Bleacher Report - Articles by Rusi Patel

Coaches Poll: Who Is Actually Voting?

Rusi Patel — Sat, 02 Aug 2008 07:52:39 -0400

The first Coaches Poll has already come out, marking an end to the dead days of summer and the impending start of another beautiful autumn.

This first Coaches Poll can be analyzed backwards and forwards as to whether a certain team deserved to be in a specific spot or not, and there are a number of teams that have a legitimate claim to No. 1.

But as opposed to the final poll of the season, few give this first poll very close scrutiny.

Many writers far better than me, both on this site and on other sites, have written about this first poll. As it is the first poll there is relatively little heated debate and trash talking. Fans want to wait till the season begins.

However, a few writers have noticed, as have I, that there is one major thing missing from this first Coaches Poll.

Steve Spurrier.

As a University of Georgia grad I loathe the Visor with all my being, but his habits and comments are always there to give me a chuckle. Free Shoes University will always live in my mind as one of the funniest coach comments of my life.

But Spurrier is notably absent from the first Coaches Poll.

You may be asking what exactly I mean.

Spurrier has made it known that he will always vote Duke No. 25 on his ballot—until they lose their first game—as a sign of respect and honor for the Blue Devils giving him his first shot as a head coach.

But there it is, the first Coaches Poll has come out and Spurrier and the Blue Devils are notably missing. This begs the question, what happened?

There are only two possible reasons that Spurrier did not vote Duke as No. 25 on his ballot.

1) He has some sort of personal vendetta against David Cutcliffe that we do not know about; or

2) He did not fill out his ballot, but someone else did.

Of the two possibilities, it is much more likely that the second is actually the true. And that, in my mind, is a problem that we have seen year in and year out in College Football with the Coaches Poll.

It's possible that the coaches aren't actually the ones filling out their ballots, and this may be a blatant instance of that.

Where is the honor? Where is the pride? Where is the sense of responsibility?

As a coach this, in a way, tells your players it is okay to have someone else do the work you were entrusted with. That, in my mind, is wrong.

Coaches are given the honor of voting in a poll of their peers to determine who gets to play in bowl games at the end of the season.

Now, you may be saying to yourself: Well, this is just the opening poll and that doesn't mean anything towards the end of the season.

That may or may not be true, but if a coach cannot take the time to fill out a ballot before the season begins, how can we expect him to fill out the ballot at the end of the season, when there are a lot more duties to take part in?

Maybe it is nitpicking, but when coaches do not fill out their own ballots it takes away from the integrity of the poll and, in turn, from the integrity of the BCS.

So, to Coach Spurrier and any other coaches who do not seem to be filling out their own ballots, take a second to realize what your failure means to the game, the teams, and most importantly, your players.

Mike Hampton: Finally Healthy.....Sort Of

Rusi Patel — Sun, 27 Jul 2008 04:49:10 -0400

Much has been written about the return of Mike Hampton to the Braves, but the difference between many of those articles and this one is...wait for it...this time he actually made it back!

But really, the question is, how much will Hampton help the Braves? Is he even a viable major league pitcher at this point in his career?

Admittedly, the Braves face a long road if they plan on competing for the last couple months of this season, and an honest look at the situation indicates the Braves are going to be sellers at the trade deadline for the first time since the 1990 season.

If Mike Hampton had only been out for one year that conclusion may be different. The Braves might have been able to look at his return as a trade deadline acquisition of a no. 2 or no. 3 starter.

But that is not the reality of the situation. Hampton has been out for so long Hayden Panettiere has gone from "Jail-bait" to perfectly legal. That fact completely alters the landscape for Hampton and for the Braves.

The Braves cannot look at Hampton as some sort of boon to the starting rotation. In fact, considering the amazing over-achievement the starting rotation has managed to maintain this season, the addition of Hampton may, indeed, be viewed as a major negative by the end of the season.

The Braves are not competing this season, despite the astounding job done by the cobbled together pitching staff. The bats have gone to the grave, with the exception of McCann and Chipper. Texiera is sure to soon be traded because of this situation.

Hampton had his first major league start in 35 months yesterday and did admirably for the first four innings. But in the fifth inning he imploded, along with a couple other pitchers, and coughed up a six run lead.

This is not the sort of addition the Braves can handle if they plan on competing in the division. Granted this was Hampton's first start and he is sure to improve, if he can maintain his health.

But there is the rub. By the time Hampton improves enough to be a positive boon on the Braves it will be too late, considering the hole the rest of the team has dug in the first four months of the season.

In all honesty, it is too bad Hampton could not make it back sooner, not for the possibility that it might have helped the Braves this season, but for the possibility that if he had managed to get a few quality starts in before the trade deadline he might have been trade fodder to a contending team somewhere.

You may say that in that situation the Braves would have had to eat a large portion of his massive contract and would not gotten much in return for Hampton. But I say to you this: Isn't that what the Braves have been doing for the past couple of years?

In the end, I hope Hampton can maintain his health for his own sake, and even more-so get a few quality starts in on his resume before the end of the season. I would hate to see his career end after this season because no one is willing to sign such a risk.

College Football Teams As Rock Bands

Rusi Patel — Sat, 26 Jul 2008 05:31:29 -0400

In the trend of humor articles about comparing college football teams to other groups or events, I began thinking of what some college football teams' counterparts in the rock 'n' roll world would be.

Although I used to work at many radio stations, my car does not even have a radio today, I do not have cable television (which will change when football season gets a little closer). With that caveat of not really listening to music anymore, here we go:

Vanderbilt:The Gorillaz

Smart. Really smart. Vanderbilt is the "nerd" school of the SEC, and as such an institution they do not actually have an athletic department. The Gorillaz, similarly, do not actually exist. They are a virtual band.

Deep down, you root for them. You admire their tenacity and the brains that went behind some of the decisions to bring them to where they are. Also, you cannot name a single player/fake band member of either team.

BYU: Twisted Sister

Why, you may ask, is a college football team that has consistently been among the better non-BCS teams being grouped with a former glam rock band? The answer is actually quite simple.

Both BYU and Twisted Sister had one glorious year: 1984. BYU won the national championship and Twisted Sister had their only two hits: "We're Not Gonna Take It!" and "I Wanna Rock".

Southern Methodist:Van Halen

Which is the true Van Halen: David Lee Roth or Sammy Hagar? (I believe a similar question was asked in the movie "Airheads"...not to digress, but what is up with Brendan Fraser always selecting movie roles as a backwards idiot?)

Both SMU and Van Halen had their heyday in the early 80's. SMU was given the death penalty. Van Halen was given Sammy Hagar. Both have recently taken steps to come back, one with June Jones and the other with David Lee Roth.

Georgia Tech: Tilly and the Wall

Who?I am going to admit a little bias here, as I went to high school with a couple members of this band. But why is Georgia Tech listed as Tilly and the Wall? Because they both run one heckuva unconventional offense! Georgia Tech is going to be running the triple option for the foreseeable future.

Tilly and the Wall, instead of a drummer, has a tap dancer! (If you haven't heard it, you should YouTube it.) As strange as both may sound, they both have proven to bring success in, albeit, small doses. And that is the problem; neither one is going to get huge, but it doesn't mean you can't admire their drive.

Alabama: Led Zeppelin

I was really tempted here to put down Alabama (the band) as the counterpart, but they don't really do much of anything anymore (and yes, you could make a joke and say the same of the football team). I decided not to be that mean and I went with Led Zeppelin. Ok...so that may be meaner. Bear with me.

Both Alabama and Led Zeppelin were the best at what they did for a while there, but neither has done much of anything since 1979. (I know Alabama won a national championship in 1992, but man there were some hellacious sanctions in the years following.)

In 2007, Led Zeppelin got back together and Alabama has hired Nick Saban, both in hopes of recapturing old glory. I got news fans....you set the bar too high a long time ago. You might find some success, but nothing like you had.

Nebraska: The Who

Both The Who and Nebraska have to be considered among the best of the best. But you really have to think about it, because they both have seemed like they don't even exist. And yes, The Who actually stills tours.

More importantly, can you really name any players on the Nebraska team anymore? This is a team that has quickly sunk into anonymity, much like the band. It would be awesome if, instead of a regular huddle, Bo Pelini, makes his players have a Who Huddle?

Notre Dame: The Rolling Stones

Both Notre Dame and The Rolling Stones are very popular. Both the band and the football team have had numerous hits over the years, but they are both living in the past.

They both can sell out a show in no time at all, but when was the last time they did anything of true notoriety? And really y'all..."waking up the echoes"...do I really need to say more? (My bad on the "ghosts" thing y'all...thanks for catching that.)

USC: U2

It is so uncool to like either one of them, but admit it. Whenever "With or Without You" comes on the radio, you find yourself belting it out like there is no tomorrow. You respect them and even like them somewhere, deep down, even though you know you are bigger tool in the long run for doing so.

Perhaps most importantly, everyone in their field wants to be them. Football programs want USC's success and fame, and bands want the success and fame of U2.

