It’s amazing to me that the only rankings that have the guts and the rules to rank USC (Univ. of Southern California) is the AP, which voted USC #5 in the country. The Harris, USA Today, and BCS just make less sense without USC. Yes, USC can’t appear in a bowl game due to transgressions from way back when Reggie Bush played there, and an ‘example’ was made of USC, right or wrong. But the bowl and recruiting restrictions shouldn’t punish what this year’s team accomplished. They beat Oregon, at Oregon, lost to Stanford in triple overtime after fumbling the ball in the red zone when they could have won that game, and blew out UCLA 50-0 (worst defeat in that rivalry in 81 years! USC did blow a couple of games fairly early in the season, but came back strong. The other polls have no good reason to just bow down to the BCS—they should simply do their job and rank teams where they belong. Even the BCS could rank teams on restriction, simply allowing any restrictions to be carried out. USC just got caught (apparently—never was an admission of guilt that I recall) doing what many other teams have done and had the good fortune to not get caught. I am not condoning USC’s past actions,nor here to discuss the validity or severity of those restrictions; just to say: Why should something that happened before even ONE of the current players chose to go to USC, let alone went there, limit the public recognition of this team’s achievements?
USC (Southern Cal) ranking
Saban & Alabama
He can “lobby” all he wants about the 2 “best” teams playing for the championship, but the FACT is Alabama lost at HOME to LSU mainly for lack of a kicker, I’m sorry Mr Saban, but you are not the 2nd best team in the country, I have NO interest in watching those two teams play again. Any one but Alabama PLEASE!!!
Oklahoma State No. 1 in the Computers? How Did Things Get so Messed Up? By Kelly Scaletta on November 2, 2011 Brett Deering/Getty Images Raise your hand if you think that Oklahoma State is the best team in the country. Put your hands down if your an Oklahoma State fan. Now put your hands down if you’re a computer. Oh, wait; computers don’t have hands. They don’t have opinions, either, which is why some people think that their Oklahoma State No. 1 ranking in them is evidence that they are in fact the best team in the country. Stripped of the perceived “SEC bias,” are the computers giving the most objective rankings? Or are they simply spitting out what they are programmed to spit out? Most humans are not giving the Cowboys the same respect that the computers are. LSU and Alabama are ranked one and two in the human polls respectively. Not one human being in either the AP or the USA Today poll have Oklahoma State ranked first. Why the disparity between the human and computers? Who has it right? Let’s take a look at Oklahoma State. They are a very good football team. They have a tremendous offense, arguably the most explosive in the nation. In fact, it’s probably not generous enough to say “arguably” the best in the nation as there may not be anyone else in the argument. Perhaps Houston could be in the discussion, but Houston’s numbers have come against a far weaker schedule. The Cowboys average 555 yards per game, ranking second in total offense. They score just shy of 50 points per game, at 49.9. Again, they are a very good team, but are they the best team in the country? Brett Deering/Getty Images Why are the computers saying they are? The bulk of the reason is that according to the computers they have played the toughest schedule of all the undefeated teams, and that’s why they are ranked first. Whether they are the “best” team is one discussion, but the toughest schedule? That’s a problem. In according to the computers, they have done so against the sixth toughest schedule in college football. Oklahoma State’s schedule is the sixth toughest in the nation? That’s something worth taking a look at. There are three reasons the computers are giving up a false impression of Oklahoma State’s schedule. First, they have substituted yardage for scoring because they’ve been disallowed from using scoring. Second, they are giving the Big 12 too much credit. Third, there are some major issues with how they quantify strength of schedule. The Yardage Problem Part of the problem begins with the BCS mandate to not include scoring in the computer rankings. Ostensibly, this has resulted in many of the computer rankings opening up a fallacious back door. The problem is that you can’t equate a one point win with a 30-point win if you’re trying to do some sort of objective analysis. To get around the point boycott, most of the polls substitute yardage for points. This can have a very specious side effect. First of all it can “reward” teams who have a tendency to turn over the ball, and at the same time, punish those teams who don’t turnover the ball. Second, it rewards offensively based teams more so than defensively based teams. Jared Wickerham/Getty Images For example, take the LSU at West Virginia game. West Virginia out-gained