Friday, October 31, 2008
The Quad Q&A: Tim Tebow
"I like Coach Mullen’s U2 sometimes. That’s his favorite. Don’t even get him started on U2."
Thursday, October 30, 2008
Philosophers call for end to madness, demand their own playoff system to determine whose social order should prevail
Philosophers today called for an end to the madness. After centuries without a playoff system to determine whose universal view should be named the No. 1 universal view in the universe, the few remaining philosophers in the world have asked the BCS to design a computer ranking system so the business of working toward a universal view that can be universally accepted throughout the universe can begin.
The BCS immediately assigned Jeff Sagarin to began working on a plan.
Sagarin said the first order of business would be to determine who would be included in the pre-ranking system.
"There is some who think Zizek has no universal view of his own," Sagarin said. "He uses his notoriety to establish himself as a good guy against society's evils."
An unnamed Bowl Coalition representative said everyone would get a fair chance to be in the playoffs whether they wanted to be or simply refused to acknowledge the accepted thought on being.
"That means you Martin Heidegger," he said.
CBS officials have already rejected the BCS request to televise the playoffs saying they felt PBS would be better suited for the contest.
"Unwatchable," said CBS executive Andrew Heyward referring to the playoffs. "We're not interested in the least bit."
The BCS did get one bit of good news: Bob Costas said he would be interested in announcing the playoffs.
The BCS immediately assigned Jeff Sagarin to began working on a plan.
Sagarin said the first order of business would be to determine who would be included in the pre-ranking system.
"There is some who think Zizek has no universal view of his own," Sagarin said. "He uses his notoriety to establish himself as a good guy against society's evils."
An unnamed Bowl Coalition representative said everyone would get a fair chance to be in the playoffs whether they wanted to be or simply refused to acknowledge the accepted thought on being.
"That means you Martin Heidegger," he said.
CBS officials have already rejected the BCS request to televise the playoffs saying they felt PBS would be better suited for the contest.
"Unwatchable," said CBS executive Andrew Heyward referring to the playoffs. "We're not interested in the least bit."
The BCS did get one bit of good news: Bob Costas said he would be interested in announcing the playoffs.
"I think we are the top two teams in the SEC statistically, which usually means in America. Why? We are balanced."
"Something will happen in that game," Shannon told the South Florida Sun-Sentinel this week. "I can guarantee you that. You better go to that game. You would get a great story. Don't come to ours. I'm serious. Something is going to happen after what happened last year. You can book that."
.........
"You talk to the guys who played here before, and they say they always felt they had the talent to beat Florida, but they felt intimidation and even fear when they played Florida."
Injury Update/Ingram
"INJURY UPDATE: A day after Meyer said freshman cornerback Janoris Jenkins would play against the Bulldogs, Jenkins was held out of practice because of his sore shin. Meyer said he still expects Jenkins to play Saturday.
Meyer said both sophomore running back Emmanuel Moody (ankle) and redshirt senior offensive lineman Jim Tartt (shoulder) practiced Tuesday. Meyer said he expects Moody to play and that Tartt could be available.
Redshirt sophomore offensive lineman Maurice Hurt (shoulder) practiced, but Meyer said he was sore and could play Saturday.
CI SIGHTING: Tight end Cornelius Ingram walked off the practice field Tuesday in a warm-up top, gloves, shorts and cleats. Despite his ACL surgery over the summer, Ingram said he went out to the field to catch a few balls and move around a little bit.
When asked if there was a chance he might play this season, Ingram replied, "I don't know.""
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
The Stomp (Part II)
When the entire Georgia team stormed the field last year to celebrate a first quarter touchdown, they made a statement. If that statement had been written down it would be something like, "I thought they said this was the largest outdoor cock party."
As his team jumped up and down, Mark Richt clapped and smiled. He may as well have been smiling at Tommy DeVito. As Meyer and Richt shook hands after the game, Meyer reportedly said, "I make you laugh, I'm here to fuckin' amuse you?"
Florida is loaded. They are coming off two huge wins; they have scored 135 points in the last 9 quarters, and now they're pissed. The players and staff have been hush mouthed about last year's game, but if you think Florida has forgotten, tune in Saturday and you will officially be welcomed to college football. They haven't forgotten.
At first I was confused why last year's celebration was named, "The Florida Stomp"- it was Georgia stomping, not Florida. But now it's obvious. It's because they needed, "The Georgia Stomp" to be available for this year's game. Because this year Georgia is going to be: crushed, manhandled, pelted, blown out, dominated, destroyed, annihilated, killed, devastated, laid to waste, demolished, smashed, obliterated... stomped!
UF- 52
GA- 20
As his team jumped up and down, Mark Richt clapped and smiled. He may as well have been smiling at Tommy DeVito. As Meyer and Richt shook hands after the game, Meyer reportedly said, "I make you laugh, I'm here to fuckin' amuse you?"
Florida is loaded. They are coming off two huge wins; they have scored 135 points in the last 9 quarters, and now they're pissed. The players and staff have been hush mouthed about last year's game, but if you think Florida has forgotten, tune in Saturday and you will officially be welcomed to college football. They haven't forgotten.
At first I was confused why last year's celebration was named, "The Florida Stomp"- it was Georgia stomping, not Florida. But now it's obvious. It's because they needed, "The Georgia Stomp" to be available for this year's game. Because this year Georgia is going to be: crushed, manhandled, pelted, blown out, dominated, destroyed, annihilated, killed, devastated, laid to waste, demolished, smashed, obliterated... stomped!
UF- 52
GA- 20
Monday, October 27, 2008
The Lacanian Real and Polls
I want to defend the wacky computer polls while still arguing that playoffs are the answer to buffer the wackiness.
If you canceled out team and conference reputations and style points, which the computers are supposed to do, mostly, then I don't think the outlier polls are that weird. That means forgetting what Tebow and Harvin are "supposed" to do (which means forgetting about Tebow's Heisman), forgetting that we know the SEC is the best conference, forget about our rivalries with Miami, Tenn, and LSU, forgetting about Demps' highschool 100 time, forgetting about how we won the game against Kentucky, in all its facets, forgetting about expectations, and budgets, and crowds, and SEC and National Titles... If we could do this, momentarily as a thought experiment, then I could understand if 2 of the 6 computer polls have Florida below some 0 and 1 loss teams, as well as having us below OSU, a team that has played a tougher schedule than us so far, but will drop below us the moment we beat Georgia.
