Payback. A story from the Dallas Morning News says TCU is pushing to keep Baylor out of the mountain west, as they're still pissed the Bears got the last ticket to the Big 12 fourteen years ago.
In the words of the great pacifist Rodney King, can't we all just get along?
Saturday, June 12, 2010
Friday, June 11, 2010
Breaking down the conference realignment
It's been awhile since I've posted, but wanted to break down all the conference realignment stuff that's been happening.
As I've seen in many periodicals, I thought I'd break it down in a Q&A forum:
WTF? Great question. In a nutshell, it's all about TV money.
Oh Wise One, can you elaborate more? I'd be glad to. The Big Ten network, which many ridiculed (me included), has been a raging financial success. It's allowed millions of government employees and unemployed people in the rust belt to pass their time watching the good old days, when Michigan and Ohio State were good at football at the same time. Somehow that's translated into $20 million per Big 10 school, and they wanted to share it with other schools.
What's the difference between an unemployed person in the Rust Belt and a government employee? Can I get back to you on that? It's a complicated question that's outside the scope of this forum.
Why did the Big 10 they pick Nebraska? You know, the Big 10 values academics. According to the US News and world report rankings the best fit geographically and academically is Iowa State. No one gives a S*** about Iowa State. Since the Big 10 is so smart, they knew that too, and went with the Huskers. Nebraska is a nationally recognized football brand.
What about Notre Dame? Everyone knows the Big 10's been whispering sweet nothings in ND's ears for years. I figured you already knew that. If it's all about TV money, why would ND walk away from their TV contract that they have to share with no one?
Why is Texas A&M interested in the SEC vs the Pac 16? I think it boils down to two things: 1) Tradition. 2) Travel schedule. it's much shorter travel time and cost to travel to the oil slick region than it is the pacific northwest. 3) Football.
That was three moron. Sorry, Aggie Football is about tradition. Aggies born prior to 1980 are used to seeing strong defense and mediocre quarterback play. If that doesn't scream ESS-EEE-SEE I don't know what does. Plus, in Aggie history, they've played 17 games against Pac 10 foes. Four of those were bowl games. They've played 151 games against SEC schools, primarily LSU and Arkansas.
All this stuff is coming out about poor chemistry in the Big 12. Do you see that being an issue in the Pac 16? If I may quote my father, "Does a bear poop in the woods?" Let's see, you've got Colorado joining a conference that Texas is going to join. Colorado is really pissed at Texas for trying to get Baylor in the conference instead of them. The original Pac 8 kicks Arizona and Arizona State (latecomers to the conference, joining in 1978) to Pac 16 Eastern Division with the Big 12 South + Colorado. You've got all the makings for acrimony and politics right there.
What should TCU do? If the Mountain West has any sense, they will organize a reverse merger with the remnants of the Big 12, where there continues to be a Big 12 conference that consists of Air Force, Baylor, Brigham Young, Colorado State, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Missouri, New Mexico, San Diego State, TCU, UNLV, Utah, Wyoming. Add Boise State and drop UNLV or Wyoming, for example, and you have a decent 14 team conference.
What about Baylor? Realistically, Baylor has three options: 1) remain in the Big 12/Mountain West as per above; 2) Join Conference USA and renew those Rice and SMU rivalries; 3) wait and see what happens with the rest of the college football landscape. Baylor has solid basketball programs, and baseball and tennis. The Art Briles era has lifted Baylor football from mediocrity to cute and mildly competitive. There's not TV eyeball allure to Baylor football, and that leaves them in a bind. I don't know where it shakes out for them.
How do you feel about the Pac-16 prospects. I'm excited about it. Football wise, the Big 12 was for the most part all about the Big 12 South. That's now the Pac-16 Not as Far West as the other guys Division. 1) It gives OU football more exposure in California, which can only help recruiting; 2) I can see Oregon-Oklahoma being a fun rivalry, even thought it'll only be played twice every eight years; 3) When USC recovers from their sanctions in 2018, it'll be interesting to watch USC-Texas or USC-Oklahoma locking horns on a regular basis. 4) I want to see how the schedule plays out, and how they do division championships. Think about it...you play your seven division rivals, plus two crossover games. Some year, Texas will get a game at Washington State and host UCLA (not the 1997 team), and OU travels to Oregon and hosts Stanford. The Sooners faithful will be howling about the unfairness of the schedule. Reverse the situation, and Longhorns are screaming about the imbalance of it all. It'll make for good, healthy internet dialogue amongst anonymous parties.