LSU:Coldplay

In the new millennium Coldplay has been just as good, if not better, than U2...and yet, they are not U2. They try to be self-righteous just like U2. They may even have more hits in the recent past. But whenever another band talks about the most successful bands, U2 still tops the list.

LSU, despite having won more BCS championships than USC, still plays second fiddle to USC. You know that just sticks up their craw.

Ohio State: Dave Matthews Band

The guys you love to hate. You know they are good. You know all they do is succeed. But damned if you can't stand them. They seem so cocky and sure of themselves, and every now and then you catch yourself saying "Man that game/song was good!" And then you realize what you just said and you want to vomit.

You know how good they are, and yet, unless you were born and bred into liking them, you will never admit to your fellow human being that you actually respect them.

The Band has been saying a new album is on the way for a couple years, but they have disappointed so far. Sound like any National Championship talk you have heard lately?

Florida: Maroon 5

Other than the fact that Urban Meyer looks like Adam Levinein 10 years? Maroon 5 is like the American version of Coldplay, just not nearly as successful lately, no matter how much they try to convince themselves. You can't help but like the lead actor Tim Tebow/Adam Levine, and they can get some hot females to tag along, but in the end you would have no problems if they never played again.

Why? Because sometimes, and by sometimes, I mean almost all the time, you really just can't stand them. It's like they have taken this new-fashioned thing called the spread offense/emo to a whole new frontier and now claim they invented the damned thing.

Plagiarism and the Bleacher Report

Rusi Patel — Sun, 01 Jun 2008 14:20:59 -0400

Since I discovered this site back in the winter I have written a little over twenty articles and three times I have encountered interesting situations when it comes to my writing.

Once, an article in the Atlanta-Journal Constitution, written by the father of an ex-girlfriend I had dated for a long time and on the week she was set to be married appeared in said newspaper. This article was written on an exact topic I had written on in the Bleacher Report and containing many of the same facts a few months prior.

These facts in and of themselves would not have been all that odd except for his opening line, which read: "It’s funny how you stumble onto things when you’re actually looking for something else." At the time, if you had googled my name, that article was one of the first things that appeared. You can see my article here and you can see his article here.

At the time his article came out I must admit I was a little more than curious and upset.

Then recent events of my last two articles I have written on the Bleacher Report have made me re-evaluate the situation.

I recently wrote an article entitled "Atlanta Braves: A Tale of Two Cities". Unfortunately, this article is no longer available on this website because of my poor timing.

A few hours before I wrote such article another writer, Chad Haynie, chose to write on the same exact topic, that being the Braves great play at home and horrific play on the road. Although Chad's article contained many more stats and was, admittedly, better written my article was taken down by the Bleacher Report's Content and Community Director, Zander Freund, because, as Zander said in his email to me it was "was copied verbatim" from Chad's article.

There was one major problem with such an assertion. It implied the article's were identical. In fact, the articles had one out of place word that put them in common, other than the topic. Chad's article talked of a "tale of two teams" while my title borrowed from Charles Dickens in a similar fashion.

Apparently, on the Bleacher Report you must be careful of using alliteration or the Content Police will delete your articles without any questions.

Unfortunately, the articles had very little in common other than the main topic. While Chad delved into stats I looked at the Braves being two distinctively different teams. One old and the other young. I did not have a single stat in the article. In fact I did not even put in the Braves home and road records, mainly because I did not want to look them up.

Nevertheless, my article was taken down without asking and I was thrown into a rage at Zander. I understood where Chad was coming from in thinking I had taken his article. I had been there before. However, I had not read his article at all until Zander told me my article had been deleted.

After I send Zander a very scathing email I read Chad's article, which, as I have said was better written than my article. As the Content and Community Director I thought Zander should have a little more tact and understanding of his own website.

Many people write for this website and it is not impossible for topics to be written about more than once, especially topics that are common knowledge amongst a base of fans, such as the Atlanta Braves road woes. Zander should have known that and should know it now.

I was willing to let that encounter pass after receiving an apology from Zander which he did after admitting to only giving the articles "a quick glance" and "for rushing to judgment without giving you a chance to explain yourself." Zander also claimed the Bleacher Report could get into some serious legal trouble if they waited until the writer responded to take down articles that looked suspicious.

Zander may be giving this website more credit than it is due. While it has been teamed with Fox Sports and some legitimate writers are now on this website, the truth of the matter is this website is a glorified blog. The writers on this website are bloggers for the most part. Unless the Bleacher Report has taken legal steps I am unaware of, and as a writer who writes on the site I should be made aware of, the majority of the material on this website is probably not copyrighted. Not being copyrighted it would be hard to get into legal trouble.

That, however, was not the end of my experiences with plagiarism and this website. A few days ago I decided to give the site another chance and wrote an article about the end of the steroids era (which is a guess in and of itself).

This article, which was selected as a "Pick of the Day" (thanks y'all), received a few comments. The most recent of which was slightly disturbing and which I will post in full from a writer named Tavi:

"I'm gonna have to call shenanigans on this article. While the content is different, I wrote an article last week with the same topic. You have a very similar title and the same picture. You used the term "the casual fan", which is the name I usually go by. While it's a different take on the effects of the steroid era on this season, you should come up with your own topics instead of piggybacking on someone else's work without crediting them."

Before I wrote this article I actually decided to look up recent articles about steroids because I did not want the same situation that happened with Chad's article to happen again. I came up with the idea of the article after looking at Carlos Delgado on my fantasy baseball team and realizing I was never going to win with him as my 1B.

Having just received this post on my article from Tavi my heart sank. I thought I had looked into steroids articles on Bleacher Report and come away feeling pretty good that this article had not been written before in any way, shape, or form. In fear I found Tavi's article and read it.

Tavi was not kidding when he said the "content is different." The articles were night and day, but they both just so happened to be about the end of steroids in baseball.

However, much like the previous article about the Braves road woes, his article contained a lot more stats than mine. (I work far too much to waste time looking up stats, another reason my fantasy team is awful.) My article also was extensively about contracts and how the steroids era changed the way teams signed aging players to long term, expensive contracts. His article did not even sniff the subject.

Tavi accuses me of using the same picture, which unfortunately for him is the best picture available for baseball and steroids in the Bleacher Report under the article photo browser on this site. As for the titles, sorry Tavi, I had a different title and one of the editors put that bad boy up there. Even worse, as of this moment, less than sixty people have even read Tavi's article, a number which may be lucky to increase by being linked to from my article.

Most ridiculously, Tavi claims proprietary rights to the phrase "the casual fan". While I thought claiming the rights to the alliteration used in "tale of two" was silly, claiming sole use to "the casual fan" borders on insanity. Even dumber, Tavi doesn't actually even use the phrase "casual fan" in his article on steroids, meaning he thinks I read his articles and saw he used the phrase in another article and then stole this article and used the phrase trying to rob him twice!

Even more infuriating, Tavi then claims sole ownership on the topic of steroids and this baseball season by stating "while it's a different take on the effects of the steroid era on this season, you should come up with your own topics instead of piggybacking on someone else's work without crediting them."

This is crossing the line into ridiculousness to a major level. Tavi clearly admits that my article is nothing like his except for the fact that they are both about steroids and this baseball season. Perhaps the most talked about topic in MLB over the past few years in, of course, the sport called "America's Pastime."

But watch out Bleacher Report writers, Tavi has sole ownership of the topic now!

In the end, what have these three articles on the Bleacher Report taught me?

First, they have taught me that it sucks to have your article stolen or even to think that it has been stolen.

Second, that people jump to conclusions and I did the same thing in March when Mr. Barnhart of the Atlanta-Journal Constitution wrote an article strikingly similar to mine.

Third, it tells me something that the creators of this site should now be well aware. With growth you will end up with many, many writers and many people have similar ideas and may choose to write about these similar ideas.

Does this mean the idea is stolen? No. It just means the "casual fan" (copyrighted by Tavi) tends to get similar ideas to other casual fans.

Lastly, it tells me that the Bleacher Report has a lot of growing to do before it will ever be considered a legitimate sporting news website.

How Steroids May Have Led to Bizarre MLB Season

Rusi Patel — Thu, 29 May 2008 15:52:54 -0400

Looking at the MLB standings this final week of May, the casual fan would find it impossible to resist doing a double-take.

The Rays and Marlins are in first place. The Yankees and Tigers are in last. That story has been beaten to death. Also of note is that the Rays and Marlins are among the two youngest teams in the league, while the Yankees and Tigers are among the two oldest. That story has also been beaten to death.

But if you look further in the standings, it is noticeable that older, veteran teams around the league seem to be under-performing all-around this season. While this may be an aberration, there could be a hidden reason for such performances.

The Red Sox are the second-oldest team in the league, and yet are among the best teams in baseball. They are, however, led by some young guns, Clay Buchholz and Jon Lester—both of whom have thrown no-hitters in the recent past.

Colorado is the fourth-youngest team in the league but is following up their World Series appearance with a major stinker of a season. They, however, have major injuries at almost every star position.

