Is Jerry Sloan right?

Is Jerry Sloan right?

In interesting idea came up recently, although it is not original, made by the Utah Jazz head coach Jerry Sloan, concerning the NBA Playoffs. He felt that the NBA Playoffs should have the best 16 teams in the NBA, not the best 8 from both the West and East Conferences.

As you know, the NBA Playoffs takes the best 8 teams from the East and the best 8 from the West. The problem with this has been that the East Conference has recently been putting teams in the playoffs that were equal to or less than .500. The last couple of years have been putting 7 and 8th seeded teams that perhaps should not have been in the playoffs to begin with.

For this reason, I can understand what Coach Sloan is saying. He feels that the NBA ought to represent the very best, and to do that, you should allow the 16 best teams overall in the playoffs. For the most part I agree. But let’s look at it this way:

As of this moment 2:11pm on January 21st 2010, the West looks like this, in order: Lakers, Mavericks, Nuggets, Trailblazers, Spurs, Suns, Thunder and Utah. Note that Jerry Sloan’s team, the Utah Jazz, would be the last team in on the West.

Now look at the East, if the season was to end at this minute: Cavaliers, Celtics, Hawks, Magic, Bobcats, Heat, Raptors and Bulls. If the season were to end today, this is very likely the playoff seedings you would have.

The problem here is that in the East, the records gets kinda soft after the 4th seed. The Charlotte Bobcats have a 21-19 record as a 5th seed, as compared to the Spurs having a 25-16 in the West. And the Raptors are 21-22, while the Bulls are 18-22. Losing records, and in the NBA Playoffs. On the other end, the Thunder have a 24-18 record while the Utah Jazz (Jerry Sloan’s team) are 24-18.

Sloan believes that the NBA ought to take the best teams overall instead of having an Eastern or Western Conference Champion. Now, IF such a rule was applied, this would drastically change the face of the NBA playoffs. How? Look at those records again.

If the NBA only took the 16 best teams, then we would have a problem in the East. The 5th seeded team in the East is currently the Bobcats but there are 3 teams in the West with better records. Houston, New Orleans and Memphis have better than 21 wins, and would, by such a new rule, push down the Bobcats. In fact, if such a rule existed, then the Charlotte Bobcats would be the 16th seeded team in the NBA Playoffs, bumping out the Toronto Raptors and the Chicago Bulls, and even the Miami Heat. You’d have 11 West teams, and 5 Eastern teams.

Well, that sounds kinda odd, but most might argue that this is just the nature of the beast, you gotta have the best teams represented, right? I agree, but I also see some problems with that. And to see it we need look no further than the #1 seed and the #16 seed, in such an example.

IF there was such a rule, where the NBA would take only the top 16 teams, then by the standings we can see that the #1 team would be the Los Angeles Lakers, and the #16 team would be the Charlotte Bobcats….does anybody see a problem with this?

Two problems… time and travel.

If the Lakers and Bobcats had to play in the FIRST ROUND, can you imagine the travel for both teams to cross the country for a 7 game series? From North Carolina to California and back, or actually vice versa since LA is the higher seed. This is a heck of a lot of travel for the first round, and in that the NBA would have to spread apart the times of those games so the athletes could get rest. After all, you can’t have these guys playing in LA on a Monday, then jetting over to Charlotte for the next two games on Tuesday.

This folks, was the reason why there is an Eastern and Western Conference, to cut down on the travel these guys would have to make over the course of the playoffs. And sure, you might argue about the Lakers and Celtics, but understand, that wasn’t the first round, that was the NBA Finals.

It is likely that Boston would have to have a first round fight against Houston, which is a bit of a travel as well. There could very well be many matchups that could result in a heck of a lot of frequent flyer miles. The NBA Playoffs ought not be about how many thousands of miles a team flies, but who is the best. Would it be fair to have a potential Portland/Orlando matchup in the first round? That would not determine the better team if it is based on endurance of travel, it should be settled on the court.

So although I do understand how Jerry Sloan feels, I think to do it that way creates far more troubles than it is worth. The NBA has a Western Conference, and an Eastern Conference, let those two sides determine who is the best, and let those two them meet in the NBA Finals. If it is teams on opposite sides of the country, so be it, but let travel be the last factor in who is the best, not the first.

So, is Jerry Sloan right…I do believe he is, but is it likely to happen, I am not sure.

Lane Kiffin to USC?

Lane Kiffin goes to USC?

And I don’t mean South Carolina!

Shocking news, that Tennessee Football Coach Lane Kiffin will be jumping ship and going to Southern California, after Pete Carroll decided to take a second stint in the NFL as the head honcho of the Seattle Seahawks.

Let that digest for a minute….

