While many college football fans are giddy for the BCS system of deciding a national title to be over and done with at the end of this season thanks to a 4-team playoff, they should be very careful on what they ask for.
Isn't the Playoff Committee that has been assembled just a smaller version of the voters/computers that have helped decide the title game in the BCS era? The 13-person committee consists of former players, coaches, and even a former Secretary of State. Do you honestly think that fans of teams in the BCS hunt are going to believe in the legitimacy of these people, who I presume have either all gone to universities with football or are currently in a position of power at an NCAA institution (or at the very least, have had a strong rooting interest in a particular team)?
For instance, one of the committee members is Tom Osborne. Do you think a fan of a PAC-12 team (let's say Oregon) will respect the opinion of the committee if one year, Nebraska (Osborne's former team) somehow edges out the Ducks for a chance to play in the playoff?
And what about the 5th best team in the nation (or 9th best in an 8-team playoff, etc.)? You think fans of bubble teams and the media talk too much/complain about the teams that don't make the March Madness tourney...and multiply it by about a hundred. With March Madness, 68 teams out of 351 NCAA teams make "the playoffs", including 37 "at-large" teams who fail to win their conference tournament (or conference in the case of the Ivy League), you have 19.3% of teams represented in the tourney....and you still have people complaining about a 19-14 team not making the tournament over a 21-12 team with perhaps a slightly less strong resume. Many fans don't subscribe to my theory of "if you've put yourself in that position of being considered a 'bubble team', then you can't complain if they don't make it," and I don't see that changing for the football version, which will initially have 4 of its 124 teams (as of this year), or just over 3% of the teams. Even if you make it 8 teams, it's still a significantly smaller percentage of teams in there as there are in March Madness. And w/ NCAA football arguably having a stronger hold over the country than basketball, imagine how ugly some of those message boards (which are ugly enough without the playoff) will be if the playoff committee slights their team's prospects of a chance at the BCS title. Imagine how much time ESPN and other sports media organizations will spend on the teams that didn't make it.
If we use the final records of teams in the top 15 of the BCS standings (the final standings before the bowl games) as a basis for the teams likely to be considered in the Top-8 discussion (assuming they eventually go to the 8-team format), here are the records of all the teams from the past 5 years (before their eventual bowl game):
2008: 12-0 teams (2)*; 12-1 (3); 11-1 (4); 11-2 (1); 10-2 (2); 9-3 (3) - 9 teams with 1 loss or less
2009**: 13-0 teams (3); 12-0 (2); 12-1 (1); 11-2 (1); 10-2 (5); 9-3 (3) - 6 teams with 1 loss or less
2010: 13-0 teams (1); 12-0 (2); 12-1 (1); 11-1 (5); 11-2 (2); 10-2 (3); 9-3 (1) - 9 teams with 1 loss or less
2011: 13-0 teams (1); 11-1 (4); 11-2 (2); 10-2 (5); 10-3 (2); 9-3 (1) - 5 teams with 1 loss or less
2012: 12-0 teams (2)***; 12-1 (1); 11-1 (3); 11-2 (3); 10-2 (5); 9-3 (1) - 6 teams with 1 loss or less
(stats above do not include any teams with these records outside of the top 15 of the final BCS standings before the bowls)
*neither of these teams (Utah and Boise State) even finished in the top 6 of the rankings and had no shot in hell of making the BCS title game.
**Of the 5 undefeated teams at the end of the year, only Alabama and Texas - the title game participants - received 1st place votes at the end of the season.
***Ohio State was not eligible for the title game due to NCAA sanctions
Showing posts with label BCS. Show all posts
Showing posts with label BCS. Show all posts
10/18/2013
8/27/2013
NFL vs College Football: Which Brand of Football Do You Prefer?
In about 48 hours, the college football season kicks off with North Carolina and South Carolina butting heads on ESPN. A week and an hour later, the defending Super Bowl champion Baltimore Ravens head to Mile High to face the Denver Broncos to start up the NFL slate of games that count.
Many of us watch both brands of football; some of us intently watch an equal amount of Saturday and Sunday football, while others have a true football love. The stories below reflect those who have true ties to one or the other.
Kalind
In discussing his love of college football, Kalind (you can find him on Twitter - @kalind_totals) reflects on a childhood rich with memories of Saturdays past spent watching college football with his dad.
"I have been watching college football for as long as my eyes could focus on a TV if you let my mother tell the story," Kalind said. "She says my father held me on Saturday afternoons while he watched."
His first college football memories come from watching the Florida Gators (his hometown rooting interest at the time) taking on Georgia in 1980. Watching the Gators lose on a late touchdown from Buck Belue to Lindsay Scott broke young Kalind's heart, but set in motion a lifelong love of the sport.
"The collegiate atmosphere is what stands out to me," he said. "The Swamp, Autzen Stadium, The Big House, The 12th Man, Death Valley. Gets no better."
He cites the evolution of offenses (from the wishbone to the current trend of the spread) and coach's constant pursuit of finding mismatches as other drawing points to his fascination with the college game over the pro version.
Due to his investing into the games, Kalind no longer has a particular rooting interest in any team but does consider the SEC his favorite conference to watch.
"I enjoy watching the SEC for the tradition in rivalries and the diverse approach to the game itself," he said. "Their ability to be a defensive minded conference yet have skilled enough offensive players to destroy opponents is what draws me to the conference. They have a complete balance of TEAM concept where neither side if the ball is solely responsible for winning games.
"The talent level is directly linked to the passion the South has for the sport from youth league up through college and the parents are just as dedicated and passionate as their sons who play the game."
Kalind's Saturdays are spent in his lab, notepad in hand with games he is investing in or planning on investing in, with remote control close by so he can enjoy the DirecTV package that he purchases every college football season to its fullest potential.
"The outside world doesn't matter much on Saturdays," he said. "I may come up from my lab for the occasional breather but for the most part this is a job I take seriously."
As far as surprise teams go for this season, he considers Boise State and Northwestern as teams who have a great shot at making some noise this season. However, he doesn't think Northwestern's schedule lends itself well to consistent defensive efforts, as Kalind believes they will be facing strong rushing attacks from the fifth week of the season onward.
And the championship game?
"BCS title game will be Oregon vs Georgia." he said. "The shoot out we have been waiting for has found itself in the Rose Bowl on Jan 6th with Oregon taking the last drive of the game to win and stop the dominance of the SEC to the tune of 41-40. This will be an explosion of two of the very best offensive teams college football has to offer and it will usher in what many college football fans have wanted for quite some time, a playoff system."
Nick
Nick doesn't subscribe to the DirecTV package like Kalind does, but he does take in a lot of games each Saturday (he sets up three televisions in his living room to watch as much live action as possible). The amount of games is definitely one of the draws for him when it comes to his love of college football.
