2009 NCAA Football Thread

[infrared41]

You know why Fox Sucks at College Football?

Because they hardly cover it.

You can have a game a week on FSN, but it is not the same, because the people they are using for the BCS games are typically not doing College Football during the regular season and have no idea or feel for what has taken place during the season. The reason ESPN and CBS do a better job is week in week out they are there at the games covering the stories, and have announcers who may have called a few games involving the teams in thew Bowls. You can not just drop someone in and expect them to know the teams or what is going on and that is what Fox's problem is.

You're right. All the more reason why they shouldn't have bothered.

[rams80]

The dead horse is back but just to say that someone in the media finally "gets it."

From Gregg Easterbrook's TMQB at ESPN.com

In other sports news, Texas Tech football coach Mike Leach was fired after allegedly confining one of his players, Adam James, in small, dark spaces twice while the team practiced. Since this action might have been addressed by a public apology, TMQ suspects it was a last straw -- that Leach had done other odd things behind the scenes, and Texas Tech had had enough. Regardless, two other questions are raised.

The lesser question is, if these allegations are true, why did Adam James consent? James is 21 years old. He could simply have said to Leach, "You're nuts," and walked away. The answer here is likely that James feared Leach would toss him off the team unless he followed any instruction from his coach, however inappropriate. College coaches often hold too much sway over athletes -- especially scholarship athletes, who know that being tossed from a team has dire financial consequences. NCAA scholarships are renewed on a semester-by-semester basis, so if you're no longer part of the team, the money flow stops.

Then again, maybe James obeyed because football culture programmed him to? In football, the head coach is a little god whose every tirade and strange instruction receives quaking obedience from players terrified of losing their status with friends (high school sports) or their ability to pay for school (college sports) or simply the stature that comes with being a football player. You don't need to be a bully to be an effective football coach -- you can treat players in a respectful manner, while holding your own ego in check. But bullies are drawn to football coaching, and the fact that so many coaches get away with little-god behavior is an indictment both of the sport's culture and of the lack of supervision by the schools coaches work for. Supervisors must share some of the blame. Texas Tech now looks awful in the eyes of the nation. It's hard to believe that Tech administrators had no inkling something was amiss in the football office. Where was chancellor Kent Hance before this embarrassment happened?

The larger question is why football coaches think they should punish players. I don't mean telling players who weren't paying attention to do grass drills -- no one questions that sort of decision. Even a coach with a heart of gold makes his players run hills in August heat -- you can't prepare for football without exhausting exertion. I mean, why do football coaches want to punish players in the first place -- not prepare them, but punish them? Isn't this behavior a character defect on the part of the coach? Especially when the players are high school players -- that is to say, children.

Later in the same article...

Mike Leach contends that Adam James was "lazy" and used his father's influence -- Craig James, a former NFL star, is a college football announcer for ESPN -- to demand "preferential treatment." That Leach would sit for 30 minutes of questioning from the same network whose employee has vehemently denounced Leach speaks well of the former Texas Tech coach. For the sake of argument, suppose Leach's view of his player is correct. What was punishing him by confinement supposed to accomplish?

Many football coaches are obsessed with punishing any player who doesn't bow before them. This points to something about the sport that is rarely discussed, the dark side of the psychology of coaches. Some men go into football coaching, especially at the high school and youth levels, because they want to be little tyrants -- especially, tyrants screaming orders at adolescent boys. Adolescent boys can't fight back physically or verbally -- they obey adults even when the adults' orders are suspect, and experience fear and shame in the presence of angry adults. What kind of person, exactly, wants to lord it over young boys, screaming obscenities at them, ordering punishment, denigrating them -- the most hateful language I've ever heard has been from youth and high school football coaches screaming at players -- then demanding that they sprint until they vomit or collapse in pain?

I can vouch for the part in bold. When I was doing sideline camera work at High School football games I was astonished by the things these coaches said to their players. It was ridiculous and sad.

You can read the entire article here.

I know better than to read Easterbrook, so I will simply ask you this.

Did he blame International Jewry at any point in the article?

[infrared41]

I know better than to read Easterbrook, so I will simply ask you this.

Did he blame International Jewry at any point in the article?

Never mind on the first part. We just disagree I guess.

To answer your question, I have no idea what you're talking about. In all seriousness I am asking, what's the problem with Easterbrook?

[LC]

Am I seeing seats tarped off...for the Orange Bowl?

[infrared41]

Am I seeing seats tarped off...for the Orange Bowl?

Better yet, am I seeing Iowa possibly being the team that finishes off a winning bowl season for The Big Ten?

