I don't think it takes a super-attentive sports fan to figure out that sports have been, well, not much fun this summer. We had to listen to the minute-to-minute updates regarding whether or not Bud Selig would be in attendance when Barry Bonds hit his 756th home run. We had to listen to all of the controversy surrounding the fact that Bonds was about to hit his 756th home run. We had to endure Denmark's Michael Rasmussen's dismissal from the Tour de France. Then there was Michael Vick. Then there was there was Tim Donaghy. Sheesh. I have co-workers who simply do not understand the point of watching sports, and lately, I don't think there's much to say to convince them otherwise.
Ah, but there's Tiger Woods! He won the PGA Championship on Sunday, inching him closer to breaking Jack Nicklaus's record for major victories. This win was just the story the sporting world needed. Clean-cut Tiger, winning his thirteenth major in front of his wife and baby daughter.
But of course, some people must ruin everything. Take ESPN's Josh Elliott, who announced on Mike & Mike in the Morning that people might begin to speculate that Tiger himself has done steroids. Gah. This is what happens when people have to talk on the radio for hours at a time and have to say, well, anything, to avoid dead air. I mean, Josh might be right. People might begin to wonder whether or not Tiger has really obtained his success by lots of practice as opposed less legitimate means. But right now there is absolutely no reason to think that that's the case. So can we just enjoy one untainted sport for the moment? If there suddenly becomes evidence of steroids in golf, then let's talk. But let's just have...one...week...of..fun...thinking that someone has accomplished something legitimately, and that he won't be indicted or arrested anytime soon.
Also, I am going to be playing Fantasy Football for the first time this season. I've sworn it off for years because I want to enjoy watching the games without worrying about my players. I'll keep everyone updated on my progress.
Monday, August 13, 2007
Tuesday, August 07, 2007
Mike Bacsik is now a trivia answer
Michael J. Bacsik to be exact. In case you missed it, the Washington Nationals pitcher gave up Homer #756 to Barry Bonds. Despite the fact that everyone knew he was going to break the record any day now, it was still easy to miss because Time Warner Cable doesn't carry MASN, which has the rights to all Nationals games. So in order to see the historic homer, you had to watch the ESPN News feed on ESPN2 and wait for them to cut in with Bonds' at bats. So he hit the homer, and then the hooplah began.
The game stopped. Hank Aaron came on the jumbotron screen and gave a speech. Bonds made a speech. There were fireworks. All during the bottom of the 5th inning. Since I don't have MASN, I currently have no idea whether or not the game has restarted. Crazy.
Now, are sports fans going to move on to other discussions, or are they going to continue the steroids debate? I think this question is, in a way, more interesting than the fact he broke the home run record. That was inevitable. Does that discussion now stop? Are we all going to forget about the controversy and move on to preseason football?
Whatever you decide to talk about, remember Mike Bacsik. It will pay off for you one day.
The game stopped. Hank Aaron came on the jumbotron screen and gave a speech. Bonds made a speech. There were fireworks. All during the bottom of the 5th inning. Since I don't have MASN, I currently have no idea whether or not the game has restarted. Crazy.
Now, are sports fans going to move on to other discussions, or are they going to continue the steroids debate? I think this question is, in a way, more interesting than the fact he broke the home run record. That was inevitable. Does that discussion now stop? Are we all going to forget about the controversy and move on to preseason football?
Whatever you decide to talk about, remember Mike Bacsik. It will pay off for you one day.
Monday, July 02, 2007
Sports or Beach?
I just got back from a week in Maui. There's beautiful beaches and mountains, and countless places for great swimming, snorkeling, surfing and windsurfing, hiking, etc. I'll have the pictures available sometime in the near future.
Anyway, being in Maui and all, I didn't pay as much attention to the sports world as I usually would. As in, I didn't completely ignore the fact that Carolina was playing in the CWS, or that the NBA draft was taking place, or that there was some good tennis being played at Wimbledon, but I didn't sit glued to my TV, either. Now, there wasn't a ton of nightlife in the area where I was staying (which was perfectly fine due to the fact that my husband and I were usually dead tired by the end of our daily adventures), so had the CWS games started at 7:00 p.m. Hawaii time, I might have actually watched as opposed to checking the score in a bar on the wharf in Lahaina. And I might have learned that the Bobcats traded Brandan Wright to the Warriors hours earlier than I actually did. But you know, when you're in Hawaii for one week only and it's the middle of the afternoon, the beach somehow becomes waaaay more interesting. And to tell you the truth, it was nice not to have anyone in my face reminding me that UNC had lost to Oregon State once again, although we did meet quite a few people from Oregon. (Note: Whereas West Coasters apparently go to Hawaii all the time, it seems somewhat of a novelty to meet East Coasters there. I'm basing this statement on the fact that every time we mentioned that we were from North Carolina, people always responded, "oooh...that's far away. We're from L.A./Portland/Seattle, etc.)
Now, people who actually live in Hawaii must get used to all of the tropical attractions, because there does appear to be a market for viewing sporting events. ESPN is on at every bar (which is how we kept up with the CWS). One of the bellhops at our resort was even quite knowledgeable about UNC basketball and the Carolina Panthers. I assumed that Hawaiians had the luxury of watching Sunday NFL games on tape delay, but my understanding is that fans actually get up at 7:00 in the morning to watch. I'm not really all that surprised, because the sun rises at 4:00 and the birds will wake you up well before 7:00 anyway. Which, again, is why I didn't mind staying in nightlife-less South Maui.
Now if we could just figure out a good way to watch the NFL while sitting on the beach...
Anyway, being in Maui and all, I didn't pay as much attention to the sports world as I usually would. As in, I didn't completely ignore the fact that Carolina was playing in the CWS, or that the NBA draft was taking place, or that there was some good tennis being played at Wimbledon, but I didn't sit glued to my TV, either. Now, there wasn't a ton of nightlife in the area where I was staying (which was perfectly fine due to the fact that my husband and I were usually dead tired by the end of our daily adventures), so had the CWS games started at 7:00 p.m. Hawaii time, I might have actually watched as opposed to checking the score in a bar on the wharf in Lahaina. And I might have learned that the Bobcats traded Brandan Wright to the Warriors hours earlier than I actually did. But you know, when you're in Hawaii for one week only and it's the middle of the afternoon, the beach somehow becomes waaaay more interesting. And to tell you the truth, it was nice not to have anyone in my face reminding me that UNC had lost to Oregon State once again, although we did meet quite a few people from Oregon. (Note: Whereas West Coasters apparently go to Hawaii all the time, it seems somewhat of a novelty to meet East Coasters there. I'm basing this statement on the fact that every time we mentioned that we were from North Carolina, people always responded, "oooh...that's far away. We're from L.A./Portland/Seattle, etc.)
Now, people who actually live in Hawaii must get used to all of the tropical attractions, because there does appear to be a market for viewing sporting events. ESPN is on at every bar (which is how we kept up with the CWS). One of the bellhops at our resort was even quite knowledgeable about UNC basketball and the Carolina Panthers. I assumed that Hawaiians had the luxury of watching Sunday NFL games on tape delay, but my understanding is that fans actually get up at 7:00 in the morning to watch. I'm not really all that surprised, because the sun rises at 4:00 and the birds will wake you up well before 7:00 anyway. Which, again, is why I didn't mind staying in nightlife-less South Maui.
Now if we could just figure out a good way to watch the NFL while sitting on the beach...
Friday, April 20, 2007
Have Some Hokie Pride Today
Please remember to wear Hokie maroon and orange today to remember the 32 students and faculty members murdered at Virginia Tech Monday morning, April 16.
Wear the colors even if you don't root for VT in the world of sports. Today is not about sports. I'm wearing the Hokie Nation colors. My mom is even wearing the colors, and that's roughly equivalent to me agreeing to wear Duke gear.
My fiance is perhaps exempt from this request, because I stole his orange and maroon clothing.
Wear the colors even if you don't root for VT in the world of sports. Today is not about sports. I'm wearing the Hokie Nation colors. My mom is even wearing the colors, and that's roughly equivalent to me agreeing to wear Duke gear.
My fiance is perhaps exempt from this request, because I stole his orange and maroon clothing.
Monday, March 26, 2007
Gah, does anyone like Billy Packer?
Here's a burning question: how does Billy Packer keep his job as lead college basketball analyst at CBS?