What do you think about the USC probation? From afar, USC appears to have taken the 1989 OU Compliance Guidebook and followed it to the letter: fail to cooperate, deny, then throw your hands up and say, "everyone does it, you're jealous of our success and are jsut out to get us." That being said, that's a harsh penalty for whatever they did. Admittedly, I've not read two paragraphs into a story on the USC investigation in five years, so I'm not an expert.
Will OU be awarded the national championship for that season now since USC has had to vacate all the wins? Did you watch the freaking game? We don't deserve a Poulan Weed Eater Independence Bowl t shirt for that performance. However, I've no doubt that someone dispatched a plane to Uganda to recover all those Oklahoma, 2005 National Champions t shirts, as they just became a little bit more valuable in Woodward, Broken Bow, Miami and several points in between.
As I've seen in many periodicals, I thought I'd break it down in a Q&A forum:
WTF? Great question. In a nutshell, it's all about TV money.
Oh Wise One, can you elaborate more? I'd be glad to. The Big Ten network, which many ridiculed (me included), has been a raging financial success. It's allowed millions of government employees and unemployed people in the rust belt to pass their time watching the good old days, when Michigan and Ohio State were good at football at the same time. Somehow that's translated into $20 million per Big 10 school, and they wanted to share it with other schools.
What's the difference between an unemployed person in the Rust Belt and a government employee? Can I get back to you on that? It's a complicated question that's outside the scope of this forum.
Why did the Big 10 they pick Nebraska? You know, the Big 10 values academics. According to the US News and world report rankings the best fit geographically and academically is Iowa State. No one gives a S*** about Iowa State. Since the Big 10 is so smart, they knew that too, and went with the Huskers. Nebraska is a nationally recognized football brand.
What about Notre Dame? Everyone knows the Big 10's been whispering sweet nothings in ND's ears for years. I figured you already knew that. If it's all about TV money, why would ND walk away from their TV contract that they have to share with no one?
Why is Texas A&M interested in the SEC vs the Pac 16? I think it boils down to two things: 1) Tradition. 2) Travel schedule. it's much shorter travel time and cost to travel to the oil slick region than it is the pacific northwest. 3) Football.
That was three moron. Sorry, Aggie Football is about tradition. Aggies born prior to 1980 are used to seeing strong defense and mediocre quarterback play. If that doesn't scream ESS-EEE-SEE I don't know what does. Plus, in Aggie history, they've played 17 games against Pac 10 foes. Four of those were bowl games. They've played 151 games against SEC schools, primarily LSU and Arkansas.
All this stuff is coming out about poor chemistry in the Big 12. Do you see that being an issue in the Pac 16? If I may quote my father, "Does a bear poop in the woods?" Let's see, you've got Colorado joining a conference that Texas is going to join. Colorado is really pissed at Texas for trying to get Baylor in the conference instead of them. The original Pac 8 kicks Arizona and Arizona State (latecomers to the conference, joining in 1978) to Pac 16 Eastern Division with the Big 12 South + Colorado. You've got all the makings for acrimony and politics right there.
What should TCU do? If the Mountain West has any sense, they will organize a reverse merger with the remnants of the Big 12, where there continues to be a Big 12 conference that consists of Air Force, Baylor, Brigham Young, Colorado State, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Missouri, New Mexico, San Diego State, TCU, UNLV, Utah, Wyoming. Add Boise State and drop UNLV or Wyoming, for example, and you have a decent 14 team conference.
