SILLY SEASON, BEGIN
Before we write anything else today:
The silly season is the British term for the portion of the year–usually the first half of the summer–where stories about dogs that can type and wacky German festivals involving beer, marksmanship, and tragic combinations thereof make up the majority of the stories you see in the news. That is because, in lieu of actual events, you are fed fake ones.

We call this image “the 2005 Orange Bowl.”
A very legitimate event occurred this weekend: the Rutgers/Cincinnati game, where the Bearcats mauled (get it! silly season punnery begins!) the Scarlet Knights and thus ended the possibility of the Big East having an undefeated team. Oh, and that Ohio State-Michigan game, too, which in pre-BCS days would have qualified as the national championship game. This would have sucked of course: the Big Ten champ would have gone to the Rose Bowl, faced USC, and likely beaten them in a largely meaningless game that would have ended up with a crap split national championship, or even worse, a spuriously claimed single champion with one loss.
The real storylines end in early December with the conference championship games if your conference has one; if not, sadly, your season of actual relevant events is almost over or is in fact completely done. The brief window of addicted and happy is closing, and nothing but cold winter and the warm, woozy embrace of scotch on the sofa waits to comfort you. Good luck with that: college football is a short vacation from the rest of the year, a three to four month window of sudden, relentless competition with no preseason and a convoluted exhibition at its conclusion. The rest is silence…

That’s you around January 6th.
The silly season may begin, though, where marketeers take over and rig up a ramshackle fix of a playoff where once there were only fluffy exhibition games. These exhibition games occasionally take the form of meaningful games, as in last year’s mindbending Rose Bowl between Texas and USC, where the two best teams just happened to meet up in a stadium and play a football game.
Then there are years where math, human foibles, and fate refuse to cooperate and reduce the silly season to an event worthy of its name: something truly silly like this year’s impending matchup between USC and Ohio State, or Notre Dame and Ohio State, or even the much-touted rematch of Ohio State and Michigan.
Your absurdity in quintuplicate:
USC/Ohio State. USC has one loss to a mediocre Oregon State team, a loss which put them out of national title contention in the minds of anyone with half an iota of reason in their souls.
Notre Dame/Ohio State. The team who was beaten dizzy by Michigan will play the team that just beat Michigan and who strutted through their bowl game last year by beating…Notre Dame, the team we started out talking about in this very elliptical sentence. If this makes sense to you, you are on peyote, and it is working.
Florida/Ohio State. Murder. Simple murder. No one wants to see this, unless they take joy from the details of killing as told by the killer. Which no one likes, right?
Arkansas/Ohio State. Another profoundly silly scenario, since you bump a team that simply molested Arkansas in a game earlier this season.
Michigan/Ohio State. A rematch! The people’s choice! Drama! Jer-ry! Jer-ry! Jer-ry! Except the Michigan/OSU game was in retrospect not even that close, with a pair of gift-wrapped turnovers keeping Michigan in the game. Even with those TOs, only a last minute TD and 2 point conversion turned it into the +3 win you would expect by the home team in an even matchup. It’s not a blowout, but OSU’s been the consistently superior team between the two for the past five years. Nothing changes in a rematch.
It’s not the pure beauty contest of the past system, but it’s not in a different zip code, either. Whatever happens will be messy, stupid, poorly governed, and loaded with advertising. This describes most sport, sure; after all, the hamfisted blind ogres who run NASCAR would kill to have something that ran as “efficiently” as college football does. The guys from the NHL would probably have to be talked off the ledges if they really thought about it in comparison.
Yet it’s not anything close to logical or systematic. For a fan with even a faint loyalty to logic, clinging to the primacy of the conference championships as a system of valuation remains your only hope at seeing something resembling clarity. (You think we’re gonna run out of modifiers here? Got a whole bag waiting, man.) The rest, BCS or no, is silly season. And if you enjoy squirrels on waterskis, you’re in luck, because after Dec 3rd or so, that’s all you’re getting.

How bad is it going to get in February? Two words: Mel Kiper.
