RICK REILLY THINKS UTAH IS THE ONLY NATIONAL CHAMP
Rick Reilly hates us, and that’s fine. If no one hates you you’re either doing something wrong, or you’re Willie Nelson, who everyone loves because he’s fuzzy, contantly high, and still wearing the same headband he put on in 1974. (Because there’s weed in it..)
Since the job of Willie Nelson is still taken, we assume being hated by someone means you’re doing something right. Also, we never read Reilly growing up and don’t read him now, since he largely comes from the school of hackneyed one-liners (occasionally scoring) and the aesthetic of Mitch Albom’s School for Guys Who Ponder the Beauty of Life, Put One Hand on Cheek, and Lean On Said Hand Wistfully. Pat “Fucking” Jordan drinks his milkshake anyday; P.J. O’Rourke leaves him in pieces in a carefully submerged bag in Haulover Sound.
Anyway, he’s being paid an astonishing amount of money to write one 800 word column a week. Too Short approves of this being paid 10Gs just to breathe on the mike, but Oliver Wendell Holmes wants a motherfucking word with you about your con law:
Call Myles Brand, president of the asleep-at-the-wheel NCAA, and ask him if he and his greedy presidents are going to stand in defiance of president-elect Barack Obama, who wants a playoff and wants it yesterday.
Rick Reilly is obviously a fan of the Unitary Executive theory of the President’s role in the Constitution, since he thinks–typing atop a pile of gold bullion while phoning John Yoo on the matter–that the President can force a playoff.
Us as David Frost: “Are you saying what you did wasn’t illegal?”
Reilly, clad in jowled foam rubber makeup: “I’M SAYING THE PRESIDENT CAN MAKE ROCK CANDY APPEAR FROM THE RECTUM OF A UNICORN IF HE WANTS!”
It’s flabbergasting to think this made it past the plausibility meter of anyone with a passing familiarity with what the President does, but two things are more galling. First, Myles Brand isn’t greedy yet, because wresting control of the BCS from the hands of the “greedy” would put it into the hands of…um…the “benevolent” Brand? Because he’s king of college sport land, and would rule with a fair and even hand?
We don’t want to defend the BCS, but this is a cartel. Cartels are brutal, unfair, and in principle foul creatures. So are dictators. If, through eight improbable steps, the NCAA ever became involved in the BCS on a serious level, that is precisely what you would have. Call it the Voltron Theory: what Reilly wants is a giant robot to come screaming from the sky and set everything right by cutting a Robeast or two in half. Thinking that either Barack Obama or Myles Brand could or should set anything right about this system is–and this is the kindest word we can use to describe it and read it in your best Christopher Hitchens voice–fatuous.
(BTW, you owe Reilly 900 bucks for that excerpt. And we’re not even going to talk about John Feinstein’s piece on the BCS. The word “fucktarded” can only be typed so many times before your fingers cramp.)










51
Rob M says:
I would just like to thank you for working into a piece on college football: the theory of the Unitary Executive, Voltron and Willie Nelson.
Really, with that my football season is complete.
January 7th, 2009 at 6:36 pm
52
HudiBlitz says:
@ 48, in my opinion, no. But even if they’d beaten Georgia, 2007 Hawaii’s resume would be weaker than 2008 Utah’s is.
Also, remember that 2007 LSU’s losses were in overtime. LSU really ought to have been 11-0-2 last year. College OT is an abomination, and I can’t for the life of me figure out why people are so accepting of it. It’s not as bad a shoot-out in soccer, but it’s still pretty awful. Either reinstitute the tie or play 7.5-minute, non-sudden death overtime periods. (NFL overtime sucks too, just differently.)
Overtime is a pure contrivance, a crutch for weak-minded, casual fans who can’t handle an ambiguous result, even when it’s the most accurate reflection of what happened on a given day. Some of the greatest games in college football history are ties (1946 Notre Dame – Army, 1966 Notre Dame – Michigan State, 1968 Harvard – Yale).
January 7th, 2009 at 6:38 pm
53
unknownhinsonfan says:
Those claiming Utah should be MNC are the same people who argue that Saduharu Oh is the all-time home run champ.
January 7th, 2009 at 6:56 pm
54
John says:
2007 Georgia wasn’t as good as 2008 Alabama. 2007 Georgia lost to a mediocre South Carolina team and got blown out by a good but not great Tennessee team.
