothing to work with. He got hit hard and often. He took the hard road to success. He had to earn the titles and recognition. And he has.
So, in the end, Tom Brady is a very good quarterback. He doesn't make a lot of mistakes. He is a very good field general. All he does is win. But be honest with yourself. If you don't listen to what the media says (based mostly on the east coast, I might add) and you watch these two quarterbacks operate for a 16-team season, who would you choose to start your franchise with? Do you want the quarterback who can win when he's surrounded by the best talent in the league, or do you want the team that can take a team of no names on his back and literally carry them to victory?
I know who I choose. Of course, I bought his jersey when he was drafted, so I may be a little biased. Who would you choose?
Tuesday, November 23, 2010
Wednesday, November 17, 2010
Cam Newton and the College Underground
You cannot read, watch or listen to anything sports related right now without hearing about Cam Newton. In case you're living under a sports rock, though, I'll tell you the "story" that is out right now.
Newton is the quarterback at the University of Auburn. He is up for he Heisman Trophy and his team is in place to play for a "national championship" (notice the quotes--I will not call it a TRUE championship until it's played out in a legitimate playoff). Within the past few weeks, though, a former football player at Mississippi State has come forward saying that Newton's father told him that it would cost Mississippi State up to $180,000.00 for Newton's services. This, of course, would be illegal according to NCAA bylaws.
So, the media, being who they are, cannot stop talking about the story. There's tons of fake outrage and surprise and plenty of speculation. I, on the other hand, want to tell you the truth.
No one is surprised.
Okay, so maybe people are surprised. If they are, they were never around big-time college athletes at big-time programs. It's impossible to be around these entities without seeing or hearing about these types of situations. When I was in school, there was always a different very nice vehicle in the driveway of a certain star athlete. No one could "prove" that the said athlete was in possession of said vehicle, but it was certainly the buzz. At another institution, I lived next door to a prominent athlete who always seemed to have an ample supply of beer, a nice car and pretty nice clothes, which was odd, since he came from the projects of New Orleans.
Let's face it, this type of thing goes on EVERYWHERE at EVERY institution. If you're thinking, "well, my favorite school is clean", stop now. It's not. Something is going on that will/could get your team in trouble with the NCAA. Someone is asking for handouts. There IS a booster who is trying to be buddies with the athletes and is giving them special treatment. It is happening everywhere.
Don't get me wrong, I don't think all of the schools and athletes are exchanging hundreds of thousands of dollars. I also will be VERY surprised if it comes out that Auburn actually paid Newton such a sum of money. I'm almost 100% positive, without seeing any facts, though, that Newton got something that could be construed as an NCAA violation. There's way too much smoke for there not to be at least a small flame.
So, as we all root for Auburn to get the axe, thus helping us get closer to a Boise/TCU "national championship" (and blowing up our current, corrupt system) , remember not to throw too many stones. Your school is one rogue athlete/booster away from a major NCAA violation. And minor violations are happening right now, your school is just not getting caught.
Newton is the quarterback at the University of Auburn. He is up for he Heisman Trophy and his team is in place to play for a "national championship" (notice the quotes--I will not call it a TRUE championship until it's played out in a legitimate playoff). Within the past few weeks, though, a former football player at Mississippi State has come forward saying that Newton's father told him that it would cost Mississippi State up to $180,000.00 for Newton's services. This, of course, would be illegal according to NCAA bylaws.
So, the media, being who they are, cannot stop talking about the story. There's tons of fake outrage and surprise and plenty of speculation. I, on the other hand, want to tell you the truth.
No one is surprised.
Okay, so maybe people are surprised. If they are, they were never around big-time college athletes at big-time programs. It's impossible to be around these entities without seeing or hearing about these types of situations. When I was in school, there was always a different very nice vehicle in the driveway of a certain star athlete. No one could "prove" that the said athlete was in possession of said vehicle, but it was certainly the buzz. At another institution, I lived next door to a prominent athlete who always seemed to have an ample supply of beer, a nice car and pretty nice clothes, which was odd, since he came from the projects of New Orleans.
Let's face it, this type of thing goes on EVERYWHERE at EVERY institution. If you're thinking, "well, my favorite school is clean", stop now. It's not. Something is going on that will/could get your team in trouble with the NCAA. Someone is asking for handouts. There IS a booster who is trying to be buddies with the athletes and is giving them special treatment. It is happening everywhere.