LSU, 533 yards to 366. LSU won the game in a blowout 47-21. However, when the computers look at the game, it looks to them like a a game that LSU “stole” more than a decisive win for the Tigers. Oklahoma State, comparatively, out-gained the Texas A&M Aggies by 13 yards in their narrow, one-point win. The computers, therefore, give them more credit for their one-point win than they give LSU for their 26-point win. LSU is the most efficient offense in the country, averaging just 9.47 yards per point scored. Oklahoma State is 11th, needing 11.12 yards for every point they’ve scored. Certainly, that’s still very impressive, but it is more favorable for OSU to compare yards than points. It works out the same way defensively. Oklahoma State’s opponents need only 17.19 yards for every point scored compared to 19.37 for LSU’s opponents and 26.15 for Alabama’s. In terms of net Yards per Point, Alabama is first in the country at 14.54 (meaning their opponents need to average 14.54 more yards for every point they score), Temple is second with 12.95, and LSU is third with 12.40. OSU is 11th with 6.08. This isn’t an attempt to compare how “good” the teams are, but to represent that Oklahoma State benefits from the substitution of yards for points in the computer rankings. It also needs to be taken into consideration that the computers aren’t accurately representing the relative value of offense and defense. A team that gives up 400 yards but gains 500 yards is not as accurately represented as a team that gains 300 yards, but gives up only 200 yards. In some ways, this can be qualified as a logical problem just based on the adage “defense wins championships.” Rob Carr/Getty Images However, there’s more to it than that. There is an underlying logic. If a team is limiting the other teams yard, generally speaking, they are going to play with a shorter field, which means they are going to need less yards to score. Furthermore, a defensively oriented team is going to generate more turnovers, which will have the effect of, again, generally shortening the field. If you look at it as a ratio, then Alabama out-gains their opponents by 253 percent, best in the country; LSU out-gains theirs by 148 percent, 10th best. OSU is at only 128 percent, 38th best. Again, this isn’t an attempt to “rank” the opponents, but to show that yardage is a poor substitute for scoring. In fact, in the Sagarin Rankings , where there is a an alternate ranking based on scoring, they fall to sixth best. Overrating the Big 12? Part of the problem is the computers inflate the Big 12 as a whole. They have the Big 12 ranked as the top conference. They aren’t. It seems there is a collective push to make the Big 12 and their schedule better than it is. Looking more closely at the schedules, though, it’s hard to fathom why. Simmer down, Big 12 fans. Read the reasoning before waging your shock and awe campaign against me. Bob Levey/Getty Images The computers primarily weigh three things: yardage, records and strength of schedule together to come up with the best teams. They need to take out of conference records into consideration, though. Obviously, any time there is an in-conference game, there is going to be a win and a loss measured against a loss. Therefore, a 5-5 record in the SEC isn’t the same as a 5-5 record in Conference USA. When you put together five or six top teams in the same conference, it becomes automatic that at least one very good team might have as many as four or five losses. Therefore, the computers need to account for that logic by first ranking the conferences before ranking the teams individually. Pretty much they use the same criteria. As a conference, the Big 12 has the best record in college football. As a result, all the teams within the conference are individually higher rated, and then, because those teams are higher rated, then the individual schedules are considered harder, which in turn makes the individual teams higher rated. According to the Sagarin Rankings, among top 25 teams, the four toughest schedules all belong to Big 12 teams. Missouri has the toughest schedule in the nation. This “toughest schedule” has come against Big 12 teams. Why is Missouri’s schedule so tough? They’ve played Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas A&M and Kansas State. All of their signature games, win or loss, come against Big 12 teams. Go through all the Big 12 schedules, and you’ll see the same thing. The Big 12 schedules are “tough” because of their Big 12 schedule. Brett Deering/Getty Images The picture starts to get clear. Is it that the “blind” computer polls are ascribing too much credit to the Big 12 has a whole? Or, are the human polls not giving the Big 12 enough credit? How much stock should be put in the Big 12′s out of conference schedule? This is really where the crux of the entire debate comes down. If the computers are right about the Big 12, they are right about Oklahoma State. What is the basis for giving all the credit to the Big 12? How much stock can be up in their having the