SportsGirl

Well, I’m a day late, but as promised here is a little college football talk. I’m thoroughly unhappy with the BCS rankings as of this week. I am only focusing on the BCS for this column because it’s the only ranking system that really matters in the end. But truly, my discontent somewhat lies in the general concept of the rankings.

I think this all goes back to the pre-season rankings and the importance placed on them. All of the analysts get together before the season, before a single meaningful snap has occurred, and they rank who they think is going to be good for the upcoming season. I understand that watching teams practice and scrimmage can offer some insight into what they might look like when facing actual opponents. But until the season starts, how can you postulate accurately on who will be good? Look at my beloved Wolverines pre-season ranking. They started the season as the #5 team in the AP rank. As happy as it made me to see that, it looked farcical after the contest with Appalachian State. Even more so after the rout by Oregon…So now Michigan is being punished when compared to other 2-loss teams because they were beaten by an unranked Division I-AA team. I do understand the ramifications of this happening to a traditional powerhouse team like U of M, but if they had started the season at a lower ranking, it probably wouldn’t have quite the impact that it has now. So that leads me to my main contention and that is I’m not sure we should rank college teams, in any ranking system, until at least 6 games into the season.

This is one thing that the BCS gets right. But consider that the BCS formula includes the AP ranking that begins before the season, and once again pre-season rank becomes a factor. Take LSU and Oregon. You could probably land on either side of the fence of the argument over which team is better. My money says Oregon, having watched them both play. LSU has needed last-second victories in too many games for me to believe they’re the #2 team in the country. I suppose this is as appropriate a time as any to state that I believe strongly in margin of victory as a factor in ranking teams. This is one reason why it doesn’t bother me that the Patriots continue to thump their opponents by such a large margin instead of sending in second-string players in the second half. Beating a team by 3 points or 6 points as time is expiring, especially when that team is not ranked, doesn’t impress me. Now, I know, I wrote earlier about the great comeback win that BC engineered over Virginia Tech so you’re probably thinking I sound like a giant hippocrate at this point. But if you re-read that entry, nowhere did I say that BC should have maintained their #2 ranking simply because they won. It took two scores in the final 4 minutes of the game to win but for the first 44 minutes of that contest, BC was dominated. That’s not a hallmark of a #2 team. I’m not saying you can’t trail your opponent at any point in a game and still be considered top-tier, I’m just saying LSU has let too many teams hang around too long for me to give them the edge over Oregon.

I propose that we eliminate pre-season rankings altogether. Let the season start, let the teams start playing their games. Let’s see how they look a few weeks into it. Then, let the BCS formula kick in, and at that point, if the AP ranking is a factor, no biggie. Because the pre-season, artificial ranking has been removed and it’s a clean slate at that point. I just don’t like to see teams have inflated rankings because they were good last season. It’s the same reason I nearly steered my car into on-coming traffic this morning when I heard Phil Simms on Mike and Mike saying that San Diego is one of only a few remaining teams that could challenge Indy or New England. San Diego. Really? The same San Diego that gave up 500+ yards to the Minnesota Vikings? Or maybe the same San Diego that doesn’t remember that LaDainian Tomlinson is one of the greatest players in football right now…They’re a team that could challenge the Pats or the Colts? Pittsburgh I’ll give you. Not San Diego.

Tomorrow I’m going to delve into the Patriots quest for perfection as there is a wealth of discussion occurring on the subject and I feel the need to weigh in.

I need to take a minute to express my complete disgust with the verdict that has come out of the Isaiah Thomas trial in regards to his (no longer alleged) sexual harassment towards Anucha Brown Sanders. I feel like this is the final nail in the coffin around his career or at least his respectability. And this is a man who was revered after the Pistons won their back-to-back titles in ‘89 and ‘90.

There is something about Zeke that just seems like he should be uber-wholesome. Maybe it’s the smile. It seems genuine. He always reminded me of Webster with that smile and that sort of little boy look. Now, not only is his basketball acumen in question but he’s been convicted of being a sexual harasser. If his critics needed any more reason to call for his resignation, this is it. Of course so far the team is saying that they stand by him, as does ownership. But how long will that last? Unless the Knicks just have an unbelievable season, which is highly unlikely given their roster and past performances, I see Isaiah losing his job and probably deservedly so. Which is just a shame to me because I want to remember him as a good guy. Especially in today’s sporting culture where so many of the champs are not truly good guys.