"The volume of games is just so much higher," he said. "Without buying Sunday Ticket, the most NFL games a person could see at home in a given week is 5-6, but there are times where on a given Saturday there are that many games on TV at the same time. More games increases the chance that one of them will be awesome.
"College football moves faster, and it's more exciting. Because the skill level isn't as high, things can change so quickly and the volume of exciting/big plays is much higher."
Like Kalind, Nick appreciates the atmosphere that surrounds college football and its fans.
"The students represent a different kind of fan than what the NFL has," he said. "It's much cooler to see the student section going crazy than some 45 year old guy with his face painted. There's also the mascots, the cheerleaders and the bands. The fact that players can only be there for four years means that there is a freshness to things that you can't get in the NFL."
His earliest memories of college football stem from a few Big Ten teams making Rose Bowl runs (Wisconsin & Northwestern), but his true love of the sport (and of the University of Michigan football) started when he attended college in the early 2000s, even though his school didn't have a college team.
Nick's Saturdays in the Fall are full of TVs and games, dedicating himself to this setup from the moment games kick off at 11am CST till the late games end about a half day later.
When asked about who will surprise this season, Nick provided a conference who he thinks will sneak up on people.
"It's really hard in any sport, in the Internet age, to call things a surprise because everyone gets so much coverage and everyone has a "surprise" team," he said. "I think the Pac 12 is better than everyone gives it credit (even outside of Stanford and Oregon), so I think the "surprise" could be them being much better and deeper than anyone is looking at. UCLA, Washington, Arizona and Arizona St. all got votes but are outside of the top 25. Lots of talent on those teams."
In fact, he has a PAC-12 team in his championship game. Nick's title game features Alabama winning its third straight title over Stanford.
"If this was year one of the new playoff system, I would throw Georgia and Clemson in as well," Nick said. "Clemson has a history of shooting themselves in the foot which is why I won't pick them to make it outright, but they have a ton of talent."
Brad
The youngest of the interviewees for this series, Brad's first memories of watching the NFL aren't much different than many of us born/raised in the 1980s.
"My earliest memory of watching the NFL is when I was a child, maybe 4 or 5," he said. "My dad showing me Bears games he recorded on VHS! Seeing Walter Payton's incredible runs."
Runs like that help define what Brad loves most about the NFL.
"The skill level of the NFL players and coaching is leaps and bounds better," he said.
In his lifetime, the game has changed and put more of a focus on player safety. For that reason, Brad's favorite part of the NFL has changed along with the times.
"It used to be the blind-sided hits and crack back blocks," he said. "Now, it's wide receiver routes. A beautifully run route to separate from a defensive back is beautiful."
The Sunday routine for Brad consists of a wake-up call around 10, pigs in a blanket about an hour later, which leads him right into game-time. Assuming they start at noon, the Chicago Bears dominate his airwaves, then it's the RedZone channel till Sunday Night Football comes on.
In the first potential cold-weather Super Bowl, Brad has a match-up of Peyton Manning's Denver Broncos facing Atlanta, with Peyton and company prevailing to win the Lombardi Trophy.
As far as surprise teams go, Brad went the opposite route of the others here and gave his surprise team to flop on its face this year.
"My surprise team this year is the Patriots. They will be bad...really bad," he said. "Tom Brady, for the first time in his career, has bum options to throw to."
Tim
Going to a Division I school isn't necessary for people to become fans of college football. In the case of Tim, it's one of the many reasons why he just can't get into college as much as the NFL.
"I never been able to make the attachment as a fan to any college team as it doesn’t seem natural and I can’t generate the same passion as the ones that did go to a Division I school," he said. "(Also), I think there are just way too many college teams and the product seems to get watered down."
His earliest memories stem from a team that he now despises - the 1985 Chicago Bears. Since then, he became a huge Dallas Cowboys fan (dating back to their dominance in the early 1990s). The national exposure and exciting players (citing the Irvin/Aikman/Smith triplets) sold him on the team that he continues to love.
So we already heard what he dislikes about college football. What exactly does Tim like about the NFL that makes it so special?
"The competition and parity are my favorite parts of the NFL," he said. "It seems like any team can win on any Sunday. And once playoffs start, throw out the records and watch a wild card team go on a run and take the whole thing."
Like Nick, Tim has a three television set-up that goes from noon till close. The DirecTV package comes in handy for this, allowing for Tim and his company to watch the games of their favorite squads. Getting the smoker or grill started beforehand is also a crucial aspect of Sundays for Tim, who treats his company to a variety of delicious cooked meats throughout the football season.
One surprise he believes is on the horizon for the 2013 season - a bounce back season from Kansas City.
"I like the Chiefs to be a lot better this year with a competent coach now (unless it comes to managing time or his timeouts) and a quarterback that is efficient and does not turn the ball over," he said. "He is surrounded with some dynamic weapons and a coach that does a good job of getting the most out of his quarterbacks. Their defense will be the biggest question mark/downfall."
The obligatory prediction business - Tim has Matt Ryan as a legitimate MVP candidate, with Ryan leading the Atlanta Falcons to a Super Bowl victory over the Houston Texans to cap off the 2013-14 season.
And his final predictions?
"I like a couple of sophomore slumps to rear its ugly head with Wilson, RGIII and Luck," Tim said. "With more tape out on these guys now, I see defensive coordinators adjusting and slowing them down some. I think Luck’s style makes him the most likely to avoid the slump."
Many of us watch both brands of football; some of us intently watch an equal amount of Saturday and Sunday football, while others have a true football love. The stories below reflect those who have true ties to one or the other.
The College Guys
Kalind
In discussing his love of college football, Kalind (you can find him on Twitter - @kalind_totals) reflects on a childhood rich with memories of Saturdays past spent watching college football with his dad.
"I have been watching college football for as long as my eyes could focus on a TV if you let my mother tell the story," Kalind said. "She says my father held me on Saturday afternoons while he watched."
His first college football memories come from watching the Florida Gators (his hometown rooting interest at the time) taking on Georgia in 1980. Watching the Gators lose on a late touchdown from Buck Belue to Lindsay Scott broke young Kalind's heart, but set in motion a lifelong love of the sport.
"The collegiate atmosphere is what stands out to me," he said. "The Swamp, Autzen Stadium, The Big House, The 12th Man, Death Valley. Gets no better."
He cites the evolution of offenses (from the wishbone to the current trend of the spread) and coach's constant pursuit of finding mismatches as other drawing points to his fascination with the college game over the pro version.
Due to his investing into the games, Kalind no longer has a particular rooting interest in any team but does consider the SEC his favorite conference to watch.