2008 Alabama went 12-0 in the regular season and was 15 minutes away from playing for the national championship. For Utah to be the only undefeated team in America AND have that kind of quality win, they deserve one-half of the national championship.
January 7th, 2009 at 7:57 pm
55
HudiBlitz says:
@ 52, good to see someone point that out explicitly. The fact that 2007 Hawaii was a paper tiger doesn’t make 2008 Utah a paper tiger. Utah has some good wins. And the fact that 2007 Georgia received a crazy halo effect from the media for routing Hawaii has virtually no bearing on the strength or weakness of ‘08 Alabama.
I’m too lazy to look this up, but has a national champion ever lost a game, in regulation, at home? To me that’s the biggest fly in Florida’s ointment. Yes, it was a close loss to a good team. But USC (and prior to the Rose Bowl, Penn St) can say their losses were close, and to good teams, and on the road.
Is Utah as deserving of national champion status as, say, 1968 Ohio State? No. Are they more deserving than, say, 1994 BYU or 1990 Colorado? Yes.
January 7th, 2009 at 8:28 pm
56
marcillac says:
George W. Bush has not done anything so remotely Ultra Vires as an Obama involvement in forcing a plaoyoff would be (well, except maybe for the auto bailout for which he has and has absolutely NO legisltative mandate – but thats another issue). Really one tries to maintaion a measure of appreciation for the Utes but they are being obliterated by the advocacy of Reilley, Feinstein and various is assorted polls (Doc Saturday has a couple of post up on it today). Whether or not they deserve to be No. 1, they certainly deserve better than this.
January 7th, 2009 at 9:00 pm
57
ROB says:
“You don’t beat the #4 team in the country and get to leapfrog 5 spots to #1″
Why not? Why are you giving credit to a bogus ranking system?
January 7th, 2009 at 9:40 pm
58
Steve-O says:
I watched Utah play three games. Michigan, TCU, and Alabama. I watched Oklahoma play 13 games. Oklahoma would win 8 out of 10 against Utah. But that’s not what determines national champions. 2002 Miami wins seven out of 10 against Ohio St., but Ohio St. won the national title.
However, Utah played four teams that had a chance of beating a top five team, none of them on the road, and one at a neutral site. Oklahoma played eight games that a top tive team could have lost, one of them on the road. Assuming they beat Florida, it’ll be nine games against quality competition, one on the road and three at neutral sites. I’m sorry, but Utah doesn’t get through that slate with less than two losses.
Oklahoma’s eighth or ninth toughest game (Nebraska at home) was about at hard as Utah’s third toughest game (Oregon St. at home). Plus look at the common opponent. TCU should have beaten Utah at Utah. OU dominated TCU. In a meaningful game, I think OU is a 14 point favorite against Utah. Is a win at Michigan Utah’s fourth best win? That’s worse than OU’s win at Baylor.
January 7th, 2009 at 9:53 pm
59
Steve-O says:
You know who Utah is? They’re Iowa if Iowa played in the MWC. Penn St. is Alabama, and they could get lucky and beat TCU, bang their wheelchair into Oregon St. a few times and come out with a victory…
Sorry, Utah’s not top five.
January 7th, 2009 at 9:56 pm
60
Mike C. says:
For as “tough” as Utah’s schedule was, let’s look at their big 3 regular season wins closer (im not counting a 2 pt win at a miserable, 3 win michigan team as a big win): Oregon State, by 3, at home (hey Feinstein, I thought the BCS teams were afraid to play road games against the Utahs of the world???). TCU, by 3, at home, and only because TCU’s kicker choked on two chippie field goals in the 4th quarter. BYU, by 24, at home. And remember, since fucktards like Feinstein seem so convinced about the merits of the “x beat y and y beat z so x is better than z!” type bull-shit argument, let’s remember that BYU was wildly overrated and is a heinous celebration call away from going to overtime with the worst team in 1-A football. Congrats to Utah on jumping out early on an Alabama team that clearly didn’t want to be there (for the first quarter, at least) and for taking advantage of a favorable conference schedule that gave them their only two tough games at home, and their only tough nonconference game at home.