Don't get me wrong, I don't think all of the schools and athletes are exchanging hundreds of thousands of dollars. I also will be VERY surprised if it comes out that Auburn actually paid Newton such a sum of money. I'm almost 100% positive, without seeing any facts, though, that Newton got something that could be construed as an NCAA violation. There's way too much smoke for there not to be at least a small flame.
So, as we all root for Auburn to get the axe, thus helping us get closer to a Boise/TCU "national championship" (and blowing up our current, corrupt system) , remember not to throw too many stones. Your school is one rogue athlete/booster away from a major NCAA violation. And minor violations are happening right now, your school is just not getting caught.
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
Why College Football is Losing Its Luster
I spent a lot of time this weekend thinking about how to express my feelings on the loss that my alma mater, Oklahoma, sustained on Saturday. I'm pretty sure I've been through the entire grieving process, and this blog post is my opportunity to complete the process. It goes a lot further than just Oklahoma for me, though. It is the entire state of college football.
This weekend, #7 BCS ranked Oklahoma went to College Station and suffered a season ending loss to the Texas A&M Aggies. No, the season isn't technically over, but for Oklahoma fans, as well as Alabama, Ohio State and others, the season may as well be over. You see, our bars are set extremely high. We recruit the best athletes, pay the best coaches and have the best facilities. This is done for one reason: Championships.
That probably sounds arrogant. In fact, it is arrogant. We are spoiled fans. We expect the world from these 18-22 year old kids. We expect the coaches to be perfect. Why? Because they have before and we know they can again. So, I put my $1000+ toward a donation and season tickets and for that, I expect championships, dammit!
Now, this is where my post goes away from my alma mater. You see, this is the inherent problem with college football today. In a perfect system, two losses wouldn't knock you out of a chance at winning a championship. In a perfect system, my alma mater would be fighting for a place as the 12-16th seed in a playoff. How cool would it be if Alabama, Wisconsin, Ohio State, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Virginia Tech, Florida State, Stanford, etc., were all still alive for a championship? You're telling me that wouldn't be a compelling regular season?
You see, that's the argument we hear against a playoff from the media. Why ruin the "best regular season in sports"? What? How is this end of the regular season compelling? Oregon has NO ONE left on their schedule that should challenge them. Auburn has a challenge at Alabama. That's it. Beyond that, TCU and Boise are waiting to replace Auburn. No one else is alive. That's compelling? Wake me up in January!
I started reading Dan Wetzel's book "Death to the BCS" last night. I recommend anyone who is interested in college football and hasn't come around to the idea of a playoff to read it. It's amazing what the media has done to form our opinions. It's more amazing WHY they are doing this. The money that exchanges hands is amazing, and, despite what the media will have you believe, VERY little of it is going to the schools involved. A playoff system, as proposed by the book, would generate $500 million more than the BCS, would allow for extra home games for the highest seeds and would make the regular season MORE important. It's a great read so far.
So, forgive me if I go to sleep for the end of the college football season. I'm bored to death. Bowl season will be upon us before you know it, and I'll watch bits and pieces of a few of those bowl games. The more compelling matchups might get my full attention. I can tell you this much, though, if it were a playoff, I'd watch EVERY game.
Remind me again why college football has it right?
This weekend, #7 BCS ranked Oklahoma went to College Station and suffered a season ending loss to the Texas A&M Aggies. No, the season isn't technically over, but for Oklahoma fans, as well as Alabama, Ohio State and others, the season may as well be over. You see, our bars are set extremely high. We recruit the best athletes, pay the best coaches and have the best facilities. This is done for one reason: Championships.
That probably sounds arrogant. In fact, it is arrogant. We are spoiled fans. We expect the world from these 18-22 year old kids. We expect the coaches to be perfect. Why? Because they have before and we know they can again. So, I put my $1000+ toward a donation and season tickets and for that, I expect championships, dammit!
Now, this is where my post goes away from my alma mater. You see, this is the inherent problem with college football today. In a perfect system, two losses wouldn't knock you out of a chance at winning a championship. In a perfect system, my alma mater would be fighting for a place as the 12-16th seed in a playoff. How cool would it be if Alabama, Wisconsin, Ohio State, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Virginia Tech, Florida State, Stanford, etc., were all still alive for a championship? You're telling me that wouldn't be a compelling regular season?