109 Replies »
Pages: [11] 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 » Show All
Pages: [11] 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 » Show All












109
As far as the 35-31 score, you’re right. Almost forgot about that because UM went 3 and out and the Bucks scored a couple plays later. That’s not the point. The point is, at what point did Kirk think OSU was going to lose? Save for perhaps the opening drive when we were all a little shell-shocked, I was confident most of the day because we looked like the better team. The turnovers and dumb penalties made me nervous at times, but it was always, if we keep screwing up we’re going to blow it, not “holy crap we’re in trouble right now.”
As for his AP ballot, well, I’ve listened to some interviews he’s given and he’s made it perfectly clear. RIGHT NOW, he thinks UM is #2. But, if USC beats ND and UCLA, he will vote USC #2. He’s playing wait and see and I think alot of the voters are doing the same thing. USC’s loss isn’t as bad as everyone thinks. Oregon State is currently #28 in the BCS.
As for his flip-flopping, to be fair, this has to be the only time in recent memory where it is clear that the two best teams are in the same conference. At least this late in the season….I can’t remember another time.
But anyone that thinks he is a homer, just flat out isn’t listening with open ears. And anyone that thinks Brent Musburger was “(giving) non-stop fellatio (to) OSU” is kidding themselves. Buckeye fans HATE Musburger because he never has one nice thing to say about us. I was laughing my ass off after the first drive when he said, “it looks like Troy Smith will have to bring the buckeyes back from behind in the fourth quarter again.” I’m sorry, but we’d barely played 3 minutes and all of a sudden we’re losing in the 4th quarter? And when have we had to play from behind in the 4th quarter? I don’t remember that happening much this year.
Comment by Brandon — November 21, 2006 @ 4:10 pm
108
Brandon: I don’t have a tape of the game, but I’m afraid I really don’t think that any of us can truly speak intelligently as to why Herbstreit changed an opinion that he’s voiced quite publicly for several years. But the fact is that for whatever reason, he did…right in the middle of the game that he said should not be rematched…up until the time it was played. And your assertion that “He still believes that USC should get the first crack” is kind of shot by the AP ballot he submitted this week. It appears to me that he actually believes that Michigan should get first shot.
Believe me, I’ve been as unabashed a Herbstreit fan as you can be for years…I know the man personally, as I worked on espn college football for three years, during the 97-99 seasons. The last I saw him was when I drank beer with those guys after a friday night radio show, before the 2001 ND game in Lincoln. You’ll not find someone who has defended Herbstreit as much as I have. But between his flip-flopping last saturday (on his well proclaimed stance that a Non-conference champ should not be eligible for the BCS) and the aforementioned AP ballot…I’ve lost a lot of respect for him as of late.
yz, I totally agree…there’s no way you could vote for Michigan over Osu, unless they won in a rout, which is highly unlikely. So we’re headed for either a split title, or a circumstance where the buckeyes are forced to win a game they’ve already won. Either way, I agree with Brandon that it’s totally unfair to everyone involved. My whole point is that you can argue all day over which one-loss team is most “deserving” but to argue for any of them is an arbitrary effort. However a conference wants to decide how to determine their championship is really a moot point…my whole point in all this was that composing 75% of the field from those who have met this criteria is a less subjective way than exists currently. And you still save room for 2 teams such as Michigan (or Boise State or the Florida/Arkansas loser) to not get left out for having great seasons, in spite of not winning their conf. championship.
Comment by DT — November 21, 2006 @ 2:50 pm
107
#101 -
While the Big 10 does not meet the requirements for a title game, let’s assume it may in the future…
I believe the ACC placed FSU and Miami in separate divisions, and the championship game in Jacksonville, with the idea that at least 6 out of 10 seasons would see the two play one another for the ACC title. Of course, the ACC Brass speaks directly to the strength (or, weakness) of its very own conference in such a scenario.