In fact, this discrepancy validates the computer polls. If things were transparent, consistent, and thoroughly rational and comprehensible through some easily discernable standard, there would be no need for computer polls (and there may not be any need for them, but cutting out some of the polls, or reducing the polls to humans, will not achieve any more of the objective standard we hope for--except for cutting out the coaches poll, which is corrupted in its own standards, but that's another story).
"The real emerges as that which is outside language: 'it is that which resists symbol-ization absolutely.' The real is impossible because it is impossible to imagine, impossible to integrate into the symbolic order. This character of impossibility and resistance to symbolization lends the real its traumatic quality."
This part of the post probably belongs here, but I would like to relate our recent computer poll observations to the Lacanian Real. The above quoted piece gives us a start to a very difficult and mysterious topic. I will add that although the Real (part of Jacques Lacan's [pictured above] triad of the Imaginary, Symbolic and Real) is impossible to represent, its very impossibility can creep into our symbolic and imaginary worlds (which represent those parts that are representable, including all cultural and linguistic fields and any of our knowledge fields). So we can best look for the Real, not "as such," but in the way we encircle it and encounter it indirectly-- it might help to think of a vase and its center when thinking of our encounter with the Real, with the molding of the sides of the vase being the encounter which causes the Real of its empty inside to emerge, or be seen (the encounter with the Real is a kind of positive representation of a lack that is impossible to fullfill...the lack is never fixed in a singularly identifiable way and so it has no center which would allow us to "contain" it and domesticate it--meaning, we are not just talking about two views of the same event whereby we simply take the balance of the 2.... this also relates to the way that art, in its freedom to avoid "normal" logic, can sometimes best represent the [Real] impossibility itself, as opposed to a systematic and empirical attempt at some direct representation of some fully constituted and enclosed mythical reality/being).
There are at least two ways (ways that I am partly basing on the recent work of Slavoj Zizek, pictured left, below, and at top) we encounter the Real in computer polling in football. And these encounters represent the impossibility of representing college football teams in a transparently knowable and fair way in a list of best-to-worst through any kind of polling--in other words, no amount of "reasonableness" will save us here.
One such way is in our using of algebraic formula's which are grounded in certain scientific and mathematic principles (or any consistent standard like a computer poll), we encounter the Real in the very incommensurability that emerges between the knowledge produced by such equations and the sensory meaning that we attain from our experience with the same phenomenon being translated by the formulae. Even the empirical qualities of whatever is being studied or understood are not shared between our subjective observation and the quantities and laws that are supposed to be based upon empirically known qualities--in other words, the mathematic/scientific formula is not simply "more empirical," and, likewise, they are not "less empirical."
For example, no matter what the observation and testing of one's brain could reveal, it would always remain incommensurable with what the "experience" produced by one's brain reveals. We might also think of the difference between the outside dimensions of a building and the way we sense the size of that building from the inside. The difference here is not one that can simply be averaged out into a sensible compromise... there is no middle ground- and yet, one cannot be absolutely prioritized over the other as being more "true" or ultimately revealing.
A simpler way of articulating this, for our purposes, is to say that no amount of computer poll tinkering will ever eliminate the Real that disrupts our experience of watching teams play from our mathematical ranking of those same teams. Likewise, no amount of observing teams and their games will ever close the gap that emerges the moment we systematically rank such teams (notice that I am arguing that any kind of ranking is enough to encounter this Real of incommensurability, not just computer ranking, because a ranking is already a minimal amount of a mathematic translation, by the way, here are some examples of Lacanian formulas, mathemes, that are attempts to forge this gap that reveals the Real, in the field of "sexuation").
What's my solution to this? Defer this Real (tragic) emergence by letting it flourish in the Real of actual games and in the tragedy of drawing a line (and thereby deciding), between the 5th and 6th best at-large teams (as opposed to being between the 2nd and 3rd ranked teams overall). Obviously, I'm talking about a playoff. But I need to clarify the other kind of emergence/encounter with the Real I hinted at, and it relates to my above comment about the "Real of actual games."
A quick example may help. We can relate the three Lacanian registers, the Imaginary, Symbolic, and Real, in a very crude way, to a game of chess. The characters on the board, who they represent to us-a queen, bishop, pawn, etc, is an imaginary function. The rules that govern their interaction and movements on the board is the symbolic function. But the impossibility of ever knowing ahead of time how these characters will play out within any particular game is the function of the Real.
You might notice how the Real is not its own substance that can be represented, but can only be represented by the impossibility, or lack, that it introduces, or rather, reveals, in our knowledge. It is encountered retroactively, you might say, because even pre-symbolic, and pre-imaginary "fullness" or "wholeness" is only possible to think of after the emergence of the imaginary and symbolic order. The lack, or impossibility was always there, so our attempts to cover over such impediments only produce new encounters with the Real--this constitutive lack is actually productive, making all of our subsequent efforts to account for it or fill it, possible, i.e, giving us more polls because of the immcomensurability of polls, rankings and the actual games and teams.
And so, in elections (according to Zizek) and in football games, we see a kind of suspension of reality that is the emergence of the Real. No matter how much polling is done before an election, there is an extra, almost mystical quality that gets introduced with the election itself that no poll could account for--we tend to call it, "the will of the people (has spoken)." But before that "will" speaks, we are talking about a collection of individual votes that have no guarantee in contributing to a social makeup--- our social reality, our society, is actually suspended momentarily by this anxious unknown of outcomes. To release our anxiety over encountering this Real, we quickly narrativize the election and what it means, even though no such meaning is guaranteed, known, or understood during an election. To relate this point to sports, think of how a 1-point loss or win is analyzed. You would think 49% of the analysis should talk about the failures of the winning team (assuming the analysis is worth anything and isn't just reiterating who won the game), but this is never the case, right?
By the way, Phillies fans are currently experiencing that anxiety of the Real right now as they observe their favored status being up 3-1 in the World Series. Hopefully, this feeling is stronger than the anxiety that Longoria and Pena are experiencing as they wonder how their bats could (irrationally and unknowingly) be so cold, bringing the series back to the Trop, where the Real the blocks and disrupts is in the form of catwalks.
So I want the Real to be reserved as much as possible to the actual games. In playoffs, we don't have to kid ourselves in believing that the winner is obviously the best team, we can just call them champions and celebrate that fact. The games themselves may turn out quite differently than our expectations, which is better than letting computers give us an outcome that is radically different than what we expect.