To the point, youth and veteran savvy can only go so far to explain what is going on this season. What may be a more sinister and interesting explanation for this season could lie back in the steroids era.

What every of the veteran teams listed above that is massively underperforming has in common is that there are a number of household baseball names on their rosters who are vastly underperforming.

Interestingly, there could be a reason for these teams being in such a predicament.

Throughout the steroid era, there were a number of players who were suspected of taking steroids or HGH, or who admitted to taking such drugs that experienced late-career resurgences or career years.

Over time, this led to some players receiving contracts in the later stages of their careers that players would normally receive when they were entering their typical late-20s prime.

Players suspected of using steroids such as Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens experienced some of their best seasons in their late-30s, a time when the typical player begins to break down and suffer from worsening numbers and production.

Bonds and Clemens, whether they took steroids or not, were not the only players who experienced late career revitalization during the Steroids Era. There were a number of players who had career years that came out of the blue, or who experienced steady numbers in their late-30s instead of declining returns.

Many teams saw these heady numbers and turned a blind eye to what may have been occurring under the subtext. They focused on the fact these players were keeping in shape and having great numbers later in their career. These teams also saw players who had proven themselves time and time again, and now were so reliable that signing them to long, expensive contracts seemed like a great idea. These were players who were sure not to disappoint.

And for years, teams may have been rewarded. Late-career peaks became the norm. Whether these players took steroids or other performance enhancers has yet to be shown. Undoubtedly, some did take such drugs to boost their performance and then parlay such production into big, long-term contracts.

Such a system worked well for both the players and the teams. Players got paid. Teams won games and had superstars breaking all sorts of records. It was win-win.

And then the hammer came down. The Steroids Era began to come to an end.

The ramifications of the end of the Steroids Era have been far and wide. Some are clear to see, such as pitchers beginning to dominate again. Some are much more subtle.

One major possible consequence of the end of the Steroids Era is how contracts in MLB are structured, and how teams that signed older superstars to long-term contracts may suffer.

Teams such as the Mets, Yankees, Tigers, and Mariners have aging sluggers who are expected to produce great numbers. But maybe those expectations are based upon an era that no longer exists.

This is not to implicate players on any of these teams—except already admitted steroid users. Instead, the point could be made that many of these aging sluggers were given hefty, long contracts because many of their peers experienced late-career stability and productivity. These teams, naturally, would expect other superstars to meet the performance of their predecessors.

Those players who, in the Steroids Era, had great seasons in their late-30s may very well have led to great contracts for the current crop of players who are just now entering that age. The latter players may have benefited from the era their predecessors played in.

These giant contracts, however, may have caused their teams to suffer immensely. Not only are these crop of players not a match for the Bondses and Clemenses of the world in a matter of productivity in their late-30s, but they are a giant burden on the teams they play for.

Players such as Carlos Delgado and Richie Sexson are earning millions of dollars and performing horribly. Maybe they didn't do steroids, but their current contracts may have benefited from the era.

Here in the post-Steroids Era, we may now see players in the later stages of their careers getting paid massive amounts of money for sub-par results, to their benefit and their respective teams' detriment.

We may also be witnessing a backlash to the Steroids Era with the youthful teams that are suddenly succeeding and competing at levels completely unexpected for them this year.

Many of these youthful team are signing their young, budding stars to long-term contracts to make sure the typical peak years are going to be spent with the home club. No longer are teams counting on being able to sign proven players who still have a lot of gas in the tank in their late-30s. Now we are seeing teams taking slight-to-giant risks on young, unproven players who have a lot of potential, instead of paying veterans who are running on empty.

What does this mean for MLB?

It could mean that we begin to see a giant youth movement throughout the league, as players begin retiring earlier and young stars are called into action earlier.

In the long term, this could mean we see an increase in such things as the sacrifice bunt, the triple, the inside-the-park homer—and, importantly, the stolen base. We could also see a decrease in the intentional walk and the home run. Basically, what we may see is return to a mid-80s style of baseball.

The next few years could be very interesting for baseball, as teams get younger and the game gets faster. We'll find out soon enough what exactly this new era has in store.

God Help Us: BCS Bowl Games Covered by "Jumper" Cam—AGAIN

Rusi Patel — Sun, 17 Feb 2008 15:47:03 -0500

You and I remember it well. During the BCS Bowl Bash, every game except for the Rose Bowl, meaning all the Fox games, had this awful thing called the "Jumper" cam.

It was lousy.

It looked awful.

It was overused.

It was overhyped.

We had to deal with ad after ad and promo after promo, leaving me and many others hoping to God that this movie would tank worse than a Paris Hilton movie.

It didn't, and now America has subjected us to possible future reprisals of this ad marketing campaign during BCS Bowl Games on Fox.

Why do you do this to us America? WHY?!

This movie needed to tank to save college football fans a little bit of the pain and agony Fox broadcasts cause.

But no, you had to go see this movie to give it an opening weekend near thirty million dollars.

I am sure this is a fine grade-B movie. One that we will be sure to see on TNT, FX, or USA in the near future, but did it have to go and make all this money on opening weekend?!

I realize this has very little to do with sports, except it will now subject us to the ad-wizards that brought us the Jumper Cam for at least one more bowl season.

Ugh.

Maybe I can get Samuel L. Jackson to star in my first movie—I think the man has jumped the shark.

Spring Is in the Air: The Return of Baseball

Rusi Patel — Sun, 17 Feb 2008 04:57:31 -0500

Living on a sub-tropical island has its perks.

One of them is the incredible weather.

For instance, it was in the eighties just last week, and as I write this it is a beautiful spring day with the azaleas all in bloom.

I can feel the Masters, March Madness, Spring Football, and the NFL Draft right around the corner. It gets me giddy like a 12-year-old schoolgirl just thinking about it.

But there is one thing that a beautiful, spring day makes me think of more than anything else:

Baseball.

Football may be my religion. Baseball is my love.

In a little over a week, players from all over the world will be gathering en masse, if they have not started to already, at various facilities in Arizona and Florida to begin the true mark of the season, Spring Training.

In my mind, there is nothing like baseball. The sights, sounds, smells. Fresh cut grass. The thwack of the bat. The smell of dirt and leather. The sun beaming down upon you reminding hearts frozen from a weary winter that the boys of summer are here again to take away all those cold, dark winter nights.

You can almost feel the ball in your hands as the spring approaches, because, after all, baseball is the only major sport that almost every average man can see himself playing.

These men are not behemoths. They do not bench press 300 pounds and squat 600. No, these are David Wells, Todd Jones, Greg Maddux.

These are you and me.

Sure they are much more talented, but if you walked by them at the store you might not immediately realize they are athletes.

Growing up in Atlanta I remember going to Braves games in the eighties where we would buy the really cheap tickets and then make our way down to dugout level because there was no one at the game.

Those days are gone now in Atlanta. There is a new stadium. Tougher ushers. More fans. But there is one thing that hasn't changed.

Baseball.

From the greatest starting rotation of our generation for much of the nineties, with the three legends—Smoltz, Glavine, and Maddux—mixed with many incredible pitchers in their own right, such as Avery and Millwood, time has moved on.

Now Smoltz is the elder ace. Glavine is returning, looking to turn back the sun on one more glorious season at home. Maddux is no longer in the city where he will always be remembered for the most incredible four year stretch of pitching in our time. But the Braves now have Hudson and a stable of young arms and it is spring, time to start anew.

It will be an interesting season for Atlanta.

It will be an interesting season for most teams. Even perenial cellar dwellers love the spring.

Teams like Kansas City, Washington, and Tampa Bay.

This is the spring.

The time when hope and everything the mind can imagine is still possible.

The time when love seems to greet you around every corner. The time when the grass, the sun, the dirt, the leather, the hot dogs, and the ice cold beer make you just want to smile and thank god you are alive.

This is the spring.

This is baseball.

This is love.

College FB Playoffs: Georgia Legislature an Embarrassment to America

Rusi Patel — Sat, 02 Feb 2008 08:40:31 -0500

Yesterday, the Georgia House, the legislative branch of the state of Georgia, voted 151-9 in favor of a resolution in favor of the NCAA to create a college playoff for FBS college football, formerly known as Division I-A.

What an embarrassment.

In what some are calling the most relevant political year since 1968...

In a year in which the state of Georgia is in the midst of a drought of biblical proportions...

In a year in which the country is at war, the housing market is crashing, recession looms around every corner, and the first election since the 20s taking place in which a former President or Vice President is not running for the most prestigious, powerful position in the world...

The Georgia House has struck upon the most important issue of our times.

Yes, a college football playoff.

It is all nice and fun arguing the logistics of a college football playoff when you do so as a fan, as a coach, as a player, even as a athletic director. Much like beating a dead horse.

Those are parties, however, who we except to make arguments for and against a playoff. Those are parties who logistically should even be making those arguments.

Undoubtedly, many members of the Georgia House, like many members of politics in general, are huge college football fans. I can't blame them. It's a great sport.

But perhaps they should reevaluate why they were elected to their positions.