This story has a LOT of plots and twists in it, some are heartfelt, some are just pure greed. In the past 10 years or so, two of the most storied college football teams have been USC and Tennessee. We all know USC for the past National Championships, and we know Tennessee for the rich history of football, and for NFL players like Peyton Manning. But the last few years have been a little difficult for both schools.

USC has had a lot of success, but it came at a price. With the NCAA looking into some violations, it is possible that USC might be hit hard with some penalties. It must be true to some degree because they threw the basketball program as a sacrifice, hoping to appease the NCAA gods…it might not have.

And maybe seeing the handwriting on the wall, Pete Carroll might have decided now was as good a time as any to step out of the college business and try a second shot in the NFL. Remember, he WAS a coach there for a minute or two. But him leaving leaves a huge gap in the program, and the school was desperate to fill that gap as soon as possible.

Tennessee was having problems of its own. In this world of “what have you done for me lately”, they ran out coach Fulmer, who won a National Championship with Tennessee but a few years later people acted like they forgot about that. Tennessee rich alumni wanted to win NOW, not later, so it seemed convenient for them to get rid of a man that gave Tennessee some of the best years they ever had. Looking to get a young coach with NFL experience, they found Lane Kiffin, and was fortunate enough to get a duet when his dad, Monty Kiffin decided to help his son. This set up a very strong future for Tennessee, and to be sure they would be back in the SEC race for a National Title in a few years.

But all that changed when Lane and his dad decided to leave and go to USC.

Fair or foul?

Depends on the angle. If you asked Tennessee fans about this, I am sure they would say foul. They had a coach that they believed could take them to the promised land, but walked out on them after one year. But to be honest, this is what they get. Don’t get too disappointed if you burn your bridge with one coach thinking the grass is greener with somebody else. Tennessee has found out that just as old coaches can be slighted, such is also the power of new coaches. Fulmer was loyal to the end, Kiffin wasn’t loyal at all.

But I understand the nature of Tennessee football, to them, football is sacred, far more than football in California, where you got warm beaches, Hollywood and 10,000 distractions. When football season (college, not pro) comes around, the whole state of Tennessee gets excited because of their Volunteers. SO I can see why it is so important for this school to continually have a top 5 or top 10 team. They were headed that way until this latest change.

But is this a fair move? While many would think this was an underhanded move, one must remember that Lane Kiffin did come from under the USC coaching staff. He has some loyalty to USC, and it was that experience that got him that temporary head coaching job for the Oakland Raiders. So there are strong ties for Lane Kiffin to USC.

But underneath this is a whole foundation of disloyalty and hypocrisy of the NCAA, I mean, think about it. If a PLAYER wanted to go from Tennessee to USC, he would have to lose a year of eligibility, he would have to sacrifice a year of his LIFE to make the move. Yet coaches can bounce on a whim with no penalty at all. We like to keep lying to ourselves that college football is about academics, but it isn’t. Its about money and business.

What this proves is that a man’s word is not worth anything. I understand Lane Kiffin’s desire to coach at USC, because there was some loyalty to it in years past. But when you committed to Tennessee, there should have been a strong loyalty that says, “they hired me, they believed in me, so I will at least run this course for the length of the contract”. Or something honorable. But this was only one year after signing with Tennessee, meaning his heart wasn’t really dedicated to the Volunteers anyway.

So what it boils down to is money and pride, pride of USC to find a good coach even with possible heavy penalties over their heads, pride of Tennessee to get rid of a coach that brought them a NCAA Championship for a young coach that has proved little as a head coach. Pride for a coach to bail out on his team to go across the country for another job….and money in between it all.

We’ll see how this goes, but did USC get any better… not sure. But Tennessee certainly did not get any better, may have even slid down a notch or two. Time will tell.

Players rest in the NFL?

Resting NFL Players: Does that work?

In the world of sports, there are times when a team can be playing exceptionally well, and catch the eye of the sports world. In the course of a season, they begin to win, and win and win until it is clear that this team is the best team in the arena. But because this is done during the regular season, and not post season, some begin to think that a perfect team should “lose” a game.

Now by “lose” I don’t mean to intentionally throw a game, but when you think about it, to not give your best effort to win is in fact throwing a game away. This is an argument that many have talked over for many years, and it grows when a team, in this case, in the NFL, is doing superior work.

The argument can easily be made about the New England Patriots, who had a perfect regular season, but ultimately lost in the Super Bowl. One can also conjure up the Tennessee Titans, who had an incredible season, at least the first 13 games, but fell apart at the back end of the season.

This year two teams came into question of this argument, the Indianapolis Colts and the New Orleans Saints. Both at one time were the perfect teams of the AFC and NFC, and some started to wonder if maybe this would be the greatest Superbowl ever, having not one, but two undefeated teams.