What about Baylor? Realistically, Baylor has three options: 1) remain in the Big 12/Mountain West as per above; 2) Join Conference USA and renew those Rice and SMU rivalries; 3) wait and see what happens with the rest of the college football landscape. Baylor has solid basketball programs, and baseball and tennis. The Art Briles era has lifted Baylor football from mediocrity to cute and mildly competitive. There's not TV eyeball allure to Baylor football, and that leaves them in a bind. I don't know where it shakes out for them.
How do you feel about the Pac-16 prospects. I'm excited about it. Football wise, the Big 12 was for the most part all about the Big 12 South. That's now the Pac-16 Not as Far West as the other guys Division. 1) It gives OU football more exposure in California, which can only help recruiting; 2) I can see Oregon-Oklahoma being a fun rivalry, even thought it'll only be played twice every eight years; 3) When USC recovers from their sanctions in 2018, it'll be interesting to watch USC-Texas or USC-Oklahoma locking horns on a regular basis. 4) I want to see how the schedule plays out, and how they do division championships. Think about it...you play your seven division rivals, plus two crossover games. Some year, Texas will get a game at Washington State and host UCLA (not the 1997 team), and OU travels to Oregon and hosts Stanford. The Sooners faithful will be howling about the unfairness of the schedule. Reverse the situation, and Longhorns are screaming about the imbalance of it all. It'll make for good, healthy internet dialogue amongst anonymous parties.
What do you think about the USC probation? From afar, USC appears to have taken the 1989 OU Compliance Guidebook and followed it to the letter: fail to cooperate, deny, then throw your hands up and say, "everyone does it, you're jealous of our success and are jsut out to get us." That being said, that's a harsh penalty for whatever they did. Admittedly, I've not read two paragraphs into a story on the USC investigation in five years, so I'm not an expert.
Will OU be awarded the national championship for that season now since USC has had to vacate all the wins? Did you watch the freaking game? We don't deserve a Poulan Weed Eater Independence Bowl t shirt for that performance. However, I've no doubt that someone dispatched a plane to Uganda to recover all those Oklahoma, 2005 National Champions t shirts, as they just became a little bit more valuable in Woodward, Broken Bow, Miami and several points in between.
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
Tiger Returns
Muich wringing of hands about "How is Tiger going to be able to shut all the distractions out and play golf?" People...1) the concentration of an elite athlete is phenomenal, and Tiger is a notch above most others elite athletes; 2) Tiger was doing a great job of balancing his elite golf game with a wrecked up personal life prior to Thanksgiving, the only difference now is that we're aware of his wrecked up personal life; 3) the lobbying group of the wife who's been cheated on is not nearly as powerful as the ASPCA...there's aren't going to be demonstrations by a PR machine, he's playing before a group of fans of corporate America. In the crowd, there's likley to be an unfortunately high number of travelling businessmen that would hop into bed with the waitress at the Augusta Perkins restaurant if she'd give the signal.
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
Big 12 losing members
Earlier today, the Wiz has a post on Colorado and Utah potentially joining the Pac 10. I love the section where it says that Colorado has the academic requirements to blend in well with the Pac 10. Yeah, and similar levels of marijuana usage as well.
A few weeks ago, when the Big 10 indicated they might wish to expand, Missouri promptly said, "Pick me! Pick me!". Apparently Missouri's thought process is that being in a second tier bowl in the Big 10 gets you to Orlando, Florida, while a second tier bowl in the Big 12 gets you freezing your arse off in Dallas in January, or worse yet, hanging out in Houston for a week.
Well, here's my Big 12 plan for remediation:
If Colorado and Utah go to the Pac 10. Pick up TCU and add to the Big 12 South. They'll jump at the opportunity, because the Mountain West is on life support without the Utah-BYU intraconference rivalry. Move Oklahoma State to the North, as the northernmost school in the Big 12. Some Boone State fans would say, "but what about the rivalry with Oklahoma?". People, I've been alive for 43 OU-OSU games. The record during that time is 36-6-1 in favor of the Sooners. Wouldn't you rather play Kansas more often instead? Plus, it would mean being beaten by 20 by the Horns twice every four years, instead of four times every four years.
