Curious Index, 12/6/07
![]() |
||
|
A new pig in the blanket? Reports indicate that Wake Forest head coach Jim Grobe has accepted an offer to become Arkansas’ new head coach. This seems like a fine hire to us, especially because Nutt Job stayed in the SEC, keeping him in the news and us in business. Grobe was the 2006 ACC Coach of the Year when he led the Deamon Deacons to the conference championship and an Orange Bowl appearance. For his sake, we hope there are no skeletons in his closet because by God the people of Arkansas will dig ‘em out, if so. Good luck, sir. There is one thing we can promise Mr. Grobe as he departs the ACC for a more… indulging… fan base. There won’t be any of this in the SEC. UPDATE! Jim Grobe is staying at Wake Forest. I should know better than to nap on an Arkansas coaching hire… The drama continues. Soooooooey! Fulmer Cup points? The arrests are trickling in, including two Aggies on drug and robbery charges, but we remind the eager readers that Fulmer Cup official scoring does not begin until after the season concludes. Certainly for teams heading to bowls then, these arrests are just unofficial warm ups. Orson will have to rule on whether teams not heading to bowls may begin accumulating points. Make yourself comfortable, Jimbo. Florida State is set to announce on Monday that Jimbo Fisher will succeed Bobby Bowden when he finally decides to retire. This would normally qualify as exciting news for an assistant coach, but we imagine Fisher handled the news like he had been told he’d inherit Montgomery Burns’ estate upon his death. AD: “Jimbo, we’re gonna promote you to coach when Bobby hangs ‘em up!” Fisher: “Hoo. Ray.” AD: “You don’t seem as excited as I’d hoped.” Fisher: [mimicks waving pom poms] “Oh, no. I’m thrrrrrilled.” AD: “What’s wrong, Jimbo?” Fisher: “Bah. Nothing. It’s just… I dunno, a man hopes to make head coach before he turns 65.” Professor, I have a question. With SMQ taking a week off to catch his breath and Orson chasing livestock in the southwest, the mean IQ of the CFB blogosphere took a pretty nasty hit this week. It’s sort of the opposite of what might happen to Sports Illustrated if they shipped out Stewart Mandel and Peter King. Fear not, though, readers: we’re not totally doomed to an Oklahoma education this week. Others have picked up the slack. The M Zone asks a smart question about the utility of the “records against winning teams” statistic (it’s bunk, he says), prompting LD to respond with some interesting follow-up thought. Thus concludes our “The More You Know” segment for the week. Back to regularly scheduled snickering and rumor-mongering. Any chance of a split? My good friend Adam Jones has written a guest editorial spot for CFB News with a paragraph at the end that caught my eye: We are all left not quite knowing who reigns supreme in the college football world. I shudder to think what the newly independent and historically mischievous voters of the Associated Press will leave us with after this bowl season. The cacophonic clamorings for a playoff—at least of the “plus-one” variety—will continue, but likely on deaf ears; a 12-0 romp by USC next season will make everyone forget this ugly anomaly. We’ve spent plenty of time discussing how wack the 2007 season has been, but we’re not sure we’ve seen anyone yet discuss the possibility of a split national title. It’s pretty difficult to imagine a situation where that would happen, but it can’t be discounted at this point. Question of the day: Is there any scenario that might tempt AP voters into casting votes for a team other than the LSU-Ohio State winner? |
||
![]() |
||











51
SD SMP says:
#34
“The AP’s choice of national chamipon will carry no more weight than, say, mine.”
True, I guess, if you have been running your poll since 1934 and the first-place team in it was widely regarded as the national champion for the vast majority of those 70+ years.
December 6th, 2007 at 2:20 pm
52
The SEC says:
Yes, I’m sick of it. LSU faces the same danger OSU did a year ago, being told the other team isn’t worthy and trying not to believe it. The Tigers aren’t exactly invincible, at least they are less so than the U team taken down by Mo Clarett and Mr. Delayed Pass Interference Caller.
December 6th, 2007 at 2:21 pm
53
OhioDawg says:
“The cacophonic clamorings for a playoff—at least of the “plus-one” variety—will continue”
Where do they get this stuff? There is no clamoring – cacophonic or otherwise – for a playoff. The only people that seem to consistently want it are the guys at the sportsertainment leader or guys who want to get there.
We flogged the topic pretty well yesterday…no clamor.
PERSONAL CONSPIRACTY THEORY: This is the media endeavoring to create a crisis that doesn’t exist because the solution helps them.
GET LOST ADAM. Go write about the NFL!
December 6th, 2007 at 2:26 pm
54
OhioDawg says:
#4 – Notre Dame doesn’t need no steeenking bowl games; they’re a 2008 pre-season #3 already.