We can better get over the tragedy of the Real by relegating the decisive playoff factors to the playing out of conference championships because it has a seemingly more objective standard than even computers can produce (even if the objectivity is illusory, like the polls). Florida not playing Auburn or Alabama this year in their pursuit of an SEC championship in the regular season does not seem as bad as a Tulsa not playing any SEC teams and getting a higher ranking than Florida... and conference championships also relieve our anxiety in similar ways--- Georgia can live with Florida not playing Alabama better if they know Fla will have to beat Bama in a championship game to win the SEC. And the fact that Florida and a 12-0 Tulsa can both make the playoffs (in the 11/5 playoff format) may further put off our anxiety and allow us to experience it in the Real of the games themselves-- instead of the Real being encountered in its most horrific ways in every poll, every week.
Of course, the "5" of the 11/5 format (11 conference champions, 5 at-large teams), still allows for the Real to creep in at every moment of the season. But this "5," is less horrifying than encountering the Real of having the same amount of SEC teams make the playoffs as the Mid-American Conference. The point of the Real in these circumstances is that the Real always returns to its place, inherent to all of our formulas and meanings is the Real of some lack, non-closure. So to attempt to eradicate it (the remainder that is the Real), by say, a vote by everyone in the country on the top 2 teams, or a computer that measured every muscle movement on every play to gauge who is best, would amount to the most terifying, totalitarian, scenario one could imagine.
A few more crude summaries of things mentioned in this post are here:
http://www.lacan.com/zizekchro1.htm
And an entire book on some of these topics, online, relating to movies, mostly (chapter titles at top):
http://www.lacan.com/zizhowto.html
More on such things will likely be posted, in the future, at http://www.michaelarnoldart.com/blog/
Odds & Ends
Tartt is expected to play Sat, and Doe may "compete" for the chance to get some play.
I see replay in baseball getting expanded, at least for postseason, beyond its current function... sooner rather than later.
I've been saying there is no obvious advantage for either team in this year's florida v georgia game, but I think Florida, with last week off before Kentucky, may be a little better rested, and may be a little more confident, and hopefully capable, on defense at this point. I do think Georgia has been better tested, playing at LSU, and playing Alabama, and played a generally more difficult schedule and has been away from home in many of those games. Our offenses look equal at this point, while we have an edge on special teams. We are probably better off in this game because of our loss to Ole Miss-- I'm sure they would say the same about their game with 'Bama.
This is from Meyer's biography, released over the summer, regarding the post-TD dance by Ga last year:
Here's another juicy detail from the column, with a little qualifying needle tacked on by Schlabach:
I see replay in baseball getting expanded, at least for postseason, beyond its current function... sooner rather than later.
I've been saying there is no obvious advantage for either team in this year's florida v georgia game, but I think Florida, with last week off before Kentucky, may be a little better rested, and may be a little more confident, and hopefully capable, on defense at this point. I do think Georgia has been better tested, playing at LSU, and playing Alabama, and played a generally more difficult schedule and has been away from home in many of those games. Our offenses look equal at this point, while we have an edge on special teams. We are probably better off in this game because of our loss to Ole Miss-- I'm sure they would say the same about their game with 'Bama.
This is from Meyer's biography, released over the summer, regarding the post-TD dance by Ga last year:
The full column with the previous bit is here, and this is the book by said columnist.
"That wasn't right," Meyer said in "Urban's Way," which was written with sportswriter Buddy Martin. "It was a bad deal. It will forever be in the mind of Urban Meyer and in the mind of our football team. We'll handle it and it's going to be a big deal."
Here's another juicy detail from the column, with a little qualifying needle tacked on by Schlabach:
And don't be surprised if the Bulldogs have something else up their sleeves for the Gators.
"The seniors came up with something new -- something we've never done before," Gamble said, while declining to provide specifics to reporters.
Actually beating the Gators two years in a row -- a feat the Bulldogs haven't accomplished since 1988-89 -- would certainly seem unique.
BCS bullshit
The latest BCS poll has Florida moving up two spots to No. 8. As I was looking at the numbers, I noticed a discrepancy in how the final two computer polls ranked us. Jeff Sagarin and Peter Wolfe's polls had us ranked between 14 and 16, while the other four computer models ranked us between 6 and 9. It seems to me JS and PW are way off and do not hold any credibility. PW has us ranked behind two teams with two losses: Ohio State and Missouri and one spot ahead of a mediocre two-loss ACC team, North Carolina. They also have us behind, Minnesota, TCU, Tulsa, Utah, Boise State and Ball State. Come on! How can we take a poll that is obviously so out whack with the other polls seriously?
JS's poll is not much better, but at least it has us ahead of Minnesota and Tulsa. Even JS and PW, though can't agree on Tulsa. PW has them at 14 and JS has them at 23. If those two computer polls were more in line with the rest, we would be up to No. 6 in the BCS. Fortunately, we will be able to work our way up the list on the field with wins over No. 6 Georgia and No. 2 Alabama, but it doesn't belie the point that the BCS rankings are a muddled mess-and this is the group we want to pick the two best teams to play for the national title? Look for yourself at the computer models and specifically check out the discrepancies across the board on LSU, North Carolina, BYU, Oregon and Tulsa. At least one poll is so far out of whack with the others that you would have to go to a system where you throw out the highest and lowest score and average the remaining four to get a more realistic view.
JS's poll is not much better, but at least it has us ahead of Minnesota and Tulsa. Even JS and PW, though can't agree on Tulsa. PW has them at 14 and JS has them at 23. If those two computer polls were more in line with the rest, we would be up to No. 6 in the BCS. Fortunately, we will be able to work our way up the list on the field with wins over No. 6 Georgia and No. 2 Alabama, but it doesn't belie the point that the BCS rankings are a muddled mess-and this is the group we want to pick the two best teams to play for the national title? Look for yourself at the computer models and specifically check out the discrepancies across the board on LSU, North Carolina, BYU, Oregon and Tulsa. At least one poll is so far out of whack with the others that you would have to go to a system where you throw out the highest and lowest score and average the remaining four to get a more realistic view.
Sunday, October 26, 2008
Weapons, weapons everywhere
It seems the coaching staff has finally gotten a handle on spreading the ball around to the multiple weapons they have at their disposal. I've gotten to the point where every time I see the ball in Demps, Rainey, Harvin or James' hands, I think "gone."
In fact when Tebow dumped the ball to Demps over the middle on that little crossing route, I said "touchdown" as soon as he caught it. You get any of those guys the ball in some space and they are going to make something good out of it.
