Checkin’ out the scene, man.

A few random bits of info and opinion floating around the internets this AM –

  • Before you get too excited about Georgia’s position on all of these excessively early 2008 preseason predictions, take a look back at CFN’s first 2007 preseason picks: 1. USC 2. LSU 3. Texas 4. Florida 5. Wisconsin 6. Ohio State 7. Oklahoma 8. Arkansas 9. UCLA 10. Michigan.
  • I could be wrong, but I don’t think this story is going to turn out too well.
  • Surprise, surprise: the CEO of the Rose Bowl doesn’t think too highly of Michael Adams’ playoff proposal.
  • ESPN’s Gene Wojciechowski (you have no idea how long that took to type) thinks Bobby Petrino isn’t completely sincere about his love for Chex Mix – and other matters.
  • Speaking of the WWL, here’s the results of its most recent poll on sports popularity: (1) NFL, 75.1 percent; (2) College football, 68.2; (3) MLB, 63.5; (4) College basketball, 53.7; (5) NBA, 52.9; (6) Figure skating, 50.0; (7) NASCAR, 43.4; (8) Boxing, 39.4; (9) WNBA, 36.9; (10) PGA, 35.4; (11) WTA, 32.1; (12) NHL, 34.2. Before you point to OMG!! playoffs!! as the reason that the NFL enjoys greater popularity than college football, ask yourself two questions. First, what do you think those numbers would look like if there were major college powers playing in the New York and Chicago markets? Second, how come college football is listed ahead of so many sports – including college basketball – that do have playoffs?
  • On the other hand, stuff like this makes me yearn for the simplicity of a playoff of conference champs.
  • Here’s a snapshot of the SEC East’s recruiting story to date. And here’s the same for the SEC West. If I’m a Tennessee fan, I’m starting to get a little nervous.
  • Hey, what can you say about this? The key from a handicapping standpoint, as always, is to measure the true realities from the perceptions, and in this case the fawning of the SEC does not go as far as it should.
  • It looks like Tuberville has found the replacement for Muschamp.


Filed under Arkansas Is Kind Of A Big Deal, BCS/Playoffs, Media Punditry/Foibles, Recruiting, SEC Football, Stats Geek!, The Blogosphere

12 responses to “Checkin’ out the scene, man.

  1. SJS

    Holy cow! The SportPundit stuff blows me away. NAYPPA? It’s fun to think about ways to quantify a football team, but statistics don’t win a football game, the team does. You’d think the result of the Sugar Bowl would suggest to them that NAYPPA isn’t always a good indicator, especially since they seemed extremely confident Hawaii would win based on their previous offensive performance. Or was that supposed to be a fluke?
    What does the ranking of an arbitrary collection of statistics actually do for us?


  2. kckd

    Senator, I love you man. This is a great site with great links to a lot of information. But you need help dude. Everything you read about college football these days makes you think “playoffs” somewhere in the back of your mind. Seriously, I’m a proponent of the plus one and the eight team (to a lesser degree) but I did not for one moment when seeing that ESPN poll on sports popularity even think college playoffs would effect it at all. Football playoffs never even came into my mind. Never even considered the thing a good, bad or so, so argument for or against it. Man, give it a rest for awhile.

    Hey, Herschel says he has mult. personality disorder. Wax poetic on that for a bit.


  3. kckd, thanks for the praise.

    I know you’re a frequent commenter here, but I didn’t have you in mind when I posted that note about the ESPN poll. There’s a fair amount of Internet commentary out there that some of the lopsided results in the BCS games are proof that college football is ailing and that it needs to take a page from the NFL or March Madness to fix itself. That’s what I reacted to.

    The only thing lately I’d say I’ve spent a good bit of time reacting to here is Michael Adams’ proposal, and that’s only because it was so blatantly self-serving and typical of the man. And I’m certainly not alone in that point of view.

    Trust me, if I wanted to obsess, I could put up at least two posts a day on the topic of “look how stupid this playoff comment is”.


  4. kckd

    My take on Adams is maybe like your take on the Big 10 and Pac 10. They are doing what you need them to do to keep things where you want, even though their motives are just as self serving as Adams have ever been.

    The best thing anyone has said about the state of college football has come out of the mouth of James Carville. For the viewing public we got some crappy games that they knew before hand pretty much would be crappy.

    While some prognosticators picked Hawaii and others picked UGA in a close one, did any of them looked suprised when it was over?

    USC and Illinois, did anyone outside of Herbie ,who wanted the Big 10 to show up so badly he almost soiled his pants when it didn’t happen, really give Illinois a chance in that game.

    I can’t fault two of the other three, because on paper at least they looked like good matchups. But the two hottest teams going in got matched up against the two weakest teams of the whole bunch, now that’s a great system right there.


  5. Well, as for what I want, I’m not sure. But I find myself leaning towards an eight team conference champ playoff format more and more – if they can rejigger some of the conferences to make them more balanced.

    In any event, while I think Delany is a dick, at least he’s been consistent. Adams has been nothing but a transparent weasel who had no problem screwing Machen over at the SEC meeting and then coopting his position, all for the greater glory of Michael Adams. So I don’t see their positions being morally equivalent, as you seem to argue..

    And finally, I find this “bad matchup” argument against the BCS really weak. There is no guarantee that a playoff will produce nothing but compelling games; indeed, the larger the number of participants, the more likely that some games will suck.