"I enjoy watching the SEC for the tradition in rivalries and the diverse approach to the game itself," he said. "Their ability to be a defensive minded conference yet have skilled enough offensive players to destroy opponents is what draws me to the conference. They have a complete balance of TEAM concept where neither side if the ball is solely responsible for winning games.
"The talent level is directly linked to the passion the South has for the sport from youth league up through college and the parents are just as dedicated and passionate as their sons who play the game."
Kalind's Saturdays are spent in his lab, notepad in hand with games he is investing in or planning on investing in, with remote control close by so he can enjoy the DirecTV package that he purchases every college football season to its fullest potential.
"The outside world doesn't matter much on Saturdays," he said. "I may come up from my lab for the occasional breather but for the most part this is a job I take seriously."
As far as surprise teams go for this season, he considers Boise State and Northwestern as teams who have a great shot at making some noise this season. However, he doesn't think Northwestern's schedule lends itself well to consistent defensive efforts, as Kalind believes they will be facing strong rushing attacks from the fifth week of the season onward.
And the championship game?
"BCS title game will be Oregon vs Georgia." he said. "The shoot out we have been waiting for has found itself in the Rose Bowl on Jan 6th with Oregon taking the last drive of the game to win and stop the dominance of the SEC to the tune of 41-40. This will be an explosion of two of the very best offensive teams college football has to offer and it will usher in what many college football fans have wanted for quite some time, a playoff system."
Nick
Nick doesn't subscribe to the DirecTV package like Kalind does, but he does take in a lot of games each Saturday (he sets up three televisions in his living room to watch as much live action as possible). The amount of games is definitely one of the draws for him when it comes to his love of college football.
"The volume of games is just so much higher," he said. "Without buying Sunday Ticket, the most NFL games a person could see at home in a given week is 5-6, but there are times where on a given Saturday there are that many games on TV at the same time. More games increases the chance that one of them will be awesome.
"College football moves faster, and it's more exciting. Because the skill level isn't as high, things can change so quickly and the volume of exciting/big plays is much higher."
Like Kalind, Nick appreciates the atmosphere that surrounds college football and its fans.
"The students represent a different kind of fan than what the NFL has," he said. "It's much cooler to see the student section going crazy than some 45 year old guy with his face painted. There's also the mascots, the cheerleaders and the bands. The fact that players can only be there for four years means that there is a freshness to things that you can't get in the NFL."
His earliest memories of college football stem from a few Big Ten teams making Rose Bowl runs (Wisconsin & Northwestern), but his true love of the sport (and of the University of Michigan football) started when he attended college in the early 2000s, even though his school didn't have a college team.
Nick's Saturdays in the Fall are full of TVs and games, dedicating himself to this setup from the moment games kick off at 11am CST till the late games end about a half day later.
When asked about who will surprise this season, Nick provided a conference who he thinks will sneak up on people.
"It's really hard in any sport, in the Internet age, to call things a surprise because everyone gets so much coverage and everyone has a "surprise" team," he said. "I think the Pac 12 is better than everyone gives it credit (even outside of Stanford and Oregon), so I think the "surprise" could be them being much better and deeper than anyone is looking at. UCLA, Washington, Arizona and Arizona St. all got votes but are outside of the top 25. Lots of talent on those teams."
In fact, he has a PAC-12 team in his championship game. Nick's title game features Alabama winning its third straight title over Stanford.
"If this was year one of the new playoff system, I would throw Georgia and Clemson in as well," Nick said. "Clemson has a history of shooting themselves in the foot which is why I won't pick them to make it outright, but they have a ton of talent."
The Pro Peeps
Brad
The youngest of the interviewees for this series, Brad's first memories of watching the NFL aren't much different than many of us born/raised in the 1980s.
"My earliest memory of watching the NFL is when I was a child, maybe 4 or 5," he said. "My dad showing me Bears games he recorded on VHS! Seeing Walter Payton's incredible runs."
Runs like that help define what Brad loves most about the NFL.
"The skill level of the NFL players and coaching is leaps and bounds better," he said.
In his lifetime, the game has changed and put more of a focus on player safety. For that reason, Brad's favorite part of the NFL has changed along with the times.
"It used to be the blind-sided hits and crack back blocks," he said. "Now, it's wide receiver routes. A beautifully run route to separate from a defensive back is beautiful."
The Sunday routine for Brad consists of a wake-up call around 10, pigs in a blanket about an hour later, which leads him right into game-time. Assuming they start at noon, the Chicago Bears dominate his airwaves, then it's the RedZone channel till Sunday Night Football comes on.
In the first potential cold-weather Super Bowl, Brad has a match-up of Peyton Manning's Denver Broncos facing Atlanta, with Peyton and company prevailing to win the Lombardi Trophy.
As far as surprise teams go, Brad went the opposite route of the others here and gave his surprise team to flop on its face this year.
"My surprise team this year is the Patriots. They will be bad...really bad," he said. "Tom Brady, for the first time in his career, has bum options to throw to."
Tim
Going to a Division I school isn't necessary for people to become fans of college football. In the case of Tim, it's one of the many reasons why he just can't get into college as much as the NFL.
"I never been able to make the attachment as a fan to any college team as it doesn’t seem natural and I can’t generate the same passion as the ones that did go to a Division I school," he said. "(Also), I think there are just way too many college teams and the product seems to get watered down."
His earliest memories stem from a team that he now despises - the 1985 Chicago Bears. Since then, he became a huge Dallas Cowboys fan (dating back to their dominance in the early 1990s). The national exposure and exciting players (citing the Irvin/Aikman/Smith triplets) sold him on the team that he continues to love.
So we already heard what he dislikes about college football. What exactly does Tim like about the NFL that makes it so special?
"The competition and parity are my favorite parts of the NFL," he said. "It seems like any team can win on any Sunday. And once playoffs start, throw out the records and watch a wild card team go on a run and take the whole thing."
Like Nick, Tim has a three television set-up that goes from noon till close. The DirecTV package comes in handy for this, allowing for Tim and his company to watch the games of their favorite squads. Getting the smoker or grill started beforehand is also a crucial aspect of Sundays for Tim, who treats his company to a variety of delicious cooked meats throughout the football season.
One surprise he believes is on the horizon for the 2013 season - a bounce back season from Kansas City.
"I like the Chiefs to be a lot better this year with a competent coach now (unless it comes to managing time or his timeouts) and a quarterback that is efficient and does not turn the ball over," he said. "He is surrounded with some dynamic weapons and a coach that does a good job of getting the most out of his quarterbacks. Their defense will be the biggest question mark/downfall."