You see, that's the argument we hear against a playoff from the media. Why ruin the "best regular season in sports"? What? How is this end of the regular season compelling? Oregon has NO ONE left on their schedule that should challenge them. Auburn has a challenge at Alabama. That's it. Beyond that, TCU and Boise are waiting to replace Auburn. No one else is alive. That's compelling? Wake me up in January!
I started reading Dan Wetzel's book "Death to the BCS" last night. I recommend anyone who is interested in college football and hasn't come around to the idea of a playoff to read it. It's amazing what the media has done to form our opinions. It's more amazing WHY they are doing this. The money that exchanges hands is amazing, and, despite what the media will have you believe, VERY little of it is going to the schools involved. A playoff system, as proposed by the book, would generate $500 million more than the BCS, would allow for extra home games for the highest seeds and would make the regular season MORE important. It's a great read so far.
So, forgive me if I go to sleep for the end of the college football season. I'm bored to death. Bowl season will be upon us before you know it, and I'll watch bits and pieces of a few of those bowl games. The more compelling matchups might get my full attention. I can tell you this much, though, if it were a playoff, I'd watch EVERY game.
Remind me again why college football has it right?
Tuesday, November 2, 2010
Good Pitching Beats Good Hitting--Yet No One Watched
Ah, yes. The World Series that no one saw or heard about (as predicted last week) ended in five games last night. For a blowout series, it was a very good one. We saw very good pitching matchups, solid baseball (minus a couple of boneheaded managerial decisions) and a long starved fanbase getting its first championship in two generations.
What I like the most about this is that the Giants are a great example of how an organization should be run. Unlike my Cubs, who seem to do things entirely wrong almost all of the time, the Giants have built from within with solid pitching and great defense up the middle. They supplemented that with second-tier, or worse, free agents that fit their style of play. From that, they build great chemistry and a team that is ready to compete when it counts.
The young Giants pitching shut down the explosive Texas lineup. Mitch Moreland, not exactly the expected leader, was the only Rangers hitter who seemed to have a clue, and the youngsters with spunk closed the series out quickly because of that.
The sad part is that this series got very little press. ESPN had very little about the series on Sports Center. Instead, they concentrated on football, which they have a current financial stake in. So, in the interest of a quick dollar, ESPN fails to promote a sport that they have a long term stake in. This was their opportunity to promote a young, likable team in the Giants against a young, likable team in the Rangers. These are two organizations who have done a great job with what they have, yet ESPN chose to act like baseball ended when the Yankees and Phillies were eliminated. This wouldn't even be an issue if they weren't the "worldwide leader" in sports. They put themselves in that spot, and they now have control over what the public perceives as the truth in sports. People look to ESPN for their sports knowledge, water cooler information and live sporting events.
Here's the truth: Baseball is not as easily manipulated for television as football and basketball. Baseball has no time limits. Baseball has no TV timeouts. The beauty of baseball is that the winning run could be scored on the first pitch or the last pitch. ESPN, and television in general, doesn't like anything that doesn't build to a climax. It doesn't make for "good TV".
NFL games run three hours on the dot. How does this happen, you ask? Hmmmmm. How do you think? Ask Jeff Fisher about that. ESPN wants control over the timing of the games. What's next? Outcomes? You don't think they already try? Baseball isn't so easy to manipulate. Ask the Black Sox how easy it is to fix games and get away with it.
Another question to be asked is whether ESPN is trying to drive the price of baseball down. When the FOX contract is up, you can guarantee that ESPN will want a stake in postseason baseball. Are they not talking about it on purpose in order to buy the rights for less money? That seems entirely plausible, because I cannot remember a World Series with less hype in my lifetime.
If you ask me, ESPN's got it all wrong. They need to be promoting baseball. One reason would be that they own the rights for most of the six-month baseball season, so it seems as if that would be a financially sound thing to do. Also, baseball can be riveting from the first pitch. Especially in games that mean something. Football and basketball, on the other hand, are generally decided in the last quarter of the game. So, if I'm not a fan of the team, what encourages me to tune in for the entire game? Unfortunately, in today's microwave society, people don't want to stay tuned in. They want highlights--dunks, big hits, etc. It's why the home run plays so well on Sports Center. Pitching doesn't sell today. Unless you understand the game.