If Missouri jumps to the Big 10. Which would have 12 teams then, but would be called the Big 10? And the Big 12 would have 11 teams? This sounds like a freaking Lost episode. Anyway, I'd react the same way, and snap up TCU. Sure, the Horns fans would want the Big 12 to pick up Rice instead, since Texas plays them every year anyway, but TCU makes more sense.
A few weeks ago, when the Big 10 indicated they might wish to expand, Missouri promptly said, "Pick me! Pick me!". Apparently Missouri's thought process is that being in a second tier bowl in the Big 10 gets you to Orlando, Florida, while a second tier bowl in the Big 12 gets you freezing your arse off in Dallas in January, or worse yet, hanging out in Houston for a week.
Well, here's my Big 12 plan for remediation:
If Colorado and Utah go to the Pac 10. Pick up TCU and add to the Big 12 South. They'll jump at the opportunity, because the Mountain West is on life support without the Utah-BYU intraconference rivalry. Move Oklahoma State to the North, as the northernmost school in the Big 12. Some Boone State fans would say, "but what about the rivalry with Oklahoma?". People, I've been alive for 43 OU-OSU games. The record during that time is 36-6-1 in favor of the Sooners. Wouldn't you rather play Kansas more often instead? Plus, it would mean being beaten by 20 by the Horns twice every four years, instead of four times every four years.
If Missouri jumps to the Big 10. Which would have 12 teams then, but would be called the Big 10? And the Big 12 would have 11 teams? This sounds like a freaking Lost episode. Anyway, I'd react the same way, and snap up TCU. Sure, the Horns fans would want the Big 12 to pick up Rice instead, since Texas plays them every year anyway, but TCU makes more sense.
Billboard in Norman 1997
From the LandThieves archives of 1997...Locals in Norman are buzzing over may who funded this billboard along the Miracle Mile of Cars along I-35. We travelled to Norman to research the the locals reaction. Bobbie Sue Jones said, "We think one of them Gibbs apologists did it. Them people think Gary was a great coach and that John Blake is just wrecking this program. I think John's done some great things here, and they just don't realize the mess this team was in when John took over. Sure, it's been over a year since he took over, and we just got shut out by Northwestern, but it's not John's fault. Once his teaching methods and philosophy takes hold, we'll be just fine."
Others believe the sign was purchased by supporters of John Blake. Demetrius Jefferson, an OU sophomore, said, "I think someone like me purchased the sign. Someone that supports Coach Blake and realizes what a great job he's doing. Not everyone is smart enough to see that."
We did find a person that was very supportive of Gibbs tenure, who wished to remain anonymous. "Look, Coach Gibbs was a great man. With what he inherited from the previous regime, with all of those scholarship deficits, it just wasn't fair to expect the level of prosperity we'd enjoyed previously. Now that you've got someone else in there running the show, and what a deeper mess there is, you can now appreciate the leadership Coach Gibbs provided during a difficult time in our team's history."
Wednesday, January 6, 2010
Top 10 OTL Segments You'll never See
As I followed ESPN's "coverage" of the Leach firing, I decided to create a list of Outside the Line Segments You'll never see...
- Craig James' parenting methods: revolutionary or revolting
- What ESPN's former jock personalities say about Erin Andrews when the mic's are off
- Trent Dilfer - the ultimate game manager
- John Clayton biopic: How espn transformed me from stuffed inside a locker to an ESPNInsider
- The Lou Holtz Effect: how do his teams keep getting probation after he leaves
- Media-ocrity: How we take failed QBs like Jesse Palmer, Tim Hasselback and Sean Salisbury and make them experts on the position when their playing time is over
- Holly Rowe: the hottest girl in Salt Lake City
- Matt Millen: how did he land a job in sports again?
- Todd McShay: ESPN NFL Draft Expert or Mel Kiper Jr's coffee runner?
- Tim Legler: how playing for one of the worst teams in NBA history allows me to tell you what it takes to be an NBA champion
If you have additions, put them in the comments.