December 6th, 2007 at 2:27 pm
55
marcillac says:
EiG
You may be right about WFV. My point is that if OU wants to have a claim to AP No. 1 they would need to win by a large margin and when I say that I specifically refer to the imperative to shut down the WFV O. I’m fairly certain OU should be able to score pretty easily. UCONN, as I’m sure you’ll recall, was actually moving the ball quite well against them in your game. OU will at least have to repeat the Pitt peroformance on D to stake a claim to the MNC.
December 6th, 2007 at 2:36 pm
56
Peter Bean says:
Ohio, you’re living in your own planet, sir. Most fans I know want a playoff. And this year, of all years, shows how silly the BCS system is for producing a “champion” in any meaningful sense of the word. The winners of the Sugar, Rose, and Fiesta Bowls will all have as valid a claim to saying they should have been #1 than the winner of LSU-Ohio State.
December 6th, 2007 at 2:38 pm
57
Edsall is God says:
55 – I wasn’t disputing your point, I was just saying that I think it’s highly unlikely. And you are dead-on about UConn, they were still in that bloodbath at halftime because WFV’s defense is very overrated. Even their biggest wins the last two years (Georgia, Rutgers last year, Ga. Tech in the Gator Bowl) have included pretty horrific defensive lapses. I’m looking forward to the game..I see lots of points back and forth.
December 6th, 2007 at 2:41 pm
58
Brandon says:
I would think Georgia, Oklahoma, and Kansas all have a chance to be number one in the AP poll. It seems to be a widely held opinion that Georgia and Oklahoma have been playing the best football lately, and what if Kansas pounds Virginia Tech as bad as LSU did (on a neutral field no less). If LSU wins, they they will probably be unanimous champs. The media has been all over their johnson all year. If Ohio State wins, and one of those other teams blows out their opponent, they we could have a split. I don’t care how it comes, I’m rooting for a split. There were a lot of teams that deserved a shot at the championship this year, and this bowl system sucks.
December 6th, 2007 at 2:41 pm
59
Edsall is God says:
50 – I don’t know in those years how many 3-loss teams were in the top 10 or 14 or whatever # the BCS was set up for in a given year. There’s also now five bowls instead of four.
What were the Rose Bowl’s options? Georgia was protected by the Sugar Bowl. ASU wasn’t picked because it’s another Pac-10 team. They weren’t taking Hawaii. It left them with: Kansas, Missouri, Illinois & West Virginia. WFV was coming off of a crippling loss and Kansas is a joke. So they could have taken Missouri but I don’t think that’s worth ruining their tradition.
For all the talk about USC/Georgia in the Rose Bowl, it could never have happened because the Sugar got to protect Georgia. It’s the “Iowa rule” from 2002 when the Orange Bowl took Iowa and the Rose Bowl was stuck with OU/Washington State, aka the worst Rose Bowl ever.
December 6th, 2007 at 2:44 pm
60
OhioDawg says:
56 – saying it doesn’t make it so. Every broadcaster I listen to wants a playoff, but nowhere near all of the fans I know want a playoff.
Five or so years ago, everyone wanted instant replay. It made so much sense. It would solve so many problems.
Now, no one seems to understand it (which plays can/can’t be reviewed? Why can’t they all? When can they be reviewed?) and it definitely hasn’t solved the problem (Oregon/Oklahoma, Texas Tech, JoPa..ok, forget that last one!).
We will get a playoff, I don’t doubt that, but it won’t help anything except Cthulhu and the sportsertainmnet leader.
December 6th, 2007 at 2:46 pm
61
Peter Bean says:
58 – if Missouri had beat OU or WVU had beat Pitt, LSU goes to the Sugar Bowl and Georgia to the Rose Bowl.
December 6th, 2007 at 2:46 pm
62
Peter Bean says:
I guess we roll with different crowds, Ohio. Most fans I know think the current system is too arbitrary. I do, as well.
Nor do I care what ESPN thinks. I care that a flex-system playoff, allowing for a multi-team playoff when needed is far more interesting and fair. The current system places two teams in a single game for all the marbles, and when you have a year that’s not like 2005, someone gets hosed.
Not sure I understand the appeal of the status quo.
December 6th, 2007 at 2:49 pm
63
Chg says:
RE #18, if that happens, we’ll just fall back on 75 years of history supported by historical record and such.