Much like Michael Adams, President of UGA, before them, these members of the Georgia House are an embarrassment.

Instead of taking the brief time the House is in session to discuss relevant issues that they can do something about, such as water management or traffic congestion, they have chosen to waste time and taxpayer money on a vote for a resolution of a college football playoff.

Do they honestly believe this action is going to do anything?

The NCAA already knows people don't like the BCS.

News flash. They don't care.

If the President came out tomorrow against the BCS, do you honestly think that the NCAA will do anything?

Politicians sometimes get too full of themselves. They believe because they are in office their voices are more important than the voices of others. Yes, they have a grander stage to make a point, as evidenced even by this action, but perhaps they should use this stage to fight for things that they can have a direct impact upon.

A college football playoff is not one of those things.

So, in conclusion, to Michael Adams, your job as the President of UGA is not to whine about a playoff so you can appeal to alumni who you have alienated time and time again. Your job as President of UGA is to ensure the education of the students of the University. It is to make sure good research gets done. It is to make sure the University stays financially stable.

To the Georgia House, how about we make some positive strides in traffic congestion and water management? Perhaps try to figure out why you and your bonehead predecessors thought it wise to build a stadium a decade ago and not expand rail service to within three miles of it. Try that if you want to dabble in sports.

At least that has something to do with something you can control and make positive changes to.

An Early College Football Top 25 List for 2008: Part Two

Rusi Patel — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 06:23:10 -0500

A few weeks ago, I drew out a Top-25 list for the 2008 college football season.

Much like this list, the article was written way too early, and with plenty of changes remaining.

This top-25 list attempts to make some changes after some early defections of players who left to enter the 2008 NFL Draft.

Like the last list, there could obviously be more research remaining, but this time I have actually done some research. I should not tell you all that because now you will just bash my article even more fervently.

The comments are meant to not be taken too seriously.

For the Notre Dame fan who posted a comment on my last top 25, if I say Charlie Weis has a front-butt, don't get your panties in a bunch; just be glad I still have your team ranked, and realize he has a front-butt.

Those of you who can't stand Notre Dame and can't understand why I would have them ranked, well I am with you. I confuse myself sometimes.

#25 - Notre Dame: Previously (#24) - Why did I drop Touchdown Jesus & co.? Because it is my list and I wanted to, that's why. Why are they ranked? To quote an old beer commercial: "Why ask why? (Try Bud Dry)"

#24 - Pittsburgh: Previously (NR) - The Panthers are growing on me like Dave Wannstedt's mustache. "Who wants a mustache ride?!? I do, I do!"

#23 - Mississippi State: Previously (#25) - The Bulldogs are either going to take advantage of momentum or their defense is going to implode. Let's go with the former for now. Whatever happened to Bud Dry anyway?

#22 - Alabama: Previously (#22) - Our first team to retain the status quo! Alabama fans better hope that doesn't mean another 6-6 season.

#21 - Penn State: Previously (NR) - I know I made one poster happy. Well probably not; he wanted them in the top 15.

#20 - Tennessee: Previously (#18) - I honestly contemplated dropping them out entirely. Last time the Volunteers lost Cutcliffe they really sucked. I know, I know, Tennessee sucks in general; but you get my point.

#19 - BYU: Previously (#23) - Apparently, praying to Mitt Romney is working. Where are those Latter-Day Saints when you need them? (Ding-dong!)

#18 - UCLA: Previously (#19) - Norm Chow. Why has he never been a head coach?

#17 - Wisconsin: Previously (NR) - Returning a lot on both sides of the ball in a weak Big-Ten Conference. Whenever I need a chuckle I think of someone from Wisconsin saying "Cheese!"

#16 - Texas: Previously (#11) - Apparently the Longhorns lost almost their entire defense. That might be a good thing though.

#15 - Kansas: Previously (#12) - Too many players left for a team that can not be too deep, and its schedule is harder. Oh yeah... "GET IN MY BELLY!"

#14 - Illinois: Previously (#16) - At least I know which judge to call when I need tickets to an Illini sporting event. (Look it up.)

#13 - Virginia Tech: Previously (#8) - I hope this is not the class of the ACC. As much as I make fun of the Big Ten, at least the Big Ten has Ohio State.

#12 - Clemson: Previously (#15) - Lose one star running back to early declaration and get better? I believe it.

#11 - Arizona State: Previously (#7) - Too high before. Too low now. I hope the cheerleading squad does not take offense.

#10 - Texas Tech: Previously (#13) - Do not be surprised if they give Oklahoma a run for the division.

#9 - Auburn: Previously (#17) - I think the Tigers are a strong possibility to win the SEC West.

#8 - West Virginia: Previously (#1) - In real life if you act like a crazy ex-girlfriend I will drop you too. You also lost a lot more than I thought on defense.

#7 - Oregon: Previously (#9) - Just because the Ducks lost Dixon and Stewart does not mean they will not be good.

#6 - LSU: Previously (#10) - The Tigers lost a ton of talent and they could finish the season with more wins. Go figure.

#5 - Oklahoma: Previously (#5) - Had to keep the Sooners here.

#5 - Florida: Previously (#5) - As my little quirk I will now have two #5 teams each time.

#4 - USC: Previously (#4) - Looks like there is some competition across town. Yup, you got it, the Bruin Condom.

#3 - Georgia: Previously (#3) - You know it is the off-season when the alcohol arrests start coming in. Tradition is a wonderful thing.

#2 - Ohio State: Previously (#6) - Returning 39 out of 44 in OSU's two-deep? I really expected more people to leave than just Vernon Gholston. Ridiculous.

#1 - Missouri: Previously (#2) - Return a ton of talent. Check. Get a year of experience. Check. Have an easier schedule. Check.

Dropped Out: Florida State (Do the Seminoles have a quarterback?), UCF (The team lost its star player.), Michigan (Drama. Does Tom Brady have any eligibility left?)

Teams I found hard to leave out: Washington, Georgia Tech, Miami, California, Cincinnati, South Carolina, Oregon State, South Florida, Virginia.

Poor Arkansas Razorbacks: Karma Strikes Bobby Petrino

Rusi Patel — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 05:18:10 -0500

I couldn't stop laughing.

Yesterday Brian VanGorder (formerly of the Georgia Bulldogs, Jacksonville Jaguars, Georgia Southern Eagles, Atlanta Falcons, and South Carolina Gamecocks) chose to return to the Atlanta Falcons because college, errr, the pros was the place for him.

Wait, what?

Didn't VanGorder just leave the Falcons a little over a month ago?

He sure did. And now he’s making Nick Saban and Bobby Petrino look like rocks of consistency.

There is a difference though. Apparently, VanGorder never signed a contract. Plus, it’s not like he left in the middle of the season.

But the funny part is who Steve Spurrier hired to replace him as coach at the University of South Carolina: Ellis Johnson, formerly of the Mississippi State Bulldogs.

Johnson left his position at Mississippi State around a month ago to be the new defensive coordinator at Arkansas.

Then he moved on to join sleazeball extraordinaire, Bobby Petrino, to rebuild the Razorbacks. Well, that marriage also lasted just a month.

Now Arkansas is the odd man out: The only party without a defensive coordinator. I think it is great. Petrino deserves it.

I just wonder if he thinks there is any loyalty left in football anymore.

Ohio State Football: Potential Recruiting Violation?

Rusi Patel — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 01:17:25 -0500

Much of the information in this article was gathered from University of Michigan websites. So take that for what it is.

Rumor has it that Ohio State may have had some interesting encounters that involved super-recruit Terrelle Pryor.

Everyone has heard about Pryor and how he will replace Tim Tebow as the "Superman" of college football. (Really, if I have to hear Tebow called Superman one more time I might throw something.)

Once again, much of this information—especially the seedy parts relating to Ohio State—come from Michigan blogs, so it all could be as true as a two-dollar hooker.

Supposedly, Pryor has spent some time in his hometown working for the richest man in town, Ted Sarniak, who owns a specialty glass business.

The hilarity ensues with a picture of Pryor next to a Corvette in a sharp white suit. Apparently, Sarniak lent the vehicle to Pryor for prom, probably last spring. Is there anything wrong with that? Probably not.

People lend other people cars all the time. I wouldn't say there is much wisdom in lending ANY teenager a shiny Corvette, but Sarniak is probably a lot richer than I am.

Let's just call him Uncle Moneybags.

The Michigan blogs seem to be having a field day with this picture though—pretty funny stuff.

The shady part begins with Moneybags supposedly saying he will give Pryor the Corvette for graduation. The story continues on Scout.com that Ohio State coaches met and had dinner with Sarniak the day before Pryor was to take his second visit to Michigan.

What's odd about that is the Scout.com story has been changed to eliminate any reference to Ohio State coaches meeting with Sarniak.

Now that? That smells fishy.

Apparently, Sarniak is no stranger to shady business either.

Just last year Uncle Moneybags was investigated for possible bribery of a police department after he was found wrapped around a utility pole with the smell of alcohol on his breath. After he was taken to the hospital, he refused a blood test to see if he was driving drunk.