As far as Utah “deserving” the title, I’ll defer to Snoop from “the wire”: “deserve’s got nothin to do with it.” Utah isn’t in “the game” so they don’t deserve shit. Spend the big boy money on college football or go away and be thankful that the BCS even let you in. Obviously the BCS is stupid, and what makes it even worse is fucktard assholes like Feinstein and Reilly writing about college football once a year and condescendingly proclaiming that they hold the answer to this cruel sport we call college football. Go get fucked assholes
January 7th, 2009 at 10:24 pm
61
www.southbendblarney.com says:
Great season for Utah. Too bad they are in the wrong conference… the big boys will always get more credit.
People cry out for a playoff while school presidents and athletic directors sleep comfortably on a bed made of money…don’t think things will change anytime soon.
January 7th, 2009 at 10:39 pm
62
D-Nice says:
A couple of points
(1) People always argue that “X” Bowl Champion deserves to be in the National Championship Game over the in-place participants, based on their bowl win. But, the national championship participants are determined BEFORE the bowls. Therefore, though we NOW know that Utah is legit and maybe could make an argument for the national championship, we did not know that before the Sugar Bowl and before Okla and Fla were picked for the title game. Based on what they did before the Sugar Bowl, the Utah argument is less compelling.
(2) Related to that, to say that “X” team deserves to a piece of the national title because “right now” they are playing great, is also misguided. This has happened to USC the past few years. As a USC fan, I fully believe they could win the National Championship game over Florida or Okla. I’m not saying it’s a sure thing, but I’d give them good odds.
But, the fact that they may, in some people’s minds, be playing the best football RIGHT NOW, doesn’t really matter, since the national title game participants, again, are picked before their recent great display of football. Before, the Rose Bowl, USC had a loss ot Oregon St. and a schedule that unfortunately didn’t quite pan out (No Top 10 or Top 12 Pac-10 team (like Cal or Oregon in years’ past), and ND sucked).
So, even if USC is, as of the Rose Bowl, “playing the best football” and “could beat anybody” (i realize those are just opinions), that doesn’t go hand in hand with deserving to be in the title game.
(3) Finally, people always make the point that an 8 or 16-team playoff will still have controversy because someone will still be left out. But, leaving someone out at the 15 or 16 spot, or the 8 spot, is a lot less troublesome than keeping someone out of the 2 spot.
So,
January 7th, 2009 at 11:46 pm
63
Kecalf Bailey says:
Utah is a better football team than Florida or Oklahoma.
True or False?
If you have watched your fair share of college football this year I think you know the answer, though at this point I am starting to think most of you like whining and arguing more than college football.
Also, A Florida sans Harvin win over healthy, motivated Alabama by 11 is more impressive than Utah’s 14 point win over an unmotivated Bama team sans Andre.
I watched us lose to both teams in person completely sober, and Florida is without a doubt better than Utah….and I hate Florida.
You don’t jump from #6 to #1 for beating the #4 ranked team.
January 8th, 2009 at 12:31 am
64
David A. says:
I am sick of hearing about how Alabama wasn’t prepared or ready to play. The fact is that that neither Oklahoma OR Florida would want to see Utah in the Championship game. FYI, the Mountain West Conference happens to own a winning record against both the PAC-10 and the Big-10 in head-to-head comp over the 3 past years straight. These are big money schools who have difficulty getting the SEC to schedule games with them. So, get yer head outa the grits and look westward for the future. It is here.
January 8th, 2009 at 12:49 am
65
Muckbeast says:
Honestly, I think it is highly possible Utah could be Florida and/or Oklahoma.
In years past, I would not have said that about the small conference team. But Utah has just slaughtered people, and slaughtered them with speed and strength and all the things small conferences rarely have. They haven’t relied on trick places like Boise. They just flat out whipped Alabama and whipped them good (in basically a home game for Alabama).
If they can do that, it is absurd to say they could not reasonably beat Florida or Oklahoma.
Utah should be #1, and the BCS should go.