By the way, if you haven’t read anything about the accusations from Ms. Brown Sanders against Isaiah, you may not realize that the title of this entry is a reference. She stated that, after backing away from a kiss on the cheek initiated by Isaiah, he said “What? No love today?”. So no, Isaiah, no love today. Only dismay at the fact that your legacy is forever tarnished and you have forever altered the perception of a girl who was a huge fan of your Championship teams almost 20 years ago.

It’s a dark day for any Patriots fan. The league has ruled on the “Videogate” scandal involving a member of the Patriots videotaping the Jets coaching staff as they call their plays. This comes after commissioner Roger Goodell specifically instructed the teams not to engage in this kind of activity. And now, as if it wasn’t going to be torture enough for me to sit through the season listening to how Michigan choked time after time, I’m now going to have to wade through (probably) endless debates of just how big an advantage the Patriots gained from their cheating and how that impacts, or doesn’t, their victories.

I don’t know that anyone is going to be able to determine the magnitude of impact these types of illegal activities had on the overall success of the Patriots franchise. How do you determine exactly how many extra points you gained because you knew that on 3rd and 9 the defense was calling a blitz package? Seriously, if you don’t realize that they’re going to blitz you on 3rd and 9 you probably shouldn’t be a coach. But that brings me to my main point and that is that you could be standing on the other team’s sideline and actually call the play for them while simultaneously sending an ESP message to your coaching staff to be prepared for Reggie Bush to run it up the middle and Bush could still gain 20 yards because it’s all about execution on the field.

Al Michaels spent much of the telecast on opening night reminding us how drastic it would be for the Colts if Joseph Addai had actually been injured on the first play of the game instead of just having the wind knocked out of him. And the reason, according to Al, it would have been so devastating was because Indy doesn’t really have a backup plan at running back. Addai is the only guy, pardon the rhyme. So if you know that Indianapolis is going to hand off to Addai and almost exclusively to Addai, and yet Addai can still gain 100 yards a game, what good would it have done you to know exactly the play being called? If your blockers miss a block, and Addai finds the hole, what advantage was gained?

Now, this is not to excuse the Patriots from committing an ugly offense in cheating by stealing signals. I just don’t think there’s a place for this kind of “competitive advantage” in sports. Just play the damn game! But to all of the people who want to say that the Patriots, or more specifically Bill Belichick’s, legacy is tarnished or that the Super Bowl wins are invalid, I just don’t think your argument has merit. It’s a shame that a sharp guy like BB resorted to these kinds of tactics, but I don’t think it diminishes just how good Tom Brady is, because that’s all about execution.

I’m hoping that the Pats score a big win against the Chargers this weekend to prove to everyone that, in the height of scrutiny, they are still the team to beat this season. Especially since I’ve got my doubts that Michigan will be able to accomplish a similar feat and I refuse to spend my weekend talking about how much they both stink!

Ok, so I am full of thoughts today and I’m feeling a little distressed. I think the sports world has gone completely mad!

It started this morning when I was listening to Mike and Mike in the Morning on ESPN Radio like I always do. The stand-in hosts, since M&M were on vacation, were interviewing Larry Johnson, running back for the Kansas City Chiefs. LJ has been holding out of training camp this season so as to force the Chiefs to renegotiate his contract since he only had a year remaining on the old one. In the middle of the interview, LJ says that while trying to decide when the right time was to agree to the terms being offered (which he recently did) he was considering what would be best for himself, the team, and his teammates. This was one of those moments where I had to yell at the radio. Sorry, but I had to. Someone needed to be the voice of reason.