Normally, in the state of Pennsylvania that is a automatic one-year license suspension.

Not for Sarniak. He apparently contacted another police officer and told his side of the story. Although he did not ask for anything, the story worked its way through the department and he was never charged with a DUI.

That in itself would not constitute bribery or even suspicion of it. What is odd is that he made a $4,000 donation to the police department later on to buy tasers. Uncle Moneybags apparently also donated many Pittsburgh Steelers tickets to the department.

Sarniak was never charged with any of this and the DA found no problems. But you would have to be silly to say that at least his DUI part did not seem a little odd.

As for Pryor, the question is, did Ohio State coaches meet with Sarniak or not? Is Sarniak doing anything wrong here? Is Ohio State doing anything wrong?

Perhaps more frightening for Ohio State fans—Does this not remind you of Maurice Clarett driving an SUV that was not his, or Troy Smith taking money from a booster?

Some stress-filled days seem to be looming at Ohio State.

PS: I am sure I am going to get bashed for writing this.

SMU Mustangs: What's Wrong with College Football

Rusi Patel — Wed, 23 Jan 2008 05:31:53 -0500

What's wrong with College Football?

Let's start with SMU.

You all know SMU. It is the only school in NCAA history to be given the 'death penalty.'

It was a harsh penalty but one that was probably deserved for a program that was cheating continually and didn't seem to want to change its ways.

That was then, this is now.

I will admit, I have rooted for SMU to return to respectability for years, but after reading what the Mustangs have recently done to a recruit, I am having second thoughts.

Every year recruits orally commit to a program only to later be told, no, we are not going to hold a scholarship for you. It is never right when that is done, but players do the same thing, so let bygones be bygones.

No, what SMU has done just takes the cake. Ralston Dews, a 6-1, 335-pound lineman from Tyler Lee, Tex., was excited about playing college football for SMU. Now he might not have the option to play college football anywhere because most programs are already full.

Dews verbally committed to SMU back in September while Phil Bennett was the head coach.

Bennett was fired and in the interim time-frame before a new coach was hired, Athletic Director Steve Orsini sent a form letter out to all recruits stating that when a new head coach was hired he would not be bound by Bennett's recruits.

He sent this information in a FORM letter BEFORE a new coach was hired.

It took SMU 71 days to hire a new coach, in January, just a short time before national signing day is upon us.

Dews never heard anything from SMU after that form letter indicating that his scholarship would be revoked.

It took his father CALLING SMU to find out that he would no longer have a scholarship waiting for him. He only discovered this pivotal information in the past week.

What is wrong with a college football program is when it changes its mind on a recruit after offering him a scholarship, and more importantly fails to even give him the common courtesy of a phone call that he will no longer have a place in their program.

I am sorry SMU; you just lost one college football fan who was rooting for you to succeed.

ACC Football: Glory Days Ahead

Rusi Patel — Sun, 20 Jan 2008 04:04:28 -0500

I may be what some people on this website would consider a SEC "homer"—but that wasn't always the case.

I actually grew up in the heart of ACC country: Atlanta, Georgia.

Atlanta is the one place in the state of Georgia where the Georgia Bulldogs don't have a monopoly on the fanbase.

When I was a kid, there was plenty to cheer about for ACC football fans. But a lot has changed since then.

In the last 20 years, more national championships have gone to current ACC programs than to teams from any other conference. Of course, this counts the titles that the University of Miami won while in the Big East—but the point stands:

The ACC was once a premier football conference.

A few years ago, the ACC added two powerhouse programs in Miami and Virginia Tech, and a perennial overachiever in Boston College. The additions were supposed to make the ACC as formidable as any conference in the country.

The plan, thus far, has not worked.

So what in the name of Mike Patrick's Britney Spears love affair is going on?

One problem is geography. Many ACC schools share recruiting bases with teams from the SEC.

What's more, many schools in the ACC, such as Duke, North Carolina, and Georgia Tech, are much better academically than their SEC counterparts—which could make recruiting more difficult due to higher admissions standards.

But those two factors alone can't explain why the entire conference has fallen on rough times.

Teams like Clemson, Miami, Florida State, and Virginia Tech have chronically underachieved in recent years. It seems that many of the schools in the ACC have similar, if not better talent, than schools in other conferences—but are still failing to measure up.

Why is that?

There are many possibilities. From facilities to fan support to luck, any number of reasons could explain the ACC's rut.

And then there's the coaching issue.

Earlier this decade, the ACC coaching pool began to stagnate. Bobby Bowden isn't getting younger. Chan Gailey was a robot. Tommy Bowden seems to just do enough to not get fired. Al Groh recruits talent and then fails to develop it it. Chuck Amato was a better Corey Hart impersonator than a football coach.

You get the picture.

The good news, though, is that the ACC is on an upswing. It may not show in the final standings, but the conference's revitalized coaches are making their marks:

Randy Shannon is recruiting another great Miami class.

Jimbo Fisher is attempting to make positive strides at Florida State.

Paul Johnson is bringing a new offense to Georgia Tech.

Jim Grobe has turned Wake Forest into an upper-middle-class football program.

Butch Davis is ready to turn North Carolina on its (tar) heels.

David Cutcliffe is going to end that 25-game ACC losing streak at Duke sooner rather than later.

Tom O'Brien is ready to turn NC State around, and Jeff Jagodzinski, the man who replaced O'Brien at Boston College, has already done an excellent job.

Even Groh and Ralph Friedgen are recruiting well, and seem to always be ready to win 10 games out of the blue.

The ACC may be a weak conference now, but along with the Big Ten, it looks poised to make a giant leap forward. Don't be surprised if you see a team from the ACC playing for the National Championship sometime in the next two years.

Ohio State Will Be Great...Next Year

Rusi Patel — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 02:23:14 -0500

It is the rallying cry of Ohio State Buckeye fans all over, including throughout articles and comments on this website:

"We are going to win the National Championship next year!!!!"

"We are going to get the monkey off our back and finally beat a SEC school in a bowl!!!"

"We are returning almost everyone from a team that had gone to the National Championship game two years in a row!"

"Laurinaitis is back! There is no stopping us!"

Talk is cheap.

Ohio State will undoubtedly be better next year. I would be the first to admit so.

This is a team that has won the Big Ten outright two years in a row, and as much as we like to make fun of them, they are a good team.

Seemingly the biggest problem for Ohio State is not talent, it is a problem that is prevalent throughout the Big Ten: making adjustments.

Big Ten football has not stagnated because of talent, or speed, or any level of depth. It has stagnated because of coaching.

Jim Tressel is a great coach, but even great coaches can learn a thing or two every now and then. Just ask Mark Richt. Tressel has led his Buckeyes to the National Championship game two years in a row, which is no small feat, even if it was coming out of a shallow conference.

Unfortunately for Buckeye fans, Tressel has been unable to adjust his game plans to counter the attacking style of the SEC. More importantly perhaps, the Buckeyes rarely play from behind in Big Ten play.

Clearly, they do not handle playing from behind well. They make mistakes, commit stupid penalties, and then snowball out of control until they are completely out of the game.

It is lack of adjustments when falling behind to equally, if not more, talented teams that has doomed the Buckeyes in the last two National Championship Games.

That goes to coaching. Buckeyes fans this offseason have been particularly fervent in their gloating and trash-talking, claiming their team will be back in the National Championship Game next season, that they are the greatest thing since sliced bread.

If they are able to upset USC early next season there will, admittedly, be very little in their way to get to another National Championship Game.

With Michigan losing all of its star players and Illinois losing one of the best running backs in college football there will be very little competition in the Big Ten next season.

Buckeye fans are, for the most part, blind to all of this though. Many like to trash-talk and proclaim their school as the "best program in college football."

If you proclaim that they are not as superior as they think they are, at this point in time, you will get bashed. You will be told you are uneducated. You will get cursed out. Basically, you will have to deal with angry little men.

It is a simple fact, at this point in time, the SEC is better than the Big Ten. That may change in the future, but that will only change if the Big Ten and Ohio State adjust.

Michigan is making a move towards adjustment with the hiring of Rich Rodriguez. Whether that works, only time will tell.

Ohio State already has a great coach. Whether he learns how to adjust, no one knows.

Meanwhile, Ohio State fans will continue to trash-talk. They will continue to proclaim next season as their return to brilliance. It all may very well happen.

But until it does...

Put up, or shut up.

Ten Reasons the Big Ten Is Awful

Rusi Patel — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 07:41:14 -0500

As long as I am making lists, I might as well make one that people will get angry about and respond to...

10. There seems to be an inability to count in the Midwest. It's eleven. Seriously, change your conference name unless you plan of kicking out Northwestern.

9. The Big Ten Network is like communism. Novel in theory, idiotic in implementation.

8. Not to get nit-picky, but it's not really the Big Ten. It's more like the Big Four and the occasional other competitor.