I keep hearing the talking heads on TV talk about Tebow having an off year following his Heismann, and wondering if he'll come around. I say "no thank you." We are better off when Tebow is giving the ball to one of the many speedsters he has at his disposal.
Now on to Georgia. I think we have the momentum and the talent to beat Georgia handily. My greatest concern with this team is a slip-up, like the one against Ole Miss, to a lesser opponent. But with all the young and hungry talent we have, if Tebow, or Mullen, calls their number, they will produce points. I just don't want to see us go into a shell with Tebow doing his three-yards-and-a-cloud-of-dust routine when things get tough.
Saturday, October 25, 2008
Early games-slow starts
Sun Sports Writer Robbie Andreu makes the claim in this week's column that the Gators are prone to slow starts when they have the early game. Andreu's scientific analysis will make empirical purists cringe. He bases his assumptions on a handful of contests over the last three years without doing any study of other start times to see if the percentage of slow starts for early games is an anomaly or if it is closely related to other slow starts.
This year we have had three early starts: Hawaii, Ole Miss and Arkansas. We led 28-0, 17-7 and 14-0 at the end of the first half in those three games. We've had two 8 p.m. starts: Miami and LSU. In those two games we led 9-3 and 20-7 at the half. In our 3:30 start, we led Tennessee, 20-0 at the half.
If you combine the three early game starts and compare them to the three later starts the scores are 49-7 (early games) and 49-10 (later games)--no statistical difference.
I submit rather that the games we have performed poorly in are the games when we have a bad third or fourth quarter and instead of Meyer changing the pre-game ritual for early games like Andreu's story said, he should think about changing the half-time ritual.
Evidence?
We have given up 7 first quarter and 10 second quarter points all season. Sounds like we have hardly had a poor first half in any of our games. Conversely, we have given up 31 third quarter and 30 fourth quarter points. We've scored more points in the second half compared to the first half: 123 to 98, but we've also given up nearly 3 1/2 times as many points 61 to 17.
I rest my case.
This year we have had three early starts: Hawaii, Ole Miss and Arkansas. We led 28-0, 17-7 and 14-0 at the end of the first half in those three games. We've had two 8 p.m. starts: Miami and LSU. In those two games we led 9-3 and 20-7 at the half. In our 3:30 start, we led Tennessee, 20-0 at the half.
If you combine the three early game starts and compare them to the three later starts the scores are 49-7 (early games) and 49-10 (later games)--no statistical difference.
I submit rather that the games we have performed poorly in are the games when we have a bad third or fourth quarter and instead of Meyer changing the pre-game ritual for early games like Andreu's story said, he should think about changing the half-time ritual.
Evidence?
We have given up 7 first quarter and 10 second quarter points all season. Sounds like we have hardly had a poor first half in any of our games. Conversely, we have given up 31 third quarter and 30 fourth quarter points. We've scored more points in the second half compared to the first half: 123 to 98, but we've also given up nearly 3 1/2 times as many points 61 to 17.
I rest my case.
Thursday, October 23, 2008
Tartt out for Kentucky game
Tartt will miss is third straight game this week. Click on the headline to read about the rest of the injuries. Moody's still sore, but could play.
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
A Bit of an Application of the Playoff Concept
First, some quick points--the automatic bid framework would be unbiased against when a team loses in the season (polls reward early losses over late), and unbiased against a team's preseason ranking, which is based on things like knowledge of recruiting and returning players, last year's performance, schedule, reputation, injuries, etc. "Style points" would also mean less, overall. Each team begins the year with the goal of winning their conference--so the 11/5 formula makes that goal fit the playoff scheme in an uncomplicated way. The at-large component, however, could reward teams that do have late surges and improve, like Georgia last year (a team that would have gotten in under the 11 conf/5 BCS picks formula instead of an obviously inferior Tennessee, because of the room for at-large picks).
Okay, I don't feel like going back and checking on who won all the individual conferences over the last few years, but I thought I'd add a list of teams that would have been eligible as at-large teams over the last 3 years, along with some general observations, just to get a sense of what kind of teams would have been in a 16-team playoff with 5 at-larges and 11 conference champions, and which would have been out. I am basing my results on the final BCS poll of the year (which is the December edition, after the conference championship games). The sites are linked on the listed years (they are pdf files). The entire list is linked on the post title. The number in front of the teams (below) is their ranking.
(These are teams that would make the playoff, along with all conference champions, in the formula I support. The point is not that these teams would get in only under this formula, but that this formula makes room for these teams even with it giving a shot to all conference champs.)
2007: 5)georgia, 6)missouri 8)kansas 11)arizona st. 12)florida. (this means 3 SECs get in, including the Gators, Hawaii gets in without any wondering about how they are ranked--and if Boise St had beaten them, Boise would have gotten in instead, without hoping for a top 12 ranking, and conference champs BYU would get in. BYU was ranked 17, so they would have been bumped out by a strictly BCS top 16 playoff. That same BCS top 16 formula would have let in 3 ACC teams, including 3-loss Boston College and 3-loss Clemson, as well as a 4-loss Tenn. Oh, and it looks like the seeding would of had Florida playing at Georgia in the first round (in the 11/5 system). Nice!)
2006: 3)Michigan 4)LSU 7)Wisconsin 9)Auburn 11)Notre Dame (Again, 3 SECs, and this was the year of Boise St, so we could have seen how that whole thing would have unfolded)
2005: 4) Ohio St (OSU and Penn St were co-Champs of the Big 10, Penn St was ranked 3, OSU was 4, so OSU would have taken an at-large spot) 5)Oregon 6)Notre Dame 8)Miami 9)Auburn (10th ranked Virginia Tech is the first team in this list to be ranked in the top 10 and not get into this system I support--but, they lost the ACC title game to Boston College, ranked 21. The ACC would have still had 2 teams in the playoffs, then, and V Tech was bumped out in a conference playoff game by the team that replaced them in the national playoffs) Florida was ranked 17, and would have missed the playoffs under this system. LSU and Alabama were 12 and 13, respectively, and would have missed as well. But the SEC would still have Georgia and Auburn in the playoffs, in a year when the SEC had less dominant teams).
Also, in 2004, both undefeated Auburn and undefeated Utah are in, as well as 3 total SEC teams (which would all be true with virtually any 16 team playoff applied to that year).
Okay, I don't feel like going back and checking on who won all the individual conferences over the last few years, but I thought I'd add a list of teams that would have been eligible as at-large teams over the last 3 years, along with some general observations, just to get a sense of what kind of teams would have been in a 16-team playoff with 5 at-larges and 11 conference champions, and which would have been out. I am basing my results on the final BCS poll of the year (which is the December edition, after the conference championship games). The sites are linked on the listed years (they are pdf files). The entire list is linked on the post title. The number in front of the teams (below) is their ranking.