And in that midst there were people on sports radio talking about whether it was good to be undefeated, if you lose in the Superbowl. Some felt that since both teams were clearly in the playoffs, to just step back and rest their players. Is there any validity to this?

I suppose there is, if you believe that a healthy NFL team is often better than a team with key players out due to injuries. Now we all know this to be true, I mean, take Tom Brady out of the Patriots and what have you got? Take Drew Brees out of the Saints and what have you got? Manning out of the Colts, ect, ect.

This is based on a fear of the unknown, something that kinda is silly when you think about it. When people start talking about the possibility of players getting injured, it to me is foolish talk. We all know that in any game in the NFL, from practice to exhibition to regular season, to playoffs or the Superbowl, or even the Pro Bowl, any player has the potential to get hurt. That is the nature of football…at any given time, a person can get hurt.

But to consider pulling players out at the back end of the season for the potential does not make sense at all. If you KNEW for a fact, by a divine revelation, for example, that Peyton Manning was going to tear his ACL (heaven forbid) on the 15th game of the season, THEN I would pull him out.

But nobody in the NFL has that kinda ability. NONE! So the fear of him getting hurt before the playoffs is no more valid than the fear of him getting hurt in the first game of the season…or the 5th, or the 10th. There is no factual reasoning for a person to think that if they continue to play their starters, they might lose one to an injury. Now don’t get me wrong, this does not mean it can’t happen, because remember, this is a violent sport. But there is no data proving that key players WILL be injured during meaningless games after a team has locked up the top seed in the playoffs.

Yet the NFL does this so often not because of caution, but because of fear. Fear of the unknown. That was not how the Colts and Saints remained the last two undefeated teams, but now with the last few weeks, their great records have been washed into normalcy. The Saints were 13-0, then lost at home to the Cowboys, at home to the Buccaneers and away to the Panthers. These are not games they are supposed to be losing, and they averaged about 15 points each of those games…that is NOT how the Saints have been playing all year. The fewest points outside of those 3 losses was 24 points in a win over the Jets. Why is this happening? Because somewhere in the Saints management is the fear of somebody getting hurt, and by playing cautious, they lost their edge.

Folks, you don’t LIMP into the playoffs, you go in strong!

The Colts were 14-0 before losing their last two, one at home vs. the Jets, the other on the road vs. the Bills. They had a lot of close games during the season, which to me seemed all more the reason to finish strong, but losing to the Jets by 14 and losing big to the Bills seemed to have shown that this team bailed out on perfection and hoping for thing to work out.

The Colts finished the last game with only 7 points…I suggest to you that this is NOT the way to enter the playoffs. I think a good sign of a team that is moving up is when they can beat opponents by at least 14 points. Too many of those 3 point wins, or less, shows that they are not as superior as we are led to think. If you look at the last 10 games, the Colts have not beaten anybody by more than 2 touchdowns, this to me is a weak link in the armor, and a reason why they should have continued to play hard the entire season, as opposed to letting themselves slow down.

Folks, again, you don’t LIMP into the playoffs, you go in strong!

This could be a problem that could end up knocking both the Saints and Colts out of the Superbowl, because they are no longer running on full mode, rather half mode. I just never understood why a perfect team stops playing perfect, but it is based on the fear that something might go wrong. But this mentality wasn’t there after the first 3 games, or the next 5 games, or the next five games. Why does it develop now? Why didn’t the coaches sit down their starters in game 8, for fear of injury? Why not after week 10?

It seems that there was a growing fear as each week passed, partly developed by the media, that if you try to go perfect, something bad will happen. I mean, only one team in the history of the NFL had done this, which is the 1972 Dolphins. But I guarantee you back then there was no influx of fear of whether they needed to sit out their starters for the last game or two of the season. Back then those guys played to win. It seems that is not the case now in the NFL, rather to gamble that you can turn off the “mojo” of a team by week 14, 15 or 16, and expect to turn it back on when the playoffs start.

Sometimes you can’t do that, and you learn too late that maybe you should have never turned it off to begin with.

So we will see what becomes of these two teams, both played exceptionally well, but what chances are there that we will see the Colts vs. the Saints in the Superbowl? If they had finished strong, I would have put money on it… but now, I am not so sure.

Christmas with ESPN…bah!

FIVE Christmas Games too many!

Ok, this is several days after ABC and ESPN had their so-called “Christmas games”, which I personally thought was a self-inflated marketing ploy for ratings.

I read an article from the coach of the Orlando Magic, Stan Van Gundy, and I agree with him in what he said about the NBA playing games on Christmas. I mean, one game, is ok, maybe even two…but FIVE? That is ridiculous.