December 6th, 2007 at 2:52 pm
64
okiedomer says:
wait…is ohio fan the only one defending the bcs?
allsome.
there’s a reason why every single other sport has a playoff, folks…
as for wfv, we will score on their d – the question is who wins the match-up of vroom-vroom vs. our d – i’d like to think we will since we’ve defended the spread as good as anyone in recent history (well, us and usc), but i have a healthy respect (and a bit of fear) for the wfv offense
my only hope is that we’ll reverse last year, when the worst bowl on paper was the best bowl played – i think wfv/OU is the best bowl on paper, so hopefully that means we’ll win by eleventyten
December 6th, 2007 at 3:11 pm
65
Steve Slaton's speed says:
Sorry I’m late, I guess I kinda f’d up the whole BCS by being nonexistent most of this year… if I find my way to Glendale I’ll see you there!
December 6th, 2007 at 3:18 pm
66
NJ Knight says:
Hawaii spanking Georgia might tempt the AP voters to put them at number 1.
December 6th, 2007 at 4:09 pm
67
R.D. Baker - Retired Blogger says:
“Where do they get this stuff? There is no clamoring – cacophonic or otherwise – for a playoff. The only people that seem to consistently want it are the guys at the sportsertainment leader or guys who want to get there. ”
Note the word “Ohio” in the poster’s name
Even if he isn’t a Buckeye fan, he’s not hearing the clamoring for a playoff because his friends and neighbors are too busy cheering on the home team.
December 6th, 2007 at 4:16 pm
68
oc phil says:
#28 Okiedomer: I didn’t mean to diss Oklahoma there, but I happen to have heard more about UGA and USC than them. They are clearly in the same conversation though.
But the chest thumping about beating the #1 team is a bit much. Mizzou at least played Illinois, but overall both Mizzo and K-state were frauds who didn’t beat top competition this year.
Conferences without a full-round robin schedule can have too much disparity based on which teams are missed in a given year. And too much chance of a rematch which usually blows.
December 6th, 2007 at 4:22 pm
69
R.D. Baker - Retired Blogger says:
Directions for Mr. Slaton’s speed:
http://maps.yahoo.com/dd_result.php?q1=Morgantown%2C+West+Virginia&q2=One+Cardinals+Dr.%2C+Glendale+AZ&q3=&q4=&q5=
Oh, and okiedomer, you’re welcome to come too
Hell everyone come down to Glendale to see the best of the BCS games
December 6th, 2007 at 4:29 pm
70
oc phil says:
#48 Pelican Pants: You are a total dumbass. Save the smack talk for when things have actually happened. tOSU and LSU still need to play the game. And the stuff on your blog about Saban’s future record being better than Tubbs is totally moronic. When you are arrogant about things that have not happened yet you just look stooopid.
December 6th, 2007 at 4:34 pm
71
Edsall is God says:
Mr. Bean: I think everyone agrees that the current BCS setup is bad, but it beats the alternative of a playoff.
At least in the old system, we got great bowl games and everyone agreed it was a “mythical” national championship. It still is now but the BCS makes believe it isn’t. That’s the fundamental problem.
Fuck, if they just put all the bowls back to where they were pre-BCS, we still wouldn’t have a champion but I bet people would be a lot happier.
And why life really so bad in, say, 1993? You had a full day of killer bowls on Jan. 1, 1994: Undefeated WFV getting smoked by Florida, Notre Dame eeking out a thriller over A&M in the Cotton Bowl, Wisconsin in its first Rose Bowl in forever and FSU scraping by undefeated Nebraska in the Orange Bowl. Sure, ND got screwed by being #2 to a team they beat but, holy hell man, that was the best day ever.
I was 11 years old that day and I would give my left arm to do it over again. A full day of football, games all day that felt like they meant something and we didn’t have a true champion. And I liked it 1000 times more than LSU playing Ohio State for a “real” championship.
December 6th, 2007 at 4:40 pm
72
R.D. Baker - Retired Blogger says:
Edsall, I’d like to go back to the old days when teams like Miami, FSU, Penn State, etc could be independent without their own TV network, and I would love to see the Big 8 and Southwest Conference exist as separate leagues… but it ain’t happening.
Besides, there’s only 2 places on earth where they hand out multiple trophies just to make sure everyone’s happy: FBS Football and youth leagues.
December 6th, 2007 at 5:03 pm
73
Edsall is God says:
72 – it has nothing to do with making the teams happy, it would make ME and the fans happy. What you rather have? A faux title game that gets everyone riled up or the old system, where everyone played it out, everyone enjoyed it and we argued over a “mythical” champ.
And look at how the bowls would be..
USC vs. Ohio State, Rose
LSU vs. Hawaii, Sugar
Oklahoma vs. West Virginia, Fiesta
Va. Tech vs. Georgia, Orange (bc Va. Tech is #3)
I say play those games, see what happens and then pick the best two. It’s just as arbitrary as the current system except each of the top contenders will have a “prove it” game and we get more good football! yah!