best OOC record in NCAAF? If you average out the defenses they’ve faced, they have given up an average of 420 yards per game. Only one defense, Texas, gives up fewer than 300 yards per game, and only two others, Missouri and Louisiana Lafayette, give up less than 400—and both of those are over 350. Just as with the yards on the individual level, the same goes for the conference as a whole. It’s a conference stacked with offenses and less than stellar defenses. While OSU has certainly had an explosive offense, it hasn’t exactly been hammering the ball down the throats of the nation’s elite defenses. The average Big 12 game sees 937 yards and 72 points. How much of that is good offense and how much is good defense. Is the Big 12 racking up massive offensive numbers as a whole “tricking” the polls into making the computers believe that they are better than they really are? This is not a unique situation. The Big 12 teams, year after year, put up huge numbers offensively, and year after year, get beaten in their BCS bowl games. Erich Schlegel/Getty Images Since the advent of the BCS, the Big 12 is 7-11 on college football’s elite bowl stage. Only the ACC has a lower winning percentage among the BCS conferences. In fact, the Big 12, over the last five years, has only one win against a top five team in the BCS and only one win against a higher ranked team in the BCS. Both of these were accomplished in the same game, Kansas’ win over No. 3 Virginia Tech in the 2008 Orange Bowl. Their only other win against a top 10 BCS Conference team was the same year with Texas’ win over No. 10 Ohio State. The Big 12 haven’t beaten the SEC in a BCS Bowl game since Nebraska beat Tennessee in the 2000 Fiesta Bowl. In other words, the Big 12 hasn’t even had a signature out of conference win in three seasons. They haven’t had a signature win over an SEC school in a decade. They’ve collected their best wins against Mid-Major schools and the weaker BCS conferences. There are going to be those who want to prop up Oklahoma’s win over Florida State this year. If that’s your best argument, you are proving my point. I’m not impressed with Oklahoma’s 48-20 beat down of unranked Connecticut in last year’s Fiesta Bowl as a signature win for an entire conference, either. There are those that are going to want to argue that you can’t use last year to argue what is happening this year. They argued the same thing last year, and the year before that and the year before that. Then, they watched their teams either get whacked in their respective bowl games or play against weak non-BCS opponents or against the weakest BCS opponents. Ronald Martinez/Getty Images Misrepresenting Strength of Schedule If there were something to this season to suggest that there’s a reason to believe that this year is different, it would be a valid argument that you can’t use history. However, there isn’t anything different this year. Where is their out of conference signature win? Oklahoma State’s “best” out of conference win is against Tulsa at home. Furthermore, the Cowboys have not beaten a one loss team this year, in or out of conference. The only team they have beaten that is presently in the BCS top 25, and that’s No. 22 Texas. Contrast that with LSU’s schedule, who has beaten three presently ranked teams, Oregon, West Virginia and Auburn, all of whom have beaten presently ranked opponents. Two of those teams played for the national championship last year. There are only two teams Oklahoma State has beaten which were ranked on game day, Texas and Texas A&M, and the latter has fallen from the rankings since. LSU has played five, including potentially the winner of two BCS conferences in West Virginia and Oregon. Yet to the computers, Oklahoma State has played the tougher schedule. Really? Really really? How on earth can this be? LSU has beaten two of the presently ranked top 25 teams in the BCS poll out of conference. They beat the Oregon Ducks, the highest ranked one-loss team on a neutral field and they beat 25th ranked West Virginia on the road. They won those two games by a total of 39 points. Ronald Martinez/Getty Images The Big 12, as an entire conference, has played one out of conference game against a team that is currently ranked in the top 25 in the BCS and they lost! And, it was to an SEC team. Arkansas beat Texas A&M. The Big 12 has the best winning percentage against out of conference teams, but who those wins come against matter. Effectively what they’ve done is put together a number of wins against above average mid-major schools, which has the effect of artificially inflating their strength of schedule. The conference’s “best” out of conference wins include wins over the likes of Louisiana-Lafayette, BYU, two against Tulsa, TCU and Nevada. The best wins they have against BCS Conference teams are against the likes of now unranked Florida State and Miami. While the Big 12 was feasting on marginal competition outside of the Big 12, SEC teams that were in contention were playing elite teams. LSU had the aforementioned games