The obligatory prediction business - Tim has Matt Ryan as a legitimate MVP candidate, with Ryan leading the Atlanta Falcons to a Super Bowl victory over the Houston Texans to cap off the 2013-14 season.
And his final predictions?
"I like a couple of sophomore slumps to rear its ugly head with Wilson, RGIII and Luck," Tim said. "With more tape out on these guys now, I see defensive coordinators adjusting and slowing them down some. I think Luck’s style makes him the most likely to avoid the slump."
8/30/2012
Brief College Football Preview + Week 1 Predictions
I've waited until the last possible minute to provide a college football preview, mainly because my knowledge of the sport is lacking and I didn't think I'd be able to provide an in-depth preview anyways. I don't really keep up with the signings, but rather rely on industry experts (including some of my Twitter followers) and a few friends who partake in plenty of Saturday football sessions.
Instead of providing a full-blown preview with analysis, I'll link you to my friend's podcast should you have the desire to learn a little bit more about the thoughts of knowledgeable college football fanatics. Nick Pazoles (@BerserkHippo) and Chris Williams (@cmwilliams51) run through each of the major conferences, with a special focus on the Big Ten, and make their picks to win each conference. They also provide a few surprise teams to watch and their BCS title predictions: Berserk Hippo Podcast - College Football 2012 Preview
I suggest taking a listen of it for more in-depth talk. Here's their predictions (and mine, just for the hell of it) summarized:
I'd be careful about using my division picks for betting purposes. I like LSU to make it to the title game again and this time win it - lots of talent on both sides of the ball. They may have one-loss entering the game, but I feel that their win in the SEC title game will be enough to boost them to title game status. Ohio State was under-coached last year - Urban Meyer brings out the best in college recruits, and OSU has plenty of talented ones. Texas has plenty of starters coming back from a team that bounced back from a mediocre 2010 bowl-less season to an 8-5 record - I think they'll outlast Oklahoma for the crown. Florida St. could have the best defense in the nation, although they seem to be a team (like Georgia) that lately seems to lose at the worst possible times. I just basically threw a dart in my head and came up with Cincinnati -the Big East will once again be unwatchable, especially now with West Virginia leaving the conference.
We all have USC in the championship game. Everything I've heard about them makes me think they are a lock to make it to the title game. Only game I could see them tripping up on is against Oregon at home or in the Pac-12 championship game. Also, I'd be weary of their last road game against UCLA the week before their home tilt against Notre Dame. Not saying UCLA is talented, but sometimes talented teams fall asleep on the road a week before a rivalry match-up.
As far as my picks for Week 1 go, I'm going with South Carolina -6.5, Alabama -14 (hoping to get a lower number), Navy +15 & Ohio +6.5 (hoping it goes to 7). Picks are subject to change and may include additional bets. I will do my best to edit this as the bets are placed - best bet is to check my Twitter (@BrianBolek or #BolekPicks).
Hope everyone is looking forward to football as much as I am.
 |
| Check out Berserk Hippo Podcast - 2012 College Preview |
I suggest taking a listen of it for more in-depth talk. Here's their predictions (and mine, just for the hell of it) summarized:
| Hippo | Williams | Bolek | |
| Big Ten Legends | Michigan | Michigan | Michigan St. |
| Big Ten Leaders | Wisconsin | Wisconsin | Ohio State* |
| BTC Winner | Wisconsin | Michigan | Wisconsin |
| SEC Champ | Georgia | Alabama | LSU |
| PAC-12 | USC | USC | USC |
| Big 12 | Oklahoma | Oklahoma | Texas |
| ACC | Clemson | Clemson | Florida St |
| Big East | Louisville | Louisville | Cincinnati |
| Darkhorse Title Winner | Virginia Tech | Clemson | Oregon |
| Title Loser | Georgia | Alabama | USC |
| Title Winner | USC | USC | LSU |
| *cannot play in Big | |||
| Ten Championship - I | |||
| have Wisconsin as | |||
| Division representative |
I'd be careful about using my division picks for betting purposes. I like LSU to make it to the title game again and this time win it - lots of talent on both sides of the ball. They may have one-loss entering the game, but I feel that their win in the SEC title game will be enough to boost them to title game status. Ohio State was under-coached last year - Urban Meyer brings out the best in college recruits, and OSU has plenty of talented ones. Texas has plenty of starters coming back from a team that bounced back from a mediocre 2010 bowl-less season to an 8-5 record - I think they'll outlast Oklahoma for the crown. Florida St. could have the best defense in the nation, although they seem to be a team (like Georgia) that lately seems to lose at the worst possible times. I just basically threw a dart in my head and came up with Cincinnati -the Big East will once again be unwatchable, especially now with West Virginia leaving the conference.
We all have USC in the championship game. Everything I've heard about them makes me think they are a lock to make it to the title game. Only game I could see them tripping up on is against Oregon at home or in the Pac-12 championship game. Also, I'd be weary of their last road game against UCLA the week before their home tilt against Notre Dame. Not saying UCLA is talented, but sometimes talented teams fall asleep on the road a week before a rivalry match-up.
As far as my picks for Week 1 go, I'm going with South Carolina -6.5, Alabama -14 (hoping to get a lower number), Navy +15 & Ohio +6.5 (hoping it goes to 7). Picks are subject to change and may include additional bets. I will do my best to edit this as the bets are placed - best bet is to check my Twitter (@BrianBolek or #BolekPicks).
Hope everyone is looking forward to football as much as I am.
7/13/2012
B List - Stupidest Sports Arguments (List 9)
I still plan on writing about the new NCAA playoff format and how it's going to cause more problems than it creates.
For now, I will mention it among six other sports arguments that I consider to be among the stupidest. This will likely have a slight Chicago lean, as I have listened to many an argument about sports from friends and strangers alike.
Here's the list of arguments that I consider to be among the most pointless.
7. Tebow - There's no way to have a reasonable debate on Tim Tebow. He's such a polarizing sports figure that you may as well discuss your stance on abortion, gun rights and gay marriage and be more productive in talking. His critics (such as myself and anyone who likes their quarterbacks to be accurate and good) will never convince his fans (who love what he stands for and his ability to win close games) that he sucks, and his fans will never convince his critics that he is the greatest quarterback of all time. I'm convinced that ranking systems like NFL Networks Top 100 players (ranked him 95th best player in the league) and NFL Films (ranking him the 7th best Heisman winner in NFL history - a ranking that was to measure the career accomplishments of Heisman winners) were just to grab attention and ratings. Anyone who thinks Tebow has accomplished more in his short career (one in which he hasn't started a complete season) than Earl Campbell (8th) and Marcus Allen (9th) is smoking the kind of crack I'd like to smoke if I was into that sort of thing.