-Michael
Threshold RPG
http://www.thresholdrpg.com
January 8th, 2009 at 2:05 am
66
Woekie says:
For the last time: championships are not decided by hypothetical matchups between two teams that haven’t played and have shared few common opponents. Do you think your team would beat Utah? Well that’s nice, but THAT GAME WILL NEVER HAPPEN. We have to go on results, and Utah played a respectable schedule, with a big bowl game win (and yes, bowl games count double in any reasonable estimation of final rankings ever since the UPI started putting out a final poll after the bowls; if they didn’t count like that, Penn State would have a great claim on the 1978 title). Other teams played much harder schedules, but they all lost a game. An undefeated record still counts for something, assuming that there is at least some difficulty. Does anyone remember when [INSANELY QUICK BUT EVEN MORE FELONIOUS HAMPTON ROADS DUAL-THREAT QB REDACTED] led my team to the championship game by waltzing through a Big East schedule filled with enough cupcakes to make a wedding cake? Did Tech really do any better over the course of the season than Utah, even before you take the bowl games into account? Utah did what they had to do to take a piece of the championship and no matter how much you wish otherwise, the teams that win their games win the titles, and that frequently isn’t the best team. West Germany ‘54, Texas Western ‘66, USA Hockey ‘80, Nicklaus ‘86 (in my opinon, Uncle Verne’s finest moment), Dodgers in ‘88 – none of them would win again in a do-over, but do-overs don’t happen. And yeah, I know that you never got a chance to beat Utah like you know you would. But that amounts to asking for a do-over for Ole Miss, Oregon St, Texas Tech, or Texas. To be quite honest, the worst of you sound like Simmonsesqe Patriots fans bitching about how much better you really were than the Giants.
But none of this really matters. Roughly half of the AP voters will take the path of least resistance and vote the winner of tonight’s game as the No. 1. They know better than to attempt to find one true champion. Even I would award half of the title to tonight’s winner, because they will have been the one to come out on top in the biggest game. Utah and USC each get a quarter. And I’m not a shrink, so I can’t determine the underlying cause of Texas’ lack of motivation against Ohio St – I just have to assume that they aren’t good enough to have a piece of the crown.
January 8th, 2009 at 2:17 am
67
TheMightyErik says:
@64-
January 8th, 2009 at 4:11 am
68
TheMightyErik says:
@64-
(sorry about that)
I am glad someone said that.. I am also tired of hearing how Alabama did not want to play that Sugar Bowl game. Yeah, well, that will be my new excuse for Penn St losing to USC in the Rose Bowl. They didn’t want to be there because Iowa broke their hearts so they committed an assload of penalties, some poor turnovers, and let the USC receivers / QB have their way with a badly conceived cover 3 defense and was glad to leave Pasadena only down 14…. yeah, that’s the ticket.
Show Utah a little more love, guys. Orson gave the Utes a 1/4 share and why the hell not? They played a great season and all anyone wants to do is shit on it.
Quick trivia question:
Name the only school to have two undefeated seasons in the BCS era (and now has 8 straight bowl wins over 10 years, for that matter)
Answer:
them upstart Utah Utes.
Here’s to that program’s continuing success to force a bit of change
January 8th, 2009 at 4:26 am
69
Steve-O says:
Utah did not do all they could to win a title. Going into every season knowing that they’ll likely have a much weaker conference schedule than other national championship contenders, they should schedule four games against BCS schools. And if they can’t get BCS schools, schedule Boise St.
I know, I know, they scheduled Michigan and Oregon St. That’s a mighty fine non-conference schedule… for a school that plays in the SEC or Big XII. They got Oregon St. at home. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to play two road games against BCS schools, or maybe get a neutral site game, a la Oklahoma and BYU next year.
Take a page from college basketball. Be like Gonzaga and play anyone, anytime, anywhere. Be like the mid-majors that schedule their bracket busters towards the end of the year.
Someone brought up Virginia Tech and Penn St. in prior years. Assuming they had weak schedules, for the sake of argument, the reason they got where they did is because of the name on the front of the jersey. The respect the earned in prior years impacted the perception of them that year. Same thing will happen for Utah. The reason people are so hesitant to give Utah the benefit of the doubt is that the moment they do, they’re in the title game every year because they should be 11-1 or 12-0 against that schedule every year if they’re really as good as Oklahoma, USC, Florida, etc.
That said, this year, Utah has a very strong case to make. I’m still not sure how much stronger it is/was that Boise St. a couple of years ago, especially because that year’s BCS champion was less impressive than this year’s will be (either team). Boise St. had a win over a top ten BCS school and over a 10-win Oregon St. squad. Sound familiar?