against Oregon and West Virginia. Alabama played Penn State. Auburn played Clemson. Georgia played Boise State. Tennessee played Cincinnati. Finally, as mentioned earlier, Arkansas beat Texas A&M. Did the SEC teams win all of those games? No, but they did win all but three of them. Three of the four wins came away from home, and by the top two teams in the conference. As a conference, they have a winning record against currently ranked, out of conference teams, and that’s something that the Big 12 cannot claim. In fact, as a conference , the Big 12 has only played one game against a presently ranked out of conference team. On top of that, they lost that game, and on top of that, it was to an SEC team! Ronald Martinez/Getty Images So how does this translate into a “better” schedule for Oklahoma State? In large part, it’s because the computers just average out the rankings of the schedules, so it has the effect of making one weak team make the entire schedule look much worse than it is. For instance, compare LSU’s out of conference schedule with OSU’s. Based on the Massey Rankings, LSU has played No. 6 Oregon, No. 161 Northwestern Louisiana and No. 40 West Virginia. That’s an average out of conference ranking of 69. OSU has played No. 85 Louisiana-Lafayette, No. 33 Tulsa and No. 53 Arizona. However, it’s a trick of the math with one game throwing LSU’s schedule completely out of whack. LSU’s schedule is completely thrown out of whack by the Championship Division team on their schedule. While they have played two teams that are ranked in the top 25 away from home, and OSU hasn’t played anyone, the computers are tricked into thinking that OSU’s schedule is tougher. When it comes to making a case for the best team in the country, it’s not the “average” opponent that matters, but the best opponents. The Big 12 as a whole is similar, feasting on above average mid majors like TCU and BYU, while the SEC has been beating teams like West Virginia, Oregon and Penn State, but diluting those wins with wins over teams like Northwestern State. The Big 12′s record overall is 27-3 (90 percent) out of conference. The SEC’s is 31-4. (89 percent) out of conference. The SEC has played seven OOC games against presently ranked opponents to the Big 12′s one. When you compare the two conferences record against OOC ranked teams, the SEC is 4-3, a .571 winning percentage, to the Big 12′s 0-1, a .000 winning percentage. When you compare the schedule against ranked unranked opponents, the SEC is 27-1, a .964 winning percentage to the Big 12′s .931 winning percentage. Yes, the SEC has a better record against ranked opponents and a better record against unranked opponents but the Big 12 has a better record and therefore has a “tougher schedule.” When OSU’s win at home over Louisiana-Lafayette gets more credit than LSU’s win over Mississippi State on the road, there’s something wrong with the rankings. In a topsy-turvy logic, the Big 12 schedule is tougher than the SEC’s. By not playing significant out of conference games, it props up the conferences overall record out of conference. That creates the illusion that the teams in the conference are better than they are, which in turn makes it look like their in conference schedule look tougher than it really is. And that’s how a weak schedule makes the computers think they have a tougher schedule. The bottom line is that neither the Big 12 or Oklahoma State are as good as the computers are telling us they are. While it may all seem very egalitarian and objective, the computers are giving a skewed representation of the relative strengths of the conferences and their opponents. The reason that there’s an SEC bias is because there’s been an SEC dominance for the better half the last decade. Over that span, the elite conference is 8-2 against the best from around the country in BCS bowls. I don’t recall a loss by a top-five SEC team in the regular season, but I do recall a few wins—one of which came this year. Jared Wickerham/Getty Images Bias isn’t necessarily a bad thing. I have a pro-democracy bias. I have a pro-literacy bias. I have all kinds of biases that are perfectly reasonable. It’s normal for informed people to have a bias. In fact, it can be argued that’s the whole point of being informed, to form our biases. And, as an informed fan of college football, it’s hard to not have an SEC bias. They have been the best conference for years. There’s been nothing to change that perception this year, as the best teams in the SEC have beaten some of the best teams from the Big 12, the Big Ten, the Pac-10 and the Big East. The Big 12 has been a conference that historically runs up big scores against marginal teams and then gets beat when they face the elite teams from the other elite conferences. There’s been nothing to change that perception this year either. Wins against marginal teams like BYU and Tulsa aren’t convincing me that anything is different. Until there’s more than questionable evidence from “unbiased” computers to say otherwise, I’ll stick to my bias.