And I say that as a very heavy sports fan, but the hypocrisy in it is that the NBA, and ESPN seem to pretend that Christmas isn’t about Jesus Christ…it’s about money.

I mean, isn’t that what it was all about? A bunch of rich men playing basketball. Now I don’t blame the players, it is the league and ESPN who fixed this foolish promotion gimmick. And I don’t care what anybody says about getting good programming on television, to heck with that if you are celebrating the birth of Christ.

Let’s recall again what Christmas is ok….the birth of Christ…not the birth of greedy money-makers who apparently don’t care where their employees spend Christmas.

To me, this is just as bad as Papa Johns, when they brag about being open on Christmas day from noon to 9 pm, or Walgreens when they promised to be open on Christmas day. Do you REALLY think the CEOs of those businesses are working on Christmas? Yeah, right.

But somebody did, meaning they didn’t get to spend Christmas with their loved ones. Don’t talk to me about how it is a convenience, that is garbage. If you forgot to buy your batteries, then deal with it for one lousy day ok?

On the same scale, we can see how something like this means nothing to the average Joe sitting at home wanting to be entertained…but oh foolish mortal, have you not forgotten the reason for Christmas: It is not for you to be entertained, it is to remember what God did for us all.

Now I am not saying that you have to turn off all the televisions and spend Christmas holding hands and singing Christmas songs and giving thanks…although that was the general idea of the holiday. But how many of you thought about those guys playing on the basketball court, far from home? How many of you saw that bowl game on Christmas Eve in Hawaii, and wondered how those kids on that team felt being so far from home?

You don’t need to be the Pope or some Bishop-Deacon-Pastor person, you just have to be reasonable for just 24 hours. Was ESPN really in the “Christmas Spirit” when they put on 5 games? It’s funny because they joked about Lebron James and Kobe Bryant, saying that those guys were “in the spirit” when doing those promotional spots… I urge ESPN to define what “spirit” they were in…because it was not the true Christmas Spirit. It wasn’t their fault, it was the NBA and ESPN who felt that they could get better ratings by putting these guys out there like third rate employees and not care one bit about them missing the holidays with their families.

Stan Van Gundy was right in what he said, considering he and his team, the Orlando Magic, have to play on Thanksgiving, Christmas and New Year’s Day…do you really think the NBA cares as they say they do? Hardly.

So congrats to you NBA, you have shown us your Christmas Spirit…the one more common in our country…that of greed. In your minds, Christ is not important, only money. Consider that next year when you make your schedules for Christmas Day.

And have a heart for a change.

Texas Tech coaching problems

Texas Tech Coach Problems

(note: today Mike Leech was fired by Texas Tech before this blog was written)

Today is Wednesday, early in the morning, and I am wondering if Coach Mike Leech of Texas Tech will have his job inside of 24 hours.

This is important to know because as was reported on ESPN, if Mike Leech is still the head coach of Texas Tech by Thursday, he will be paid about $800,000 per year, but if he is fired before Thursday, he will get half of that.

As many of you know, recent developments about the coach leave him in a very bad light at the moment. He is reported to have possibly abused one of the football players by putting him in an closet and in light deprivation at least twice. Worse, the player is the son of an ESPN analyst so the story might be taken more personal with the ABC Family of networks.

We have seen the results of something like this before, ask Kansas what happened to their coach when the coach reportedly said some slurs to some players. But this, if it is true, is more condemning. What I am reading into this so far is that one of the players had a concussion, and Coach Leech either forced him or asked him to spend some time in a dark room, with the idea that if you have a strong headache or migraine, you don’t want to be around too much light.

However, the argument seems to hover around the idea that this player was FORCED to do it, locked away in a dark room for hours at a time. If there is any truth to this…this will clearly make Mike Leech a villain. And rightly so.

The player in question is the son of Craig James, who is an excellent analyst for ESPN, one of my favorites.

Now, last I heard, Mike Leech’s lawyers are trying to prevent Texas Tech from firing him, so that he can coach the football game that Texas Tech has coming up. They play Michigan State on January 2nd, in the Alamo Bowl. To me, I personally don’t think he is trying to get the right to coach this team…. I think he is stalling for time.

We all know the tremendous attention that will be directed at this team if he returns to coach in the bowl, the media will be swarming all over him the second he gets there, and it will be a complete distraction to the team. Also, because he has admitted that the events DID in fact take place, he has already made himself to be a villain to many fans and people in general. Even if, as he put it, it was to help the player, this does not justify locking a kid in a closet for hours on end. You could have just as easily told him to stay in his dorm room and fix the room to keep light out…you didn’t have to put him in a closet….unless Leech is implying that the player AGREED to do it.