Saturday, January 2, 2010
Analysis of the affidavit from trainer
The big news in the Leach drama today is the affidavit of Steve Pincock the HFAT (Head Football Athletic Trainer) at Texas Tech. Could you be the Football Trainer and not be the Football Athletic Trainer? Perhaps there's a Football Academic Trainer? I digress.
The morons at ESPN keep saying that Leach was punishing Adam James for having a concussion. As I said previously, Leach appears to be punishing Adam James for being a punk, as we'll see below.
Anyway, I wanted to share a couple of excerpts from this and provide my opinions, full copy of the affidavit is here:
"3.In the morning on Dec 17, 2009, James reported to the training room...he was examined by Dr Michael Phy, who diagnosed him with a minor concussion...James should not practice and should not perform exercise that would increase pressure in his head."
I have no comment on this part, I'm just providing to add context. The emphasis added below is mine.
"4. In the afternoon of Dec 17, 2009, we had practice...Injured players are placed in an area on on the field referred to as "muscle beach" to participate in activities that are consistent with their respective injuries. James arrived for practice wearing street clothes, his cap on backwards and sunglasses and began walking around the field in a very nonchalant way. He was not wearing the standard jersey and cleats or workout gear expected of all players during practice, including injured players.
So, Leach was unhappy with a player who was loafing, and did not show up in the appropriate gear to practice, even for injured players. I ask you, the reader, what would you do in that instance? Is it appropriate for a coach to discipline a player for a nonchalant attitude?
"5. ...Leach was upset and concerned about James appearance and attitude. Leach said he did not want him loafing while the players were working...Leach told me to place James in a dark place "in a place so dark that the only way he knows he has a dick is to reach down and touch it".
I don't care you you are, right there, that's funny. This is not bridge club, it's football. I do believe that college football coaches have been known to swear on occasion, and it seems like Mr. Leach is no different. If you don't want your players sworn at, send them to Vanderbilt.
"6. ...Leach ordered me to place James in the dark, enclosed area where he could not sit or lay down...I told James that he was to stand in the dark for the entire practice....When I went to check on James after approximately 30 minutes...found him on the floor."
So, within 30 minutes, James had a) shown up for practice not prepared; b) walked around nonchalantly; c) disobeyed the coach's and trainer's instructions to remain standing.
"11. I am not aware of any other football player...being placed in a darkened shed or room similar to James...I feel that Leach's treatment of James was inappropriate, and I did not agree with it."
Look, I've had the same boss of the better part of the last 14 years. I've followed him from one job to another. There are times that I do not agree with decisions he's made that I must follow/administer. Every time that happens, I go through the same type of questions: a) does this violate my ethics?; b) am I required to do something as a result that will violate my ethics? c) do I understand the position and just disagree with it? d) do I need to gain further understanding of the decision before I proceed?
Note that Pincock did not agree with it, but did not take a stand and refuse to comply. Nowhere in Pincock's affidavit does he indicate that this treatment impaired James rehabilitation, nor does he indicate James is increase the likelihood of a recurrence of injury.
The treatment Mike Leach is trying to address here is best addressed by a quote from an email by Lincoln Riley, who is James' position coach, "Adam is unusually lazy and entitled...I have always been worried about Adam's effect on my other players because of his weak and conceited attitude."
And another email from Riley, "Two practices before...Coach Leach and I were forced to discipline him for poor effort...this has been a common theme...during his entire career...it was very clear Adam did not agree with the punishment."
An email from Dana Holgorsen, Adam James first position coach at Tech, "I always remained critical of Adams ability to play at this level due to being lazy not only in the classroom but also in the offseason and during practice."
Finally, Leach's firing was a result of insubordination, which I believe comes from refusal to sign a document Texas Tech instructed him to sign. Leach's firing, resulted from a long-standing contentious relationship between Leach and TT AD Gerald Myers, as well as certain people higher up in the TT administration. It's a great example of how regardless of your ability to execute (in Leach's instance, measured by wins and player graduation rates) may not override your penchant to complain about money and have a bad relationship with your boss.
