TMQ FAILS TO ENRAGE US ADEQUATELY
Jew-hatin’ Gregg Easterbrook sometimes deigns to write about college football, and oh how do we love to attempt to bring out the sharp knives when he does that. I mean, when he writes shit like this…
In Division I, coaches are little gods, the players are for the most part obedient, and the football-factory schools hold such huge advantages in recruiting and gimmick schedules that an orangutan could coach a Top 25 team to bowl eligibility. In Division I, coaches throw clipboards if they don’t win by five touchdowns.
…I mean, how can he…
Oh. Um, nice little piece there, Gregg. Walking on, not looking up, hey, don’t you want some coffee (whistling)…or we would walk straight by if NASA-porn fan Easterbrook hadn’t included this blatant and complete falsehood a bit further down.
On the flip side, consider that Penn State under Joe Paterno never runs up the score.
The data set for countering this point is decades deep, but most recently Florida International would like to raise a strenous objection to this statement. With that point refuted, we now allow TMQ to go back to masturbating to the Hubblecast. Ohhhh, the resolution is so…clear…AHHHHHHH….
Loading ...
29
When you see names like Larry Federoff and Graham Zug in the box score, that should tell you Penn State wasn’t running up the score on anyone….
Comment by dmoney350z — December 20, 2007 @ 5:50 pm
28
#s 23 and 25
Look, I don’t like scheduling 1-AA teams AT ALL - and my school has scheduled its share, for sure. I’m all for outlawing those games all together, or maybe not allowing any team that scheduled one to play in a BCS bowl, which would wipe it out from the big-boy schools (where is is most rediculous) all together.
But teams in the upper half of the major confrences couldn’t even play 8 conference games without having at least 4 practically guaranteed wins. Hell, the Big T(elev)en only has 3 ranked teams in the whole league.
I would also like to see the mid majors be split off somehow, because those teams really have no national championship they can even play for. Perhaps, if we ever get a D1A playoff, we can have a D1A NIT for those schools — NIT games in the afternoon and Big Boy tourny at night.
But if we cut off scheduling of CUSA, MAC, WACC etc. by BCS conference schools, then I hope you like the idea of the national champion having a 0.750 winning percentage, which is what you’ll get. Maybe that would be best. I don’t really know.
Comment by TIGERinATL — December 20, 2007 @ 8:59 am
27
[pedant mode] It looks like a Rolls Royce grille, but with an eagle rather than the Flying Lady; so either a half-arsed attempt or avoiding RR IP issues.[/pedant mode]
Comment by Not a Fifer — December 20, 2007 @ 5:35 am
26
#24
And : my 12 year old knows the rules better than officials blah, blah, blah, I coach a kids’ football team better than NFL coaches, blah, blah, blah.
The only good thing you can say about him is that Peter King is worse.
Comment by Not a Fifer — December 20, 2007 @ 5:31 am
25
I very seldom read TMQ and now I remember why. The first part of that column about giving too much credit and blame to coaches was dead on though.
#19: I see no problem with that scenario.
If I were supreme potentate of college football, I’d say that any game against a 1AA team can’t count towards bowl eligibility. I think the only conference who handled the recent expansion of the schedule the right way was the Pac 10. Making every school play an extra-conference game rather than a cupcake was the correct decision. It does make the league LOOK worse in the conference pissing matches though since 1/2 the teams have to pick up a loss rather than them all just crushing cupcakes (except for the occasional HOT HOT HOT upset of course).
Comment by oc phil — December 20, 2007 @ 2:59 am
24
Every Easterbrook column written:
blah… don’t blitz… blah… Science fiction bitch and moan… blah… go for it on fourth down.. blah… cheerleader… blah… use words like animadversion that ensure I never get laid.. blah.. repeat ad infinitum… blah.. cash ESPN check.
Clip this boys and girls so you can do something more interesting with your lives like watch paint dry.
Comment by bevo — December 19, 2007 @ 9:40 pm
23
#19, are you joking or are you seriously touting that as a reason not to play tougher schedules? I fail to see the downside there.
In an ideal world, there wouldn’t need to be a rule, just athletic directors concerned with making sure each game is competitive. It would be kind of fun to have an “X losable game” rule even if X is a low number just because the bigger teams are going to have to label some of their games not losable and that label would have to be sanctioned by the NCAA. That’s got to be some locker room motivation for the underdogs.
Comment by Dante — December 19, 2007 @ 9:14 pm
22
Also, that would be “garbage bag”. Or garbage can. Or even a truck.
Comment by Run Up The Score — December 19, 2007 @ 5:56 pm
21
The weird part is, there’s a line in the PSU fight song that says “We’ll hit that line, roll up the score”. And I didn’t even use that. I just like the concept of running up the score, whether the victim is a keg of Yuengling, a garbage full of weed (Bam Morris, call me!) or Coastal Carolina.
Anyway, Paterno tends to avoid RUTSing if at all possible, and I don’t think that the FIU game is a particularly good example. It’s not like Paterno suddenly invoked the spirit of Spurrier — four of the last five TD drives were less than 40 yards.
A good data point in this discussion is the 2005 Illinois game. Penn State didn’t throw a single pass in the second half.
Comment by Run Up The Score — December 19, 2007 @ 5:55 pm