January 8th, 2009 at 6:45 am
70
hailtogeorgia says:
@62: I’m right there with you on those points. Had the National Championship last year been decided based on what teams were playing the best football in the country, then it should have very easily been between USC and UGA. No doubt about it. Unfortunately, like you said, that’s not what happened. It is very important to remember that Utah did not miraculously become undefeated after beating Alabama. They were undefeated the entire season, but yet people like John Feinstein or Rick I-Can’t-Write-An-Article-With-Less-Than-Two-Thousand-Oneliners Reilly decide NOW that Utah deserves the national championship. Give me a fucking break.
As for the argument that Alabama wasn’t motivated to be in the Sugar Bowl, that’s probably very true. Is it an excuse for them not showing up to play? Certainly not. There have been many other teams who haven’t been motivated to go to their bowl games and they still show up. The game was a bit of a trap game for Alabama, just like any bowl game against a mid-major is for a tradition powerhouse program. However, I wish that Alabama would’ve taken the same stance that Georgia took last year, which was to listen to everyone say that UNDE-FREAKING-FEATED Hawaii had a chance in the game (or in Mark May’s case, that they would win) and then go out and beat the ever-living shit out of them. Did Andre Smith being hurt impact the game? Most certainly. It affected both their offense and defense (as much of their defense is their clock management on offense), but it’s no excuse. They weren’t ready to play until the second quarter, and by then it was too late. To quote a text message my Volunteer friend sent me during the game, “Bama is getting West Virginia’d”. Anyone who remembers the 2006 Sugar Bowl (in ATLANTA, no less) will agree that this is completely accurate. I’ll get off my soapbox now.
January 8th, 2009 at 8:44 am
71
hailtogeorgia says:
Oh, and one more thing. It’s not just the little guys who have been screwed after having undefeated seasons. Auburn in 2004, anyone? If Utah should have a share of the title this year, then after undefeated Oklahoma was trounced by undefeated USC in 2004, shouldn’t undefeated Auburn gotten half? Where was Rick Reilly then to come and be Robin Hood? It just goes to show you that the Johnny-Come-Latelies for Utah are only out to make themselves look like these great guys who are looking out for the little guy, when it’s really just for their own personal glory. I hate Rick Reilly.
January 8th, 2009 at 8:56 am
72
marcillac says:
@MightyEric: OH PUHLEEEEEEEEEEEZE!!
Saying Penn State was unmotivated to play USC is like saying you’re unmotivated to fuck Angelina Jolie jsut becuase Catherine Zeta Jones turned you down (I actually have a very strong preferance for the latter). Utah by contrast is a decent looking chick who turns out to have a pretty good body.
Don’t get me wrong: I respect Utah’s accomplishment, especially in the second half when Alabama finally arrived but the Utes were able to put them away. Still, they do not win the game if the Andre Smitthless Tide comes to play from the beginning. Not to mention the many close games Utah played agains dubious competiotn and the near-loss to TCU which was soundly beaten by OU at home (while holding the Sooners to their lowest point output of the season).
Again, I do not wish to diminish Utah’s accomplishment, would rank them at least in the top 5 and can appreciate the argument that they deserve a share of the title. It is however, abusrd to suggest they deserve it in its entirety and must dimiss completely the Penn State/Bama motivation analogy.
January 8th, 2009 at 9:29 am
73
chg says:
If an SEC team had backed out of hosting Texas to play a 1-AA, every hack and talking head coast-to-coast would be bitching about it. Utah got a nice feel good win over Alabama. There only other quality win was a TO fueled 13-10 home win over TCU where they were outgained by 140 yards. Any team approaching competitive status on their regular season schedule had to play in Salt Lake City. They are an 8-4 Big 12/SEC team that came up with a solid performance in their bowl game, but they are nowhere near national title worthy.
January 8th, 2009 at 9:48 am
74
chg says:
@23 and 34 Good grief, the comedian’s a bear!
How is a healthy Utah’s neutral site win over an Alabama team missing their best player more impressive than Florida, minus their most explosive player on offense, defeating a full strength Alabama on a neutral site?
Teams in the SEC that “would give Utah trouble”: everyone but Mississippi State and first half Arkansas. Second half Arkansas, Auburn, Vandy, Kentucky, and South Carolina might need HFA to take down the Utes, but every road game would be tougher than their most impressive road win (at Wyoming?).
January 8th, 2009 at 10:09 am
75
Ara Parseghian says:
When healthy, my 1962 Northwestern Wildcats were 6-0 and ranked number #1 in the country. When healthy . . . .