I ask because no one (with the possible exception of the people who work at CBS) seems to appreciate his "talents." There are petitions. There are blogs. There are people hanging around their break room water coolers.
The verdict from, well, pretty much everyone, is that Packer has to go. He's negative, without one nice word to say for anyone, with the possible exception of his alma mater, Wake Forest. At least "oh my God turn the sound down it's..." Dick Vitale has enthusiasm for the game, even if he does talk about certain ACC teams a bit too much (although those Hooters commercials ought to be illegal).
The list of complaints against Packer goes on and on...insulting female Duke students...showing more sympathy for the fact that Gerald Henderson was ejected from the March 4 Duke-Carolina game than the fact that Tyler Hansbrough had a bloody nose...just having a reputation for being that guy who rains on everyone's parade.
If Packer worked for ESPN, he would have been axed long ago. ESPN has not the first problem with firing or otherwise reassigning analysts it finds to be embarrassing to its image or ineffective (read: Michael Irvin and Joe Theismann).
The latest laughable incident? In an interview with WFAN radio, Packer called Tar Heel senior Reyshawn Terry's game "soft." Terry responded to CBSsportline Columnist Mike Freeman by effectively telling Packer off. The really funny part? Unless I've missed something, no one cares. They chuckle because they think it's funny that a player said such things about Packer to a member of the media. There's no outrage about disrespect. There's no outrage about speaking out of place. Maybe Packer thinks it's funny. After all, he doesn't seem like the best judge of what is appropriate speech and what isn't. In the end, though, it just adds up to another example of why CBS needs to enter the 21st century and find an analyst that speaks to a new generation. Or an analyst that can just muster up the energy to say something nice every once in a while.
Just keep that person out of Hooters commercials.
I ask because no one (with the possible exception of the people who work at CBS) seems to appreciate his "talents." There are petitions. There are blogs. There are people hanging around their break room water coolers.
The verdict from, well, pretty much everyone, is that Packer has to go. He's negative, without one nice word to say for anyone, with the possible exception of his alma mater, Wake Forest. At least "oh my God turn the sound down it's..." Dick Vitale has enthusiasm for the game, even if he does talk about certain ACC teams a bit too much (although those Hooters commercials ought to be illegal).
The list of complaints against Packer goes on and on...insulting female Duke students...showing more sympathy for the fact that Gerald Henderson was ejected from the March 4 Duke-Carolina game than the fact that Tyler Hansbrough had a bloody nose...just having a reputation for being that guy who rains on everyone's parade.
If Packer worked for ESPN, he would have been axed long ago. ESPN has not the first problem with firing or otherwise reassigning analysts it finds to be embarrassing to its image or ineffective (read: Michael Irvin and Joe Theismann).
The latest laughable incident? In an interview with WFAN radio, Packer called Tar Heel senior Reyshawn Terry's game "soft." Terry responded to CBSsportline Columnist Mike Freeman by effectively telling Packer off. The really funny part? Unless I've missed something, no one cares. They chuckle because they think it's funny that a player said such things about Packer to a member of the media. There's no outrage about disrespect. There's no outrage about speaking out of place. Maybe Packer thinks it's funny. After all, he doesn't seem like the best judge of what is appropriate speech and what isn't. In the end, though, it just adds up to another example of why CBS needs to enter the 21st century and find an analyst that speaks to a new generation. Or an analyst that can just muster up the energy to say something nice every once in a while.
Just keep that person out of Hooters commercials.
Friday, March 16, 2007
About Duke
I'm a UNC fan. I don't like Duke. I don't like Coach K. I loved watching VCU come from behind to win last night's game, leaving Duke one-and-done for the first time since 1996.
That being said, I think the criticism reigning down on the Blue Devils is a bit unfair. As usual, I'm calling for some rationality.
We knew coming into the season that the team wasn't going to be up to par with past Duke teams. The AP ranked them 12th in their preseason poll; ESPN/USA Today ranked them 11th. For most teams, such a ranking would be an honor. But for Duke, such a ranking was a sign that things were amiss. J. J. Redick was gone. Shelden Williams was gone. There were no comparable players to replace them. Greg Paulus? Puh-lease.
Some people took it almost as a sign of Duke's apocalypse. After all, even UNC was ranked 19th in both preseason polls before the infamous 8-20 season (they dropped out in the Week 3 polls). So I can just imagine some confused voters trying to figure out what to do with a Duke team that wasn't going to be ranked 1 or 2:
"Hmmm...we don't think Duke is going to be as good as usual this year. But...it's Duke...they can't really be that bad. Let's just throw them somewhere in the middle of the poll and see how things pan out."
But unlike UNC, Duke managed to stay in the Top 25 for most of the season, with the exception of a brief absence following a 4-game skid. Did they look like a Top 25 team? Sometimes yes, mostly no. But they didn't look like a bad team, either. They were still a good team, but an average type of good, rather than the usual spectacular type of good.
They lost 11 games total. They finished 8-8 in the ACC, good for 6th place. They lost to NCSU in the opening round of the ACC Tournament, meaning they would not win the tourney for only the second time since 1999. They had two 4-game losing skids: one to UVa, FSU, UNC, and Maryland, and the other to Maryland, UNC, NCSU, and VCU. They lost their remaining three games to Marquette, Virginia Tech, and Georgia Tech. Nine of these losses were to teams that made it to the NCAA Tournament; the other two teams made it to the NIT. Duke can at least say it lost all of its games to quality teams, unlike some teams (Syracuse) that failed to make the NCAA Tournament (Syracuse) and then whined about it (Syracuse) by pointing to their, let's say 3, quality wins (Syracuse).
As much as I hate to admit it, Duke is no Syracuse. Some people think they should have been ranked lower than a 6 seed, and based on last night's loss, that might very well be true. Or it could mean that VCU should have been ranked higher than an 11 seed. In the end, the seeding didn't matter. VCU won; the only reason Duke might not be back in Durham yet is a snowstorm in Buffalo. But despite their relatively sub-par season, I wouldn't count them out for the longhaul. Maybe this season was a sign that Coach K is slipping, and that might very well be true. But I think I'll wait and see what happens during the next couple of seasons before I make that assessment. After all, UNC did come back from that 8-20 season to win a national championship three years later.
And with that, I'm going to take a shower so I can wash off all this "apologizing for Duke" crap. Go Tar Heels!
That being said, I think the criticism reigning down on the Blue Devils is a bit unfair. As usual, I'm calling for some rationality.
We knew coming into the season that the team wasn't going to be up to par with past Duke teams. The AP ranked them 12th in their preseason poll; ESPN/USA Today ranked them 11th. For most teams, such a ranking would be an honor. But for Duke, such a ranking was a sign that things were amiss. J. J. Redick was gone. Shelden Williams was gone. There were no comparable players to replace them. Greg Paulus? Puh-lease.
Some people took it almost as a sign of Duke's apocalypse. After all, even UNC was ranked 19th in both preseason polls before the infamous 8-20 season (they dropped out in the Week 3 polls). So I can just imagine some confused voters trying to figure out what to do with a Duke team that wasn't going to be ranked 1 or 2:
"Hmmm...we don't think Duke is going to be as good as usual this year. But...it's Duke...they can't really be that bad. Let's just throw them somewhere in the middle of the poll and see how things pan out."
But unlike UNC, Duke managed to stay in the Top 25 for most of the season, with the exception of a brief absence following a 4-game skid. Did they look like a Top 25 team? Sometimes yes, mostly no. But they didn't look like a bad team, either. They were still a good team, but an average type of good, rather than the usual spectacular type of good.
They lost 11 games total. They finished 8-8 in the ACC, good for 6th place. They lost to NCSU in the opening round of the ACC Tournament, meaning they would not win the tourney for only the second time since 1999. They had two 4-game losing skids: one to UVa, FSU, UNC, and Maryland, and the other to Maryland, UNC, NCSU, and VCU. They lost their remaining three games to Marquette, Virginia Tech, and Georgia Tech. Nine of these losses were to teams that made it to the NCAA Tournament; the other two teams made it to the NIT. Duke can at least say it lost all of its games to quality teams, unlike some teams (Syracuse) that failed to make the NCAA Tournament (Syracuse) and then whined about it (Syracuse) by pointing to their, let's say 3, quality wins (Syracuse).