(These are teams that would make the playoff, along with all conference champions, in the formula I support. The point is not that these teams would get in only under this formula, but that this formula makes room for these teams even with it giving a shot to all conference champs.)
2007: 5)georgia, 6)missouri 8)kansas 11)arizona st. 12)florida. (this means 3 SECs get in, including the Gators, Hawaii gets in without any wondering about how they are ranked--and if Boise St had beaten them, Boise would have gotten in instead, without hoping for a top 12 ranking, and conference champs BYU would get in. BYU was ranked 17, so they would have been bumped out by a strictly BCS top 16 playoff. That same BCS top 16 formula would have let in 3 ACC teams, including 3-loss Boston College and 3-loss Clemson, as well as a 4-loss Tenn. Oh, and it looks like the seeding would of had Florida playing at Georgia in the first round (in the 11/5 system). Nice!)
2006: 3)Michigan 4)LSU 7)Wisconsin 9)Auburn 11)Notre Dame (Again, 3 SECs, and this was the year of Boise St, so we could have seen how that whole thing would have unfolded)
2005: 4) Ohio St (OSU and Penn St were co-Champs of the Big 10, Penn St was ranked 3, OSU was 4, so OSU would have taken an at-large spot) 5)Oregon 6)Notre Dame 8)Miami 9)Auburn (10th ranked Virginia Tech is the first team in this list to be ranked in the top 10 and not get into this system I support--but, they lost the ACC title game to Boston College, ranked 21. The ACC would have still had 2 teams in the playoffs, then, and V Tech was bumped out in a conference playoff game by the team that replaced them in the national playoffs) Florida was ranked 17, and would have missed the playoffs under this system. LSU and Alabama were 12 and 13, respectively, and would have missed as well. But the SEC would still have Georgia and Auburn in the playoffs, in a year when the SEC had less dominant teams).
Also, in 2004, both undefeated Auburn and undefeated Utah are in, as well as 3 total SEC teams (which would all be true with virtually any 16 team playoff applied to that year).
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
When Moody comes back
When Moody comes back, I think he deserves his carries but not at the expense of Rainey and Demps. There are plenty of carries for Moody, Demps and Rainey. Tebow is the one who needs to give up his carries. He has carried three times as much as Demps or Harvin and almost twice as much as Rainey. He's averaging 2.5 yards per carry because people expect him to carry 12-15 times a game. If he carries 2-5 times a game, Moody can get 10 carries and defenses will be more surprised when Tebow carries. Plus they will have to game plan for a tough, tackle-breaking bronco like Moody, two small, speedy backs who hide behind the line and are gone in a flash and a bruising fullback-quarterback who will gash you if you aren't looking for it.
Monday, October 20, 2008
All Work and No Playoff
"Trouble is, once we get 'Plus One' format the college football brain trusts won’t stop until they’ve got 16, then 32, then 64."
That's a quote by Buddy Martin in the article cited in the post below. In philosophy, or logic, he is guilty of either this or this, I always have trouble interpreting which applies, maybe it's easier to just say, "slippery slop fallacy." However, I want to embrace the "absurdum" of it, in other words, 16, 32... yes, please!
Plenty more to dislike about Martin's piece. He mentions the old, "regular season won't count as much" argument. This argument is also guilty of being a phallic, uhh, I mean, a fallacy. I don't have any latin phrases to describe why it's fallacy, though. But I will say that 1) it's not true...why? look at MLB. Years ago, one could, and many probably did, argue against a wild card in MLB because it makes the season less meaningful, or interesting, or intense, etc, because it takes away the excitement and meaningfulness of a divisional race. Well? What Happened? It added the excitement of a Wild Card race, which is better than a divisional race because it includes more teams from more than 1 division and it brings more hope and excitement for more teams and fans by extending the season for otherwise earlier eliminated teams, and it still left intact the excitement of divisional races in general.
Furthermore, it didn't end the regular season intensity of divisional fights and rivalries, it simply extended them into postseason. Remember those Yankee-Red Sox postseason moments of the last decade? Not possible without a wildcard (and yes, there was still plenty of coverage and talk about the regular season series' between the 2). How about last night's Red Sox-Rays game? Not possible without a wild card. How about many of the recent World Series Champions? Frequently wild card teams. 2) Isn't this argument kind of like someone saying "no dessert for you" so that you will treat your meal as meal and dessert? I mean, you still want that meal. You need it. But it's just so patronizing, or presumptuous, for someone to tell you that you would stop enjoying that meal if you got cheese cake after it.
Would Martin, or any of his ilk, agree to take away NFL playoffs and just have an ESPN power ranking select the Super Bowl teams? It sure would make that regular season mean more, wouldn't it? Not really. Last year would have been Dallas v New England. And we would have known it was NE about halfway through the season. And the real Super Bowl Champs wouldn't have even got a ticket to play-- in fact, they (the Giants) would have been eliminated about 3 quarters of the way through the season.
Let's think about a rivalry we love, Florida-Georgia, in the context of a playoff. The type of playoff I support, linked below and in post title (11 conference champs, 5 at-large teams chosing with rankings, bowls still contribute by hosting late rounds, 8 high seeds get home field in first round, losers in the first round and every other team not in playoff could still be eligible for a bowl), would allow a possible Florida-Georgia matchup in the playoffs. So, either the Fl-Ga game will possibly knock 1 of the 2 out of being eligible for the playoffs, since you would need either a conference championship or top 10 or 15 ranking, to make the playoffs. This would increase the rivalry..... INCREASE IT! Not take from it. Or.... Fla and Ga would still both make the playoffs and thereby possibly meet one another in the playoffs or title game. Are you kidding me!?!? How nice would that be? Remember, this happened twice in the 1990s between Fl and FSU, once in the title game and once after the tie. Did those postseason matchups take away from the regular season rivalry? Of course not. Oh yeah, if this hasn't been enough, there would also be a possibility of Ga and Fla playing at each other's home stadium in the first round.
So, the format I would support (details of what bowl hosts what could vary, as well as how the 16 are chosen), would still have bowls, polls, money, meaningful conference championships, rare matchups between classic or competitive teams, with more mixture for teams playing in unfamiliar stadium, and, of course, rivalries would remain. No team would play over 16 teams, and that would only be an elite few playing that many. And, as the post below notes, people don't seems to complain about the plight of student athletes in every other division of playoff, and every other sport, including March Madness.