7. Kirk Ferentz gets paid how much?!?!?

6. THE Ohio State University. Stop being pretentious, it's Ohio State. Get over yourselves.

5. As long as I am piling on Ohio State: dotting the "I". We get it, your band is damn good and they make other bands look like crap. I am tired of hearing the ten minute "dotting the 'I'" story every time I watch one of your games.

4. Jim Delany: "I wish we had six teams among the top 10 recruiting classes every year, but winning our way requires some discipline and restraint with the recruitment process." Maurice Clarett, Jim? Bueller? Bueller?

3. Kirk Herbstreit and Lee Corso.

2. Michigan State. Seriously, you are the biggest tease since that Britney Spears sex tape that was supposed to exist a few years back. (Pre-Insane Britney.)

1. The Schedule. Really, does every season have to end so early with the same game? Variety is the spice of life fellas. (Of course, telling that to Jim "I can't adjust my game plan, mid-MNC game" Tressel and Jim "Our players aren't thugs" Delany is easier said than done.)

College FB: Top 10 Reasons Big 10 Teams Don't Travel South

Rusi Patel — Sun, 13 Jan 2008 08:03:36 -0500

I just saw that article by Warren Groomer and felt it needed a response.

10. The sloppy roads in the Midwest slow the teams down even further.

9. It's hard to make it across all those rivers when they are always on fire.

8. The women are too good looking, they like keeping things average.

7. Teams are scared of getting a farmer's tan.

6. They don't want to marry their cousins, well unless it is Brooklyn Decker, then exceptions can be made.

5. It would cause them to not schedule Directional Michigan and every school in Ohio.

4. Recruiting speed on defense is overrated anyway.

3. Nick Saban is like "The Kramer"...."His struggle is man's struggle...he's a loathsome, offensive brute, yet I can't look away."

2. If they go too far south they could end up wearing jean shorts, jorts for short.

1. Don't want to force Herbstreit out of his element.

Heat-Hawks: No Fair Mom, I Want a Do-Over!

Rusi Patel — Sat, 12 Jan 2008 03:09:03 -0500

I will be the first to admit. I barely pay attention to the NBA. It had something to do with the Atlanta Hawks, the team I grew up loving, giving the ultimate middle-finger to the fans in 1999.

Granted, the Hawks, had first flipped the bird to fans in the 1993-1994 season, when to the astonishment of many the team traded Dominique Wilkins, the teams all-time leading scorer, for Danny Manning, who left via free agency shortly thereafter.

Nique was not only the most popular player for a second tier franchise, he was a former University of Georgia player, which meant half the state would root for him no matter where he was.

However, in 1999, the Hawks traded Steve Smith, another immensely popular player.

This time, the team tanked. I stopped watching after that season.

It wasn't that I was not a fan anymore. It was more that the team didn't seem to care about winning or the fans, so why should I care about the team.

That brings me to this article.

I will admit I was already more interested in the Hawks this season than I had been in years.

For the first time in a long time this team seemed like it was moving in the right direction the past couple of seasons, and this years team figured to be a sleeper for a playoff spot.

Then something funny happened.

In an overtime game against the Miami Heat on December 19th, the Hawks scorer's table collectively forgot how to count and mistook Udonis "I rifled basketballs at opposing fans in college" Haslem for Shaquille "I play a cop in my free time" O'Neal.

How you make that mistake is beyond me. Especially, since Haslem played for the Hawks briefly.

Yesterday, news came out that this will cost the Hawks an overtime win, at least temporarily. I have no problems with the NBA saying the last 51.1 seconds have to be replayed starting with the score of 114-111 Hawks.

No, that is not the problem I have.

What amazes me is that, in the NBA, the home team of a basketball contest, provides the scoring table personnel.

WHAT?!?!

These people are as important, if not more so, than the referees running up and down the court!

The NBA also fined the Hawks $50,000 for the scoring mistake in charging a foul to Shaq that should have gone to Haslem.

I am sorry, why exactly does the home team provide the scoring table personnel?

Shouldn't the NBA fine itself $50,000 for being so stupid?

It is no wonder the NBA has this image of being corrupt in officiating and showing clear bias towards teams.

First there was the offseason gambling scandal involving Tim Donaghy, followed by the news that many other NBA referees like to gamble in their free time.

Now, there is this.

Obviously, scorer's cannot call fouls, but they can assign a foul to someone who did not earn a foul, and who is to say that an 'accident' has not occurred before that no one caught?

I am not saying the Hawks did this intentionally, or even knew they did it until a protest was filed. I am just saying why run the risk?

I think it is time the NBA reevaluates this process and perhaps hires their own traveling sets of scorers, ones who might not be biased towards either team.

BCS Fix: Why a Playoff Won't Work

Rusi Patel — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 02:45:05 -0500

Full disclosure: I am a University of Georgia graduate.

Yesterday, the school's president, Michael "I am hated by my entire University" Adams, made his own proposal for a form of NCAA sanctioned playoff in college football.

I will flat out state right here that I am against such a proposal or anything else that has been proposed thus far.

First, let's look at the ridiculous "Plus One" format that many people seem to be leaning towards.

Would another game have solved anything this season?

The top four teams going into the BCS were Ohio State, LSU, Virginia Tech, and Oklahoma. Needless to say, only one of those teams looked anything like a top-four squad after the games were over.

Yet, in this season, Georgia, USC, Missouri, Kansas, and West Virginia would all have been left out in the cold in a Plus One format.

What about the eight-team seeded playoff, you may ask?

Granted, this format would have grabbed a number of the aforementioned teams, but what else would it have done?

The end of the season games would not longer be gargantuan matchups. Teams would rest players. Teams would start running Big Ten schedules where the season ended earlier than other schools. Teams would schedule cupcakes at the end of the season and move the harder teams to early in the season when they are still working out the kinks.

Admittedly, the NCAA Tournament works very well in basketball and the College World Series works pretty well in baseball.

The difference here is that those two sports allow many more teams to enter the postseason tournament than a football playoff would allow. This is not a bad thing, but in a Plus One format, what if you are the fifth team? In an eight-team format what if you are #9?

Neither of these "solutions" actually solves anything. It just pushes the burden of the team left out in the cold from playing in postseason from the number 3 team to a team a little further down in the rankings.

In basketball, pretty much any team that could have a hope to make the national championship game by getting on a hot streak will make it to the NCAA Tournament. College baseball is very similar.

Football cannot and should not be like that. A college football playoff would ruin the bowl system. It would decrease the viewership to important regular season games, and if you don't think it would you are kidding yourself.

Perhaps most telling, it would turn the regular season of college football into a reflection of the NFL.

No offense to the NFL, but it is no college football.

Let's stop worrying about making a playoff for college football and realize that we just witnessed one of the greatest seasons the game has ever seen, and it is nearly every season where we get to say something similar to that.

College football is the greatest sport in America.

Let's not go and ruin it by turning it into something it isn't.

2008 Georgia Preview: Channeling Larry Munson

Rusi Patel — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 17:14:16 -0500

Both ESPN and Sports Illustrated have put out polls for an early top-25 of next season placing the University of Georgia at the top. I am a huge University of Georgia fan, but I am going to pull a Larry Munson on this one. I don't like it. It doesn't smell right. I think the team will be great and have a strong chance to be among the best teams next season.

I also think that there will be a couple of undefeated teams at the end of next season and the University of Georgia will probably not be one of those. The schedule that team faces is ridiculous.

Let's take a look.

08/30/08 Georgia Southern Eagles

09/06/08 Central Michigan Chippewas

09/13/08 at South Carolina Gamecocks

09/20/08 at Arizona State Sun Devils

09/27/08 Alabama Crimson Tide

10/04/08 Bye Week

10/11/08 Tennessee Volunteers

10/18/08 Vanderbilt Commodores

10/25/08 at LSU Tigers

11/01/08 Florida Gators (neutral site)

11/08/08 at Kentucky Wildcats

11/15/08 at Auburn Tigers

11/22/08 Bye Week

11/29/08 Georgia Tech Yellow Jackets

12/06/08 SEC Championship Game

The University of Georgia faces eight, count them, eight coaches who was the head coach of a team that won a national championship on some level of college football. That is 66% of the schedule for the University of Georgia, and does not include the multiple championships by coaches Dennis Erickson and Paul Johnson.

In case you are wondering, here is a run-down:

Head coach of Georgia Southern -- a division I-AA power, which actually means something after Appalachian State this year -- Chris Hatcher went 76-12 at Valdosta State University, before leading them to the National Championship for Division II in 2004.

The next game is against Central Michigan -- the back-to-back MAC champions -- who also have a quarterback named LeFevour, the only quarterback in the history of the NCAA Division I not named Tebow to throw for 20 TD's and run for 20 TD's in one season.

Then the schedule gets hard.

Georgia goes to South Carolina to face perennial Bulldog killer, Steve Spurrier, who, by the way, has won a National Championship.

Next is a trip to Arizona State to face one of the best coaches of the past thirty years and a probable top-15 team, Dennis Erickson. Oh yeah, he has a couple of National Championships to his name.

The next week involves a home game against what will surely be an improved Alabama team. By the way, there is this guy with a National Championship ring coaching at that school named Nick Saban.

