Daily Archives: December 9, 2010

You don’t know me. You just think you know me.

Et tu, Brian Cook?

… I’ve become a playoff guy over the past decade or so but even BCS proponents in the blogosphere (of which there appears to be one, the guy behind Get The Picture) have to wince at statements like this:

College football was one weekend away from Boise State participating in the BCS National Championship Game because of what happened on the playing field — not in a chatroom, a boardroom or a newsroom.

For the record, I, “the guy”, didn’t wince at Hancock’s lame attempt at a defense.  I laughed.  But why I am getting dragged in as Exhibit “A” to Brian’s smack down in the first place?  I’m not pro-BCS.  I’m anti-extended playoff. Those are different positions, right?  Or did I miss a meeting?

About these ads

46 Comments

Filed under BCS/Playoffs, The Blogosphere

Who saw him play?

Kwame Geathers, of all people, makes the SEC Coaches’ All-Freshman Team.  It’s too bad he didn’t make Rodney Garner’s.

35 Comments

Filed under Georgia Football, SEC Football

Is Terence Moore’s faith in Paul Johnson’s virtue about to be tested?

Somehow, I knew that header would get your attention.

20 Comments

Filed under Georgia Tech Football, Media Punditry/Foibles, Recruiting

Playoff proponents, Jim Delany really doesn’t care what you think.

How do you know that somebody’s a true schmuck?  When he says something you know is true, but says it in such a way that you want to punch him in the face anyway.

Like this.

The Big Ten commissioner insists his conference has already sacrificed much for the good of college sports by giving up some access to the Rose Bowl, and he sees no reason why it should give even more to create a football playoff.

Sacrifice?  I haven’t seen Big Ten schools missing too many meals lately, if you know what I mean.  BCS-era football has been berry, berry good to Delany’s conference.  But I get that he’s tired of being asked to share more with schools and conferences which haven’t put in the same amount of effort to build brand loyalty and market value that his bunch has.

Oh, you want a direct quote?  Here, then.

“Now some of the people who’ve received the most have put in the least,” he said after the panel discussion. He was referring to the five nonautomatic qualifying conferences.

Ouch.  Awaiting a response from Bob Kustra in five… four…

And then there’s this implied threat to the likes of Orrin Hatch:

“All I’m saying is if you think you can continue to pressure the system and it will just naturally provide more and more and more, I don’t think that’s an assumption our presidents, our ADs, our football coaches and our commissioners are necessarily going to agree with,” Delany said during the discussion. “I’m just saying we’ve got fatigue of defending a system that’s under a lot of pressure.” [Emphasis added.]

Translation:  I’m seriously tired of listening to you political bitches moan and groan.  Piss off.

I eagerly await Joe Barton’s snatching up of Delany’s thrown gauntlet.  It won’t be a fair fight.

***********************************************************************

UPDATE: When Bill Hancock gets irritated, he uses words like “balderdash” and “malarkey”.

12 Comments

Filed under BCS/Playoffs, Political Wankery

Cecil’s aggression will not stand, man.

I mentioned before in the context of Mike Slive’s faux concern over his hands being tied in regards to Cecil Newton’s shopping his son to the highest bidder – those damned ineffective regulations! – that it’s hard to see what steps the grand poobahs of enforcement could take to make college athletics a better world in that regard.

It’s not that they can’t rewrite the regs to give themselves more authority to do something.  John Infante has a few suggested changes you can read here.  They’re fine as far as they go, but the real issue is whether the NCAA and the SEC have the stomachs to enforce them.

Judge for yourself.

… NCAA president Mark Emmert discussed his organization’s ruling last week that reinstated Auburn quarterback Cam Newton without penalty, even though the NCAA said his father had solicited money from Mississippi State in exchange for his son signing a letter of intent. Emmert argued the facts, or the lack of them, compelled the NCAA’s decision, even as that decision “stretches credibility.”

“The burden of proof that we have to rely on before we make a decision that affects a university, a young man, a program, or a young woman in a program, is obviously greater than someone who writes in a blog or somebody who has heard a rumor or has a story,” said Dr. Emmert, speaking speaking before the commissioners.

I may write in a blog, but I’m not an idiot.  No one contests that Cecil Newton had his hands out for a six-figure payment.  We’re way past a burden of proof threshold.  Far enough past it that even Emmert admits in a nice turn of phrase that the NCAA’s ruling “stretches credibility.” I’m curious what part of it remains credible.

For whatever reason, in this case college athletics’ organizing body and the SEC were reluctant to enforce the rules on the books (does anyone really believe that neither has ever pondered the issue of a parent or relative seeking bids for a student-athlete’s services before?).  So what are a few new sentences in the guidebook going to do?

And I’m not sure that’s even necessary.  Jim Delany, arguably the biggest prick in college athletics and a former NCAA investigator, has a suggestion that makes a lot of sense.

… Delany, a former NCAA investigator, said, “Nobody likes the facts of this case.” He suggested that the rule be changed to put the burden of proof on the future Auburns and future Newtons. That’s what the NCAA does in infractions cases. It has not been as demanding in eligibility cases.

“In the eligibility area, there’s a tendency to look at the welfare of the athlete,” Delany said. “I agree with that. But then it comes to a point where certain circumstances, certain facts emerge, then the reversal of that presumption is appropriate.”

What I like about that is it takes the decision out of the hands of parties that may be compromised by, shall we say, market forces and makes it the responsibility of those who have the most at stake to prove their hands are clean.  Instead of having an incentive to cover up and hide (and I’m not saying that’s what occurred with the Newtons and Auburn, because I don’t know, obviously), the player and the school become obligated to prove that a violation didn’t take place.

It’s not a politically correct solution, though, which means it’s unlikely to see the light of day, Delany’s power notwithstanding.  Emmert’s walking a tightrope here.  He doesn’t have a lot of friends with the NCAA’s call and any attempt to offer a solution that is little more than window dressing is likely to be met with more skepticism.  Or maybe something even stronger.  We’ve still got showboating Congressmen out there, right?

22 Comments

Filed under The NCAA

Looks like they picked the wrong week to have coached Tebow.

Is the GPOOE™’s high school coach still gainfully employed?

6 Comments

Filed under Tim Tebow: Rock Star

NCAA president: players play, we get paid.

That whole “we’re concerned about the welfare of the athlete” thing only goes so far for Mark Emmert.

… When asked if elite players whose numbers are used on jerseys will ever get compensated, Emmert also said no way.

“We’re providing athletes with world class educations and world class opportunities,” Emmert said. “If they are one of the few that are going to move on to become a pro athlete, there’s no better place in the world to refine their skills as a student-athlete.”

As long as they don’t make anything off their names, at least.  Only NCAA-member schools should be allowed to do that.  Return on investment and such…

2 Comments

Filed under It's Just Bidness, The NCAA