One (or 3) more point(s), for now: We have a playoff. It's just for 2 teams, or for teams that have a conference championship. If you took away championships and postseason play, you would take away some of the enthusiasm over the regular season. So what happens when you add to the postseason?
We just want a more fair, inclusive, and rigorous (and entertaining) system. The one I support (again, below), would allow smaller conference champions, which would create, I argue, even more parity in the long run, and set out a path that could be attained by every team in the country regardless of schedule strength and conference exposure, etc. It would also have some space for the 2nd and 3rd best SEC teams, or Big 12 teams, for instance. And the ranking would have allowed, for example, an obviously better Ga team to be selected over Tenn last year, even though Tenn won the East.
I'd like to address everything that is wrong with Martin's "80%" comment... but... maybe next time. (A hint: It's something like saying "a little bit of corruption demands us to conform to total corruption.".... also, his number is wrong. It's not that obvious 80% of the time. Moreover, you can't know how things would develop differently under a playoff scenario-- for example, if Ohio State had played Michigan or USC in 2006, Martin would have to say that the system got it right, because if Ohio St won, it would have seemed obvious they were best, and if a USC or Mich won, much like Fla did, they would have been declared the right and deserving BCS pick. A playoff creates more different kinds of matchups that will reveal varying strengths and weaknesses against different types of teams.... more of a decathlon type obstacle to complete.)
http://whitwatson.sunsportstv.com/2006/08/best-of-both-worlds.html
That's a quote by Buddy Martin in the article cited in the post below. In philosophy, or logic, he is guilty of either this or this, I always have trouble interpreting which applies, maybe it's easier to just say, "slippery slop fallacy." However, I want to embrace the "absurdum" of it, in other words, 16, 32... yes, please!
Plenty more to dislike about Martin's piece. He mentions the old, "regular season won't count as much" argument. This argument is also guilty of being a phallic, uhh, I mean, a fallacy. I don't have any latin phrases to describe why it's fallacy, though. But I will say that 1) it's not true...why? look at MLB. Years ago, one could, and many probably did, argue against a wild card in MLB because it makes the season less meaningful, or interesting, or intense, etc, because it takes away the excitement and meaningfulness of a divisional race. Well? What Happened? It added the excitement of a Wild Card race, which is better than a divisional race because it includes more teams from more than 1 division and it brings more hope and excitement for more teams and fans by extending the season for otherwise earlier eliminated teams, and it still left intact the excitement of divisional races in general.
Furthermore, it didn't end the regular season intensity of divisional fights and rivalries, it simply extended them into postseason. Remember those Yankee-Red Sox postseason moments of the last decade? Not possible without a wildcard (and yes, there was still plenty of coverage and talk about the regular season series' between the 2). How about last night's Red Sox-Rays game? Not possible without a wild card. How about many of the recent World Series Champions? Frequently wild card teams. 2) Isn't this argument kind of like someone saying "no dessert for you" so that you will treat your meal as meal and dessert? I mean, you still want that meal. You need it. But it's just so patronizing, or presumptuous, for someone to tell you that you would stop enjoying that meal if you got cheese cake after it.
Would Martin, or any of his ilk, agree to take away NFL playoffs and just have an ESPN power ranking select the Super Bowl teams? It sure would make that regular season mean more, wouldn't it? Not really. Last year would have been Dallas v New England. And we would have known it was NE about halfway through the season. And the real Super Bowl Champs wouldn't have even got a ticket to play-- in fact, they (the Giants) would have been eliminated about 3 quarters of the way through the season.
Let's think about a rivalry we love, Florida-Georgia, in the context of a playoff. The type of playoff I support, linked below and in post title (11 conference champs, 5 at-large teams chosing with rankings, bowls still contribute by hosting late rounds, 8 high seeds get home field in first round, losers in the first round and every other team not in playoff could still be eligible for a bowl), would allow a possible Florida-Georgia matchup in the playoffs. So, either the Fl-Ga game will possibly knock 1 of the 2 out of being eligible for the playoffs, since you would need either a conference championship or top 10 or 15 ranking, to make the playoffs. This would increase the rivalry..... INCREASE IT! Not take from it. Or.... Fla and Ga would still both make the playoffs and thereby possibly meet one another in the playoffs or title game. Are you kidding me!?!? How nice would that be? Remember, this happened twice in the 1990s between Fl and FSU, once in the title game and once after the tie. Did those postseason matchups take away from the regular season rivalry? Of course not. Oh yeah, if this hasn't been enough, there would also be a possibility of Ga and Fla playing at each other's home stadium in the first round.
So, the format I would support (details of what bowl hosts what could vary, as well as how the 16 are chosen), would still have bowls, polls, money, meaningful conference championships, rare matchups between classic or competitive teams, with more mixture for teams playing in unfamiliar stadium, and, of course, rivalries would remain. No team would play over 16 teams, and that would only be an elite few playing that many. And, as the post below notes, people don't seems to complain about the plight of student athletes in every other division of playoff, and every other sport, including March Madness.
One (or 3) more point(s), for now: We have a playoff. It's just for 2 teams, or for teams that have a conference championship. If you took away championships and postseason play, you would take away some of the enthusiasm over the regular season. So what happens when you add to the postseason?
We just want a more fair, inclusive, and rigorous (and entertaining) system. The one I support (again, below), would allow smaller conference champions, which would create, I argue, even more parity in the long run, and set out a path that could be attained by every team in the country regardless of schedule strength and conference exposure, etc. It would also have some space for the 2nd and 3rd best SEC teams, or Big 12 teams, for instance. And the ranking would have allowed, for example, an obviously better Ga team to be selected over Tenn last year, even though Tenn won the East.
I'd like to address everything that is wrong with Martin's "80%" comment... but... maybe next time. (A hint: It's something like saying "a little bit of corruption demands us to conform to total corruption.".... also, his number is wrong. It's not that obvious 80% of the time. Moreover, you can't know how things would develop differently under a playoff scenario-- for example, if Ohio State had played Michigan or USC in 2006, Martin would have to say that the system got it right, because if Ohio St won, it would have seemed obvious they were best, and if a USC or Mich won, much like Fla did, they would have been declared the right and deserving BCS pick. A playoff creates more different kinds of matchups that will reveal varying strengths and weaknesses against different types of teams.... more of a decathlon type obstacle to complete.)
http://whitwatson.sunsportstv.com/2006/08/best-of-both-worlds.html
Playoffs, schmayoffs
Anybody read Buddy Martin's column on why the BCS system works just fine? If not, click on the headline of this story to view.