As much as I hate to admit it, Duke is no Syracuse. Some people think they should have been ranked lower than a 6 seed, and based on last night's loss, that might very well be true. Or it could mean that VCU should have been ranked higher than an 11 seed. In the end, the seeding didn't matter. VCU won; the only reason Duke might not be back in Durham yet is a snowstorm in Buffalo. But despite their relatively sub-par season, I wouldn't count them out for the longhaul. Maybe this season was a sign that Coach K is slipping, and that might very well be true. But I think I'll wait and see what happens during the next couple of seasons before I make that assessment. After all, UNC did come back from that 8-20 season to win a national championship three years later.
And with that, I'm going to take a shower so I can wash off all this "apologizing for Duke" crap. Go Tar Heels!
Thursday, March 15, 2007
Okay, they only won by 2
If anyone made a big bet on VCU winning by 3, I apologize for the fact that they only won by 2.
Nice.
Nice.
Monday, March 12, 2007
VCU v. Duke
Sources say VCU will beat Duke by 3. I'd link you to this prediction, but it's all contained in an AIM away message.
Ty Lawson Message Board Madness
I'm going to get a lot of nasty comments about this post. Or I would, if more than two people read it.
Here it is: people post stupid things to message boards. This apparently applies to any message board. For instance, I sometimes go to the Lost message board in order to see if people have interesting insights about the latest episode. What I usually find is something along the lines of:
1) This week's episode was the worst episode ever. The writers are way off track. Why aren't they answering any of my questions? I think I'm going to stop watching this stupid show.
(Which would be fine, except that the same person will say the exact same thing the next week)
or
2) Why aren't they showing more of Sawyer? He's soooo hot!
But since this is a sports blog, I'll stick to sports-related message boards. In particular, I'm going to focus on the message boards that UNC and NCSU fans tend to frequent. I don't post to them, but I sometimes read them to see what people are saying. What I see is not any better than the Lost board. Since we're all supposed to be intelligent folks in the Triangle area, I'm calling for people from both schools (and ECU fans, who like to troll the NCSU boards) to stop making stupid comments on message boards.
Here's yesterday's scenario:
UNC and NCSU played an exciting game that everyone should remember for a long time. The fact that NCSU made it to the final game was a great story, and most UNC fans that I know were rooting for the Wolfpack until they played the Tar Heels in the final.
With less than 10 seconds on the clock, UNC rebounds the ball. It ends up in Ty Lawson's hands. Lawson sprints down the floor and dunks the ball, which we all thought was funny because we always joke that he can't actually do that since he usually lays it in.
After that, my fiancee and I looked at each other and said, "The State fans are going to say that that was classless."
Which they did, repeatedly.
Well, okay...I'll admit...maybe he shouldn't have done that. But according to the NCSU message boards, Lawson's dunk was not the result of an excited freshman celebrating the Tar Heels' first ACC championship since 1998.
Oh no. It was a sign of disrespect directed specifically at the Wolfpack. State fans know this, because at the end of the Boston College game, the Tar Heels elected to take a shot clock violation instead of running up the score. Therefore, Lawson dunked the ball because he was playing State.
I don't know Ty Lawson, and I haven't drilled him about the reasons that he dunked the ball. But my guess is he didn't do it as a sign of disrespect toward the Wolfpack.
I think this because I think players respect one another a lot more than fans respect one another. You see, many of the players on opposing teams don't despise one another as much as the fans want them to. Some of them went to high school together. Some of them played on McDonald's teams together. Some of them know each other for other reasons. They don't go around stealing each other's mascots, spray painting other schools' property, or writing maniacal diatribes on other fans' message boards.
So let's end that thread now.
Here are my other gripes about the message boards:
1) Is it really necessary for UNC fans to comment on NCSU boards or vice versa? Doing so accomplishes nothing but creating a flame war. It doesn't matter if you compliment the other team or if you go in guns blazing. Then again, maybe that's what people are going for.
2) NCSU fans should not whine about "Carowhina" fans. Think about it.
3) Make sure you say something somewhat intelligent (or at least make sure you don't say something retarded). Example: An NCSU fan, in response to a thread that Roy Williams and/or Ty Lawson are classless, wrote: "NC = No Class" Think about it.
I'm willing to give some benefit of the doubt that a trolling ECU fan wrote that.
4) Furthermore, there was not a conspiracy to put UNC in the hardest bracket (although there is a legitimate argument that they are in fact in the hardest bracket). They're a #1 seed. If someone wanted a conspiracy, I don't think the #1 seed would have happened. Along those lines, Tyler Hansbrough's broken nose did not cause Carolina to be in the hardest bracket. Let's be reasonable here.
--
End rant. Why post to message boards when I can rant on my own blog?
==
UPDATE
I saw some of these comments last night and for some reason didn't mention them, but WRAL did.
So...
5) Don't make racist comments on message boards. That goes for UNC fans, NCSU fans, and Duke fans.
And anyone else for that matter.
Sheesh.
Here it is: people post stupid things to message boards. This apparently applies to any message board. For instance, I sometimes go to the Lost message board in order to see if people have interesting insights about the latest episode. What I usually find is something along the lines of:
1) This week's episode was the worst episode ever. The writers are way off track. Why aren't they answering any of my questions? I think I'm going to stop watching this stupid show.
(Which would be fine, except that the same person will say the exact same thing the next week)
or
2) Why aren't they showing more of Sawyer? He's soooo hot!
But since this is a sports blog, I'll stick to sports-related message boards. In particular, I'm going to focus on the message boards that UNC and NCSU fans tend to frequent. I don't post to them, but I sometimes read them to see what people are saying. What I see is not any better than the Lost board. Since we're all supposed to be intelligent folks in the Triangle area, I'm calling for people from both schools (and ECU fans, who like to troll the NCSU boards) to stop making stupid comments on message boards.
Here's yesterday's scenario:
UNC and NCSU played an exciting game that everyone should remember for a long time. The fact that NCSU made it to the final game was a great story, and most UNC fans that I know were rooting for the Wolfpack until they played the Tar Heels in the final.
With less than 10 seconds on the clock, UNC rebounds the ball. It ends up in Ty Lawson's hands. Lawson sprints down the floor and dunks the ball, which we all thought was funny because we always joke that he can't actually do that since he usually lays it in.
After that, my fiancee and I looked at each other and said, "The State fans are going to say that that was classless."
Which they did, repeatedly.
Well, okay...I'll admit...maybe he shouldn't have done that. But according to the NCSU message boards, Lawson's dunk was not the result of an excited freshman celebrating the Tar Heels' first ACC championship since 1998.
Oh no. It was a sign of disrespect directed specifically at the Wolfpack. State fans know this, because at the end of the Boston College game, the Tar Heels elected to take a shot clock violation instead of running up the score. Therefore, Lawson dunked the ball because he was playing State.
I don't know Ty Lawson, and I haven't drilled him about the reasons that he dunked the ball. But my guess is he didn't do it as a sign of disrespect toward the Wolfpack.
I think this because I think players respect one another a lot more than fans respect one another. You see, many of the players on opposing teams don't despise one another as much as the fans want them to. Some of them went to high school together. Some of them played on McDonald's teams together. Some of them know each other for other reasons. They don't go around stealing each other's mascots, spray painting other schools' property, or writing maniacal diatribes on other fans' message boards.
So let's end that thread now.
Here are my other gripes about the message boards:
1) Is it really necessary for UNC fans to comment on NCSU boards or vice versa? Doing so accomplishes nothing but creating a flame war. It doesn't matter if you compliment the other team or if you go in guns blazing. Then again, maybe that's what people are going for.
2) NCSU fans should not whine about "Carowhina" fans. Think about it.
3) Make sure you say something somewhat intelligent (or at least make sure you don't say something retarded). Example: An NCSU fan, in response to a thread that Roy Williams and/or Ty Lawson are classless, wrote: "NC = No Class" Think about it.
I'm willing to give some benefit of the doubt that a trolling ECU fan wrote that.
4) Furthermore, there was not a conspiracy to put UNC in the hardest bracket (although there is a legitimate argument that they are in fact in the hardest bracket). They're a #1 seed. If someone wanted a conspiracy, I don't think the #1 seed would have happened. Along those lines, Tyler Hansbrough's broken nose did not cause Carolina to be in the hardest bracket. Let's be reasonable here.