6. Comparing Michael Jordan to anyone - There are way too many times people want to compare the best players of the day to MJ. I discussed this in a blog almost two months ago with Kobe and how he and Lebron are often brought up by people who want to discuss today's players with the best of all time. No reasonable person would argue that these guys are better than MJ. Many times, this argument, at least from my observations, is usually addressed by the folks who are so hard for MJ that they can't wait to bring his name up anytime Kobe or LeBron does something good. "Kobe's good, but he's no MJ" or pictures of MJ flaunting his rings asking LeBron about his rings are just a few of the examples that pop up when people want to remind the world that MJ is the best. I don't think we need these comments/pictures posted on FB all the time to know that MJ is better than both of them. Let it go.
5. Old champs vs. new champs - Media and public folks do this a lot. How would (current champ) do against (some old great team), with most of the folks who are on the elderly side of the debate usually arguing for the latter. The most recent example of this was Kobe being asked if he thought this current collection of Olympians could beat the Dream Team in a game, with Kobe answering affirmatively. Did everyone expect Kobe to say, "No, you know what, I think we'd get killed." It's not in Kobe's DNA to admit that he can't do something, even if his heart of hearts believed that his current squad would have no chance. In one game, sure, this collection of guys may be able to win, but the Dream Team, whose player composition included all but one Hall of Famer, would likely win most matchups. But you know what? You can't possibly know what would happen because it can never happen. Therefore, these type of arguments are deemed pointless in my eyes.
4. Best running back ever - I've heard this many times argued among friends and on TV alike. There's only a few names that I would even consider being reasonable to discuss in the equation - including Jim Brown, Barry Sanders, Emmitt Smith, OJ Simpson, Earl Campbell, and of course Walter Payton. Living in Chicago, the most common debate I heard was Payton being the best, with a few of my Dallas friends arguing Emmitt's case. It may not be the worst argument in sports, but with the way I've heard it argued, it usually turns into an ugly conversation. Perhaps that's more of a reflection of my friends arguing it than the argument itself. Since I am not old enough to have seen (or remember) many of these guys play, I can only go by statistics to say who was the best. And I don't think that's fair to the debate. I've always contended that Jim Brown was the best ever. Take a look at his stats and accomplishments if you get the chance to understand why I would think this. I'd rather not get into this argument, so I'm going to stop now.
3. BCS - For most of its existence, people have denounced the BCS as a crappy way to crown a college champion. The truth is - there is no perfect way to do this. Since there are many conferences and there's no way that teams can play completely balanced schedules, there will always have to be a human element involved with deciding who should be considered for the right to be champion (or at least play for the championship). The system that preceded the BCS was straight up voting, with many seasons in NCAA history ending without the two best regular season teams facing each other based on how the Bowl system would place teams into specific Bowls. Instead, the winner was voted on in polls before the BCS. At least with the BCS, you have almost always had two of the top 2-4 teams in the nation playing for the national championship. This new 4-team playoff is going to cause more problems than it will solve and will likely become one of its own top 2-3 dumb sports arguments out there. Whenever a selection process is used to decide who will make a playoff (as this playoff will be), you will hear about at least 2-3 teams a year (if not more) who got screwed out of a chance to play.
2. NCAA Tourney snubs - Speaking of NCAA and selection committees, one of the dumbest arguments I hear on a yearly basis is the teams who were left out of the NCAA March Madness tourney. Every year, a big part of ESPN and CBS broadcasts on Selection Sunday is devoted to the teams who barely squeaked in and the teams who just missed the tourney. Cases are made for each team who didn't make it (teams who are roughly 18-12 and lost in the second round of their conference tourney) as if they were leaving out the best team in the nation. It's gotten so bad with the tourney that they've even expanded the tourney several times in our lifetimes and people still complain about the last team who didn't make it. If you can't convince people that you are not one of the best teams in the nation when you have an 18-12 record and you don't win an automatic bid, you can't complain when you leave your team's postseason fate in the hands of a committee. The screams for the last team in are bad with the NCAA tourney - imagine how bad it will be when football gets around to their 4-team playoff.
1. All Star snubs - And the grand champion for stupid debates for me is All Star snubs. And this is by far the stupidest for me. While baseball is fresh in my mind, this also applies for the other sports who host an annual All-Star game. However, the bickering over baseball All Stars is probably the loudest (and definitely the most annoying). Even with expanding rosters, you could always find an idiot who says "My guy should have made it". Yeah, he could/should have, but who cares? In some ways, I'd rather have my guy rest for 3-4 days than go to a glorified exhibition game that most fans (at least the ones I know) don't care who wins. Even with the White Sox making a run towards the postseason, I have given little thought to the fact that they would be travelling for Game 1 of the World Series if they were lucky enough to make it that far because a collection of AL players lost 8-0 the other day. The new rule of adding a World Series stipulation to the game inspired the slogan "This Time, It Counts" from Fox for the longest time, inspiring even more annoying banter among people who say their guy should have made it and been able to help their league out in what should be a meaningless All-Star game. The emotion that is wasted when one gets sad or angry about their guy being left off a roster should instead be used to cheer that player on after the All-Star break ends. At the end of the day, the All Star game is an exhibition, whether the MLB's WS stipulation tells you or not.
For now, I will mention it among six other sports arguments that I consider to be among the stupidest. This will likely have a slight Chicago lean, as I have listened to many an argument about sports from friends and strangers alike.
Here's the list of arguments that I consider to be among the most pointless.
7. Tebow - There's no way to have a reasonable debate on Tim Tebow. He's such a polarizing sports figure that you may as well discuss your stance on abortion, gun rights and gay marriage and be more productive in talking. His critics (such as myself and anyone who likes their quarterbacks to be accurate and good) will never convince his fans (who love what he stands for and his ability to win close games) that he sucks, and his fans will never convince his critics that he is the greatest quarterback of all time. I'm convinced that ranking systems like NFL Networks Top 100 players (ranked him 95th best player in the league) and NFL Films (ranking him the 7th best Heisman winner in NFL history - a ranking that was to measure the career accomplishments of Heisman winners) were just to grab attention and ratings. Anyone who thinks Tebow has accomplished more in his short career (one in which he hasn't started a complete season) than Earl Campbell (8th) and Marcus Allen (9th) is smoking the kind of crack I'd like to smoke if I was into that sort of thing.
6. Comparing Michael Jordan to anyone - There are way too many times people want to compare the best players of the day to MJ. I discussed this in a blog almost two months ago with Kobe and how he and Lebron are often brought up by people who want to discuss today's players with the best of all time. No reasonable person would argue that these guys are better than MJ. Many times, this argument, at least from my observations, is usually addressed by the folks who are so hard for MJ that they can't wait to bring his name up anytime Kobe or LeBron does something good. "Kobe's good, but he's no MJ" or pictures of MJ flaunting his rings asking LeBron about his rings are just a few of the examples that pop up when people want to remind the world that MJ is the best. I don't think we need these comments/pictures posted on FB all the time to know that MJ is better than both of them. Let it go.