So, with that, I say goodbye to baseball for a few months. It's always a bittersweet end for me. I miss the game when it's gone, but it means the Cubs are back in first place, at least until April 1st!
What I like the most about this is that the Giants are a great example of how an organization should be run. Unlike my Cubs, who seem to do things entirely wrong almost all of the time, the Giants have built from within with solid pitching and great defense up the middle. They supplemented that with second-tier, or worse, free agents that fit their style of play. From that, they build great chemistry and a team that is ready to compete when it counts.
The young Giants pitching shut down the explosive Texas lineup. Mitch Moreland, not exactly the expected leader, was the only Rangers hitter who seemed to have a clue, and the youngsters with spunk closed the series out quickly because of that.
The sad part is that this series got very little press. ESPN had very little about the series on Sports Center. Instead, they concentrated on football, which they have a current financial stake in. So, in the interest of a quick dollar, ESPN fails to promote a sport that they have a long term stake in. This was their opportunity to promote a young, likable team in the Giants against a young, likable team in the Rangers. These are two organizations who have done a great job with what they have, yet ESPN chose to act like baseball ended when the Yankees and Phillies were eliminated. This wouldn't even be an issue if they weren't the "worldwide leader" in sports. They put themselves in that spot, and they now have control over what the public perceives as the truth in sports. People look to ESPN for their sports knowledge, water cooler information and live sporting events.
Here's the truth: Baseball is not as easily manipulated for television as football and basketball. Baseball has no time limits. Baseball has no TV timeouts. The beauty of baseball is that the winning run could be scored on the first pitch or the last pitch. ESPN, and television in general, doesn't like anything that doesn't build to a climax. It doesn't make for "good TV".
NFL games run three hours on the dot. How does this happen, you ask? Hmmmmm. How do you think? Ask Jeff Fisher about that. ESPN wants control over the timing of the games. What's next? Outcomes? You don't think they already try? Baseball isn't so easy to manipulate. Ask the Black Sox how easy it is to fix games and get away with it.
Another question to be asked is whether ESPN is trying to drive the price of baseball down. When the FOX contract is up, you can guarantee that ESPN will want a stake in postseason baseball. Are they not talking about it on purpose in order to buy the rights for less money? That seems entirely plausible, because I cannot remember a World Series with less hype in my lifetime.
If you ask me, ESPN's got it all wrong. They need to be promoting baseball. One reason would be that they own the rights for most of the six-month baseball season, so it seems as if that would be a financially sound thing to do. Also, baseball can be riveting from the first pitch. Especially in games that mean something. Football and basketball, on the other hand, are generally decided in the last quarter of the game. So, if I'm not a fan of the team, what encourages me to tune in for the entire game? Unfortunately, in today's microwave society, people don't want to stay tuned in. They want highlights--dunks, big hits, etc. It's why the home run plays so well on Sports Center. Pitching doesn't sell today. Unless you understand the game.
So, with that, I say goodbye to baseball for a few months. It's always a bittersweet end for me. I miss the game when it's gone, but it means the Cubs are back in first place, at least until April 1st!
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
A Fall Classic Without The Yankees: Count Me In!
So, if you're a Yankees fan, go ahead and stop reading now. You won't like what I'm about to write, nor will it be new to you. It is something for me to rant about today, though, so the pinstripes are going to take a beating today.
Rangers at Giants. What a boring interleague series, huh? What? You say this is the World Series? Sweet!
Seriously, if this was an interleague series, I wouldn't do anything more than look at the box scores to see how my fantasy team did. Aubrey Huff went long? Great! (Yes, I did have Aubrey Huff on my team this year, which should garner me some credit!) Beyond that, who cares?
Yet, somehow since this is the World Series, I'm excited. More excited for a World Series than I've been in years! These are two franchises that have struggled for my entire life. Sure, the Giants have been in a handful of playoff series, and have even gotten to the World Series twice in my lifetime (who can forget the earthquake?) but they've never won it. Not since my uncle Howard, the only Giants fan I ever knew until he brainwashed his children, was "in diapers". The Rangers hadn't won a playoff series before this year. That's over 40 years of losing in Arlington.