--
End rant. Why post to message boards when I can rant on my own blog?
==
UPDATE
I saw some of these comments last night and for some reason didn't mention them, but WRAL did.
So...
5) Don't make racist comments on message boards. That goes for UNC fans, NCSU fans, and Duke fans.
And anyone else for that matter.
Sheesh.
Tuesday, March 06, 2007
He does it again!
Since my brother is, in fact, supposed to be a contributor on this blog, I'll make his contribution for him by posting the podcast of his correct prediction of last night's George Mason-VCU game--VCU by six. And to think that Rick Roth and Larry Richmond laughed at him on The Sportsline. Skip to the end of the segment if you don't want to hear about Zabian Dowdell or Virginia Tech in general.
Monday, February 05, 2007
Better than the Swami
Check out Virginia Commonwealth University's Commonwealth Times Super Bowl preview, where Sports Editor Jonathan Howard predicted that the Colts would win 34-17, and rather accurately broke down why.
Way to represent the family, little bro.
Way to represent the family, little bro.
Thursday, January 18, 2007
Creating a College Football Playoff
The college football season is now long over. There are plenty of great stories to remember, including Boise State's win over Oklahoma, Wake Forest's Orange Bowl run, and the Ohio State-Michigan game. The Florida Gators are the national champions, (perhaps) crowned with less controversy than some other teams in recent years.
Now that the season is over, let's rationally discuss why college football needs a playoff system. This conversation is hard to have during the season, because emotions tend to cloud rational judgment. People tend to say things like:
"Boise State's win over Oklahoma proves why there should be a playoff system."
"Even if we had a playoff, some deserving team (Boise State, for instance) would get left out."
"There aren't ever enough deserving teams to justify a playoff."
"A playoff would destroy the existing bowl system, which everyone likes for their own reasons."
Here's what I'm asking for: an eight-game playoff system. I think it can be done relatively easily, if the BCS is committed to doing it. And I think it beats the four-game playoff that BCS coordinator Mike Slive has said he is "open-minded" about considering.
For the love of [insert your deity here], Division I-A football is the only Division I-A NCAA sponsored sport without an organized tournament to determine a champion. Every other division has a playoff. We'd scratch our heads if at the end of the season, the NCAA decided that the #1 and #2 ranked basketball teams would play each other to determine a national champion, sans the NCAA Tournament.
With that said, let's pick the above arguments apart one by one. Be prepared for lots of references to college basketball.
"Boise State's win over Oklahoma proves why there should be a playoff system."
Boise State's win over Oklahoma bolsters the argument for a playoff, but by itself proves nothing. Just like George Mason's 2006 run to the Final Four bolstered the argument that letting more mid-major teams into the tournament was a good idea, but in reality didn't prove a thing (what if no mid-majors make it to the Final Four this year?). Really, I think everyone knows that this argument is silly. But emotions make people say silly things, see?
"Even if we had a playoff, some deserving team (Boise State, for instance) would get left out."
Well, you've got me there. That very well could happen. It supposedly happens in basketball every year, despite the fact that 65 teams get to go to the NCAA tournament. 65 teams. So yeah, I suppose at least one team is going to feel left out each year. But under the current system, only two teams get to play for the championship. So let's toss this argument out the window.
This argument actually supports my idea that an eight-game playoff is superior than a four-game playoff. With a four game playoff, all of the major conferences wouldn't even have a chance to be represented, so you can definitely forget about your Boise States.
"There aren't ever enough deserving teams to justify a playoff."
And here's the other extreme. This argument is really only relevant when discussing an eight-game playoff, not the four-game playoff. And of course, I'm going to use the NCAA Tournament again to make my point. The NCAA Tournament has 65 teams. 65 teams. Do you honestly think every single one of those teams really has a chance to win the whole thing? Doesn't a favored heavyweight almost always end up winning?
Plus, you're never going to convince me that there aren't eight teams deserving to go to a playoff. If we had had an eight-game playoff this past season, here's how it might have looked. We'll assume the champions from the six major conferences, plus two at-large bids:
ACC Champion: Wake Forest
Big Ten Champion: Ohio State
Pac-10 Champion: USC
Big 12 Champion: Oklahoma
Big East Champion: Louisville
SEC Champion: Florida
WAC Champion/At-large bid: Boise State
At-large bid: Notre Dame
Oh, I know, I know. What about Michigan? What about LSU? Etc., etc.
I think I've proven my point.
"A playoff would destroy the existing bowl system, which everyone likes for their own reasons."
Here are the reasons:
The schools like it because of the money involved.
The hosting cities like it because of the money involved.
The fans like it because all their teams have to do is win six games, and they (usually) go to a (usually) meaningless post-season game that gives them an excuse to go on vacation to a place they (usually) wouldn't go otherwise. Or at the very least, it allows them to watch their team for one last game.
Why would having a playoff get rid of any of these aspects? An eight-game playoff would require seven games. There were 32 bowl games this past year, and if the creation of the Toronto Bowl, indicates anything, there could probably be more. Everyone likes these bowls, right? And hey, if any of these bowls fail, I don't think a playoff would have much to do with it.
From 1998 until 2005, eight teams played in four "BCS" bowls. Those bowls, the Rose Bowl, the Sugar Bowl, the Fiesta Bowl, and the Orange Bowl, were already being used for marquee games. The only difference was that one of the games was the "national championship game" between the top two teams in the BCS standings. The current system has five "meaningless" games taking place in traditional bowls, plus an additionally created national championship bowl. Neither of these formats destroyed the bowl system, so why would a meaningful playoff system? You wouldn't even have to extend the season further into January (playing the championship game on January 8 seemed a bit late to me, but I don't like having the Super Bowl in February, either). You can have multiple playoff games on the same day, just like in the NFL playoffs. They would all get spectacular ratings, just like in the NFL playoffs. They would all be well attended, just like in the NFL playoffs.
Hell, if the BCS wanted to, they could even continue to play the Pac-10 champion and the Big Ten champion against one another, even if it would mess up the seeding. Yeah, it would be a little silly, but no sillier than not having a playoff at all.
So let's have this idea turn into reality. I can wait until 2010 if need be. Just don't tell me that it can't, or shouldn't, be done.
Now that the season is over, let's rationally discuss why college football needs a playoff system. This conversation is hard to have during the season, because emotions tend to cloud rational judgment. People tend to say things like:
"Boise State's win over Oklahoma proves why there should be a playoff system."
"Even if we had a playoff, some deserving team (Boise State, for instance) would get left out."
"There aren't ever enough deserving teams to justify a playoff."
"A playoff would destroy the existing bowl system, which everyone likes for their own reasons."
Here's what I'm asking for: an eight-game playoff system. I think it can be done relatively easily, if the BCS is committed to doing it. And I think it beats the four-game playoff that BCS coordinator Mike Slive has said he is "open-minded" about considering.
For the love of [insert your deity here], Division I-A football is the only Division I-A NCAA sponsored sport without an organized tournament to determine a champion. Every other division has a playoff. We'd scratch our heads if at the end of the season, the NCAA decided that the #1 and #2 ranked basketball teams would play each other to determine a national champion, sans the NCAA Tournament.
With that said, let's pick the above arguments apart one by one. Be prepared for lots of references to college basketball.
"Boise State's win over Oklahoma proves why there should be a playoff system."
Boise State's win over Oklahoma bolsters the argument for a playoff, but by itself proves nothing. Just like George Mason's 2006 run to the Final Four bolstered the argument that letting more mid-major teams into the tournament was a good idea, but in reality didn't prove a thing (what if no mid-majors make it to the Final Four this year?). Really, I think everyone knows that this argument is silly. But emotions make people say silly things, see?
"Even if we had a playoff, some deserving team (Boise State, for instance) would get left out."
Well, you've got me there. That very well could happen. It supposedly happens in basketball every year, despite the fact that 65 teams get to go to the NCAA tournament. 65 teams. So yeah, I suppose at least one team is going to feel left out each year. But under the current system, only two teams get to play for the championship. So let's toss this argument out the window.
This argument actually supports my idea that an eight-game playoff is superior than a four-game playoff. With a four game playoff, all of the major conferences wouldn't even have a chance to be represented, so you can definitely forget about your Boise States.