January 8th, 2009 at 11:30 am
76
imissbrasil says:
Fozzie, others saying the Utes’ SOS was respectable:
Since Fozzie opened up the sagarin can of worms in ‘defense’ of the Utes’ schedule, of the teams ranked in the Sagarin top 40 (before bowls), name the teams with the worst SOS:
#40 James Madison – SOS 119
#39 Navy – SOS 74
#36 Ball State – SOS 116
#23 BYU – SOS 83
#11 Boise State – SOS 113
#9 TCU – SOS 76
#8 Utah – SOS 70
Notice something?
Next comes Rutgers, Northwestern, Cincy, PennSt & Bama – all above #57 but and only slightly tougher than 70.
Conversely:
OU’s SOS comes in at 8 (plus the extra game)
UF at 19 (plus the extra game)
Tx at 10
SC at 38, for comparison
The Utes had a great year and have a great team, but come on… As stated above, their toughest games were at home & spread out & the ‘weaker/filler’ opponents are much worse than OU & UF.
However, I do agree that they deserve recognition as being one of the better teams not to get a shot this year, which puts them in the top 5. Since they went undefeated, give them an honorary slice of the MNC if you like, but more along the lines of 10%. But if you do that, then Tx deserves at least the same, especially if OU wins tonight.
As for a playoff, right or wrong, I don’t expect to see one anytime soon, and definitely not as a result of any perceived grievances to any non- big football factories.
January 8th, 2009 at 11:38 am
77
Last Dragon says:
#53 wins
January 8th, 2009 at 12:10 pm
78
Kecalf Bailey says:
64,
“The fact is that that neither Oklahoma OR Florida would want to see Utah in the Championship game”
thanks for making my point. While it is true that they wouldn’t want to see Utah in the Championship game (whatever the hell that means), they would much rather see Utah than each other, or Texas, or USC, because they, and most people, believe them to be the better teams.
11:19 am and Utah still isn’t national champion.
Congratulations on your undefeated season.
January 8th, 2009 at 12:20 pm
79
TheMightyErik says:
@72 marcillac
It’s called sarcasm…. look into it.
Penn State was flat out beaten last week and we all know it. See how retarded the ‘Bama was unmotivated’ excuse looks when we use it on another team?
January 8th, 2009 at 1:03 pm
80
Woekie says:
#53: Don’t be a jackass – Josh Gibson is the all-time home run champ.
Signed,
Eddie Robinson
January 8th, 2009 at 2:23 pm
81
Distant_Gator says:
Someone asked if a national champion had ever lost before at home in regulation.
LSU lost to Florida in 2003 19-7 at home. This was a far worse loss than UF’s. And while it wasn’t at home, Miami got trounced by Florida 28-3 in 1983, yet still won the MNC. This should have disqualified the Canes from the MNC, yet it was conveniently forgotten in the excitement of the OB.
I feel bad for them but Utah has no case. After tonight either Florida will have beaten OU or OU will have beaten Florida. Utah doesn’t have a win that can compare to this. I guess they could make a case for #2 perhaps.
January 8th, 2009 at 2:24 pm
82
chg says:
Urban Meyer and Bob Stoops would gladly choose Utah as their opponent if given the opportunity. Utah needed help from the TCU kicker and QB to eke out a 13-10 come from behind victory. Oklahoma demolished TCU 35-10. In a national title game, UF or OU would depants the Utes even worse.
January 8th, 2009 at 3:11 pm
83
Bob says:
While I agree that Utah’s schedule overall wasn’t good enough, you can’t fault them for not trying. Scheduling an opening game against Michigan in Ann Arbor is, in most years, a pretty brutal opener. It’s not Utah’s fault that UM had its worst team in 50 years.
January 8th, 2009 at 3:23 pm
84
Cleat Meat says:
The fanboys who argue over the sure-fire winners of hypothetical games that can’t possibly happen are the guys for whom the Alien vs. Predator movies were made.
January 8th, 2009 at 3:29 pm
85
Dan says:
Does anyone understand the point of Rick Reilly’s article. He’s not really claiming that Utah is the best team in the country, hes bashing THE MOST RETARDED CHAMPIONSHIP-DETERMING SYSTEM IN SPORTS. He’s simply claiming that under this system Utah has the best resume, undefeated, 4 quality wins (2 top 10 wins).