Budweiser? Anheuser-Busch InBev , a Belgian/Brazilian brewer that now owns Anheuser-Bush, has over 250 beer brands produced and sold throughout the world. This makes them the largest brewing company ever conglomerated. The NFL can not even get an American owned company that brews beer? Miller- Miller Brewing Company , although based in Milwaukee, WI, is owned by SABMiller (South African Breweries) which was created in 2002 when it was purchased from the Altria Group. Why not American BEER? 1. The Boston Beer Company , brewers of about 20 different varieties of Samuel Adams, is probably the best known “craft brewer” in the United States (and is, in fact, the largest). Sam Adams beers are “contract-brewed” meaning, they are so large that not all of it comes from one brewery. Hence, Sam Adams can be found nationwide. With a name like Samuel Adams–an American patriot famous for his role in the American Revolution–it is one of your best beverage choices for patriotic consumption this Fourth of July. For a hot summer weekend, try Sam’s Summer Ale, Sam Adams Light, and the original Sam Adams Lager. Or . D.G. Yuengling & Son , commonly called Yuengling, of Pottsville, Pennsylvania, is the oldest operating brewing company in the United States, having been established in 1829, and is one of the largest breweries by volume in the country. They produce, among others, the popular Yuengling Lager. Or 2. Shipyard Brewing Co. in Portland, Maine makes the fantastic Shipyard Export Ale as well as a Summer Ale that is slightly less hoppy, perfect on a warmer day. 3. Abita Brewing Co. in Louisiana makes Abita Amber and Purple Haze for the warmer days and Turbo Dog for those cooler nights. 4. Anchor Brewing Company , in San Francisco, CA, makes the very popular and easy-to-find Anchor Steam as well as a seasonal summer wheat beer. 5. Magic Hat Brewing Company in Vermont, makes the easy-to-find-east-coast beer #9. 6. Pete’s Brewing Company of San Antonio, TX, makes Pete’s Wicked Ale, an American Brown Ale. One of my personal favorites–if I can ever find it again–is Pete’s Strawberry Blonde, a summer brew. We at the National Fauxball League want Americans to drink Fauxbeer from other countries. We pride ourselves in running the beer con on America to go along with the Fauxball con we have going now! We cannot afford American made beer commercials Just ignore the fact that the game has changed with the beer the fans enjoy. They just don’t need AMERICAN made beer. They don’t need real football like they just don’t need AMERICAN made beer. Just don’t pay any attention to how we save money to promote the National Fauxball League. How we make money. The average price of an NFL ticket rose 4% this season to $75. The increase was fueled largely by the steep prices at the Cowboys’ new stadium, Team Marketing Report’s survey of NFL ticket prices said. One game? The sticker shock doesn’t end with the cost of tickets, however. The Fan Cost Index — what it takes to bring a family of four to a game — is $759 in Dallas, by far the highest in the league. We are in the business of making money from you the fans,anyway we can,$60.00 stadium tickets more if you want good seats $25.00 parking,imported beers at $7.25 average in a plastic bottle,$7.50 hot dogs we buy in bulk at 10 cents a dog. YOU PAY MORE and get less for the game of Fauxball. The National Fauxball League is going green, faux turf,faux play and rules that keep any injuries from occurring. We at the National Fauxball League will be combining with the Lingerie Football League for harder hitting action, since hitting is no longer allowed in the National Fauxball League. Get ready to RUMBLE! These players will soon become NFL players around the league drafting from LFL will start this spring! They will fit right into the new rules! They will be protected like a National Fauxball quarterback with a sprained pinky finger. The official crying booth will still only be open to National Fauxball League quarterbacks. Thanks to rising ticket prices, overall cost, and the quality of NFL broadcasting, the majority of professional football fans will be staying home this season. The USA Today ran front-page news this morning that most Americans no longer have the urge to actually attend games. I wonder why?