5. Old champs vs. new champs - Media and public folks do this a lot. How would (current champ) do against (some old great team), with most of the folks who are on the elderly side of the debate usually arguing for the latter. The most recent example of this was Kobe being asked if he thought this current collection of Olympians could beat the Dream Team in a game, with Kobe answering affirmatively. Did everyone expect Kobe to say, "No, you know what, I think we'd get killed." It's not in Kobe's DNA to admit that he can't do something, even if his heart of hearts believed that his current squad would have no chance. In one game, sure, this collection of guys may be able to win, but the Dream Team, whose player composition included all but one Hall of Famer, would likely win most matchups. But you know what? You can't possibly know what would happen because it can never happen. Therefore, these type of arguments are deemed pointless in my eyes.
4. Best running back ever - I've heard this many times argued among friends and on TV alike. There's only a few names that I would even consider being reasonable to discuss in the equation - including Jim Brown, Barry Sanders, Emmitt Smith, OJ Simpson, Earl Campbell, and of course Walter Payton. Living in Chicago, the most common debate I heard was Payton being the best, with a few of my Dallas friends arguing Emmitt's case. It may not be the worst argument in sports, but with the way I've heard it argued, it usually turns into an ugly conversation. Perhaps that's more of a reflection of my friends arguing it than the argument itself. Since I am not old enough to have seen (or remember) many of these guys play, I can only go by statistics to say who was the best. And I don't think that's fair to the debate. I've always contended that Jim Brown was the best ever. Take a look at his stats and accomplishments if you get the chance to understand why I would think this. I'd rather not get into this argument, so I'm going to stop now.
3. BCS - For most of its existence, people have denounced the BCS as a crappy way to crown a college champion. The truth is - there is no perfect way to do this. Since there are many conferences and there's no way that teams can play completely balanced schedules, there will always have to be a human element involved with deciding who should be considered for the right to be champion (or at least play for the championship). The system that preceded the BCS was straight up voting, with many seasons in NCAA history ending without the two best regular season teams facing each other based on how the Bowl system would place teams into specific Bowls. Instead, the winner was voted on in polls before the BCS. At least with the BCS, you have almost always had two of the top 2-4 teams in the nation playing for the national championship. This new 4-team playoff is going to cause more problems than it will solve and will likely become one of its own top 2-3 dumb sports arguments out there. Whenever a selection process is used to decide who will make a playoff (as this playoff will be), you will hear about at least 2-3 teams a year (if not more) who got screwed out of a chance to play.
2. NCAA Tourney snubs - Speaking of NCAA and selection committees, one of the dumbest arguments I hear on a yearly basis is the teams who were left out of the NCAA March Madness tourney. Every year, a big part of ESPN and CBS broadcasts on Selection Sunday is devoted to the teams who barely squeaked in and the teams who just missed the tourney. Cases are made for each team who didn't make it (teams who are roughly 18-12 and lost in the second round of their conference tourney) as if they were leaving out the best team in the nation. It's gotten so bad with the tourney that they've even expanded the tourney several times in our lifetimes and people still complain about the last team who didn't make it. If you can't convince people that you are not one of the best teams in the nation when you have an 18-12 record and you don't win an automatic bid, you can't complain when you leave your team's postseason fate in the hands of a committee. The screams for the last team in are bad with the NCAA tourney - imagine how bad it will be when football gets around to their 4-team playoff.
1. All Star snubs - And the grand champion for stupid debates for me is All Star snubs. And this is by far the stupidest for me. While baseball is fresh in my mind, this also applies for the other sports who host an annual All-Star game. However, the bickering over baseball All Stars is probably the loudest (and definitely the most annoying). Even with expanding rosters, you could always find an idiot who says "My guy should have made it". Yeah, he could/should have, but who cares? In some ways, I'd rather have my guy rest for 3-4 days than go to a glorified exhibition game that most fans (at least the ones I know) don't care who wins. Even with the White Sox making a run towards the postseason, I have given little thought to the fact that they would be travelling for Game 1 of the World Series if they were lucky enough to make it that far because a collection of AL players lost 8-0 the other day. The new rule of adding a World Series stipulation to the game inspired the slogan "This Time, It Counts" from Fox for the longest time, inspiring even more annoying banter among people who say their guy should have made it and been able to help their league out in what should be a meaningless All-Star game. The emotion that is wasted when one gets sad or angry about their guy being left off a roster should instead be used to cheer that player on after the All-Star break ends. At the end of the day, the All Star game is an exhibition, whether the MLB's WS stipulation tells you or not.
12/07/2011
Bye to the Hiatus: Sports Talk about Santo, Marlin$, Te-Pro Bowl
I've had writer's block, haven't really sat down by my computer after work, etc., so I apologize to the 10 of you who read my blog regularly.
And by apologize, I mean I'm not really sorry and you should write for me on my writing hiatuses.
Anywho, lots of sports stuff - might write a few blogs tonight. For now, a bulleted one.
As they always say, you're always more famous when you're dead...Ron Santo in the Hall of Fame, finally.
For years, Santo and his loyal fanbase lobbied for his induction into the Hall of Fame by the Veteran's Committee, which passed him over with each vote. It took the Golden Era Committee (which reviews players from 1947-1972 that have been left out of the Hall) to vote him in. A couple of points from this and the Hall of Fame in general:
Pujols has had 3-4 years in declining stats and is going to be an average to slightly above-average player in about 4-5 years, which means 5-6 years of dead money. Also, we assume he is 31 right now. With how often Dominicans who come to the major leagues have fudged their age, what if he is 33 right now? That would mean he would be 42-43 when this deal ends. Like I said a few weeks ago, the Cards should let the Marlins sign him. The Cardinals do not need him to contend in a weak NL Central now. And with the solid foundation of ownership that they've always had, they won't need him in the near future.
Never thought I'd be saying this, but I'd be surprised if Tebow WASN'T a Pro-Bowler this year. Before you think I've swallowed a couple of crazy pills and smoked a pipe, look at the AFC and look at the talent of the QBs this year by division. And by no means am I a believer in his long-term success, merely looking at this year's QB situations in the AFC. (Note: I've named the starter to be the guy who has started the most game for his team at this point):
AFC North: Big Ben, Flacco, McCoy, Dalton: Only one who will make Pro Bowl (at least initially) will be Big Ben.