"There aren't ever enough deserving teams to justify a playoff."
And here's the other extreme. This argument is really only relevant when discussing an eight-game playoff, not the four-game playoff. And of course, I'm going to use the NCAA Tournament again to make my point. The NCAA Tournament has 65 teams. 65 teams. Do you honestly think every single one of those teams really has a chance to win the whole thing? Doesn't a favored heavyweight almost always end up winning?
Plus, you're never going to convince me that there aren't eight teams deserving to go to a playoff. If we had had an eight-game playoff this past season, here's how it might have looked. We'll assume the champions from the six major conferences, plus two at-large bids:
ACC Champion: Wake Forest
Big Ten Champion: Ohio State
Pac-10 Champion: USC
Big 12 Champion: Oklahoma
Big East Champion: Louisville
SEC Champion: Florida
WAC Champion/At-large bid: Boise State
At-large bid: Notre Dame
Oh, I know, I know. What about Michigan? What about LSU? Etc., etc.
I think I've proven my point.
"A playoff would destroy the existing bowl system, which everyone likes for their own reasons."
Here are the reasons:
The schools like it because of the money involved.
The hosting cities like it because of the money involved.
The fans like it because all their teams have to do is win six games, and they (usually) go to a (usually) meaningless post-season game that gives them an excuse to go on vacation to a place they (usually) wouldn't go otherwise. Or at the very least, it allows them to watch their team for one last game.
Why would having a playoff get rid of any of these aspects? An eight-game playoff would require seven games. There were 32 bowl games this past year, and if the creation of the Toronto Bowl, indicates anything, there could probably be more. Everyone likes these bowls, right? And hey, if any of these bowls fail, I don't think a playoff would have much to do with it.
From 1998 until 2005, eight teams played in four "BCS" bowls. Those bowls, the Rose Bowl, the Sugar Bowl, the Fiesta Bowl, and the Orange Bowl, were already being used for marquee games. The only difference was that one of the games was the "national championship game" between the top two teams in the BCS standings. The current system has five "meaningless" games taking place in traditional bowls, plus an additionally created national championship bowl. Neither of these formats destroyed the bowl system, so why would a meaningful playoff system? You wouldn't even have to extend the season further into January (playing the championship game on January 8 seemed a bit late to me, but I don't like having the Super Bowl in February, either). You can have multiple playoff games on the same day, just like in the NFL playoffs. They would all get spectacular ratings, just like in the NFL playoffs. They would all be well attended, just like in the NFL playoffs.
Hell, if the BCS wanted to, they could even continue to play the Pac-10 champion and the Big Ten champion against one another, even if it would mess up the seeding. Yeah, it would be a little silly, but no sillier than not having a playoff at all.
So let's have this idea turn into reality. I can wait until 2010 if need be. Just don't tell me that it can't, or shouldn't, be done.
Monday, November 27, 2006
He's heeeere!
After receiving my video message from Butch Davis, I can now breathe easy that he really is going to be UNC's coach next season. I don't like getting excited over unofficial deals. Remember Bobby Cremins taking the job at the College of Charleston, only to change his mind mere hours later? Not to worry, Tar Heel fans. He's now decked out in Carolina Blue, with the fight song running in the background, saying how glad he is to be UNC's coach. He's a coach to get excited about. Don't associate him with "the dirty Miami program," as I've heard some people refer to it. He had a fantastic win-loss record with the Hurricanes, despite the fact that he was also cleaning up that program. Davis should bring the same level of honor and respectability to the university as did John Bunting, but (hopefully) with a better record.
On the one hand, I feel bad for John Bunting. He's definitely a first-class guy. On the other hand, I don't think his firing is going to have a major negative impact on his career. That's the beauty of the coaching profession...if you don't succeed with one team, you still have a good chance of finding another coaching job elsewhere and making an impact. Look at Matt Doherty. After a humiliating "resignation" from UNC, he's gone from the television booth to Florida Atlantic to SMU. Butch Davis is another example. After his success with the Hurricanes, he was unable to accomplish anything with the Cleveland Browns (insert your favorite Cleveland Browns joke here). Point being, Bunting's career is not over.
Neither are Larry Coker's or Chuck Amato's, for that matter. Here's where the fun begins!
Actually, talking about the Miami coaching search is no fun at all. It's going to be either Rutgers coach Greg Schiano or Wisconsin athletic director (and former head coach) Barry Alvarez. Period.
Now, I do think it's fun that Miami is trying to woo anyone from Rutgers. A friend of mine who lives in New Jersey swears that there are three truths in life: death, taxes, and Rutgers football sucks. Due to Rutgers unexpected performance this season, she's probably now wandering the shoulder of the turnpike carrying signs predicting the end of the world.
Barry Alvarez makes sense, especially when you remember that Miami president Donna Shalala used to be the chancellor at Wisconsin. I've got no problem with Alvarez, but I am troubled by the idea that he would be both the head football coach and the athletic director. Hello? Les Robinson? Why does anyone ever think being both a head coach and an AD is a good idea?
Of course, Alvarez turned the Hurricanes down once before, back in 1995. But that was before Shalala was there. And shoot, Roy Williams said no to UNC the first time they asked. Well, okay, maybe this coaching search is fun to talk about after all.
Now onto NC State, which has already had one fun coaching search this year. Don't worry, Wolfpack fans. This search should be shorter and less circus-like. Why? Because the circumstances are different.
The decision to leave NC State was Lee Fowler's not Chuck Amato's. Amato liked being at State. The names State has supposedly targeted as potential replacements, Navy head coach Paul Johnson and Tennessee Titans offensive coordinator Norm Chow, are people who would benefit from becoming the head coach at an ACC school.
This thought, of course, assumes that Bill Cowher is not going to leave the Steelers to coach the Wolfpack, although he does have a nice house in Raleigh. I really can't imagine why Cowher would want to leave the NFL in order to coach college. Coaches leave the NFL for college for two reasons:
1) It's a promotion. As it would be for Norm Chow, and as it was for John Bunting.
2) They left college for the NFL, and realized it was a mistake. As it was for Steve Spurrier and Butch Davis.
Cowher fits into neither category.
I've also heard people mention Steve Logan. I'm not going to flat out say he wouldn't do it, but I doubt it. I think if he wanted to get back into coaching college football, he would have done it by now.
The process of finding a new coach should be short and painless. Now let's compare this search with the basketball search. Sendek had Lee Fowler's full support, at a premiere ACC school, and still chose, for all intents and purposes, to leave Raleigh in the middle of the night. While many Wolfpack fans celebrated Sendek's departure, many coaches probably saw Sendek's actions as a big warning sign, i.e. "Don't coach here." State then turned around and courted coaches (read: Rick Barnes, Rick Pitino, etc.) who would not benefit from leaving their schools to go to NC State. I bring up the basketball search not so much to make fun of it, but to point out why the football search should not resemble it at all. AT ALL.
But these things always have twists and turns. Let the fun begin.
On the one hand, I feel bad for John Bunting. He's definitely a first-class guy. On the other hand, I don't think his firing is going to have a major negative impact on his career. That's the beauty of the coaching profession...if you don't succeed with one team, you still have a good chance of finding another coaching job elsewhere and making an impact. Look at Matt Doherty. After a humiliating "resignation" from UNC, he's gone from the television booth to Florida Atlantic to SMU. Butch Davis is another example. After his success with the Hurricanes, he was unable to accomplish anything with the Cleveland Browns (insert your favorite Cleveland Browns joke here). Point being, Bunting's career is not over.
Neither are Larry Coker's or Chuck Amato's, for that matter. Here's where the fun begins!
Actually, talking about the Miami coaching search is no fun at all. It's going to be either Rutgers coach Greg Schiano or Wisconsin athletic director (and former head coach) Barry Alvarez. Period.
Now, I do think it's fun that Miami is trying to woo anyone from Rutgers. A friend of mine who lives in New Jersey swears that there are three truths in life: death, taxes, and Rutgers football sucks. Due to Rutgers unexpected performance this season, she's probably now wandering the shoulder of the turnpike carrying signs predicting the end of the world.
Barry Alvarez makes sense, especially when you remember that Miami president Donna Shalala used to be the chancellor at Wisconsin. I've got no problem with Alvarez, but I am troubled by the idea that he would be both the head football coach and the athletic director. Hello? Les Robinson? Why does anyone ever think being both a head coach and an AD is a good idea?