I’m definitely not in the camp that says athletes should take what they’re given at the first offer and be happy with it. Yes, I get a little nauseated thinking  about the money they seem to pooh-pooh because it’s more than I could dream of earning in a lifetime. But I’m an Economics major so the concept of supply and demand makes sense to me. There really is a short supply of athletes who are genuinely gifted enough to make it in the NFL and the demand by the fans for a quality product on the field dictates how large that contract gets. Owners aren’t philanthropists when it comes to their NFL endeavors; they won’t sign a guy to a Vick-esque contract without feeling reasonably certain (so sorry to you Arthur Blank) that through ticket, jersey and other paraphernalia sales they will recoup that money. So I’m fine with the contracts and I’m also fine with the notion that the NFL, like the other major sports leagues, is a business first and foremost. And I believe both parties–player and owner–are clear to treat it that way. However, (and that should be read with Steven A. Smith-type emphasis) please, Larry Johnson or any other athlete holding out of training camp, don’t tell me that you’re considering what’s “best for the team” when you make a move like that. Holding out of training camp is about one thing and one thing only–the athlete seeking what’s best for him. That could mean max money, more guaranteed money, longer years signed, etc. But it’s definitely not about what’s best for the team. Because what’s best for the team is for you to get your butt into training camp like the rest of the people who are unhappy about their contracts and work. Like you’re being paid to do…

Now, that was to be my thought for the day. Then I got to work and poked around ESPN.com for a bit and read an article stating that the Atlanta chapter of the NAACP wants Michael Vick to be allowed to return to the NFL, preferably to the Falcons. I don’t necessarily have a problem with that. As I’ve stated before I definitely am appalled by his behavior. But I’m not sure it merits him being banned from the game for the rest of his life. He’ll serve the time that the U.S. Attorney deems appropriate and that will be that. What irks me so much about the NAACP is that the leader of that chapter was suggesting that Vick is merely human and made an error in judgment and that it’s our collective responsibility to welcome him back to aid in his re-entry to productive society. Really? How about we give Vick a chance to prove that he’s genuinely contrite for what he’s done, not just for getting caught? How about we make him work 500 hours of community service at his local SPCA shelter so he can see where some of these former fighting dogs end up? Why should the fans have to decide now that we’re ready to accept him again in a positive light as a public figure? We haven’t heard much from Mike lately, just a few canned comments from his attorney about how sorry he is. But I for one want to reserve my final assessment of where I think he should land until he’s served his sentence and we see what he intends to do with his life.

Alright, so I thought that’s where my post would end until I read another column about one man’s view that the NFL Player’s Association isn’t doing enough right now to rage against the machine that is Roger Goodell.  The author states that the NFLPA has been too willing to accept the punishments Goodell is handing down in the name of the Personal Conduct policy, all for the sake of maintaining good PR with the league. He goes on to suggest that, while the Vick saga along with the Pac Man Jones ordeal aren’t popular actions to defend, it’s the PA’s responsibility to in essence reject anything the league says just for the heck of it. That accepting the league’s findings in these types of matters is too dangerous and that the PA then isn’t representing their constituency voraciously enough.

Hold on here; let me first state that I’m not a fan of the entire concept of a union. I understand in the 1800’s that the little working man didn’t have enough of a voice to feel that his interests were represented in his job. But this is 2007. With or without a union, the players have a voice, albeit maybe a slightly weaker voice individually than the collective union voice. But all of Goodell’s actions to this point have seemed reasonable and not at all like he’s trying to control every aspect of the players’ lives.  For the union to object to his rulings thus far just because that’s what unions are supposed to do seems ludicrous. The author of this article suggests that they’re setting a dangerous precedent for any future dealings with the NFL front office. I couldn’t disagree more. I think by working with the league to mete out punishments to men who frankly probably deserve  more than what they got is a great way to build some cache with the league for the times when you really need to pull out the muscle. At least you’ve shown them that you’re willing to be reasonable when a situation is so blatantly bad that it needs no discussion on proper punishment. Complaining now, on issues you actually don’t disagree on, will send the signal that the union is really more interested in stirring the pot than actually advancing the cause of the players.

So, that, dear readers, is why I was feeling in need of such assistance. I needed some clarity to get perspective on all the craziness I was apparently surrounded with today!  Hopefully tomorrow there won’t be as much to get me riled up. Sending out the SOS call two days in a row? More than I could handle…