AFC South: Schaub, Painter, Hasselbeck, Gabbert: No Pro-Bowlers here. Schaub, who would have made it, is out for year.
AFC East: Brady, Sanchez, Fitzpatrick, Moore: Brady will go. Sanchez is under-rated and gets too much criticism, don't see him getting in. Fitzpatrick is a sleeper for nomination. If Moore could have started the year, he may be more considered (and Miami may be a playoff team).
AFC West: Tebow, Palmer, Rivers, Cassel: Again, no one here deserves nomination. Rivers is having a down year, Palmer is still getting his feet wet.
Will get in: Brady, Big Ben
Could get in: Flacco, Dalton, Fitzpatrick, Tebow
Probably won't: Rivers, Hasselbeck, Sanchez
Won't get in: Everyone else
As you can see by a breakdown, it's not too crazy to think that the Tebow hype gets him in the Pro Bowl, even though his stats don't show it. The fans get a third of the vote, remember. Also remember that Big Ben and Brady will likely bail on the Pro Bowl (playoff status or not) and there will be replacement(s) for them.
Also remember that the Pro Bowl is a useless game that no one really cares about or watches anyways, and the arguments over who doesn't get in are as pointless as the arguments about the fringe teams who don't make the NCAA tourney.
The BCS got the final game right, but there should at least be a +1 scenario in place. Just about everyone who watches college football has something bad to say about the BCS, and most believe there should be some kind of playoff. I know some people who believe a team should win their conference (whether it have a title game or not) in order to be considered. Others don't like the idea of a rematch in the title game - I have no problem with one.
However, I do think that there should be some mini-playoff, like a +1 scenario, which I understand to be a four-team playoff, with winners of semi-final games to play in championship game. In years where there are less than two major conference teams that finish undefeated, the BCS process gets critiqued. Last year, Oregon and Auburn finished undefeated, so no problems there. This year? LSU and then a bunch of 1-loss teams.
I think Bama and OK St should play each other in a couple weeks to play for the right to play LSU in champ game. Either way, I think it'd end up being Bama/LSU for the title.
And by apologize, I mean I'm not really sorry and you should write for me on my writing hiatuses.
Anywho, lots of sports stuff - might write a few blogs tonight. For now, a bulleted one.
As they always say, you're always more famous when you're dead...Ron Santo in the Hall of Fame, finally.
 |
| Welcome to the Hall, Ron. Too bad you weren't around to answer the call. |
For years, Santo and his loyal fanbase lobbied for his induction into the Hall of Fame by the Veteran's Committee, which passed him over with each vote. It took the Golden Era Committee (which reviews players from 1947-1972 that have been left out of the Hall) to vote him in. A couple of points from this and the Hall of Fame in general:
- Good for him, but why did he get voted in a year after he died? Did it take his death to get voted in?
- The Hall of Fame shouldn't be easy to get into. It should be a selective process and reward only the game's best.
- Santo didn't get voted into the Hall by the regular voters mainly because of the influx of guys voted into the hall during his 15 year eligibility span (over half of the time he was eligible, 4+ guys got voted in by regular committee).
- The Hall voters are dumb. Only thing you need to know, no one, not even Babe Ruth or Ted Williams, has ever been voted in unanimously. Voters who leave certain guys off their ballots should have their vote taken away. Next example of this - Greg Maddux.
- How can voters not vote for someone one year, then next year change their ballot to include said player(s)? Player's stats (aside from Hack Wilson's) haven't changed after they retired, so it makes no sense to leave a guy off of a ballot if you think he is a HOF. Either you think he is HOF-worthy or he is not. It shouldn't be a year-to-year thing where as a voter, you change your mind and say, you know what, he is worthy now.
Pujols has had 3-4 years in declining stats and is going to be an average to slightly above-average player in about 4-5 years, which means 5-6 years of dead money. Also, we assume he is 31 right now. With how often Dominicans who come to the major leagues have fudged their age, what if he is 33 right now? That would mean he would be 42-43 when this deal ends. Like I said a few weeks ago, the Cards should let the Marlins sign him. The Cardinals do not need him to contend in a weak NL Central now. And with the solid foundation of ownership that they've always had, they won't need him in the near future.
 |
| Tebow a Pro-Bowler? Not as crazy of a thought as you might think. |
Never thought I'd be saying this, but I'd be surprised if Tebow WASN'T a Pro-Bowler this year. Before you think I've swallowed a couple of crazy pills and smoked a pipe, look at the AFC and look at the talent of the QBs this year by division. And by no means am I a believer in his long-term success, merely looking at this year's QB situations in the AFC. (Note: I've named the starter to be the guy who has started the most game for his team at this point):
AFC North: Big Ben, Flacco, McCoy, Dalton: Only one who will make Pro Bowl (at least initially) will be Big Ben.
AFC South: Schaub, Painter, Hasselbeck, Gabbert: No Pro-Bowlers here. Schaub, who would have made it, is out for year.
AFC East: Brady, Sanchez, Fitzpatrick, Moore: Brady will go. Sanchez is under-rated and gets too much criticism, don't see him getting in. Fitzpatrick is a sleeper for nomination. If Moore could have started the year, he may be more considered (and Miami may be a playoff team).
AFC West: Tebow, Palmer, Rivers, Cassel: Again, no one here deserves nomination. Rivers is having a down year, Palmer is still getting his feet wet.
Will get in: Brady, Big Ben
Could get in: Flacco, Dalton, Fitzpatrick, Tebow
Probably won't: Rivers, Hasselbeck, Sanchez
Won't get in: Everyone else
As you can see by a breakdown, it's not too crazy to think that the Tebow hype gets him in the Pro Bowl, even though his stats don't show it. The fans get a third of the vote, remember. Also remember that Big Ben and Brady will likely bail on the Pro Bowl (playoff status or not) and there will be replacement(s) for them.
Also remember that the Pro Bowl is a useless game that no one really cares about or watches anyways, and the arguments over who doesn't get in are as pointless as the arguments about the fringe teams who don't make the NCAA tourney.
The BCS got the final game right, but there should at least be a +1 scenario in place. Just about everyone who watches college football has something bad to say about the BCS, and most believe there should be some kind of playoff. I know some people who believe a team should win their conference (whether it have a title game or not) in order to be considered. Others don't like the idea of a rematch in the title game - I have no problem with one.
However, I do think that there should be some mini-playoff, like a +1 scenario, which I understand to be a four-team playoff, with winners of semi-final games to play in championship game. In years where there are less than two major conference teams that finish undefeated, the BCS process gets critiqued. Last year, Oregon and Auburn finished undefeated, so no problems there. This year? LSU and then a bunch of 1-loss teams.
I think Bama and OK St should play each other in a couple weeks to play for the right to play LSU in champ game. Either way, I think it'd end up being Bama/LSU for the title.