But again, the distractions should he return would be immense. Yet I don’t think the primary reason is to coach the team…I think he is trying to stall so that contract clause can kick in on Thursday. If he can keep Texas Tech from firing him before Thursday, then whether he coaches or not, they HAVE to pay him $800,000. If that happens, he will gladly step aside, let the team play without him, and then use the “I would be a distraction to the team” excuse, while banking in the money. Of course, if it got worse, he could leave the team for another, with the checks in his pocket coming every month.

It’s about money.

I don’t believe for one second that any lawyer can help him force Texas Tech to allow him to play, it is their decision to remove him or not, nothing legal about that. I don’t believe this is about him wanting to coach his players, I think he is just trying to get the money first, and then accept whatever happens later. Would not matter anyway, if they still had to pay him, and then he can bounce to another school. Pity though, it was just last year when he had a chance to go to a Pac-10 school, but declined…perhaps he should have.

At any rate, by the end of the day, we will know what happens. In either case, Texas Tech will have problems to deal with.

Sports is greater than Christ

Sports is greater than Christ

Shocking statement, yes?

Now, before anybody starts to think that I am a fool, let me establish first that I am a Christian, which might make my title even more controversial. But I didn’t state that as how I felt, I stated that in how American Sports feels.

Sometimes I believe that we as a nation (US) feel that every holiday is for marketing and seeing how much money we can squeeze out of the American consumer. Now I understand the nature and necessity of business to some degree, but when does it become a spiritual problem that we as a nation have apparently ignored?

When I was younger, I remember in the past on major holidays that many businesses and stores were closed, and on some stations there were lots of reruns of old shows. Even some radio stations played special programs instead of their regular format. Why was this? Because those people were home with their families.

HOME!

Not working!

A day or rest, and in the case of Christmas, some respect for what the holiday, or HOLY day is about. It is about Christ. Now I understand the childhood aspects of Christmas, with Santa Claus and stuff like that, hey, I was young too not too long ago. I get that. But today’s society, especially the business aspect, has apparently completely forgotten who Jesus was…

And apparently does not care.

Need proof? Thinks about this:

Last night I was watching NBA on ESPN, and they were bragging about how they were going to “give” us FIVE NBA games over the course of the day, either on ABC or ESPN. Now to be honest, to a person that does not put Christ first, that sounds exciting… I mean, a whole day of NBA Basketball sounds soo cool.

But spiritually speaking, this is a terrible idea and a direct rejection of the day we are supposed to devote to the birth of Christ. And again, to the common person, who in many cases does not have Christ first anyway, this does not seem to be a problem. I mean, what can it hurt to have some great matchups on tv? There is no harm in giving great programming to people over the holidays, right?

I used to agree, but I beg to differ.

Let’s use one team as an example. The Cleveland Cavaliers.

Last night (Dec. 18th) they played the Milwaukee Bucks. Now they go on a four game road trip. Consider where they are going. Monday the 20th AT Dallas. Tuesday the 21st AT Phoenix. Wednesday the 23rd AT Sacramento. Friday the 25th AT Los Angeles Lakers.

Now, I am not going to argue the first three, but the fourth one I do have a problem with. Folks, that is Christmas Day!

CHRISTMAS DAY!

And again I believe a lot of folks are sitting there saying, “so what, they are professionals, and a big time matchup like that is good for television” But in that reasoning, you have personally rejected the true value of Christmas. ESPN isn’t GIVING us anything that important…in fact they are taking money because of the ratings they expect to get.

Come on folks, think about this just for a second on a human level and on a family level, if not on a spiritual level. Those guys on the Cavs will be on the road, away from their family and friends the entire week. It is likely that no Cavalier will come back to their home until after Christmas…how can we possibly see anything good in that?

I don’t care how much money they make, no amount of money ought to make a person or business think that they can prosper over the name of Christ…which of course is the foundation of Christmas. I know that sounds a little fanatical, but I think the NBA and ESPN have overstepped their boundaries by having other men lose their holiday for the sake or money. Understand folks, it isn’t for YOU. They can say all they want about how they are giving YOU some great matchups, but at the cost of ignoring Christ?

Those guys will be away from home for Christmas, some of those guys have children, some have wives, some have moms or dads or friends they want to be close to, especially on a day like Christmas. Heck, I bet there are even a few Christians in the NBA. Would any of YOU want to be away from the people you loved most?

And right away I know some smart aleck is gonna say, “yeah, for the money they get I would”…and in that very thought you have betrayed your soul…remember that.

Look, I am all for the NBA and I love sports, and I know it is a business, but when the business thinks it is greater than Christ…because that IS what sports believes, then we have ignored the true meaning of sports and how small it is when compared to life itself, and even greater, to God and Christ. It is funny, but in a sad way, how sports only realizes how small it is after a terrible tragedy in American lives or life. After 911, or just recently after Bengals player Chris Henry died, only then did people talk about how small sports is compared to life.