[dfwabel]

I know better than to read Easterbrook, so I will simply ask you this.

Did he blame International Jewry at any point in the article?

Never mind on the first part. We just disagree I guess.

To answer your question, I have no idea what you're talking about. In all seriousness I am asking, what's the problem with Easterbrook?

"red", from 2003.

Gregg Easterbrook, (then_ senior editor of The New Republic, posted an unedited essay on TNR's Web site panning "Kill Bill," the new Quentin Tarantino film, for excessive violence. Easterbrook concludes as follows:

"Disney's CEO, Michael Eisner, is Jewish; the chief of Miramax, Harvey Weinstein, is Jewish. Yes, there are plenty of Christian and other Hollywood executives who worship money above all else, promoting for profit the adulation of violence. Does that make it right for Jewish executives to worship money above all else, by promoting for profit the adulation of violence? Recent European history alone ought to cause Jewish executives to experience second thoughts about glorifying the killing of the helpless as a fun lifestyle choice. But history is hardly the only concern. Films made in Hollywood are now shown all over the world, to audiences that may not understand the dialogue or even look at the subtitles, but can't possibly miss the message--now Disney's message--that hearing the screams of the innocent is a really fun way to express yourself."

[infrared41]

I know better than to read Easterbrook, so I will simply ask you this.

Did he blame International Jewry at any point in the article?

Never mind on the first part. We just disagree I guess.

To answer your question, I have no idea what you're talking about. In all seriousness I am asking, what's the problem with Easterbrook?

"red", from 2003.

Gregg Easterbrook, (then_ senior editor of The New Republic, posted an unedited essay on TNR's Web site panning "Kill Bill," the new Quentin Tarantino film, for excessive violence. Easterbrook concludes as follows:

"Disney's CEO, Michael Eisner, is Jewish; the chief of Miramax, Harvey Weinstein, is Jewish. Yes, there are plenty of Christian and other Hollywood executives who worship money above all else, promoting for profit the adulation of violence. Does that make it right for Jewish executives to worship money above all else, by promoting for profit the adulation of violence? Recent European history alone ought to cause Jewish executives to experience second thoughts about glorifying the killing of the helpless as a fun lifestyle choice. But history is hardly the only concern. Films made in Hollywood are now shown all over the world, to audiences that may not understand the dialogue or even look at the subtitles, but can't possibly miss the message--now Disney's message--that hearing the screams of the innocent is a really fun way to express yourself."

Interesting. Still, none of that changes the fact that Gregg Easterbrook's passage about Leach was a good one. Nor does it change the fact that Mike Leach is a whack job. Killing the messenger doesn't change the message.

Easterbrook made some good points in the article I sited. The stuff about Disney isn't relevant to the article about Leach. That said, I find it quite amusing that the same guy that wrote the above in TNR also has a column called Tuesday Morning Quarterback on ESPN.com.

And I loved Kill Bill. I think most people understood that it wasn't reality based. Although by the looks of it, that idea seemed to escape Gregg Easterbrook.

[NEW.ERA]

I sure hope the National Championship is more exciting then the previous BCS Games.

[HedleyLamarr]

This is where I start to complain about there being too many bowl games.....I'm starting to get burned out on football, and that's not easy for me. There have been games on every day since Christmas, if you include the NFL.

It isn't helping that these last few games haven't been as exciting as the earlier games.

[rams80]

To: All 120 Division I-A football programs and fans

From: Big Ten Conference

RE: BIG TEN IS TEH SUXORSS!!!!!!1111one ESPECIALLY IN BOWLS LOL!!!!

4-3. Including wins over two BCS Conference champions.

Please STFU now.

[dfwabel]

This is where I start to complain about there being too many bowl games.....I'm starting to get burned out on football, and that's not easy for me. There have been games on every day since Christmas, if you include the NFL.

It isn't helping that these last few games haven't been as exciting as the earlier games.

I hope that you did not participate in any bowl pick 'ems. That makes these games seem more relevant then they really are. Then again, I have gotten increasingly more amped for the NFL playoffs in the past four years than any sport I watch.

[HedleyLamarr]

This is where I start to complain about there being too many bowl games.....I'm starting to get burned out on football, and that's not easy for me. There have been games on every day since Christmas, if you include the NFL.

It isn't helping that these last few games haven't been as exciting as the earlier games.

I hope that you did not participate in any bowl pick 'ems. That makes these games seem more relevant then they really are. Then again, I have gotten increasingly more amped for the NFL playoffs in the past four years than any sport I watch.