Conversely, if I may comment on Myers and Hance, part of being a leader is learning to manage different personalities and utilize their strengths. If they attempted to appreciate his difference and manage through them, it was clear they were done with that long before this most recent episode.
The morons at ESPN keep saying that Leach was punishing Adam James for having a concussion. As I said previously, Leach appears to be punishing Adam James for being a punk, as we'll see below.
Anyway, I wanted to share a couple of excerpts from this and provide my opinions, full copy of the affidavit is here:
"3.In the morning on Dec 17, 2009, James reported to the training room...he was examined by Dr Michael Phy, who diagnosed him with a minor concussion...James should not practice and should not perform exercise that would increase pressure in his head."
I have no comment on this part, I'm just providing to add context. The emphasis added below is mine.
"4. In the afternoon of Dec 17, 2009, we had practice...Injured players are placed in an area on on the field referred to as "muscle beach" to participate in activities that are consistent with their respective injuries. James arrived for practice wearing street clothes, his cap on backwards and sunglasses and began walking around the field in a very nonchalant way. He was not wearing the standard jersey and cleats or workout gear expected of all players during practice, including injured players.
So, Leach was unhappy with a player who was loafing, and did not show up in the appropriate gear to practice, even for injured players. I ask you, the reader, what would you do in that instance? Is it appropriate for a coach to discipline a player for a nonchalant attitude?
"5. ...Leach was upset and concerned about James appearance and attitude. Leach said he did not want him loafing while the players were working...Leach told me to place James in a dark place "in a place so dark that the only way he knows he has a dick is to reach down and touch it".
I don't care you you are, right there, that's funny. This is not bridge club, it's football. I do believe that college football coaches have been known to swear on occasion, and it seems like Mr. Leach is no different. If you don't want your players sworn at, send them to Vanderbilt.
"6. ...Leach ordered me to place James in the dark, enclosed area where he could not sit or lay down...I told James that he was to stand in the dark for the entire practice....When I went to check on James after approximately 30 minutes...found him on the floor."
So, within 30 minutes, James had a) shown up for practice not prepared; b) walked around nonchalantly; c) disobeyed the coach's and trainer's instructions to remain standing.
"11. I am not aware of any other football player...being placed in a darkened shed or room similar to James...I feel that Leach's treatment of James was inappropriate, and I did not agree with it."
Look, I've had the same boss of the better part of the last 14 years. I've followed him from one job to another. There are times that I do not agree with decisions he's made that I must follow/administer. Every time that happens, I go through the same type of questions: a) does this violate my ethics?; b) am I required to do something as a result that will violate my ethics? c) do I understand the position and just disagree with it? d) do I need to gain further understanding of the decision before I proceed?
Note that Pincock did not agree with it, but did not take a stand and refuse to comply. Nowhere in Pincock's affidavit does he indicate that this treatment impaired James rehabilitation, nor does he indicate James is increase the likelihood of a recurrence of injury.
The treatment Mike Leach is trying to address here is best addressed by a quote from an email by Lincoln Riley, who is James' position coach, "Adam is unusually lazy and entitled...I have always been worried about Adam's effect on my other players because of his weak and conceited attitude."
And another email from Riley, "Two practices before...Coach Leach and I were forced to discipline him for poor effort...this has been a common theme...during his entire career...it was very clear Adam did not agree with the punishment."
An email from Dana Holgorsen, Adam James first position coach at Tech, "I always remained critical of Adams ability to play at this level due to being lazy not only in the classroom but also in the offseason and during practice."
Finally, Leach's firing was a result of insubordination, which I believe comes from refusal to sign a document Texas Tech instructed him to sign. Leach's firing, resulted from a long-standing contentious relationship between Leach and TT AD Gerald Myers, as well as certain people higher up in the TT administration. It's a great example of how regardless of your ability to execute (in Leach's instance, measured by wins and player graduation rates) may not override your penchant to complain about money and have a bad relationship with your boss.
Conversely, if I may comment on Myers and Hance, part of being a leader is learning to manage different personalities and utilize their strengths. If they attempted to appreciate his difference and manage through them, it was clear they were done with that long before this most recent episode.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
