Two things that don’t really have any linkage, except for the snotty attitude they generated from me when I read them:
I get the point Spurrier is making here in terms of South Carolina’s ability to compete for the elusive division title…
During April’s SEC coaches conference call, Spurrier stressed that while his Gamecock rosters will never totally stack up with the conference’s powerhouses’ rosters, he only has to find 35-45 great players at the top because you can only play 11 at a time. Has Spurrier assembled his 35-45 great players?
… but can’t Florida and Georgia find just as many great players, if not more, based on how well each has recruited? That’s an awfully thin reed for the OBC to cling to.
And here’s a cool quote from Chris Brown that will no doubt resonate with the Mike Bobo bashers out there:
In Edgar Allan Poe’s story The Purloined Letter, a character recounts a story of a young man who excels at game called “odds and evens,” known somewhat more popularly now as “matching pennies.” The game is a two-strategy version of rock-paper-scissors: Each player secretly turns their coin to heads or tails and then both reveal their choices simultaneously. If the pennies match (both heads or both tails) then one player gets a dollar; if they do not then the other gets the dollar. As told in the story, the young man quickly sizes up his opponents, gains a psychological advantage, and amasses a fortune by outguessing his opponents.
I suppose all playcallers think themselves like the young man, but most are probably more similar to the suckers. But here’s the rub: The suckers could nullify the young man’s psychological advantage. How?
By choosing randomly. If the suckers put no thought into whether they chose heads or tails, they would do better than if they tried their best to out-think him. They would break even — a fantastic result against the world’s greatest matching pennies player, an unnatural genius who, according to the story, would go through lengthy Sherlock Holmsian deductions to determine if his opponent would choose heads or tails, and of course almost always guessed correctly.
This is a breath-taking result: you can nullify anyone’s advantage by picking randomly. But it is also scary — would I be better off picking my plays entirely randomly?
One question: how well would that work if your quarterback is tipping plays out of shotgun formation?