America loves the underdog.....in everything except sports. In sports, America loves to watch the Lakers, Cowboys, Duke basketball, and yes, the dreaded Yankees. Well, I can't stand any of those teams. I love an underdog, which makes this series extremely fun for me. The Giants' pitching versus the Rangers' lineup. Classic series between two anything but classic teams. Perfect in my mind.
Yet, instead of the massive hype machine we've grown accustomed to, we're hearing very little about this series. Hell, had I not known it was starting tonight, no one would have told me! There's very little on ESPN. Our local stations, despite being a Rangers AAA affiliate for almost two decades, are saying nothing. The silence is deafening.
Can you imagine this silence if the Yankees or Red Sox were in the series? Nah, we'd be hearing all about how the *insert AL East team here* are the best team in history and there's no way that *insert team outside of the east coast* can win. The Yankees have the best lineup we've ever seen. The Red Sox pitching cannot be stopped. Then, the team headquartered west of the original 13 colonies pulls off some sort of a miracle win and the world comes to an end. Right? That's what we're supposed to think, right?
My guess is that this series will be billed as "bad for baseball". The ratings will be down (imagine that....no hype = lower ratings) and there will be a perceived lack of general interest. For baseball fans like myself, though, this is great! These two franchises have built from within. They haven't been tainted as most have with too many high priced free agents. They grow their players, then supplement with free agency to fill holes. This is the way it's supposed to work.
So forgive me if I laughed a bit when the Rangers clinched the series against the Yankees, and again when the Giants finished off the Phillies. I don't want to watch teams that are bought by the highest bidder. It's not good for the sport that Cliff Lee is "destined" for pinstripes because they can pay him the most. It's good for the league to have new winners. This year's series is good for the league.
So, instead of being hampered by excess hype and overblown expectations, sit back, relax and watch some really good baseball by organizations who are doing things the right way! Go Rangers! Go Giants! Whatever. Mostly, Go Baseball!
Rangers at Giants. What a boring interleague series, huh? What? You say this is the World Series? Sweet!
Seriously, if this was an interleague series, I wouldn't do anything more than look at the box scores to see how my fantasy team did. Aubrey Huff went long? Great! (Yes, I did have Aubrey Huff on my team this year, which should garner me some credit!) Beyond that, who cares?
Yet, somehow since this is the World Series, I'm excited. More excited for a World Series than I've been in years! These are two franchises that have struggled for my entire life. Sure, the Giants have been in a handful of playoff series, and have even gotten to the World Series twice in my lifetime (who can forget the earthquake?) but they've never won it. Not since my uncle Howard, the only Giants fan I ever knew until he brainwashed his children, was "in diapers". The Rangers hadn't won a playoff series before this year. That's over 40 years of losing in Arlington.
America loves the underdog.....in everything except sports. In sports, America loves to watch the Lakers, Cowboys, Duke basketball, and yes, the dreaded Yankees. Well, I can't stand any of those teams. I love an underdog, which makes this series extremely fun for me. The Giants' pitching versus the Rangers' lineup. Classic series between two anything but classic teams. Perfect in my mind.
Yet, instead of the massive hype machine we've grown accustomed to, we're hearing very little about this series. Hell, had I not known it was starting tonight, no one would have told me! There's very little on ESPN. Our local stations, despite being a Rangers AAA affiliate for almost two decades, are saying nothing. The silence is deafening.
Can you imagine this silence if the Yankees or Red Sox were in the series? Nah, we'd be hearing all about how the *insert AL East team here* are the best team in history and there's no way that *insert team outside of the east coast* can win. The Yankees have the best lineup we've ever seen. The Red Sox pitching cannot be stopped. Then, the team headquartered west of the original 13 colonies pulls off some sort of a miracle win and the world comes to an end. Right? That's what we're supposed to think, right?
My guess is that this series will be billed as "bad for baseball". The ratings will be down (imagine that....no hype = lower ratings) and there will be a perceived lack of general interest. For baseball fans like myself, though, this is great! These two franchises have built from within. They haven't been tainted as most have with too many high priced free agents. They grow their players, then supplement with free agency to fill holes. This is the way it's supposed to work.
So forgive me if I laughed a bit when the Rangers clinched the series against the Yankees, and again when the Giants finished off the Phillies. I don't want to watch teams that are bought by the highest bidder. It's not good for the sport that Cliff Lee is "destined" for pinstripes because they can pay him the most. It's good for the league to have new winners. This year's series is good for the league.