  6. kckd

    OK, on this BCS vs. playoff thing you are arguing apples and oranges IMO.

    I think what most folks are saying, if you’re gonna do this BCS, one bowl game bonanza thing, at least do the best job you can to make these games compelling and competitive.

    I’d rather have the top four teams go to a plus one playoff type thing than eight team conference playoffs. This year would be the only time in the past 25 years that I think the fifth team in the polls or BCS standings would have a legit argument. This year it was UGA, but I’m still not sure that we wouldn’t have been bumped up to number two in the polls and been in the top four in the BCS if the pollsters knew LSU wouldn’t need to be no. 2 to have a shot at the NC.

    An eight team conference champion playoff leaves more room for debate in most years. Not as much as now, but more than a top four type thing.

    For instance in 2002 FSU would’ve been in the playoff while they were ranked in the high teens. But I would still favor that over what we have now.

    And I think you do worry too much about the expansion thing provided the NCAA does not get involved. The presidents, conf. commisioners and ADs of the BCS conferences are not gonna want to give up the control and I think they know that if it were to expand any more than eight it would diminish the bowls and move things closer to the NCAA taking over. None of them want that.


  7. All the BCS has ever promised is that it would match the #1 and #2 teams at the end of the regular season.

    Like it or not, the bowls have never been about optimal matchups, but about putting asses in the seats. For example, the Sugar wasn’t willing to be left with something like an Arizona State-Hawaii matchup just so the Rose Bowl could try to thrill viewers with Georgia-USC.

    And I disagree with you about the “debate” issue. If you restrict the playoffs to the conference champs, you limit the debate – if you don’t win your conference, you don’t make the playoffs. A subjective four team playoff leaves room for debate in years like we’ve just had. I think it will be far easier to expand a subjective playoff than an objective one.


  8. kckd

    Dude, it ain’t about did they deliver on their promise. No one has said they told us they were gonna give us great games.

    Let’s see, if my kid never tells me “I promise I’ll never do drugs or commit a felony”, does that mean I ought to be OK with it if he does?

    You actually think a team like UGA this year is not gonna debate the merits of an FSU type getting in with a conference championship in a BCS conference that looks more like the WAC or Mount. West than big time football?

    The debate will rage on. I mean, right now it’s “if you’re not one or two in the BCS you don’t get in”.

    I don’t really see how saying “you win your conference or you don’t get in” is any different.

    There will be many who complain and do it loudly.

    And what about Notre Dame?


  9. You actually think a team like UGA this year is not gonna debate the merits of an FSU type getting in with a conference championship in a BCS conference that looks more like the WAC or Mount. West than big time football?

    Which part of my “if they can rejigger some of the conferences” qualification did you not get?

    The debate will rage on. I mean, right now it’s “if you’re not one or two in the BCS you don’t get in”.

    I don’t really see how saying “you win your conference or you don’t get in” is any different.

    Because in the first case, your team’s post season fate is ultimately determined by the voters and the computers and in the second case, it’s simply a matter of meeting an objective standard that was established at season’s start.

    If your point here is that some people are going to bitch no matter what the format is, sure, I can’t argue with that. But if you’re arguing that there’s no difference in the selection process between the two, I don’t see the point in changing anything.

    Let’s see, if my kid never tells me “I promise I’ll never do drugs or commit a felony”, does that mean I ought to be OK with it if he does?

    You really don’t expect me to take your analogy seriously, do you?


  10. kckd

    the analogy just means that I can still be upset at stupidity even if intelligent thinking was not promised. Nothing more than that.

    A scenario that might be not as much of a problem for you:

    The restaurant never promised me a great steak, but I assumed since they were charging 75 bucks it would be. And I was upset when it wasn’t.

    The big bowl games should be great matchups, doesn’t take a dummy to figure out that if you’re selling five games as the biggest of the year that the matchups should support the claim.

    And again, what about Notre Dame?

    Also, the SEC gets the shaft in the eight team confernce champion thing.


  11. Your analogies aren’t working.

    First off, you aren’t buying anything other than the promise of a matchup between two schools. You have no idea how that will turn out – especially in as crazy a year as we’ve just had. You don’t get a refund in hindsight.

    Second, unless you actually bought a ticket to a BCS game, a more proper analogy would be that you stood in front of a restaurant window in the hopes that the diners would have a good experience with their steaks and that you were disappointed with the presentation. All of which sounds pretty silly.

    Finally, if you don’t think some schools or conferences are going to get short changed with whatever postseason format gets picked, you’re dreaming. For example, if the BCS formally adopts a four team “plus one”, I’d be surprised if a conference is allowed more than one team in the mix (and with those conferences that have championship games, it would be hard for that to happen anyway, as we’ve just seen). The “SEC got screwed” argument is exactly what I fear will drive playoff proponents like yourself to push for an expansion of schools in the tourney.


  12. kckd

    As James Carville says, the fans are what make the sport. Why does football make more money than the others? It’s because people buy tickets and want to see it on TV.

    If we didn’t come, they couldn’t have it. And someone is spending money on that steak mister. If not, they couldn’t afford to prepare it, or the other plethora of dishes (wrestling, tennis, golf, etc. etc.) that no one ever buys.

    As for as the other stuff, I’m just tired now. I’ll wait till you mention again sometime, no doubt you will. (wink)