Let's take a breath, because then there is an off-week for the University of Georgia.

Coming back from the off-week is another home game, against yet another National Championship coach, Philip Fulmer, and a Tennessee team that has clobbered Georgia two years in a row.

The next week is another home game against Vanderbilt. No championships there, but coach Bobby Johnson did take Furman University to the I-AA National Championship game in 2001.

Then comes murderer's row.

Away at LSU. In case you haven't heard, this guy named Les Miles just took LSU to the 2008 National Championship.

Then it is mostly away against Florida. Although this is a "neutral site" game, it should be noted it is over a six hour drive from the University of Georgia and close to an hour from Gainesville. Also, there is the returning Heisman Trophy winner, Tim Tebow, and new Fox Analyst/National Championship coach, Urban Meyer.

Georgia then goes away to Kentucky against Rich Brooks. Once again, no national championships there, but he was once named National Coach of the Year at the University of Oregon and also was the interim coach for the Atlanta Falcons at the end of the best season in Falcons history, the season in which the team went to the Super Bowl.

Then, for what is the fourth weekend in a row, Georgia plays away from Athens, away from the hedges on the Plains at Auburn. Tommy Tuberville has never won a National Championship. Or has he? Some may argue that 2004 Auburn team was robbed. Certainly, they were robbed more than any other team in the history of the BCS can claim has been robbed. That team finished undefeated and ranked second.

Finally, Georgia has an off week to prepare for what may be the biggest game of the 2008 season for the team.

It is no secret that Georgia Tech has been the red-headed stepchild to the University of Georgia in recent years. It cost Chan Gailey his job, despite a winning record and bowl appearances in every season he was coach.

Georgia Tech has hired a new coach, Paul Johnson, who has won National Championships at Georgia Southern in both 1999 and 2000, and took Navy to heights it had not seen in decades -- during a time of war! Make no mistake, Paul Johnson was hired to beat Georgia, and you can guarantee that this game has already been marked on his calendar.

After all of that, the University of Georgia, if it plays well enough and is lucky enough, will get the chance to play in the SEC Championship Game, against an undoubtedly stacked SEC team.

Georgia may very well be among the best teams in the nation in 2008, but, channeling Larry Munson, I find it hard to believe the team will make it through unscathed.

I can’t believe we have to wait eight months for football. It’s going to be a long summer.

College FB Polls: The Art of Leapfrogging the Georgia Bulldogs

Rusi Patel — Sun, 06 Jan 2008 15:58:27 -0500

It occurred to me recently that the University of Georgia may have something quite unprecedented happen to it come Tuesday morning—and I thought I'd write about it here before it actually comes to pass.

Going into Championship Saturday over a month ago, Georgia was ranked fourth in both major polls behind Missouri, West Virginia, and Ohio State.

It stood to reason that if two of those teams lost, UGA would move up to the No. 2 spot. But it wasn't a normal weekend, and Georgia was jumped by not one, not two, but three teams that won their conference title games.

Whether that was the right, I don't know. I do know that I was not very happy about it, and I do know that of those three teams that jumped Georgia, the two that have played bowl games have lost—to lower-ranked opponents.

And on Tuesday, unfortunately, we may witness a repeat of that fateful weekend.

To wit:

On New Year's Day, the University of Southern California and the University of Georgia both destroyed the teams they played in their respective BCS bowls.

USC, which was ranked seventh, defeated thirteenth-ranked Illinois 49-17.

UGA, which was ranked fifth, defeated tenth-ranked Hawaii 41-10.

Based on those results, it seems logical that no matter what the result in the BCS Championship Game Monday night, the University of Georgia would end the season ranked ahead of the University of Southern California.

These are college football rankings, though—and logic and rankings, as already proven this season, don't mix.

You see, USC has one thing going for it that UGA doesn't (other than the song girls, UGA needs to get on that one): media idolatry.

It wouldn't surprise me in the least if the final polls come out and USC has leapfrogged UGA—becaue USC is the media darling, and UGA is not.

When the Virginia Tech, Oklahoma, and LSU leapfrogged the Bulldogs a month ago, it was because they played in conference championship games and won them—something UGA did not and could not do.

USC, however, doesn't have that kind of edge. What's more, the Trojans have fewer wins against winning teams than does UGA, beat a lower-ranked team in their bowl game, and have, by far, a more egregious loss on their resumé.

If USC leapfrogs UGA in the final poll, alas, there will be only one explanation:

Media bias.

Sugar Bowl Fiasco 2.0: Bashing Fox, Not Hawaii

Rusi Patel — Sat, 05 Jan 2008 07:14:25 -0500

Let's be clear:

I do not hate Hawai'i, as some Anonymous Cowards have commented.

Personally, I like Hawai'i.

After watching the Sugar Bowl and reading various articles both before and after the game, I would have to say the Warriors ought to be proud of their fans and their team (once again, with the exception of Keenan Jones).

To travel that far and spend that much money for a football game is proof enough to me that the Warriors belong—and once they can prove themselves able to compete with the big boys again, they should be afforded the opportunity without any "Well they got blown out by Georgia" BS.

I don't have a problem with Colt Brennan. I think he's made the best of a self-created bad situation, and I hope his draft stock wasn't hurt too much by the meltdown of his offensive line in the Sugar Bowl.

I did have a HUGE problem with the Fox broadcast of the game. The broadcast was extremely biased and poorly researched (they get paid to do it, I don't), and the camera work left a lot to be desired.

I've already discussed in a previous article Thom Brennamen and his "Gator" call.

I've already discussed the pregame human-interest story which I thought should have just stuck to football, or maybe picked a player who had a real tragedy happen to him—not someone who created his own problems.

I've already discussed the bias in calling UGA classless for still playing hard while saying Hawai'i was gutty for doing the same.

Then there was the matter of fundamental coverage breakdowns.

During the game, Marcus Howard had a tremendous sack of Brennan near the goal line, and the ball came loose. The officials ruled Howard had recovered for a UGA touchdown.

But everyone in my apartment saw a Hawai'i player come out with the ball.

Fox didn't show any decent replays, and the announcers accepted the officials' ruling without showing another angle. It was a very halfhearted effort from the broadcast team.

I never saw Howard come up with the ball, and no matter how many times I replayed it on my DVR, I couldn't find an image of him gathering it in. Fox failed in the replay department, as many people have already noted.

Now let's go a little further.

At one point in the game, I believe it was the second quarter, one of the famed Hawai'i dreadheads took a massive hit on a pass play and lay motionless on the turf. Everyone in my apartment went silent, pale. I remember uttering the phrase "Oh, God" a number of times.

What did the Fox broadcast crew do?

Cut to commercial.

Normally, that would be fine, IF THEY HAD SEGUED WITH SOMETHING, ANYTHING. But Fox did not segue—they just went to commercial, without a word from the broadcast crew.

There was no, "We hope he is all right, we will go to break now and try to find out more." There was nothing. There was silence.

Commercials mattered more to Fox than saying a sympathetic line for a fallen kid.

Imagine if you were that player's mother, brother, aunt, or uncle who could not get to New Orleans for the game and was watching on television. Fox not only failed the casual viewer. They not only failed the schools. Fox failed the people who really mattered in that situation—the family and friends of the player who was down.

Luckily, when Fox returned the player was moving around, but imagine how scary those couple of minutes would have been for a family member.

So, before you bash me as a Hawai'i hater, Anonymous Coward, why don't you actually read the article for its purpose. I was bashing announcers, and particularly Fox.

BCS Championship Game: In Living Color

Rusi Patel — Sat, 05 Jan 2008 01:31:46 -0500

First, a caveat: I went to an SEC school.

Twice.

That said, I'm sick and tired of fans and the media dismissing Ohio State in the BCS Championship Game...and I don't even like Ohio State!

I was talking to this girl I met recently, and the talk turned to sports. She's a huge hockey fan and she's from the South. (How I get so lucky I will never know.)

Yesterday, she brought up an interesting point about March Madness:

She said a lot of the girls she knows pick teams based on colors—and they often win their pools.

So that is what I will do here—let's analyze Ohio State and LSU based on their team colors.

LSU's colors are Royal Purple and Old Gold.

Ohio State is Scarlet and Gray.

Old Gold? Really? What is that? Does gold get old?

I know if I were walking along the street and found a bar of gold from the time of Cortez, I would look down at it and say, "Damn, that's some old gold!"

A note to LSU: Gold doesn't oxidize, so it pretty much looks the same all the time. It doesn't really get old, because, well...gold is gold. It's been here for a while—all of it.

Technically, all gold is old gold.

Personally, I think LSU should go with Old de Soto Gold Bar as their official color. It has a ring to it, and that way people know it refers to the color of gold as de Soto might have found it—which is to say, it would be the color of gold.

And then there's Scarlet.

According to that bastion of correct information, Wikipedia, Scarlet is traditionally the color of the flame.

I won't go there.

Wikipedia says Scarlet also describes the color of the blood of a living person. I must admit, that's pretty manly. Even if it is flaming.