Of course, Alvarez turned the Hurricanes down once before, back in 1995. But that was before Shalala was there. And shoot, Roy Williams said no to UNC the first time they asked. Well, okay, maybe this coaching search is fun to talk about after all.
Now onto NC State, which has already had one fun coaching search this year. Don't worry, Wolfpack fans. This search should be shorter and less circus-like. Why? Because the circumstances are different.
The decision to leave NC State was Lee Fowler's not Chuck Amato's. Amato liked being at State. The names State has supposedly targeted as potential replacements, Navy head coach Paul Johnson and Tennessee Titans offensive coordinator Norm Chow, are people who would benefit from becoming the head coach at an ACC school.
This thought, of course, assumes that Bill Cowher is not going to leave the Steelers to coach the Wolfpack, although he does have a nice house in Raleigh. I really can't imagine why Cowher would want to leave the NFL in order to coach college. Coaches leave the NFL for college for two reasons:
1) It's a promotion. As it would be for Norm Chow, and as it was for John Bunting.
2) They left college for the NFL, and realized it was a mistake. As it was for Steve Spurrier and Butch Davis.
Cowher fits into neither category.
I've also heard people mention Steve Logan. I'm not going to flat out say he wouldn't do it, but I doubt it. I think if he wanted to get back into coaching college football, he would have done it by now.
The process of finding a new coach should be short and painless. Now let's compare this search with the basketball search. Sendek had Lee Fowler's full support, at a premiere ACC school, and still chose, for all intents and purposes, to leave Raleigh in the middle of the night. While many Wolfpack fans celebrated Sendek's departure, many coaches probably saw Sendek's actions as a big warning sign, i.e. "Don't coach here." State then turned around and courted coaches (read: Rick Barnes, Rick Pitino, etc.) who would not benefit from leaving their schools to go to NC State. I bring up the basketball search not so much to make fun of it, but to point out why the football search should not resemble it at all. AT ALL.
But these things always have twists and turns. Let the fun begin.
Tuesday, November 21, 2006
The Sports Chic returns (at the most opportune time)
For my two fans who have asked about my blog, I'm back. The master's paper is done, the semester's almost over, and there's still tons of football and basketball to be watched.
I think I picked a good two months or so to tune out. Who wants to write about UNC getting trounced by South Florida, anyway? That was the last game I attended until the NC State game this past weekend. The South Florida game was cold, we lost to a team that everyone thought we could beat, and I didn't get my free hot dog for Student Appreciation Day because of some planning snafu (as in, the vendors seemed unaware that every student in the stadium was going to ask for a hot dog). It was enough to make me wonder why I wasn't watching the game in a climate-controlled bar, with beer, where I had the option of watching other games as well.
I was so distraught, I decided to go underground and do things like attempt to graduate on time.
I re-emerged into the sports world just in time for the UNC-NC State football game. I think I timed that as well as I possibly could. UNC continued its mini-tradition of beating State, regardless of their performance during the rest of the season. The only drawback of this victory? Lee Fowler might just decide to can Chucky. UNC fans feel the same way about Chucky as they did about Herb Sendek--they like him because UNC always finds a way to beat him.
Oh well. UNC gets Butch Davis (we think..we hope...the end of the Dook game can't come fast enough...). I'm more than happy to sit back and watch another NC State coaching search circus.
Okay...let the catching up begin.
I think I picked a good two months or so to tune out. Who wants to write about UNC getting trounced by South Florida, anyway? That was the last game I attended until the NC State game this past weekend. The South Florida game was cold, we lost to a team that everyone thought we could beat, and I didn't get my free hot dog for Student Appreciation Day because of some planning snafu (as in, the vendors seemed unaware that every student in the stadium was going to ask for a hot dog). It was enough to make me wonder why I wasn't watching the game in a climate-controlled bar, with beer, where I had the option of watching other games as well.
I was so distraught, I decided to go underground and do things like attempt to graduate on time.
I re-emerged into the sports world just in time for the UNC-NC State football game. I think I timed that as well as I possibly could. UNC continued its mini-tradition of beating State, regardless of their performance during the rest of the season. The only drawback of this victory? Lee Fowler might just decide to can Chucky. UNC fans feel the same way about Chucky as they did about Herb Sendek--they like him because UNC always finds a way to beat him.
Oh well. UNC gets Butch Davis (we think..we hope...the end of the Dook game can't come fast enough...). I'm more than happy to sit back and watch another NC State coaching search circus.
Okay...let the catching up begin.
Tuesday, October 17, 2006
New Updates Soon
Contrary to popular belief, the Tar Heels football team has not driven me to stop posting on this blog. I just caught up with trying to graduate (imagine that! I'm stopping at 5 degrees!). Stay tuned.
Monday, September 25, 2006
Clemson 52, UNC 7
Let's revisit a few sentences from last week's blog about the Furman game:
1) "There's no defensive players in here. I've killed them all."
That's what John Bunting told reporters after UNC's narrow victory over the Furman Paladins, during which UNC's defense(?) gave up 521 yards of total offense.
2) Now my question is, if Bunting killed them all, who's going to play defense(?) against Clemson this weekend?
Well, ladies and gentleman, we now have the answer to my question! Absolutely no one!
I don't think I need to go into detail about what went wrong here. The defense didn't show up. The offense didn't show up. The final score looked like a score we're accustomed to seeing for Dook, not us.
Here's a very important consequence of Saturday's loss: my dad has decided he wouldn't mind if John Bunting gets fired.
For those of you who don't know my dad, he's rather passionate about Carolina football. He goes to the games and yells. If you didn't know better, you'd think he's always waiting for the coach to get fired so he can get a chance at the job. But in reality, he's usually on the coach's side. His saying has always been that you don't fire a coach mid-contract over a matter or wins and losses.
Don't look for him to start contributing to FireBunting.com anytime soon. But his statement that he would not disapprove of Bunting being fired is, for me anyway, quite a strong statement.
So what's caused my dad's change of heart? Read on. I've inserted some of my own commentary as well.
1) This is John Bunting's program.
That's right. He's been the head coach since 2001. The recruits are his. The system is his. He's had time to dismantle any remnants of Carl Torbush's system.
Dick Baddour axed Torbush after a mere three seasons, after he had racked up a 16-18 record (17-18 if you count his first game as head coach, the 1997 Gator Bowl). Torbush's biggest problem was that he was the first head coach after Mack Brown. Brown compiled a 62-32-1 record during his tenure as UNC's head coach, including a 20-3 record in his last two seasons. UNC had big expectations and a renovated stadium. 16-18 wasn't going to cut it. You can argue that Torbush got a raw deal. After all, Brown went 2-20 during his first two seasons. But that's a whole different line of discussion.
What is up for discussion is that Bunting now has a 25-39 record at Carolina. That's 9 (or 8) more wins in 5+ seasons than Torbush had in three seasons. And he's already lost more games than Brown lost in 10 seasons. Lucky for him that he's the second coach after Mack Brown and not the first.
All this talk leads to...
2) The program isn't going anywhere.
If anything, it's going backwards. Sure, it's great that we can beat State and Dook most years, and the 2001 win against FSU and the 2004 win against Miami were nice. But when you give up 40+ points and have to rely on a last second field goal to beat a Division I-AA team, and then lose 52-7 the next week, people begin to dismiss your team (if they haven't already).
Let's go back to Carl Torbush's first win as UNC's head coach, the aforementioned 1997 Gator Bowl.
I remember this game quite well. I was visiting my family in Miami. On the day of the game, my dad, brother, and I boarded a commercial flight to Jacksonville, rented a car, went to the game, and then flew back to Miami. The next day, we got in the car (with my mom) and drove home to Virginia. Don't worry if those arrangements don't make any sense to you.
Anyway, the Tar Heels were ranked #4 in the nation, and had a legitimate argument that they should have gone to a BCS bowl. Denied, UNC played an up-and-coming program who many people had never paid attention to before, and won the game 42-3.
The team they beat? Virginia Tech.
As I said, the program isn't going anywhere. And unfortunately, that all leads back to Bunting.
3) The natives are restless
It's nice to think that Tar Heel fans will sit back, smile, and root for their team regardless of performance. But this never happens in reality, either in college sports or professional sports.