A&M domino could fall Wednesday…
So where are all the people now who called me an idiot for even broaching the subject of this SuperConference idea? Uhoh…it’s about to happen! A&M domino could fall Wednesday; then tilt-a-whirl really begins Depending on your choice of historical conflict, several of America’s largest college athletic programs are either at Lexington, Mass., or floating in Charleston Harbor, waiting for some conference to fire the first shot. If that shot comes — and indications are it could come as early as Wednesday — the first stages of a major realignment of the conferences could be sudden, swift and dramatic. The Pac-12, which has received interest from Oklahoma, Texas, Oklahoma State and Texas Tech, does not want to make the first move. After last year’s drama, when commissioner Larry Scott’s league was the aggressor, the Pac-12 has been happy to sit back and look forward to the day its 12-year, $3 billion media rights deal kicks in. The league doesn’t need to expand. But if another conference — the SEC, for instance — decided to grow, then the Pac-12 would be far more inclined to listen to the schools searching for safe haven outside the Big 12, where the environment has become too toxic for a certain powerful school (rhymes with Stokelahoma) to bear. By Tuesday night, the SEC should know whether it has the required nine presidential votes to extend an invitation to Texas A&M, which sent a conditional withdrawal letter to the Big 12 last week. If the Aggies get the invitation, they will accept and announce as early as Wednesday their intention to join the SEC. Then, things could get wild. So, with college sports again on the precipice of a major realignment for the second time in 15 months, here are the answers to a few key questions. • Who is the aggressor this time? Last year, conferences sought out new members. The (then) Pac-10 courted six Big 12 schools, while the SEC courted Texas A&M and Oklahoma. This year is more like a Sadie Hawkins dance. The schools are the ones doing the asking. Texas A&M approached the SEC in July. Oklahoma approached the Pac-12 in August. The tenuous threads that tied the Big 12 back together after near-Armageddon last year began to snap as schools pushed back against the Longhorn Network — which Texas launched last month. Texas A&M saw the Longhorn Network as a looming monster that would ensure the Aggies were relegated to second-class-citizen status in their own state. So A&M president R. Bowen Loftin reached out to the SEC to see if the league still had interest in expanding into Texas. Meanwhile, Oklahoma president David Boren, fed up with instability in the Big 12, said last Friday that the Sooners will have a voice in this round of realignment drama. “We obviously want stability in our conference relationships,” Boren told The Oklahoman . “We want partners that are above outstanding, both athletically and academically. A conference that’s strong is not only stable, but it’s one in which there are multiple relationships, along with sports, between university members.” • Where does Texas stand? That’s an interesting question. The Longhorns are tired of being painted as the villains, so don’t expect them to make any move before the Sooners. But if Oklahoma — and by extension Oklahoma State — breaks away from the Big 12, then there would be no Big 12 left to salvage. Texas would need to decide whether it wants to join a conference or be independent. The Pac-12 probably would be the most attractive conference option. • But what about the Longhorn Network? If Texas moved to the Pac-12, it would be possible to fold the Longhorn Network into the Pac-12′s new regional network structure. Texas may have to partner with another school such as Texas Tech to make the deal work. Remember, ESPN, which runs the Longhorn Network, also is a network partner of the Pac-12. ESPN could essentially negotiate with itself to make a deal work that keeps all its partners happy. • So if Texas A&M goes to the SEC and four Big 12 schools go to the Pac-12, are we far away from multiple 16-team superconferences? Let’s hop in the time machine and travel back to July 2010. In an interview with SI.com, the Pac-12′s Scott explained that he believed superconferences would eventually form. “Something like that is bound to happen at some stage,” Scott said 14 months ago. Why? Because when he floated the idea in 2010, Scott found that television executives loved it. “What you couldn’t predict is what fan reaction would be, what media reaction would be and how the TV executives who would ultimately have to stroke some big checks would react,” Scott said. “That was the part that was very pleasing. I got contacted by every major TV network in the country.” Since the SEC has barely acknowledged the concept of expansion, we don’t know whether commissioner Mike Slive wants to go to 16. We do know that he told CBSSports.com in July that that league was capable of getting that big. “I could get to 16 (teams) in 15 minutes,” Slive told the site. Meanwhile, Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany said this to The Chicago Tribune : “We’re about as comfortable as we can be with where we are. We’ve said we will continue to monitor the landscape, but we have closed down active expansion.” The landscape could begin to shift this week, but it’s still unclear what that would mean for the Big Ten, which would need to add schools of significant value (read: Notre Dame and others) to ensure its current members didn’t lose revenue in the deal. At any rate, the Big Ten would have plenty of time. The league could wait a few years, see how the dominoes fall and time expansion to its next media rights deal. • Can the Big 12 still be saved? Never say never when talking realignment. Last year, the Big 12 was dead until it wasn’t. Do not underestimate the power of Big 12 commissioner Dan Beebe to complete a Hail Mary. He has done it before. Until Texas A&M has nine votes from the SEC presidents, the tilt-a-whirl probably will not spin. Still, it’s difficult to imagine a scenario in which the Aggies could come back to the Big 12. They seem to have passed the point of no return. But until the SEC presidents vote, nothing is certain. __________________________
Fantasy Football killing football?