Regardless, if Michigan and Ohio State played in the same division or in separate divisions, I don’t see how the two meet again for the BCS title. Then again, I really don’t understand how the two will meet again for the present Title, so to hell with all of it.
Comment by J-skool — November 21, 2006 @ 12:27 pm
106
um, actually, it was 35-31 just after the start of the 4th quarter. maybe herbie just wanted to sound balanced compared to mushberger’s non-stop fellatio of osu.
in any event, how could you vote um #1 if the two split 2 games? (and i’m STILL against a rematch)
Comment by yz — November 21, 2006 @ 11:30 am
105
“And what ever happened to the argument that was used so often five years ago…that a team that failed to win their conference had no business in the MNC discussion. Herbstreit used to be a clear proponent of that school of thought, until about the time on Saturday when it looked like his buckeyes might possibly not win their conference. Looks like Kirk isn’t the only big 10 apologist who has conveniently forgotten this premise.”
DT - at what point did it look like the buckeyes might not win? did you watch the same game I did? Until the onside kick, Michigan was never even within two scores. Kirk’s opinion changed because Michigan is a heck of a football team. He still believes that USC should get the first crack, but that if the Trojans slip up, that he can’t find anyone else that would give the Buckeyes a game. It had nothing to do with HIS team potentially losing. Anyone that thinks Kirk is biased in his commentating is listening with unbiased ears himself. OSU fans complain that he often speaks negatively and picks against OSU in this match-up.
I still haven’t seen anyone refute the argument about OSU having to beat UM twice to win the NC when UM would only have to beat OSU once. Is that fair? Doesn’t that make the amazing game that was just played somewhat meaningless?
Comment by Brandon — November 21, 2006 @ 11:08 am
104
j.j. -
I agree. Would love to see Boise St. play for, and lose the championship and USC and Michigan go old school.
Comment by tzubear — November 21, 2006 @ 11:01 am
103
Hokie andrew post #71-
excellent idea. I had not thought of it but an exponential curve would perfectly represent relalative parity.
Comment by tzubear — November 21, 2006 @ 10:57 am
102
The BCS is a tale told by an idiot, signifying nothing.
Comment by CrunchTime — November 21, 2006 @ 8:03 am
101
For all this clamor about the Big Ten not having a CCG - do you really think tOSU and UM would be in different divisions? That seems akin to putting the Red Sox and Yankees in different divisions. The Buckeyes and Wolverines seem to battle it out most years for the conference championship. Also, call me a traditionalist, but isn’t it heresy to anyone else that old-school rivalries like Auburn-Alabama and tOSU-UM could be played anywhere besides {Jordan-Hare, Bryant-Denny} and{the Shoe, the Big House}? Falsehood, methinks.
Not only that - who *likes* CCGs besides the money-grubbing whores that run our beloved sport? For every evenly matched and exciting CCG, there seems to be a 5-loss Florida State or Kansas State upset that causes an laughable BCS representative. Anyone see the Orange Bowl last year? I would rather eat my own head than be subjected again to that debacle.
My two cents: I have to buy the argument that Ohio State should not have to beat UM twice (in consecutive games, no less) to earn the MNC. Can anyone reasonably refute this? Not only is it not fair to the Buckeyes, it isn’t fair for the rest of the country, who will always resent the fact that they did not have a representative in Glendale on 1/8/2007.
I won’t spend too long ruminating about the potential of Florida, Arkansas, and USC because these teams have appeared beatable in multiple games this year and each still has two more dangerous games left. Early speculation is wasted effort because of the “any given Saturday effect” that seems to take place *EVERY YEAR* around late November/early December. Though I haven’t been inspired watching SC in the doldrums of its Pac-10 schedule, it never seemed like they weren’t going to put it together (double negatives aren’t not HOTT) every week and win (save for Oregon State). Can you say that about Florida, Arkansas, and Notre Dame? If all of these teams (except ND) end up with 2 losses, we may have to see a Big Ten rematch, but hopefully it will the impetus needed to get us a playoff, once and for all.
Comment by BearNut — November 21, 2006 @ 3:33 am