So, instead of being hampered by excess hype and overblown expectations, sit back, relax and watch some really good baseball by organizations who are doing things the right way! Go Rangers! Go Giants! Whatever. Mostly, Go Baseball!
Monday, October 18, 2010
The Initial BCS Standings and the Fake Media Outrage
I thought long and hard about what to write this week. I had a few options. A certain anniversary that every Cubs fan wants to forget forever. A game I attended in Norman, Oklahoma, that started to have a certain feel that Sooner fans are familiar with. I'll save those for some other time, though, because I got what I wanted last night when the BCS rankings were released---something I can rant about!
I found myself watching the BCS show last night. I suppose it's because I had heard that my Sooners were going to be #1 in the standings, and I wanted to get angry with ESPN. I could have told you what was going to be said, and with the exception of Kirk Herbstreit, I would have been correct.
You see, my alma mater, rightfully so, has become a media whipping boy. Losses in three straight BCS Championship games and five straight BCS games will do that to you. So, when the standings were released, the shock and dismay was thick on the air. Even today, there are all kinds of tweets, articles and rants about what a sham it is that Oklahoma is ahead of Boise State and Oregon and how the system is somehow "wrong". One of my favorites was a tweet by Pat Forde saying that he couldn't believe that Oklahoma got so much respect for blowing out Iowa State. Newsflash, Pat, the respect has nothing to do with the Iowa State win and EVERYTHING to do with the Texas and Florida State wins, two teams Oklahoma beat. That's the way the system works.
Here's the underlying problem: The formula itself is not broken. It works the way it's supposed to work. That's not to say that I like the system. I don't. In fact, I'd scrap it tomorrow if I could. But, because the media doesn't have complete control of the system, they whine every time it works. They've changed it twice due to the fact that the computers overruled the people. Isn't that what the computers are there for? They're supposed to even out some of the media bias, right? So, when they do, they change it to where the computers hardly even matter anymore. That makes a lot of sense.
Which brings me to the point of my rant. Oklahoma has been #1 in the BCS more often than anyone since the system was implemented. They've been in the top 5 more than anyone since this system was implemented. And, despite what E(SEC)PN might want you to believe, it's not because Oklahoma plays in an inferior conference. It's because they have the system figured out. It's not hard to figure out, but the other schools (ahem...Auburn) would rather whine than do what it takes to put themselves in a position to win it all.
Oklahoma has a strict scheduling policy for non-conference games. They play one major conference "power". That team might not be on top when they play them, but it's a name school. This year it's Florida State. In the future, it's Notre Dame, Tennessee & Ohio State. Oklahoma doesn't duck road games against powerhouses. Next year, Oklahoma goes to Tallahassee. Again, this is all by design. They supplement that game with two mid-major conference games. This year, those were Air Force and Cincinatti. In the past, this game has bitten the Sooners (see BYU last year and TCU a few years back). These games are typically at home. The fourth game (which will go away with the new Big "12") is a weak opponent. This game has hurt OU in the past, but typically can be offset by the other three.
This scheduling system has put Oklahoma in the title game over USC in 2003, Auburn in 2004, and Texas in 2008. It's the schedule that puts Oklahoma, at the angst of the media, ahead of their darlings. In 2003, no one could believe that an SEC team could be left out of the BCS Championship Game without a loss. USC had the biggest beef. Their schedule was respectable. Auburn's non-conference schedule: Louisiana Monroe, The Citadel and Louisiana Tech. Texas in 2008: Florida Atlantic, UTEP, Rice & a bad Arkansas team.
So, for all of those media members who refuse to support a college football playoff, please allow the system to work the way it is built to work. Everything will work itself out in the end, or it won't. Either way, it's the system we have. They act like they don't know it is. I don't buy it. They should be more studied up on the system than anyone.
I'm all for a playoff. Every other sport has one. Every other division in college football has one. There's no reason that the FBS cannot have a playoff, other than peoples' pockets getting lined.....which reminds me, I can't wait to read Dan Wetzel's new book. I was going to save my BCS rant until after I read it, but I'll probably have more to rant about at that point.
In the meantime, enjoy the ride that is the college football regular season!