But you never hear ESPN or FOX or NBC or any station talk about how small it is compared to God. It’s like they have completely refused God, except when holidays like Christmas comes around. Oh sure, they might slip in a discreet message like, “and remember the reason for the season” but that is kinda cowardly when you think about it. It is almost like television is afraid to say CHRIST, although they say Christmas 55 times a minute.

To me, IF you are going to have sports on Christmas, at least make it so the teams are close enough to play and get back home. Sure people would grumble if the Lakers played the Clippers on Christmas, or the Warriors, but if that means the players can get back home and enjoy Christmas like the rest of us, fine. If that means Orlando playing Miami, fine. But to have these guys so far away seems to show that the NBA does not care about their employees….and remember, that is EXACTLY what they are. No different if Wal-Mart told their customers, “for your convenience, we will be open all day Christmas Day”.

Oh that sounds nice to YOU…but did you think about who has to work on Christmas Day? Do you even care? If not, you just betrayed your own soul, and showed that Christmas has no meaning to you at all.

So there will be sports on television on Christmas, not because it is good for us the sports fans, and not because it is Christmas. It is because there is money to be made, and sports is, in many people’s minds, greater than Christ…even on Christmas. I guarantee you in all 5 games on ESPN, the word “Christmas” will be said over 100 times…

But Christ won’t be mentioned once.

New Orleans Bowl 2009

R & L Carriers New Orleans Bowl

Southern Miss vs. Middle Tennessee State

So we have a showdown with the Sun Belt Conference and the Conference USA. Interesting.

This is actually pretty interesting because the record of these two teams is 16-6, for an average of an 8-3 mark…not bad for a bowl that is lowly ranked. But let’s look at the tales of the tape of these teams and see what is real, and what is not.

Southern Miss comes out of the CUSA with a 7-5 record, while Middle Tennessee State has an impressive 9-3 mark. But let’s explore those numbers and see what’s what.

Southern Miss is still trying to get back into the national spotlight after running out their head coach a few years ago, because they weren’t winning like they wanted to… somebody remind me how many National Championships Southern Miss has won…none? I thought so. Southern Miss alumni reminds me a lot of Nebraska and Notre Dame alumni where they feel like if they can’t get their way right now, they want heads to roll. Nebraska has paid for their impatience with years in the cellar, Notre Dame is there now and Southern Miss has been forgotten like old newspaper.

Southern Miss has two decent wins from the start, with wins over Central Florida and Virginia. But Virginia has been in the dumps and UCF has not been a national threat. And beating the basement teams of Conference USA hardly qualifies as a powerhouse. It might be safe to say that perhaps all of their 7 wins, minus UCF was based on a weak schedule.

Everything looked fine when they went 3-0, but all those games were at home, the next three games, vs. then #20 Kansas, UAB and Louisville, quickly evened the record. Beating Memphis and Tulane got them to the 5 win mark, which is about how many wins those teams had combined this year. A loss at then #18 Houston and then a win over average Marshall gave them a 6-4 record. Beating a 5-win Tulsa team and losing to ECU gives them the record they have now. So what have we learned?

Southern Miss is an average team in an average conference. Outside of beating Marshall, all their losses come on the road, and their wins against less than average teams. Simply put, they beat the lesser foes, and struggle against the good ones…especially on the road. So is Middle Tennessee a good team, an average or less than average?

Sadly, many right off the bat put the Sun Belt Conference as the weakest in the division. While the WAC and Mountain West sport the “BCS Buster” phrases, the Sun Belt is far from such grand claims. But let’s look at MTSU and see what we have.

Only two teams in the Sun Belt had winning seasons, so you can assume that MTSU was able to sop up with the bottom feeders, especially with Western Kentucky winning no games, and North Texas winning two all year. But it’s the first 6 games of the season that is interesting. Middle Tennessee loses the first game to Clemson, which is not bad at all, after all, Clemson played in the ACC Championship game vs. Georgia Tech. This is not a bad loss.

Afterwards they beat Memphis…a Conference USA team, before beating ACC team Maryland. Folks, for a Sun Belt team, this is very good, and shows a strong team in this conference. A win over hapless North Texas gave way to two losses back to back, against Sun Belt Conference Champs Troy, and SEC foe Mississippi State. Think about that folks, this team played to ACC teams, one SEC team and a Conference USA team. Not bad at all.

The rest of the schedule isn’t too important, because outside of LA-Monroe, all the other teams had a losing record. Even LA-Mon was 6-6. But you have to give credit to this team for bulking up their schedule.