#12 is right on when he says that college football has over 100 teams and only 12-13 games in a season.But that is only more reason to have a playoff in college football. Its regular season isn’t long enough to determine its best teams the way other leagues do (for example, the MLB shouldn’t have an 8 team playoff, 165 games between 30 teams should be able to determine 2 deserving teams to play for the title)
In college football, there is every year 3 to 8 teams that can claim they are capable of winning the national title at sesons end. This year, there were 7, with only texas tech, Alabama, and the loser of tonights game now out of the picture. There needs to be a playoff to determine who is the best amongst these teams, not sportswriters, coaches and computers.
January 8th, 2009 at 5:23 pm
86
Cleat Meat says:
Okay, so I finally got to Feinstein’s column. “Fucktarded”? C’mon, Orson — can you seriously, swear-on-a-stack-of-Spurrier-playbooks claim you wouldn’t say the same damned thing of Florida weren’t in the game tonight?
The BCS as constituted is indeed a cartel most foul, the OPEC cancer on college football’s soul. Hell, it oughta be the subject of RICO prosecution since it’s really just an organized crime syndicate dedicated to enriching the family. (Sorry, end of metaphors.)
Feinstein merely recognizes this and calls out the dorks who vote for this travesty. The BCS needs to die, and I’m glad he said so. Bring on the playoffs.
January 8th, 2009 at 5:49 pm
87
HudiBlitz says:
@ Distant_Gator, thanks. That’s very interesting to know.
- – - – -
@ Dan and Cleat Meat. “There needs to be a playoff to determine who is the best amongst these teams, not sportswriters, coaches and computers.” The catch is that tournaments don’t determine the best team. They determine a tournament champion, nothing more or less. I have news for you: Villanova was not the best college basketball team in 1985; Georgetown probably was. Arizona was not the best basketball team in 1997; Kansas probably was. And, yes, sometimes the best team does win the tournament. And sometimes there really isn’t a single best team (see Kansas and Memphis last spring).
In general, Americans have been sold a bill of goods that the only way to get closure is with an end-of-season tournament. It has made literally every sport’s regular season unwatchable to me except for college football. The last thing I want to see is a sport where 85% of the programs are reduced to the status of Joe Palooka. It’ll be a sad day when the highlight of a given school’s season is either (a) a close loss that knocked USC or Alabama’s seeding down from # 3 to #5 or (b) a castrated rivalry game like Harvard – Yale. Cheer for a Purdue, an Ole Miss, or a UCLA? Good luck. Rest assured, a tourney would eventually kill off the bowls, and that’s a bad thing for most 1-A programs. Incidentally, I have zero problem with letting the invisible hand kill off bottom-tier bowls. That’s the nature of the bowl system. What I like to see, though, is good teams rewarded for good seasons with a meaningful bowl game.
IMO, a tourney is a good thing for
- the 800-lb gorilla type programs, and there are only a handful of those.
- casual fans who only pay attention to a sport for one week out of the year.
- front-runner fans who cheer for the 800-lb gorilla programs. And, no, not all of those programs’ fans are front runners (see Distant_Gator, who’d probably be, for example, a passionate and knowledgeable Pitt fan if he or she had gone there for school).
- jackasses like Reilly who pay attention to college football for one week out of the year, and then only to bitch about it.
I’d rather see a sport more like college football was pre-BCS and pre-Bowl Alliance. The crazy emphasis on the MNC is actually a pretty new thing and is adding a ton of negativity to the sport..
January 8th, 2009 at 6:39 pm
88
jacobo says:
Talk about an overwritten sports related article…. sheesh. Is that how you win blog awards? Big words for blue collar topics?
Utah is #1, I don’t know who the hell Reilly is to be honest, but I read the article and he’s right. Nor do I hold how much money the guy makes against him, that’s what happens when you get to the top, you make more money. The guy may live like an elitist, but maybe that’s why he doesn’t feel the need to write like one (*cough *cough.)
I can’t believe how seriously you took what he wrote, half that article was just quib, if you analyzed my sarcasm I’d look pretty retarded too (well one of us would.)
Hows that hand me down coach working out for you guys? Too bad he couldn’t pull off with your program what he pulled off with ours in 2004. Maybe he’ll turn tail on you guys like he did to us in the postseason and try to come back now that we are national champions. We won’t want him though.
January 17th, 2009 at 11:40 pm