Playoffs would make me cry.
December 6th, 2007 at 5:13 pm
74
R.D. Baker - Retired Blogger says:
> What you rather have? A faux title game that gets everyone
> riled up or the old system, where everyone played it out,
> everyone enjoyed it and we argued over a “mythical” champ.
Neither.
December 6th, 2007 at 6:17 pm
75
SD SMP says:
#59
Not true, the Rose had first pick (see below, borrowed from TMQ) in the “draft” and a bowl can’t “protect” a conferenc/team choice if their assigned conference champ goes to the title game (e.g. LSU). The Rose could have taken GA if they wanted to, but went with the 3-loss Illini due to the “tradition” that the Rose Bowl so desperately clings to (although I preferred the “non-traditional” TX-USC game played in the Rose Bowl, myself).
“The Rose Bowl lost the Big Ten winner, Ohio State, to the top BCS game, but took USC automatically as the Pac-10 winner. The Sugar Bowl lost the SEC champ, LSU, to the top game and so had no commitments going into this year’s bidding. A draft was arranged in which the Rose would go first, then the Sugar, then the Orange, then the Fiesta and then the Sugar again because it lost its automatic team.”
Then, in the Sugar, it could have been Hawaii v. Missou or ASU, both of whom were more deserving of a BCS berth than Illinois.
December 6th, 2007 at 6:32 pm
76
D-nice says:
@34 “The fine folks at the AP can vote for whomever they wish after the seasons end, but it won’t give us a split championship. 1997 saw the end of that. The AP’s choice of national chamipon will carry no more weight than, say, mine. If it did, then all of the folks clamoring for Pete Carrol to have two (’03 and ‘04) should actually be saying that he has three (’03 and two in ‘04). Likewise, if we could still have split championships, Tressel would have two in the past few years, as would Mack Brown and Urban Meyer. But alas, they do not. The aforementioned three coaches each have one. Because we now have one national champion each year, the winner of the BCS championship game. End of story.”
I generally agree, and think we’ll see fewer split championships, if any from now on. But, it’s really not the “end of story.” There is no offical NCAA Championships. There can be split championships as long as anyone is willing to recognize them. And, many commentators, fans, and pundits still recognize split championships. Yeah, the BCS is supposed to be “offical”, but given its so convoluted, if there is any opportunity for the AP to vote otherwise, and a significant number of people agree, then there is a split championship. And, obviously, whether or not someone recognizes such a split, is often dependent on their affiliation. But, let’s say Oklahoma played USC or Georgia and beat them pretty good, while LSU had an ugly win over OSU. I think more than just OKlahoma fans would recognize Oklahoma as having won a champiosnhip, even if it is from the AP.
December 6th, 2007 at 6:55 pm
77
SpartanDan says:
SD SMP: You missed a key point there. The “Iowa Rule” (put in after the Orange Bowl took Iowa the year of Miami-OSU) states that the bowl that loses its normal representative because they’re #1 can’t choose a team from the conference of the #2 team unless the bowl that would normally have that team consents. Meaning that the Sugar Bowl could have (and almost certainly would have) vetoed the selection of Georgia.
Basically, the rule guarantees that the bowl that loses the #2 team can have a team from that conference if they want one. And there’s no way the Sugar Bowl didn’t want Georgia.
December 6th, 2007 at 7:00 pm
78
SD SMP says:
# 59, 77
You’re right, I’m wrong, sorry.
It’s getting hard to keep up with the BCS’s yearly reactionary tweaking. This is just another example of how their tweaks generally cause just as much harm as good.
December 6th, 2007 at 7:20 pm
79
marcillac says:
EiG,
Yeh, the BCS has pretty much sucked the life and significance out of the Bowls by presuming to crown the “National Champion”. With raree exceptions (Texas/USC) the old system was clearly better. Some of the games turn out great but in general there is much less excitment.
A set 8 or 16 team playoff would be worse for any number of reasons. However, over at BON there’s a pretty extensive discussion of the Flex System Peter is talking about. Its not entirely realistic but if we were to have a playoff that would certainly seem to be by far the best opion.
December 7th, 2007 at 7:50 am
80
Timgen says:
LSU narrowly defeating anOSU in triple overtime, but only because of a horrible call/non-call…..
AND
Hawaii blowing out Georgia by 3TDs+…..
AND
OU steamrolling WVU……
equals split title. (And who knows who the AP would give it to – it could be split split title
I’m by no means predicting the above, but it would result in a split in any sane world.
December 7th, 2007 at 6:47 pm
81
Dr. Ed PHD.XYZ says:
Yeh, And a terrorist takes out Santa with a Stinger
December 8th, 2007 at 5:42 am