I did one of the Pick'ems on here, but I haven't even looked at how I've fared. I just guessed on most of the bowls, especially those involving non-BCS conference teams that I haven't seen all season.

I only had interest in a few games to begin with: UGA's game, the Chick-Fil-A Bowl, the Sugar Bowl, and the BCS Championship. I've watched parts of other games, but wasn't ever really wrapped up in the bowl games this year.

[infrared41]

This is where I start to complain about there being too many bowl games.....I'm starting to get burned out on football, and that's not easy for me. There have been games on every day since Christmas, if you include the NFL.

It isn't helping that these last few games haven't been as exciting as the earlier games.

Agreed. But I don't think it's the number of games as much as it's how they're scheduled. I love all the bowl games but I loved it even more when they were all wrapped up by January 1st. Finish them all by New Year's Day. Take a week off. Play the title game. I get that FOX wants the BCS games on by themselves but c'mon this is getting ridiculous. It wasn't that long ago when you could watch all the big bowl games in one day. I remember watching The Rose Bowl segue right into The Orange Bowl etc. TV ruins everything.

[infrared41]

To: All 120 Division I-A football programs and fans

From: Big Ten Conference

RE: BIG TEN IS TEH SUXORSS!!!!!!1111one ESPECIALLY IN BOWLS LOL!!!!

4-3. Including wins over two BCS Conference champions.

Please STFU now.

Wow. Cool. OK. I was just happy that The Big Ten had a winning record in bowl games this season and that the conference won it's two BCS games. But hey, if you want to tell everyone to -off on behalf of The Big Ten then who am I to argue?

Can I add that all three bowl losses were pretty close?

[gingerbreadmann]

Did I hear that right? Did Ferentz just say that it was a really tough matchup against.... Wake Forest? Wooow. It's late, I guess.

(Insert ACC Irrelevancy joke here)

Edit: Yes.

[dfwabel]

This is where I start to complain about there being too many bowl games.....I'm starting to get burned out on football, and that's not easy for me. There have been games on every day since Christmas, if you include the NFL.

It isn't helping that these last few games haven't been as exciting as the earlier games.

Agreed. But I don't think it's the number of games as much as it's how they're scheduled. I love all the bowl games but I loved it even more when they were all wrapped up by January 1st. Finish them all by New Year's Day. Take a week off. Play the title game. I get that FOX wants the BCS games on by themselves but c'mon this is getting ridiculous. It wasn't that long ago when you could watch all the big bowl games in one day. I remember watching The Rose Bowl segue right into The Orange Bowl etc. TV ruins everything.

Scheduling for the 2010-11 season is going to be very difficult as January 1 will fall on a Saturday. Plus, we are adding more bowls (Dallas Football Classic, Yankee Bowl and Cure [for Breast Cancer] Bowl). January 2 will be NFL week 17 so there will be even more crap to deal with.

Outside of the Cotton Bowl, FOX is out of game presentation. That game will be on primetime, Jan. 7, 2011, at 8 p.m (really).

[infrared41]

Outside of the Cotton Bowl, FOX is out of game presentation. That game will be on primetime, Jan. 7, 2011, at 8 p.m (really).

That ought to be a huge ratings success.

[NEW.ERA]

When again is the earliest that the Cotton Bowl can become apart of the BCS?

[dfwabel]

When again is the earliest that the Cotton Bowl can become apart of the BCS?

I believe it is 2015 is the earliest which all deals for the BCS are up. The fact that Jerry has the "his new stadu'jum" (and AT&T money) is why the Fiesta Bowl was asking workers to pay political figures then get reimbursed by the Bowl. Plus, the Fiesta Bowl still owes Arizona Cardinals and the Arizona Sports and Tourism Authority about $500,000 on back expenses.

[lbr218]

Well, I'm sure you all know how I feel about last night's game...

Now, as I wrote a few days ago, I thought Iowa would win. But we just sucked. They were the better team in every way, and it showed. We have now been completely embarrassed on National TV five years in a row. Luckily I go to a school where there are no Georgia fans, because tomorrow would have been a REALLY tough day for me had that not been the case.

And Georgia fans (Hedley, Elliot, etc): lay it on me. "The ACC and Georgia Tech suck. 30-24 HAHAHAHA" Right now I would love to agree with you.

Yeah, I sound like a HUGE downer now, but I have had an awful day, not just because of the game. The only good thing that came out of this is HOPEFULLY our star players will realize they are not good enough to make it in the NFL right now and need one more year of college, but I doubt it.