In order to fuel the stats for fantasy football, the league is changing rules to make football an offensive game. The reason player safety is a topic of discussion is to keep key players on the field. Thus keeping them in fantasy football leagues(this and the ridiculous amounts of money the players are paid). The rules are creating football scores of 45-40 and making the game hard to watch. 400 yard passing combined by the end of the first half. You now have to wait until a receiver catches the ball turns around takes two steps gains ten yards and then you have to hug them to the ground. You can no longer break up a play with a big hit to dislodge the football and separate the player from the ball. This is getting so ridiculous I really do have a hard time watching football. You look at the “highlights” of any game and all they show is big pass plays and touchdowns. Maybe this is what a majority of the fans want to see, but not this fan. IMO this has been a direct product of fantasy leagues and the millions they bring in. It sickens me. My team is good in reality and I have not and never will be in a fantasy league. I just wish people would pull their heads out and realize this is what is making football like a two hand touch Frisbee football league. This coupled with the sissified people who populate this country and can’t stand seeing somebody getting their bell rung. If you don’t like the big hits go watch soccer. I have said this many times before but the players know the risks and have a choice to play or not. Football is a violent sport and IMO should be kept that way. The product they put on the field today is a mockery of the game I grew to love and it is killing me. The rule changes they have made are not cutting down on injuries. They are just making the game look like a powder puff game. I feel bad for the real football players of yester year because had they played with these rules those real men would have been able to play for twenty years no problem.
Arkansas Loses Davis
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/6856103/arkansas-razorbacks-expect-knile-davis-miss-all-2011 Knile Davis, the top RB in the SEC and one of the best in the country last year, is out for the season. Last year he averaged over 6 yards/carry, 147 yards/game and rushed for over 1300 yards for the season. Arkansas was in a position to make a serious run at the SEC title and quite possibly the BCS title as well this year, but things don’t look too good for them now. They’ll still be a good team, but probably not championship-caliber. Oh well, I guess it’s good news for the rest of the SEC and several teams in the country.
Alabama Wins the 2012 National Championship
Alabama Crimson Tide Will Win 2012 BCS Championship by a Score of 28-23 By Prepstar.com (Contributor) on August 11, 2011 The Alabama Crimson Tide will win 2012 BCS Championship by a score of 28-23, according to computer simulations. PredictionMachine.com has simulated the 2011-2012 College Football season 50,000 times and concluded that the Crimson Tide will win their second title in three years. It would also mark the SEC’s sixth consecutive BCS title. According to the simulations, the Crimson Tide will play Oklahoma and beat them 56% of the time by an overall average winning score of 27.6 to 23.1. The BCS title game was not the only bowl game outcome simulated by PredictionMachine.com . The simulation had Florida State winning the ACC title and taking down West Virginia in the Orange Bowl by a score of 23-14. Boise State earned itself a spot in the Sugar Bowl against the SEC runner-up, South Carolina. The Broncos from Boise take them down by a score of 27-25. Notre Dame returns to the BCS in a loss to Texas A&M in the Fiesta Bowl. The Oregon Ducks, ranked No. 3 in the nation, miss the National Championship game but win the Rose Bowl against the Wisconsin Badgers, 41-31. LSU finishes No. 5 in the country and finishes the year with a win over No. 10 Oklahoma State in the AT&T Cotton Bowl. Now that the computers have done their job, it’s time for these collegiate athletes to do theirs. The 2011 College Football season will be filled with intrigue and drama, as always. When it’s all said and done, will the computers be right?
Everyone who was surprised by this announcement, raise your hand in stupidity. Allegedly, the five OSU players signed a contract with the NCAA that they would return for this season and serve five game suspensions if they were allowed to play in the Sugar Bowl. They played, and now Pryor won’t honor his committment. We now know what his word or signature on a contract is worth. While I don’t think the rule they violated should be there, it was; therefore they should have obeyed it. In this country, if you violate the rules you must pay a penalty (unless you are rich enough to get a free pass or buy off the legal system). You don’t change a law simply by violating it; you get enough like-thinkers to violate the law publicly to call attention to its unfairness. This means you pay the penalty until the law is changed. Poetic justice would be for no professional team to sign Mr. Pryor to a contract, but that won’t happen, as he has too much potential….
The NFL whiners!