For the record, Wikipedia says Old Gold is actually a different color—a darker shade of gold. But it also says that the Saints use the color.

You're diggin' your own grave LSU.

As for Royal Purple—Wikipedia has failed me on Royal Purple, as it just links me to the page for Purple. I already know what Purple is—it's the color of Prince.

I like Prince mainly because he painted Carlos Boozer's house purple. That was hilarious. Well, not to Carlos. He was pissed.

The Wikipedia page for purple does have variations of purple listed. Some of those include Psychedelic Purple, which is really cool, and Pansy Purple.

Yup, that's right—Pansy Purple.

Finally, let's look at the color Gray. Gray might very well be the most boring color, which is fitting in this case because Ohio State is in the Big Ten, and I can always count on a Big Ten game as nap time.

As we all know, there are shades of gray—many, many shades of gray. I even bet there's an "Old Gray." I wonder what shade of gray Ohio State goes with. I'm sorry, THE Ohio State.

No matter what, it's going to be boring, and it's going to be gray.

Anyway, after that rather long discussion, I think it's clear that I really should go to the local Michael's and buy a lot of paint and have myself a snack, or a sniffing party.

Based on the color analysis, though, I think Ohio State has the clear advantage in this one. I'm sorry LSU, you associated yourself with the Saints—that's just too much.

Of course, what do I know? God knows Ohio State has better school colors than the University of Florida—and all that got them last year was beat 'til they were the color of a baboon's ass.

Which is to say, they were Scarlet.

An Early Top 25 for 2008 College Football Season

Rusi Patel — Thu, 03 Jan 2008 07:17:31 -0500

So having just seen another early Top Ten go up on this site I thought I would throw my hat into the fray to analyze what the top twenty-five of the next year should look like to begin the season.

All this is done, of course, without actually knowing which players are going to go to the NFL and which are going to stay. Which coaches may be hired and which may go at the last second.

I am not going to lie when I say that this top twenty-five might have some surprises in it and I only put these surprises in there because I think these teams have a chance to surprise a lot of people.

The hard part about making this sort of list, other than not knowing which players might return, is that at the end of every season, half of the bowl teams have a strong reason for optimism going into the next season, either because of bowl wins or because of new coaches.

Then there are teams like Notre Dame who probably have optimism, but I am having a hard time figure out where they belong. Yes, they had an awful year. Yes, I cannot stand Notre Dame. But you cannot deny that amount of talent and you cannot deny that Charlie Weis, god bless his front-butt ass, will do everything he can to improve his coaching this next season.

Without further ado, I give you a shitty top 25 that can be blasted from here to eternity:

#25 - Mississippi State: Why? Because I find it hard not to believe in Sylvester Croom. This is a man who knows his football, and more importantly, the kids believe in him. I believe this is a team ready to take the next step and cause havoc in the SEC, especially in a season in which LSU and Auburn will have new starting quarterbacks.

#24 - Notre Dame: I have no idea why I have them ranked. Something just tells me that they pull out some tough wins to get to eight wins on the season.

#23 - BYU: Because they are religious and they will pray to their god....Mitt Romney.

#22 - Alabama: Yes, they lose to Croom again. It's called penance. But I think they also finally beat Auburn.

#21 - Florida State: I think this may have been the most impressive victory of the Bowl Season so far...and they lost! If they don't face massive sanctions I think they have a chance to claim their division.

#20 - UCF: Mr. Smith returns. Mr. O'Leary returns. UCF learns how to pass a little.

#19 - UCLA: How does Rick Neuheisel avoid a NCAA Tourney pool with that basketball team?!? Oh, and he is a good coach.

#18 - Tennessee: The Great Pumpkin is a good coach and people in Orange Nation should be happy with what they have.

#17 - Auburn: They are going to try the spread next year with a new quarterback named Burns. They will do just that to a lot of defenses.

#16 - Illinois: I meant to put them here, and then I put Wisconsin here. To be honest I am going to end up being way wrong either way.

#15 - Clemson: Honestly, I think a darkhorse to run the table. But it's Clemson and they are always a darkhorse, and they always disappoint.

#14 - Michigan: I think Lloyd Carr did his last great coaching move in the bowl game and unleashed the team for R-Rod. Another school that should have been happier with their coach.

#13 - Texas Tech: Another darkhorse. Mike Leach is a lawyer. Enough said.

#12 - Kansas: I think this team is a lot better than people give them credit for and I think they are going to start proving it.

#11 - Texas: I know Charles is leaving, but that was an impressive win in the bowl game. They also have Colt McCoy coming back, and he doesn't look like that other Colt after the Sugar Bowl.

#10 - LSU: Ryan Perilloux gets his time. But they lose Glenn Dorsey.

#9 - Oregon: I think they found a new quarterback. Now, if they could only get rid of those old plain uniforms.....

#8 - Virginia Tech: I had a friend that called the LSU-VT game earlier this year "The Tragedy Bowl" and that is reason enough to place them this high.

#7 - Arizona State: They have one heck of a coach. They weren't even supposed to be good this year. I think they unleash the devil. And their cheerleaders are hot.

#6 - Ohio State: All they do is win. Except when playing the SEC. Shoot me if I ever wear a sweater vest.

#5 - Oklahoma: Yes, I forgot about them. Yes, I had to make two number fives to put them in. Yes, I can count. Yes, this makes about as much sense as the BCS. Yes, unlike most people, I will admit to drinking the Kool-Aid.

#5 - Florida: Don't Tase me Bro!!!

#4 - USC: Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you this decade's Florida State, never out of the Top 4.

#3 - Georgia: This team is loaded. So is their schedule. No way they get through unscathed.

#2 - Missouri: This team brings back tons of talent and next year they have the experience to take it all the way. Too bad they don't have fans that travel.

#1 - West Virginia: I think this is a team on the cusp of greatness. Not to mention the weak conference they are in.

Teams I found hard to leave out: Pittsburgh, Washington, Georgia Tech, Miami, Wisconsin, California, Penn State, Cincinnati, South Carolina.

You can make fun of this all you want, because I put absolutely NO research into this. If you get all hot and bothered that your team was left out...well get a life, cause I just made this shit up.

And if you really want to know. If I just made this a true top-25, and got rid of the two #5 teams, Florida State would be the team out of luck. The Seminoles are probably facing stiff NCAA sanctions anyway.

Sugar Bowl Fiasco: Blame the Voters, Bowls, and FOX

Rusi Patel — Thu, 03 Jan 2008 05:30:34 -0500

We have had three BCS games so far, and every single one of these snoozers has allowed me to sleep soundly.

We were spoon-fed the "Hawai'i is this year's media darling" stories for weeks, and all it got us was the sheer and utter humiliation that that was the Sugar Bowl.

We were fed that "Illinois has speed and power, and might pull off an upset."

Pass the applesauce, please.

We were told WVU had no chance—without noting that they had a pretty good defense and Rich Rodriguez didn't coach that side of the ball. Without noting that there was this guy named Pat White on offense—who can also be known as the Flash from now on.

This BCS season went downhill early. Imagine going into championship Saturday a month ago with Notre Dame at #4 instead of UGA. The #1 and #2 teams in the country lose. Who do you think Kirk Herbstreit is promoting to be in the National Championshp game then?

My point is not necessarily that UGA deserved to be in the title game. (But who the hell knows if they did? We will never get the chance to find out.)

My point is that announcers have too much control over the BCS process. College Gameday blatantly pandered for an LSU-Ohio State game over a month ago, while dismissing teams like UGA and Kansas.

Do I have a problem with the LSU-Ohio State game? No. In fact, I actually think it might be a pretty good game—and Lord knows, of all the teams clamoring for a spot in the Championshp, those two probably had the strongest arguments.

My problem is that the pandering would not have occurred if Georgia was held in the same regard as Notre Dame, USC, or Nebraska.

Announcers talking too much took a new turn in the Sugar Bowl. All throughout the pregame show, viewes had to deal with this "Hawai'i is the team of destiny, and everyone is supposed to like them" shtick.

Colt Brennan had a personal interest story about how he redeemed himself from his "mistake." I am proud that he has been able to redeem himself as are many other people throughout the nation. I am not proud of the Fox network or Brennan failing to say what that mistake was.

Brennan broke into a woman's room and exposed his genitals to her. Don't make a personal interest story about your status as a victim if you can't state that. That story made it seem like he did nothing wrong, and was run out of the University of Colorado by mean and evil people.

Later in the game, Thom Brennaman—who should never call a college game again after referring to UGA players as "Gators"—started praising Hawai'i for not giving up, while at the same time calling UGA classless for still playing hard.

Thom, the team had its backups in. These are kids that never see playing time. You want them to start taking knees with ten minutes to go against the highest-scoring offense in college football?

You want them to come into the Sugar Bowl, a game they may never get the chance to play in again, and not try?

Go back to the NFL, Thom.

I am hoping for a better matchup in the Orange Bowl tonight. But, to be honest, I kind of smell a Kansas victory in impressive fashion—that team still wants to prove themselves.