I found myself watching the BCS show last night. I suppose it's because I had heard that my Sooners were going to be #1 in the standings, and I wanted to get angry with ESPN. I could have told you what was going to be said, and with the exception of Kirk Herbstreit, I would have been correct.
You see, my alma mater, rightfully so, has become a media whipping boy. Losses in three straight BCS Championship games and five straight BCS games will do that to you. So, when the standings were released, the shock and dismay was thick on the air. Even today, there are all kinds of tweets, articles and rants about what a sham it is that Oklahoma is ahead of Boise State and Oregon and how the system is somehow "wrong". One of my favorites was a tweet by Pat Forde saying that he couldn't believe that Oklahoma got so much respect for blowing out Iowa State. Newsflash, Pat, the respect has nothing to do with the Iowa State win and EVERYTHING to do with the Texas and Florida State wins, two teams Oklahoma beat. That's the way the system works.
Here's the underlying problem: The formula itself is not broken. It works the way it's supposed to work. That's not to say that I like the system. I don't. In fact, I'd scrap it tomorrow if I could. But, because the media doesn't have complete control of the system, they whine every time it works. They've changed it twice due to the fact that the computers overruled the people. Isn't that what the computers are there for? They're supposed to even out some of the media bias, right? So, when they do, they change it to where the computers hardly even matter anymore. That makes a lot of sense.
Which brings me to the point of my rant. Oklahoma has been #1 in the BCS more often than anyone since the system was implemented. They've been in the top 5 more than anyone since this system was implemented. And, despite what E(SEC)PN might want you to believe, it's not because Oklahoma plays in an inferior conference. It's because they have the system figured out. It's not hard to figure out, but the other schools (ahem...Auburn) would rather whine than do what it takes to put themselves in a position to win it all.
Oklahoma has a strict scheduling policy for non-conference games. They play one major conference "power". That team might not be on top when they play them, but it's a name school. This year it's Florida State. In the future, it's Notre Dame, Tennessee & Ohio State. Oklahoma doesn't duck road games against powerhouses. Next year, Oklahoma goes to Tallahassee. Again, this is all by design. They supplement that game with two mid-major conference games. This year, those were Air Force and Cincinatti. In the past, this game has bitten the Sooners (see BYU last year and TCU a few years back). These games are typically at home. The fourth game (which will go away with the new Big "12") is a weak opponent. This game has hurt OU in the past, but typically can be offset by the other three.
This scheduling system has put Oklahoma in the title game over USC in 2003, Auburn in 2004, and Texas in 2008. It's the schedule that puts Oklahoma, at the angst of the media, ahead of their darlings. In 2003, no one could believe that an SEC team could be left out of the BCS Championship Game without a loss. USC had the biggest beef. Their schedule was respectable. Auburn's non-conference schedule: Louisiana Monroe, The Citadel and Louisiana Tech. Texas in 2008: Florida Atlantic, UTEP, Rice & a bad Arkansas team.
So, for all of those media members who refuse to support a college football playoff, please allow the system to work the way it is built to work. Everything will work itself out in the end, or it won't. Either way, it's the system we have. They act like they don't know it is. I don't buy it. They should be more studied up on the system than anyone.
I'm all for a playoff. Every other sport has one. Every other division in college football has one. There's no reason that the FBS cannot have a playoff, other than peoples' pockets getting lined.....which reminds me, I can't wait to read Dan Wetzel's new book. I was going to save my BCS rant until after I read it, but I'll probably have more to rant about at that point.
In the meantime, enjoy the ride that is the college football regular season!
Monday, October 11, 2010
ESPN--The Case for Too Much of Anything Can Be Bad......
It is not very often that I get a Saturday to just sit around and do nothing but watch college football. This week, I had that opportunity, and man was it fun! It was so much fun that I woke up Sunday morning wanting more, so I went online and started looking for any college football information that I could find. I looked for articles, commentaries and computer polls. Then it hit me. ESPN is about to ruin college football for me.
