Sometimes when we touch, the honesty’s too much.

Usually, when we look at big picture decisions – playoffs being an obvious one –  affecting college football, the folks calling the shots like to couch their decisions in soothing terms, like “it’s what the fans want”.

Every once in a while, though, for some reason, a little honesty pops through the cracks.

Take as an example this blurb from Ivan Maisel’s I-Formation today about the effect the clock rule change has had on the game this season:

“We’re really where we were two years ago,” NCAA Football Rules Committee secretary-editor John Adams said. “Games are going three hours and five [minutes], 3:10.”

The rules adopted this year to shave time off games — moving the kickoff back five yards to the 30, making one timeout last no more than 30 seconds and reducing the length of the play clock coming out of a TV commercial from 25 seconds to 15 seconds — haven’t done the job.

OK, fine, no real surprise there.  But Adams says something’s gotta be done about it.

Adams wants officials to get the ball into play and get teams quickly on and off sidelines. He doesn’t know yet whether the Rules Committee will try again next winter to curtail the length of games.

Why?  Are fans complaining about getting their paltry 10 or 15 minutes of action back?  Of course not.

“The spectators never complained,” Adams said. “The TV people were complaining and a lot of the [conference] commissioners were complaining.”

And so it goes.

Building a new tradition at Notre Dame

The humiliation is complete. The Irish are now a punch line, a reference point for crapitude. Just listen to Nebraska LB Corey McKeon defend his program against criticism after the embarrassing near loss to Ball State.

“This isn’t a down year for Nebraska,” he said. “We’re 3-1 and people are looking at it like . . . we’re Notre Dame, like we’re 0-4.”

It’s a long way from the Gipper and Rudy, ain’t it?

(h/t The Wizard of Odds)

The best things in life are free.

Over at CBSSports.com, Spencer Tillman purports to take a look at what he refers to as “… the gross imbalance in what football players at major college institutions give in comparison to what they really get in return.”  While he does give lip service to the idea that D-1 football players do derive some positives from the current arrangement, it’s apparent where his sympathies lie.

He promises some surprising solutions to the issue he’s raised in his next article.  I’m curious to see how he proposes to get around the biggest problem with paying college football players, namely, that at most schools there just isn’t enough money in the athletic department budget to do that.

Dawg stat watch: what it takes to win, week 4.

If you’ve followed me on this so far, you know the drill: there are seven statistical categories that Georgia excelled in for the three years that it’s gone to the SECCG under Richt (you can read the background on my analysis here). They are

1. Hold opponents under 17 points per game.
2. Finish at least +8 in turnover margin.
3. Average better than 380 yards per game on offense.
4. Finish in the top five in total defensive yardage.
5. Finish in the top three in first downs.
6. Finish no worse than third in passing yardage.
7. Finish no worse than third in sacks.

I’m keeping track of the Dawgs’ progress in each of these statistical categories during the 2007 season. Here’s where Georgia stands in these categories after the ‘Bama game:

1. Points allowed per game: 17.2
2. Turnover margin: -2
3. Total offense per game: 364 yards
4. Total defense per game: 282.5 yards, 2nd in the conference
5. First downs: 79, 7th in the conference
6. Passing yardage per game: 223.2, 6th in the conference
7. Sacks: 9, 2nd in the conference

They aren’t gaining any serious ground in the offensive categories, but the good news there is that the next two games are against #s 11 & 12 in the SEC in total defense. The bigger concern is that Georgia still isn’t making any headway in turnover margin. The Dawgs survived a -1 in Tuscaloosa, but that’s something that will come back to bite them, just as it did last year, if they don’t start making improvement there.