Look, going to games is time-consuming. You have to find and pay for a parking spot. You've got to walk to the stadium. You've got to push your way through the crowd. You've got to pay for the overpriced concessions. You've got to watch the game while avoiding getting your eye poked out by an over-enthusiastic pom-pom waver. Then you've got to find your car and wait 5 years to get out of the lot/deck. I'm not whining. I love going to games. But the more disappointing the team, the less likely people are going to be to go through the whole ordeal, especially when they can watch the game at home and flip to a better game when necessary. It's no coincidence that good teams play to packed stadiums, and bad teams play to empty stadiums. And no amount of arguing that "fans should support their teams no matter what" is going to change that.
John Bunting knows this. That's why he thanked the fans during their support during the Furman game.
--
Okay, so we've established reasons why Bunting should go. Now, let's not do silly things like expect the first top-name coach we can think of to take the job should it become vacant. I've seen the names Jimmy Johnson, Lou Holtz, and Tommy Bowden all thrown out on FireBunting.com. Don't be disappointed if none of those coaches are there next season. For all we know, Bunting will still be there. A few years ago, many Tar Heel fans started talking about Steve Spurrier coming to Chapel Hill. The only problem was that the team didn't have a coaching vacancy. And Dick Baddour says he's not planning to fire anyone.
1) "There's no defensive players in here. I've killed them all."
That's what John Bunting told reporters after UNC's narrow victory over the Furman Paladins, during which UNC's defense(?) gave up 521 yards of total offense.
2) Now my question is, if Bunting killed them all, who's going to play defense(?) against Clemson this weekend?
Well, ladies and gentleman, we now have the answer to my question! Absolutely no one!
I don't think I need to go into detail about what went wrong here. The defense didn't show up. The offense didn't show up. The final score looked like a score we're accustomed to seeing for Dook, not us.
Here's a very important consequence of Saturday's loss: my dad has decided he wouldn't mind if John Bunting gets fired.
For those of you who don't know my dad, he's rather passionate about Carolina football. He goes to the games and yells. If you didn't know better, you'd think he's always waiting for the coach to get fired so he can get a chance at the job. But in reality, he's usually on the coach's side. His saying has always been that you don't fire a coach mid-contract over a matter or wins and losses.
Don't look for him to start contributing to FireBunting.com anytime soon. But his statement that he would not disapprove of Bunting being fired is, for me anyway, quite a strong statement.
So what's caused my dad's change of heart? Read on. I've inserted some of my own commentary as well.
1) This is John Bunting's program.
That's right. He's been the head coach since 2001. The recruits are his. The system is his. He's had time to dismantle any remnants of Carl Torbush's system.
Dick Baddour axed Torbush after a mere three seasons, after he had racked up a 16-18 record (17-18 if you count his first game as head coach, the 1997 Gator Bowl). Torbush's biggest problem was that he was the first head coach after Mack Brown. Brown compiled a 62-32-1 record during his tenure as UNC's head coach, including a 20-3 record in his last two seasons. UNC had big expectations and a renovated stadium. 16-18 wasn't going to cut it. You can argue that Torbush got a raw deal. After all, Brown went 2-20 during his first two seasons. But that's a whole different line of discussion.
What is up for discussion is that Bunting now has a 25-39 record at Carolina. That's 9 (or 8) more wins in 5+ seasons than Torbush had in three seasons. And he's already lost more games than Brown lost in 10 seasons. Lucky for him that he's the second coach after Mack Brown and not the first.
All this talk leads to...
2) The program isn't going anywhere.
If anything, it's going backwards. Sure, it's great that we can beat State and Dook most years, and the 2001 win against FSU and the 2004 win against Miami were nice. But when you give up 40+ points and have to rely on a last second field goal to beat a Division I-AA team, and then lose 52-7 the next week, people begin to dismiss your team (if they haven't already).
Let's go back to Carl Torbush's first win as UNC's head coach, the aforementioned 1997 Gator Bowl.
I remember this game quite well. I was visiting my family in Miami. On the day of the game, my dad, brother, and I boarded a commercial flight to Jacksonville, rented a car, went to the game, and then flew back to Miami. The next day, we got in the car (with my mom) and drove home to Virginia. Don't worry if those arrangements don't make any sense to you.
Anyway, the Tar Heels were ranked #4 in the nation, and had a legitimate argument that they should have gone to a BCS bowl. Denied, UNC played an up-and-coming program who many people had never paid attention to before, and won the game 42-3.
The team they beat? Virginia Tech.
As I said, the program isn't going anywhere. And unfortunately, that all leads back to Bunting.
3) The natives are restless
It's nice to think that Tar Heel fans will sit back, smile, and root for their team regardless of performance. But this never happens in reality, either in college sports or professional sports.
Look, going to games is time-consuming. You have to find and pay for a parking spot. You've got to walk to the stadium. You've got to push your way through the crowd. You've got to pay for the overpriced concessions. You've got to watch the game while avoiding getting your eye poked out by an over-enthusiastic pom-pom waver. Then you've got to find your car and wait 5 years to get out of the lot/deck. I'm not whining. I love going to games. But the more disappointing the team, the less likely people are going to be to go through the whole ordeal, especially when they can watch the game at home and flip to a better game when necessary. It's no coincidence that good teams play to packed stadiums, and bad teams play to empty stadiums. And no amount of arguing that "fans should support their teams no matter what" is going to change that.
John Bunting knows this. That's why he thanked the fans during their support during the Furman game.
--
Okay, so we've established reasons why Bunting should go. Now, let's not do silly things like expect the first top-name coach we can think of to take the job should it become vacant. I've seen the names Jimmy Johnson, Lou Holtz, and Tommy Bowden all thrown out on FireBunting.com. Don't be disappointed if none of those coaches are there next season. For all we know, Bunting will still be there. A few years ago, many Tar Heel fans started talking about Steve Spurrier coming to Chapel Hill. The only problem was that the team didn't have a coaching vacancy. And Dick Baddour says he's not planning to fire anyone.
Monday, September 18, 2006
Panthers: I know I'm not a coach...
...and there's a good reason that I'm not a coach. I know that John Fox is much more qualified to coach the Panthers than I am.
But I am absolutely speechless about two calls Fox made versus the Vikings on Sunday.
1) You know what this point is without me saying it. Why, with a 13-6 lead...midway through the fourth quarter...with momentum...and good field position...did Fox tell Chris Gamble to throw a lateral on a punt return?
My initial reaction: "Leon Lett is off the hook."
I can't say anything more about this play. I am absolutely speechless.
2) Since the Vikings took advantage of their fantastic field position and scored a touchdown, why...with 15 seconds left in the game...with two timeouts remaining...on the road...when you know sudden death is the alternative...did Fox decide to run out the clock and go to OT? Delhomme couldn't have taken a shot at the end zone? Or tried for field goal position?
So, the Panthers took a risk when they didn't need to, and chickened out when they should have gone for the win.
I know, I know. I'm not the coach.
But I am absolutely speechless about two calls Fox made versus the Vikings on Sunday.
1) You know what this point is without me saying it. Why, with a 13-6 lead...midway through the fourth quarter...with momentum...and good field position...did Fox tell Chris Gamble to throw a lateral on a punt return?
My initial reaction: "Leon Lett is off the hook."
I can't say anything more about this play. I am absolutely speechless.
2) Since the Vikings took advantage of their fantastic field position and scored a touchdown, why...with 15 seconds left in the game...with two timeouts remaining...on the road...when you know sudden death is the alternative...did Fox decide to run out the clock and go to OT? Delhomme couldn't have taken a shot at the end zone? Or tried for field goal position?
So, the Panthers took a risk when they didn't need to, and chickened out when they should have gone for the win.
I know, I know. I'm not the coach.
UNC D(?)
"There's no defensive players in here. I've killed them all."
That's what John Bunting told reporters after UNC's narrow victory over the Furman Paladins, during which UNC's defense(?) gave up 521 yards of total offense. The Sports Monday section of the Daily Tar Heel: "UNC eludes embarrassment, barely."
Now, had you told me that the defense(?) would give up such numbers after UNC's loss to Rutgers, I probably would have believed you. After all, Rutgers' running back Ray Rice rushed for 201 yards and three touchdowns. My final assessment: offense okay, defense bad.