On Sunday, the wise and venerable BCS folks released their newest rankings, and Florida is 10th. If the BCS folks goal is to create dialog much like an editorial writer pens poisonous columns to instigate readers, then they have been successful.
On the other hand, our eloquent current president put it best when he said "what we have here is failure to confregate."
Aside from "W's" botched attempt to quote Strother Martin, there is a nugget of truth to what he is saying.
"Huh," you say.
"Exactly," I say.
In what world is the BCS a good system? Those who argue there is no better system, are being disingenuous. Of course there is! A playoff!
Those who argue that any other system would violate the integrity of the current system cannot believe we would accept that garbage as a valid argument. The current system has no integrity. If we are to believe the goal is to crown the top college football team in the U.S., then how does the current system pass the integrity question?
Playoffs--that's how.
I'll leave it to those who have presented viable playoff plans to present their ideas in the blogs to come and maybe, somewhere down the line, the "integrified" gentlemen from the BCS will be paid enough to change their votes.
On Sunday, the wise and venerable BCS folks released their newest rankings, and Florida is 10th. If the BCS folks goal is to create dialog much like an editorial writer pens poisonous columns to instigate readers, then they have been successful.
On the other hand, our eloquent current president put it best when he said "what we have here is failure to confregate."
Aside from "W's" botched attempt to quote Strother Martin, there is a nugget of truth to what he is saying.
"Huh," you say.
"Exactly," I say.
In what world is the BCS a good system? Those who argue there is no better system, are being disingenuous. Of course there is! A playoff!
Those who argue that any other system would violate the integrity of the current system cannot believe we would accept that garbage as a valid argument. The current system has no integrity. If we are to believe the goal is to crown the top college football team in the U.S., then how does the current system pass the integrity question?
Playoffs--that's how.
I'll leave it to those who have presented viable playoff plans to present their ideas in the blogs to come and maybe, somewhere down the line, the "integrified" gentlemen from the BCS will be paid enough to change their votes.
Just take it two games at a time
For most fans, a win is a win. And for most teams, they'll take it anyway they can get it. Not for me. Not this week.
I know, after Ole Miss we shouldn't take any team for granted. But I'm not a player or a coach... and as a fan, I think I should expect a big win over Kentucky. By definition, when your team is on top of the SEC, you expect big wins over Kentucky. And I don't just want it to get ugly, I want it to get ugly quick. Because it's not only about expectations, it's about Georgia.
The quicker Florida puts Kentucky away, the quicker players like Tebow, Harvin, and Spikes can sit safely on the sidelines. Last year Tebow hurt his shoulder against Kentucky and it may have cost us the Georgia game. So this week should not just be about winning, but staying healthy as well. And what's the best formula for staying healthy? Blowout!
Key Player:
Kentucky is going to have a hard time moving the ball or stopping the Gators Saturday, but the one player who could let them linger longer than necessary is Caleb Sturgis. Kentucky comes in with the 4th best kickoff return average in the nation. Florida's return team has been good, but not great, and when they struggle it's almost always due to a poor kickoff. If Sturgis has a good day, expect another clinic by the Gators.
UF- 45
UK- 10
Injuries- 0
I know, after Ole Miss we shouldn't take any team for granted. But I'm not a player or a coach... and as a fan, I think I should expect a big win over Kentucky. By definition, when your team is on top of the SEC, you expect big wins over Kentucky. And I don't just want it to get ugly, I want it to get ugly quick. Because it's not only about expectations, it's about Georgia.
The quicker Florida puts Kentucky away, the quicker players like Tebow, Harvin, and Spikes can sit safely on the sidelines. Last year Tebow hurt his shoulder against Kentucky and it may have cost us the Georgia game. So this week should not just be about winning, but staying healthy as well. And what's the best formula for staying healthy? Blowout!
Key Player:
Kentucky is going to have a hard time moving the ball or stopping the Gators Saturday, but the one player who could let them linger longer than necessary is Caleb Sturgis. Kentucky comes in with the 4th best kickoff return average in the nation. Florida's return team has been good, but not great, and when they struggle it's almost always due to a poor kickoff. If Sturgis has a good day, expect another clinic by the Gators.
UF- 45
UK- 10
Injuries- 0
Sunday, October 19, 2008
Joe Plumbing the Depths (of History)
Upon being asked recently a topical question about contemporary politics and the electoral college, JoPa strangely complained about having his vote for Cleveland undermined by some antiquated rules of procedure. Several press members quickly reminded Paterno that even if he had lost money in a friendly office pool betting on a Cleveland Browns team that failed to have seven men on the line of scrimmage on the game's final play, such a bet is technically against NCAA rules and is irrelevant to today's politics. Paterno went on to explain he was talking about the stupidity of the electoral college rules, to which a reporter asked if the 2000 election between Bush and Gore was decided on anti-democratic principles. JoPa then awkwardly revealed his biographical reference points when he claimed that he was referring to the 1888 election between Benjamin Harrison and Grover Cleveland, when JoPa's candidate of choice, and the popular vote winner, Cleveland, was beaten by electoral college victor, Harrison.
In another JoPa related political story, Paterno admitted to being consulted by Obama campaign workers on his knowledge for implementing a publicly funded health care system. It is being reported that Paterno's expertise is based on actually being alive when Germany was adopting a version of the first ever public health system in the world in 1885.
In other German news,
JoPa admitted to having stayed up late on his 18th birthday to watch Friedrich Nietzsche host Saturday Night Live, in 1888. Nietzsche had just completed his masterpiece, "Genealogy of Morals."In other Philosophy news, there are media reports of further proof of JoPa's non-human existence. Apparently JoPa proposed to his wife on a beach while reading passages from Albert Camus' existential classic, "The Stranger." Camus' book is about an alienated urban dweller that loses all passions and finds himself unable to feel emotion at his mother's funeral and goes on to commit a senseless murder in a moment of confusion on a beach... much like a short-circuited, unfeeling robot might do.
Paterno: 'I'm not an android'
Michael W. Arnold
Sunshine Sports
marnold12@tampabay.rr.com
In a story that has more legs than a centipede orgy, Penn State football coach Joe Paterno angrily denied claims he was an android and offered to have his DNA tested before athletic director Timothy M. Curley whisked him away from reporters outside the Beaver Stadium's recharging station in Pennsylvania.