How will this translate against a tougher CUSA foe in Southern Miss? I think this game means more to MTSU by a long shot than to Southern Miss, and we may have missed the boat on this team. Nobody seemed to care that they were 9-3, because nobody from the Sun Belt has threatened the BCS. But this team has beaten some quality names like Maryland and Memphis. They CAN beat you. Southern Miss has wins over Central Florida and Virginia, so they can beat names too.

I think at first glance you will favor Southern Miss, simply because most Sun Belt teams don’t get much respect, but I would not be surprised if there was an upset here. My head says Southern Miss will win by a touchdown, maybe even 10 points… but I gotta wonder, can Middle Tennessee State steal one…they have played tough enough talent to do so. We shall see…..

St. Petersburg Bowl 2009

St. Petersburg Bowl

UCF vs. Rutgers

This might be a nice game to watch, if you have been following the Big East and Conference USA, a pretty nice matchup of two good schools and two good coaches.

I really like what UCF has done since they have come into the big leagues. Granted they are not one of the BCS conferences, but when you have a school in Florida, you have an excellent chance to get strong recruits. But I also like the way Rutgers has turned things around, I found myself really enjoying this team when I had a chance to see them. So I am split on who I want to win, but I have to defer to my stats as who SHOULD win.

Now I am sure few will argue which is the stronger conference, the Big East is better than Conference USA. This is NOT to say that CUSA is a half a step off the 4A high school conferences, because we have seen some good teams this year out of this non bcs conference.

But we still have to credit Rutgers for surviving in a tough league, right? Let’s see:

Central Florida comes into this game with an 8-4 record, which seems pretty strong. But such a record should have them as one of the top 25 in the nation, right? Their four losses were to Southern Miss, East Carolina, Miami and Texas… consider for a sec that three of those 4 losses were away….hmmm.

Consider also that all four of these teams are winning teams. So you have to ask, did Central Florida beat any quality teams? Marshall ends up with a 6-6 record, but Houston was a big win for Central Florida. It was a home game though, which makes one raise their eyebrows on the true strength of UCF. To be great, you have to win big games on the road. Three of their four losses were on the road, granted to some good teams, but beating Houston at home was in their favor. Still this is a quality team, I cannot take too much away from that.

Rutgers comes in with an identical 8-4 record, with a few raised eyebrows too. Three of their losses were AT home…ugh. And playing FIU, Howard AND Texas Southern is highly questionable. Come on guys, you are a BCS conference, man up!

Beating Maryland isn’t saying too much, but beating UCONN and West Virginia does mean something, especially since West Virginia was ranked when Rutgers beat them. Still, these two teams ended up 7-5, barely above average.

So you wonder, who is better? Both teams lost several games to high quality teams, but Rutgers seems to freeze up when they play at home in a big game. They are 4-1 away from home, although that lone loss on the road was to Syracuse…how close is that to Rutgers…

But Central Florida will be playing in their home state, which evens out the game a bit. But if you ask me who had the tougher schedule, I might say Rutgers, by the slightest of margins. Central Florida fed a lot on the bottom of CUSA, and has very few quality wins. Rutgers has tasted some hot success, and the trip will do them good. I think Rutgers wins this one, but very close…

Very close.

New Mexico Bowl 2009

New Mexico Bowl 2009

Fresno State vs. Wyoming

So now we can get ready for bowl season, where teams are rewarded for a season of tough battles, cuts and scrapes and can enjoy one last game of the year. One of the first bowls, if not the first, is the New Mexico Bowl, held in….Florida!

(just joking…it’s in New Orleans…..)

(………..)

Anyway, we have Fresno State vs. Wyoming in an interesting matchup but something that has a strong west coast flavor, which many in the east might not really be into, but for sake of college football, they will watch it.

Fresno State comes in 8-4, out of the WAC, and is one of those teams you have to pull for because they aren’t afraid to play anybody. This team will travel to the opposite side of the nation to play a team if that is what needs to be done, but it is that same resolve that might have exhausted this team.

Consider that they were 1-3 after the first four games, and things looked bleak. But those losses came after their win over UC Davis, and then the Bulldogs lost at Wisconsin in overtime, lost to Boise State, and lost by 8 to Cincinnati….folks, that is not bad at all. To say that two of your losses came to currently undefeated teams is incredible.

Their final loss came to Nevada, but in between those were a lot of lesser foe wins. Could one argue that Fresno State lost to the good teams, and beat the bad ones? That would make them kinda par for the course. But this is a good team.

Wyoming, to me is a little different. A 6-6 team, they seemed to have benefited from a poor schedule. Sure they lost 6 game, to Texas and all they superior teams in the Mountain West…and a loss to Colorado.