11/03/2011
Crucial Taunt - More B-Bo NCAA Ramblings & Football picks for Week 9
The unofficial play-in game for the BCS title game is going on this weekend...LSU heads to their rival Alabama's home field for a Saturday night tilt that will decide who goes to the championship game. This is dependent on the winner not slipping between now and then - but for all intents and purposes, the winner will have a chance to extend the SEC's dominance in the title game. Oddsmakers currently have Bama tabbed as a 5 pt favorite with an O/U of 41. I have no idea what side to play, so I shouldn't. If anything, I think I'd like the Under in this battle. Watch for Les Miles to do something crazy that will make or break LSUs chances of going into January undefeated and going for the crown.
How come college programs don't get penalized for leaving conferences...and yet, players who dare transfer these same college programs to other college programs have to sit out a year (unless they have special circumstances)? I think a good deterrant for these teams would be to enforce the same rules that they have for the players - if they decide to switch conferences, they have to sit out a year. That'd really make WVU reconsider leaving the Big East. While I think my idea is slightly drastic, I hate that the NCAA continues to spew these double standards where multi-million dollar coaches can switch programs w/ no problem, teams that can switch conferences at will, yet unpaid players who want to switch teams have to miss a season. Sounds fair to me. F you, NCAA.
Fools Gold Pick of the Week (NFL Week 9)
Last week, we suffered another loss, 5-3 now (4-3, +$10). This week presents a different twist on the Fools Gold platter.
San Fran -3.5 at Washington - Washington is coming off a few sloppy losses, including a shutout at the hands of the Buffalo Bills - who aren't exactly known for their stout defense. Meanwhile, you have San Fran coming into town. The Niners boast one of the best defenses in the NFL, including an amazing stat of no rushing TDs allowed in the team's first seven games.
Normally this year, I would either avoid this game or bet against the deceiving line. However, I already threw some money on San Fran in this game. I can't even say it's a homer bet. I just don't see where Washington gets their points in this game. Alex Smith has been fantastic in managing the games (only 2 picks thrown this year) and the team continues to utilize Gore in the running game. I recommend not betting this game because of the deceiving line, so do as I say, not as I do.
Fools Gold Pick: Washington +3.5 (betting opposite of this for the first time this year)
Other NFL picks this week I am considering (follow me @brianbolek on Twitter for a full blast of games)
NYG (+9) at NE - I have already bet NYG. They always play up to the level of their competition. I expect their pass rush to give Brady fits. I expect this game w/in a touchdown either way.
SD (+5.5/6) vs. GB - I consider SD a buy-low candidate here. They're usually a good home team. I'd like to see SD go to +7 but doubt it. Haven't bet it yet.
Chi +8 at Phil - Too many points to spot the Bears. They contained Vick well last year, and Forte vs. the Eagles presents a big advantage to the Bears. Also might consider the under of this game as well (total of 47)
NCAA picks for Saturday
Iowa +4 vs. Michigan - play of the day
Washington +17 vs. Oregon
LSU/Alabama under 41
Ohio St/Indiana over 52
Wake Forest +13.5 (maybe catch it at 14)
| Week 8 | Week 9 |
| NFL 5-3, $104.10 | NCAA 5-4-1, $165 |
| Totals 1-2, -$60 | Totals 2-1-1, $60 |
| MLs 1-1, -$5.90 | MLs 0-2, -$90 |
| Spreads 3-0, $170 | Spreads 3-1, $195 |
| YTD: 31-25-3, $438.20 | YTD: 15-19-1, -$209 |
| Totals: 10-8-1, $219.60 | Totals: 2-4-1, -$160 |
| MLs: 4-2, $202.60 | MLs: 0-5, -$260 |
| Spreads: 17-15-2, $16 | Spreads: 13-10, $256 |
12/13/2010
Bowl Chumpionship Series
On the eve of bowl season about to begin, college football teams are releasing 2011 and 2012 schedules. I happen to catch the nonconference powerhouses that Illinois is going to play in those two years. If you aren't already seated, I suggest doing so, as these powerhouse names will potentially give you a heart attack:
2011
Arkansas State
South Dakota State
Arizona State
Western Michigan
2012
Western Michigan
@Arizona State
Charleston Southern
Louisiana Tech
Outside of Arizona State, who was a very competitive Pac 10 team this year (i.e. lost to Oregon by lower double digits when compared to Oregon's normal beatdowns against teams), those are all home games in September that Illinois should win. You got those ignorant assholes like Ohio St's president who said teams like Boise and TCU, if undefeated, don't deserve to play in the title game because of their soft schedules. I really don't feel like looking up their schedule, but I know OSU's schedules in an average September look very similar (at least 3 of 4 games are at home and against bottom-tier college teams that are willing to get destroyed on the gridiron in exchange for a cut of the money produced for the game). Schedules like this are encouraged for the big conferences, who often have 7-8 different bowl game tie-ins after the season ends. In order to qualify for a bowl, you need 6 wins. With 8 conference games for a typical conference, a team can go 2-6 or 3-5 in conference and still make a bowl. This is accomplished by scheduling a minimum of 3 patsies that will allow you to rape them with a pigskin for 60 minutes (3 hours, 15 minutes in actual time) - AT YOUR OWN HOME NO LESS!
Meanwhile, Boise State has to schedule at least 2 of 4 nonconference games against respectable BCS schools (this year, Virginia Tech and Oregon State), win those games convincingly, win their conference games even more convincingly and pray that all of the BCS schools get at least one loss on their schedule somewhere - and even then that's not enough. How many teams leapt over Boise State this year (before they lost to Nevada), even though Boise started the year ranked 3rd? If Boise was a major market team, they would have ascended to 1 or 2 at some point in the season based on losses in front of them. Now, I know they lost a few weeks back and TCU would be a better example this year, but all I'm saying is that there is absolutely ZERO chance of these teams ever making the championship game no matter what they do, because the people who vote in these polls that heavily influence the BCS standings will always find a way to say that Boise's (or Team X in non-power conference) schedule is too soft and thus put them in a lower position as a result. If you're ever in Vegas looking at betting futures odds, I'd never invest a single dime in a non-BCS school's chances of winning the title.
Now the Week 14 final pick...Hou/Balt over 46 ($66 to win $60): I'm too lazy to write an extensive write-up, but I'll just say that I expect this to be a passing game for both teams (Houston's pass D is the worst in the league), and wouldn't be surprised to see a pick-six or two. I see this around a 30-27 final score.
Week 14 picks from Thurs-Sun: 4-2, $80; Year-to-date in NFL: 32-26, +$88
Turn out the lights, the party's over.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