Curley said everyone knows Joe and there is no need for a DNA test. "Sure JoePa is 138 years old, but there are a lot of active centenarians out there. I don't know why Bobby Bowden would say that about Joe. Maybe he is a little jealous of the success Joe has had this year."
Later reporters tried to interview several Penn State athletic department employees dressed in white lab coats as they exited the charging station driving a hearse with tinted windows.
TV camera crews are currently analyzing tapes of the brief interview to determine if those are really eyes behind the Mister Magoo glasses Paterno wears.
Sunshine Sports
marnold12@tampabay.rr.com
In a story that has more legs than a centipede orgy, Penn State football coach Joe Paterno angrily denied claims he was an android and offered to have his DNA tested before athletic director Timothy M. Curley whisked him away from reporters outside the Beaver Stadium's recharging station in Pennsylvania.
Curley said everyone knows Joe and there is no need for a DNA test. "Sure JoePa is 138 years old, but there are a lot of active centenarians out there. I don't know why Bobby Bowden would say that about Joe. Maybe he is a little jealous of the success Joe has had this year."
Later reporters tried to interview several Penn State athletic department employees dressed in white lab coats as they exited the charging station driving a hearse with tinted windows.
TV camera crews are currently analyzing tapes of the brief interview to determine if those are really eyes behind the Mister Magoo glasses Paterno wears.
Foley: 'We've got our man!'
Michael W. Arnold
Sunshine Sports
marnold12@tampabay.rr.com
Florida Athletic Director Jeremy Foley giddily announced Sunday afternoon he had completed an exhaustive search to replace football coach Urban Meyer, who resigned several hours earlier in the day to take the Clemson job.
In a twist of irony that could only occur on the pages of "Ode to the Gators," Foley hired former Clemson head coach Tommy Bowden to replace Meyer.
"What makes this deal so great is it is a two-for-one acquisition," Foley said. "We get Bobby in the deal, too."
Bobby Bowden, coach of Florida's greatest rival Florida State, announced he would be hired as a recruiting and corn pone consultant for the Gators.
The elder Bowden finally realized he would not be able to keep up with Penn State coach Joe Paterno in his quest to be the winningest coach of all time. "Paterno is a android," Bowden said. "He belongs in a Steven Speilberg movie, not on the sidelines in college football. Someone ought to do some DMA or CNA sampling, or whatever it is they do on them CIS shows."
Bobby Bowden's primary responsibility would be to provide spin for son Tommy Bowden as his losses pile up at Florida. Foley said "BB has done a terrific job at FSU keeping the Alumni off his ass while the Seminoles sink further and further into obscurity. We need that same commitment to bullshit here at Florida."
Ironically, Tommy Bowden was only able to get one statement in during the press conference as his dad spouted one archaic colloquialism after another. He guaranteed he could beat Spurrier.
"That's good enough for me," Foley said.
Sunshine Sports
marnold12@tampabay.rr.com
Florida Athletic Director Jeremy Foley giddily announced Sunday afternoon he had completed an exhaustive search to replace football coach Urban Meyer, who resigned several hours earlier in the day to take the Clemson job.
In a twist of irony that could only occur on the pages of "Ode to the Gators," Foley hired former Clemson head coach Tommy Bowden to replace Meyer.
"What makes this deal so great is it is a two-for-one acquisition," Foley said. "We get Bobby in the deal, too."
Bobby Bowden, coach of Florida's greatest rival Florida State, announced he would be hired as a recruiting and corn pone consultant for the Gators.
The elder Bowden finally realized he would not be able to keep up with Penn State coach Joe Paterno in his quest to be the winningest coach of all time. "Paterno is a android," Bowden said. "He belongs in a Steven Speilberg movie, not on the sidelines in college football. Someone ought to do some DMA or CNA sampling, or whatever it is they do on them CIS shows."
Bobby Bowden's primary responsibility would be to provide spin for son Tommy Bowden as his losses pile up at Florida. Foley said "BB has done a terrific job at FSU keeping the Alumni off his ass while the Seminoles sink further and further into obscurity. We need that same commitment to bullshit here at Florida."
Ironically, Tommy Bowden was only able to get one statement in during the press conference as his dad spouted one archaic colloquialism after another. He guaranteed he could beat Spurrier.
"That's good enough for me," Foley said.
Meyer leaving Gators for Clemson
Michael W. Arnold
Sunshine Sports
marnold12@tampabay.rr.com
Urban Meyer shocked Florida Gator football fans Sunday morning when he announced he was leaving Florida to accept the head coaching job at Clemson.
"I'm tired of constantly competing for national championships at a school that expects results and gives me everything I need to be successful," Meyer told reporters at a hastily organized press conference.
Meyer cited burnout at as a contributing factor in a rambling 45-minute speech laced with profanity.
"I've been at Florida twice as long as any other job I've had," Meyer sighed. "And I am simply exhausted."
Meyer said at Clemson, expectations would be much lower and noted he would no longer have to play in the shadow of legendary Florida coach Steve Spurrier, who left Florida for the same reasons. In fact, he said, I could run him out of South Carolina.
Tommy Bowden, who coached Clemson for the past 10 years before resigning Oct. 13, never won more than nine games in a season, never won an ACC title, but did take the Tigers to eight bowl games where he had a 3-5 record.
Clemson Athletic Director Terry Don Phillips was prepared to fire Bowden many times before, but said "the pesky bastard kept beating South Carolina at the end of the year to keep his job." Bowden was 7-2 against the in-state rivals.
Meyer said those types of expectations better suited his temperament. "Hell, I can win nine games in a year easy in a second-rate conference like the ACC."
Meyer guaranteed at least a .500 record and a middle-of-the-pack finish in the moderately competitive Atlantic Division of the ACC. "I know I can finish ahead of the Wolfpack," Meyer said referring to lowly North Carolina State.
Meyer has been a winner everywhere he has coached. His first head coaching job was at Bowling Green where he was 17-6 in two years with a second and third place finish in the MAC. Following that, Meyer spent two years at Utah and where he was 22-2 and won the Mountain West Conference both years. The Utes were 12-0 in Meyer's second year. At Florida, Meyer is 36-9 in 3 1/2 years with a national championship. Meyer said he needed to get out of Florida before the fans realized he sucked at recruiting, and could only win games with other coaches' signees.
"Everyone knows the 2006 BCS title was Zooker's," Meyer said. "I need a place where everyone knows your name, but no one cares. And Clemson fills that bill."
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)