Their wins have not been too impressive, every team they have beaten has a losing record. But they qualify for the bowl, so here they are. That is not to put Wyoming down, because to be sure, they are battle tested, but sometimes when you are beaten too much by the big boys, you don’t have the strength to fight the average ones. Fresno State is not one of those “big boys”, but they are big enough.

So I see Fresno State capping off a good season with a win over Wyoming, likely by 10 points. We shall see!

College Playoffs?

College Football Playoffs?

We all have our ideas of what the BCS should do… or should NOT do, and I suppose mine is no different. As I blog this, there are five undefeated teams in the national spotlight, stirring up controversy on whether there ought to be a college playoff system.

I am not really FOR the playoffs, but not really against it. Let me explain why.

To me, I think the arguments for playoffs are for those who think that the little guy ought to be held in the same esteem as the big guy. Ok, I see a reason for that, but I go back to something an old school wrestler named Ric Flair once said…

“In order to BE the man, you have to BEAT the man”

If you want to be considered up there with the big boys, then play a schedule like them. This is my biggest argument against teams like Boise State, because they had numerous opportunities to make a more challenging schedule, but opted not to do so because they seemed to want sympathy from those sitting on the fence.

I mean, their schedule was weak as water, after you take out Oregon. And granted, that was a great win…in your house… against a first time head coach… in his first game with the Ducks…nice.

But it still is a very quality win. So why did you schedule Miami of Ohio and UC Davis…what’s that about?

To me, before you start whining about playoffs, make sure that we are talking about legit teams. Now, I know TCU is not in the Championship game, and I actually do feel that they deserve strong consideration, and I am not too happy about them playing Boise State in a repeat bowl…that game proves nothing.

Before we start whining about playoffs, we have to define those parameters. First off, how many should be in it. Right off the bat, I don’t believe in a 16 team system, too many teams that have no business fighting for a National title. When you only play 12 or so games, you don’t need 16 teams claiming rights to the throne.

How about 8 teams? I wonder about that too. Go back in your NCAA history books of college football and see how many teams ranked #8 or 7 had a legit shot at a NCAA title…not very many.

To me, the arguments about who should play in the National Championship usually fall on 2-4 teams. Of course, you may argue with me that maybe Boise State, or maybe Florida has a case, but with Florida losing, I would doubt that, and Boise State just has not played a tough enough schedule to prove that they are an elite team. They are just a great team in a soft conference.

So I think IF you have a playoff, it should be the FOUR best teams in the nation. Think about it, Pittsburgh, LSU, Georgia Tech, USC, Ohio State and teams of that ilk have no real claim to the throne.

Second, if you really want to figure on who is the best, force EVERY conference to determine a true champion. Either by playing every team in their conference or having a conference championship. This eliminates the probability of two undefeated teams out of one conference that may not even play each other….BIG 10 for example.

It is conceivable that the Big 10 could have two undefeated teams in their conference, since they don’t play every opponent, and don’t have a conference championship. I think that needs to be fixed, if that means adding one more team to make it an even 12, fine, either that or find some way to have one true champion.

The Pac-10 does not have a championship game, but they do play everybody, so in essence you still get a true champion. We know the ACC, Big 12 and SEC does have a true championship game, and the Big East has a small conference to in theory they can have a true champion, since they would play everybody in their conference.

But the big question comes with non BCS conferences…mainly the Mountain West and WAC. Remember folks, years ago they used to be one super conference, with 16 teams, before they split up…would have been better if they did not. Had they not, then you would have the Boise States, TCUs, Utahs, and other teams would face each other and we would have a TRUE champion, which also would make a much stronger case for the BCS.

But even then, there are so many stipulations that nobody has thought of. The results of this year dictate what people want to see, what if next year is different? What if next year there is only 2 undefeated teams, why then would there need to be a playoff if we have the two best teams in the nation?

If Alabama and Texas were the only undefeated teams in the nation, we would not be having this conversation about playoffs would we? So the temperature of playoffs is based only on what we last saw. What if each of the BCS teams produces an undefeated team, along with the Mountain West and WAC…what if the Mid American Conference puts out an undefeated team…they did last year with Ball State.

So in theory, you could have 9 undefeated teams, what do you do then? What if Notre Dame (ugh) goes undefeated? What if Conference USA produces an undefeated team. Where does this end?

Now these are extremes, but you see my point.

Do I think there needs to be a better way to decide the national champs, maybe, but the smaller teams can help their case by taking out their cupcakes and putting in real meat. TCU to their credit did this, so I can see their argument, but not quite for Boise State.

So, with Congress getting involved (although I don’t see why), things may change sooner than later…but unfortunately, it all comes down to money…ironic since we are talking about sports and college students…that never changes…

Greed, that is…playoffs…maybe.