ESPN and I have a love/hate relationship already. I can't live without the "four letter" network, but I don't like how they are the spokesperson for anything that makes them money, either. When Duke is playing North Carolina, for example, you'd think there's nothing else going on in the world. According to them, there's no rivalry in baseball that compares to Yankees vs. Red Sox. (Ask a Red Sox or Yankees fan about that rivalry before the hype....not as big as ESPN has made it out to be)
So, this morning, I was looking for the time the BCS standings would be released. For some reason, I had it in my mind that it was this week instead of next week. When FOX had control of the BCS, the new rankings always came out during the NFL coverage. We knew who was there by 5:00 or so my time every week. Now, ESPN is making a "show" out of the release every week. A prime time show. So, instead of seeing the new poll and moving on, they're trying to force football fans to spend half an hour listening to their drivel in order to see the results. They're also making us wait over 2 more hours to see it.
And here's where my dislike for everything Bristol, CT, comes in. We already know what they're going to say! They're going to have their teams that they want in the BCS Championship game, and that's who will get the air time. This year, count on that being Boise State, TCU & Alabama, even after Bama's loss this week (you could already hear that from Musberger and Herbstreit last night). It's all about the little guy this year, so Boise and TCU will get lots of air time. Then, when you take into account the new multi-million dollar contract between ESPN and the SEC, prepare to be bombarded with pro-SEC propaganda from the boys in Bristol.
I guess where my problem comes in is when an entity advertises itself as a neutral observer and source of "news", yet pays millions of dollars to televise individual conferences in order to make millions of dollars for those contracts. Since ESPN is the sole provider of sports news for millions of sports fans, the are extremely influential on the voting process in the polls, too, which makes ESPN owning the rights to the SEC and the BCS a dangerous situation. Since the polls REALLY control the fate of the BCS Championship Game (http://bcsguru.blogspot.com/2010/09/do-computers-really-even-matter.html), ESPN truly has the potential to not only broadcast the game, but set it up so they can have their ideal matchup in the game. That's a dangerous proposition for sure.
So, just like they've done to the pre-season college basketball tournaments, some of the best sports rivalries and the World Series of Poker, ESPN is in the process of ruining everything college football. Just give them time. Of course, if the "powers-that-be" would wise up and institute a playoff system, this wouldn't be an issue......but that's another topic for another week. For now, tell me how much you love/hate ESPN!
ESPN and I have a love/hate relationship already. I can't live without the "four letter" network, but I don't like how they are the spokesperson for anything that makes them money, either. When Duke is playing North Carolina, for example, you'd think there's nothing else going on in the world. According to them, there's no rivalry in baseball that compares to Yankees vs. Red Sox. (Ask a Red Sox or Yankees fan about that rivalry before the hype....not as big as ESPN has made it out to be)
So, this morning, I was looking for the time the BCS standings would be released. For some reason, I had it in my mind that it was this week instead of next week. When FOX had control of the BCS, the new rankings always came out during the NFL coverage. We knew who was there by 5:00 or so my time every week. Now, ESPN is making a "show" out of the release every week. A prime time show. So, instead of seeing the new poll and moving on, they're trying to force football fans to spend half an hour listening to their drivel in order to see the results. They're also making us wait over 2 more hours to see it.
And here's where my dislike for everything Bristol, CT, comes in. We already know what they're going to say! They're going to have their teams that they want in the BCS Championship game, and that's who will get the air time. This year, count on that being Boise State, TCU & Alabama, even after Bama's loss this week (you could already hear that from Musberger and Herbstreit last night). It's all about the little guy this year, so Boise and TCU will get lots of air time. Then, when you take into account the new multi-million dollar contract between ESPN and the SEC, prepare to be bombarded with pro-SEC propaganda from the boys in Bristol.
I guess where my problem comes in is when an entity advertises itself as a neutral observer and source of "news", yet pays millions of dollars to televise individual conferences in order to make millions of dollars for those contracts. Since ESPN is the sole provider of sports news for millions of sports fans, the are extremely influential on the voting process in the polls, too, which makes ESPN owning the rights to the SEC and the BCS a dangerous situation. Since the polls REALLY control the fate of the BCS Championship Game (http://bcsguru.blogspot.com/2010/09/do-computers-really-even-matter.html), ESPN truly has the potential to not only broadcast the game, but set it up so they can have their ideal matchup in the game. That's a dangerous proposition for sure.
So, just like they've done to the pre-season college basketball tournaments, some of the best sports rivalries and the World Series of Poker, ESPN is in the process of ruining everything college football. Just give them time. Of course, if the "powers-that-be" would wise up and institute a playoff system, this wouldn't be an issue......but that's another topic for another week. For now, tell me how much you love/hate ESPN!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)