But the following week against Virginia Tech, the defense played just fine. Sure, the final score was 35-10, but VT got a bunch of those points due to interceptions. My final assessment: offense took fall break a month or so early, defense just fine.
So, I don't quite understand how during the Furman game, the offense looked as good as it's probably going to look, and the defense(?) looked like it had forgotten it had played so well against the Hokies.
The only glitch in the offense was the one Cam Sexton interception. That was my friend's fault. For whatever reason, he commented that we hadn't had any interceptions. Sexton threw the INT during the next play. People who aren't sports fans don't understand sports fans' beliefs in superstitions and jinxes. But oh, how real they are. In fact, maybe my blog is a jinx...
...okay, that's a whole different blog post.
Now my question is, if Bunting killed them all, who's going to play defense(?) against Clemson this weekend? Will they prove to be consistently bad or consistenly good, or will they keep us guessing each week?
Tune in Saturday to find out.
That's what John Bunting told reporters after UNC's narrow victory over the Furman Paladins, during which UNC's defense(?) gave up 521 yards of total offense. The Sports Monday section of the Daily Tar Heel: "UNC eludes embarrassment, barely."
Now, had you told me that the defense(?) would give up such numbers after UNC's loss to Rutgers, I probably would have believed you. After all, Rutgers' running back Ray Rice rushed for 201 yards and three touchdowns. My final assessment: offense okay, defense bad.
But the following week against Virginia Tech, the defense played just fine. Sure, the final score was 35-10, but VT got a bunch of those points due to interceptions. My final assessment: offense took fall break a month or so early, defense just fine.
So, I don't quite understand how during the Furman game, the offense looked as good as it's probably going to look, and the defense(?) looked like it had forgotten it had played so well against the Hokies.
The only glitch in the offense was the one Cam Sexton interception. That was my friend's fault. For whatever reason, he commented that we hadn't had any interceptions. Sexton threw the INT during the next play. People who aren't sports fans don't understand sports fans' beliefs in superstitions and jinxes. But oh, how real they are. In fact, maybe my blog is a jinx...
...okay, that's a whole different blog post.
Now my question is, if Bunting killed them all, who's going to play defense(?) against Clemson this weekend? Will they prove to be consistently bad or consistenly good, or will they keep us guessing each week?
Tune in Saturday to find out.
Thursday, September 14, 2006
Meet Stanley
To celebrate the beginning of NHL training camp, let's take a few moments to view last season's ultimate prize, the Stanley Cup. Most of these pictures were taken at the home of Carolina Hurricanes' Director of Media Relations Mike Sundheim. The latter pictures were taken at Linda's Bar & Grill on Franklin Street in Chapel Hill. Many of the pictures feature Kyle Hanlin, the Hurricanes' manager of media relations.
A few comments: It's the real Stanley Cup. No, not the original Stanley Cup. We all know that one's in the Hockey Hall of Fame. Get over it. But this one is the current real Stanley Cup, not the replica that gets taken to promotional events.
Also, if anyone wants to post their own Stanley Cup pics on this blog, let me know. I'll see what I can do. Watch out for new pics as they appear.
Enjoy.
Click here to see Stanley.
A few comments: It's the real Stanley Cup. No, not the original Stanley Cup. We all know that one's in the Hockey Hall of Fame. Get over it. But this one is the current real Stanley Cup, not the replica that gets taken to promotional events.
Also, if anyone wants to post their own Stanley Cup pics on this blog, let me know. I'll see what I can do. Watch out for new pics as they appear.
Enjoy.
Click here to see Stanley.
Sunday, September 10, 2006
Panthers: the season is not lost...
...although Fox's announcers would like for you to think it is. According to them, the fact that Carolina lost to Atlanta signifies "a major shift in the NFC South." (I apologize for not remembering who the announcers were.)
Mind you, the Panthers lost their opening game of the season last year to the New Orleans Saints. I don't think that loss lead to a major shift in the NFC South. Come on, folks. It's the first game of the season. In fact, the Panthers have now lost their past three season openers--all at home. This isn't college football. You can lose some games along the way without sending your season into the oblivion of meaninglessness.
Furthermore, it's not like the Panthers looked awful in the pre-season. But since everyone seems to have picked Carolina as their Super Bowl favorites, the Panthers are going to have to deal with the fact that every blemish on their record is going to be overly scrunitnized.
With that being said, I was disappointed by the 20-6 loss. Atlanta's offense, lead by Warrick Dunn, had their way with the Panthers' defensive line. Carolina's offensive line couldn't figure out how to stop Falcon offseason acquisition John Abraham. I could go on and on, but the main theme is this: the Falcons looked like they were ready to play, and the Panthers didn't.
It's true that the Panthers were playing without Steve Smith, who was sidelined with a hamstring injury. Had he played, he might have been able to electrify the offense. But I'm not going to dismiss this loss as something that happened because Smith didn't play. Yes, I'd like him to get healthy as soon as possible so he can get on the field. But although he's the Panthers #1 offensive weapon, he's certainly not the only one. The Panthers are talented enough to run a good offense without Smith, although they are more talented with him.
In summary: Today's loss doesn't really mean much. And don't blame Smith's injury for it.
As always, and perhaps more annoying than the Panthers performance, was the fact that the game was on Fox. Let's list some of the more interesting aspects of the broadcast:
1) On more than one occasion, the cameraman in charge of following the ball failed to do so.
2) On at least one occassion, the person in charge of adding the "down/to go" arrow graphics displayed the wrong information.
3) Near the beginning of the game, Carolina linebacker (and former Georgia Bulldog) Thomas Davis was called for a late hit. The crowd started booing. One of the announcers commented that this was probably the first time Davis had been booed in Georgia. Apparantly that guy isn't too good at geography, as the game took place in Charlotte. I can pick apart his statement even further, but I'll spare you.
4) Sound level issues.
5) Once the Falcons-Panthers game ended, the Jaguars-Cowboys came on. On at least one occasion, one of the announcers (mind you, different announcers) referred to the Cowboys as the Panthers.
6) Etc.
Oh, the joys of watching football on Fox.
Mind you, the Panthers lost their opening game of the season last year to the New Orleans Saints. I don't think that loss lead to a major shift in the NFC South. Come on, folks. It's the first game of the season. In fact, the Panthers have now lost their past three season openers--all at home. This isn't college football. You can lose some games along the way without sending your season into the oblivion of meaninglessness.
Furthermore, it's not like the Panthers looked awful in the pre-season. But since everyone seems to have picked Carolina as their Super Bowl favorites, the Panthers are going to have to deal with the fact that every blemish on their record is going to be overly scrunitnized.
With that being said, I was disappointed by the 20-6 loss. Atlanta's offense, lead by Warrick Dunn, had their way with the Panthers' defensive line. Carolina's offensive line couldn't figure out how to stop Falcon offseason acquisition John Abraham. I could go on and on, but the main theme is this: the Falcons looked like they were ready to play, and the Panthers didn't.
It's true that the Panthers were playing without Steve Smith, who was sidelined with a hamstring injury. Had he played, he might have been able to electrify the offense. But I'm not going to dismiss this loss as something that happened because Smith didn't play. Yes, I'd like him to get healthy as soon as possible so he can get on the field. But although he's the Panthers #1 offensive weapon, he's certainly not the only one. The Panthers are talented enough to run a good offense without Smith, although they are more talented with him.
In summary: Today's loss doesn't really mean much. And don't blame Smith's injury for it.
As always, and perhaps more annoying than the Panthers performance, was the fact that the game was on Fox. Let's list some of the more interesting aspects of the broadcast:
1) On more than one occasion, the cameraman in charge of following the ball failed to do so.
2) On at least one occassion, the person in charge of adding the "down/to go" arrow graphics displayed the wrong information.
3) Near the beginning of the game, Carolina linebacker (and former Georgia Bulldog) Thomas Davis was called for a late hit. The crowd started booing. One of the announcers commented that this was probably the first time Davis had been booed in Georgia. Apparantly that guy isn't too good at geography, as the game took place in Charlotte. I can pick apart his statement even further, but I'll spare you.
4) Sound level issues.
5) Once the Falcons-Panthers game ended, the Jaguars-Cowboys came on. On at least one occasion, one of the announcers (mind you, different announcers) referred to the Cowboys as the Panthers.
6) Etc.
Oh, the joys of watching football on Fox.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)