I’ve had it… I can’t take being quiet about this anymore. The League, the Owners, and all the Players are a bunch of GREEDY little !#^#’s!! How can the players whine about more money, health care, and two more games a year? Players such as Peyton Manning, Ben Rothlisberger, Champ Bailey, Larry Fitzgerald, Albert Haynesworth all make millions of dollars a year to play a GAME! It is hard to put a guy like Peyton in the same sentence as Haynesworth, one has character and a love of the game, while the other is just a big fat bum, but.They all love their union brothers and will stick together, so, “Oh well Peyton, your in with the bums to.” Haynesworth and Manning make the almost the same per year! Remember, millions to play a game that they “Love”. After the Steelers won Super Bowl XL, Antwon Randal El went to the Redskins for 5 years and made $50,000,000! I was upset that he left, because he was a big part of our team, but then I was even more upset with the price! If I work the next 40 years, which I will have to, I will not even put a dent in his 5 year job. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t believe that we should all make the same amount of money and that the players shouldn’t get paid, but where is the line drawn? Why aren’t hockey players whining about their 83 game schedule? That is much more of a brutal sport then football. I don’t hear anyone in Washington talking about spreading the players money around or that they make to much like a CEO of a company! They are not the ones paying the bills for stadiums, training equipment, practice facilities, etc, etc! O, and don’t worry players, the Owners are just as bad! How is it that most of the new stadiums being built are paid for with TAX money. The people in Pennsylvania voted against a tax increase and public funding for Heinz Field and Lincoln Financial Field, yet the bums in office and the greedy owners passed it anyhow. Everyone in Allegheny county and Phili now pay 1% more for a football stadium. What about the poor suckers that do not like football? This when the Rooneys own a team with the fourth largest income from team Merchandise. I can’t even buy a ticket for a game, except from a scalper, because the line for season tickets is 20 some years. But let’s just add 10,000 seats to the place because Three Rivers was falling apart, so much for good union work in building the place to begin with. The Cleveland fans lost their team because Modell wanted a new stadium and the fans said no, so he went to Baltimore, then they built a stadium for him, and I’m guessing it was with a public tax increase. Back in Cleveland they got a new team, with a new stadium, and I’m guessing that the taxes went up there too! Heinz Field only gets used tops, 48 days a year people! They have only had maybe 6 concerts in the place since being built. Talk about a RIP OFF on the investment!!! Now you do have some stand up owners, Mr… Kraft up in the dreaded New England area, Jack Kent Cook, former owner of the Redskins, Jerry Jones, all Paid for the stadiums themselves!!! And these stadiums aren’t cheap! Kudos gentleman! What gets me, is that it is us, the people, the fans that are paying for all the salaries, bonuses, stadiums of the players and owners! Us. The guy who makes $30,000, $50,000, even $70,000 a year. Us. Supporting our teams when they get to the playoffs and still supporting our teams when they don’t get there. Buying the $100.00-$300.00 dollar jersey for a rookie who has not even done anything. Ryan Leaf, Tim Couch, Matt Leinart all come to mind. Rashard Menndenhall, the guy breaks his shoulder his first game, plays OK his second year, fumbles quit a bit, drops the ball in the Super Bowl, and then compares the lockout to slavery? Not when he makes millions of dollars for carrying a ball around, even when he can’t hold on to it. The owners are taking risks on these guys and then he says things like “Usama Bin Laden didn’t attack the US.” A day after real heroes killed his **bleep**. It is his right, by living in this great country to say what he wants, don’t agree with it at all but, slavery, Cmon’ MAN!! Plaxico Burress, Mike Vick, Pac-man Jones, what is going on? Vick has done his time, paid for the dumb things he has done, and has come back and has done great. These are guys that kids look up to, why, because the make money, and they want some more. Where are the values that the kids are learning from this? Is the value GREED, not something I would want my kids to learn! I guess I am saying that the teams, the league, and the players need to get their !#^*! Together and play the game. For all the complaining that I am doing, I waste 10 hours a day watching the games on Sunday, 4 on Monday (usually), and then 4 on Thursdays. I enjoy watching the players make great catches, big hits, and close games. I support the Steelers quite a bit with the shirts, Jerseys, Posters, Magazines, etc. that I purchase. Hell, I even pay the outlandish prices of scalpers at times to go watch a game that I can watch for a whole lot cheaper at home. We have the best banner in Heinz field, when we can get there. Because I do love to watch football. But, as of now, actually since this strike has begun in March, I will NOT support the Steelers or the NFL by wearing anything with team colors, and that includes my seasonal jackets, hats socks, and shirts. I will NOT watch the NFL channel to see what is going on. We are the people that make this league and players bring in $9,000,000,000 a year. The people in Pittsburgh alone could pump a ton of money into the economy if we didn’t wear our Steelers gear, I went back to a lot of old shirts that I was not wearing. If the teams and players and the league can’t get together and work things out, the we the people should do the same and not support any of them!! When they have no revenue, then maybe the will finally understand the hardships of the normal people in this country.