There are quite a number of people who would easily qualify for the new BartenderCabbie "Asshat of the Week Award." Harry Ried, Piers Morgan and Al Gore comes to mind but I'm thinking that this weeks' Asshat award has to go to Redskins coach Mike Shanahan.
Shanahan perhaps put one of the NFL's stellar young QBs' career in jeopardy by keeping RGIII in the game in their ultimate loss to the Ravens. It was obvious the man was hurt and ineffective. Keeping him so long in the game did Robert, Redskins fans, and general NFL fans a disservice. Yes I know that Shanahan is considered a "winner" and that RGIII could have, at any time, taken himself out of the game, but...........
Mike Shanahan is not only the winner of the Asshat of the Week, but he is truly a piece of shit.
Nothing further!
Wednesday, January 9, 2013
Tuesday, January 8, 2013
The BCS "National Champion' is Crowned. Holiday Season Draws to a Close
The outcome of the BCS "National Championship" game is in the history books and the outcome was fairly easy to predict. Even though the game was a blowout it was not even as close as the score.
If anyone watched Notre Dame this season, any at all, they should have come to the conclusion that, while the Irish may have been top ten, they certainly were not anywhere close to being the number one team in the land. That was certainly proven last evening down Miami way.
All in all there would have been quite a number of match ups that would have been much better. Alabama being in the game is perhaps a given, but I would have made a case for a rematch with the Aggies or a meeting with Oregon. Either would have been better than that tripe we were served on a platter.....
If we were just to go on w/l records alone; this season could have easily been a Notre Dame vs Ohio State match up (were the Buckeyes not under sanction). That would have been a joke but could certainly have been the case. Thankfully we at least got to see one team in the game that deserved to be there instead of two marginally top 10 teams masquerading as "national championship" material.
Looking to next season it is not inconceivable that the Tide will be there again. Not inconceivable at all. They will be challenged by Georgia, Texas A&M and Oregon likely. Some dark horses will be in the mix including Oklahoma, LSU, Ohio State, Notre Dame, Florida, and Florida State. Perhaps Kansas State, Louisville, Clemson, Texas, or South Carolina may be in play. We may even see a few real long shots making a move with a Baylor, Boise State, UCLA, TCU, Ole Miss (yes them), Oklahoma State, Virginia Tech (well probably not), or Stanford type team in the mix. We will see.
There were some bright spots, with some teams having a surprisingly good season. No one, (including me), had any inkling that Texas Agriculture would have had such a good first season in the SEC. Sumlin (like Art Briles), just seems to be blessed with great college QB's behind center. It took a few games to work out the bugs, but at the end of the season it is quite possible that the Aggies were the best of the best.
No one would have figured that a MAC squad would make a BCS game. NIU may or may not have deserved to be there, but that had a very good season none the less. More than one MAC team should not be taken lightly by anyone.
Who would have thought that San Jose State would have such a stellar season? No one. Utah State also was very good, but that was perhaps predicatable. For the last couple of years they have been a team that might have been able to surprise some top 10 teams on a good day.
What about Vanderbilt? One of the best seasons in history in Nashville. The Commodores probably won't make a play for the SEC Championship, but if they keep up the good work, they can certainly end the season in a major bowl. I would not rule out the Cotton if they stay on track here. If they were in the ACC or Big East they would have at least challenged for the conference crown and a BCS appearance. They don't play in the ACC or Big East though....
A few others come to mind. Kent State had a commendable year as did Louisiana Tech, Arkansas State, ULL, and San Diego State. Even Duke and Rice had good seasons as far as such things go.
Conversely there were some major "disappointments." USC, this season, is perhaps one of the biggest flops in the history of the game. From a team that was ranked number one and two by most major polls and publications to one that ended up finishing with a Sun Bowl loss to a Georgia Tech squad that should not have even been "bowl eligible." Pretty sad. It is not that the team is without talent. They are loaded with it. Has to be the coaching staff. Kiffin is not a qualified HC at the major college (or any) level probably, but to be somewhat fair, Pete Carroll, who took his unscrupulous act to the NFL, is not without some blame for the shambles that the Trojan program has become.
West Virginia showed such promise at the beginning of the season and many folks (myself included) thought that they make make some noise and find themselves in another BCS game. Not to happen. This team imploded and ended up looking like they could do nothing right. They may be a good team next season but there is some major work ahead......
Some believed that the University of Arkansas would make some noise, but they turned out to be less than average. Frankly, I thought it easy to predict that they would have a below par season. The Petrino fiasco left them in shambles and John L Smith was probably not the man to turn things around. He had personal issues and likely could not give his full attention to the team. The Hogs made a pretty good hire with Bielema but I fear that his brand of football may become outmoded for all but a few schools. That would be another "we will see" perhaps..........
LSU is a bit of a disappointment also. Some folk thought that they were ready to challenge the Tide in the SEC but, having watched numerous games, I knew that was borderline ridicoulous. The same (and more) can be said for Florida. This year they were very very lucky to have the w/l record they finished the season with. Very lucky indeed. The Gators were just not a very good football team.
Perhaps you forgot about Southern Mississippi? In one season the Golden Eagles went from the best in CUSA to a winless season. Now that is ridiculous.
All in all it was a pretty fun season and I ended with year with a fairly decent 121-63 w/l record and more importantly, had a lot of fun with it.
I guess it is time to try to get interested in the NFL playoffs and then begin to pay some attention to college basketball. "March Madness" is one tournament that the NCAA actually does the right way.
If anyone watched Notre Dame this season, any at all, they should have come to the conclusion that, while the Irish may have been top ten, they certainly were not anywhere close to being the number one team in the land. That was certainly proven last evening down Miami way.
All in all there would have been quite a number of match ups that would have been much better. Alabama being in the game is perhaps a given, but I would have made a case for a rematch with the Aggies or a meeting with Oregon. Either would have been better than that tripe we were served on a platter.....
If we were just to go on w/l records alone; this season could have easily been a Notre Dame vs Ohio State match up (were the Buckeyes not under sanction). That would have been a joke but could certainly have been the case. Thankfully we at least got to see one team in the game that deserved to be there instead of two marginally top 10 teams masquerading as "national championship" material.
Looking to next season it is not inconceivable that the Tide will be there again. Not inconceivable at all. They will be challenged by Georgia, Texas A&M and Oregon likely. Some dark horses will be in the mix including Oklahoma, LSU, Ohio State, Notre Dame, Florida, and Florida State. Perhaps Kansas State, Louisville, Clemson, Texas, or South Carolina may be in play. We may even see a few real long shots making a move with a Baylor, Boise State, UCLA, TCU, Ole Miss (yes them), Oklahoma State, Virginia Tech (well probably not), or Stanford type team in the mix. We will see.
There were some bright spots, with some teams having a surprisingly good season. No one, (including me), had any inkling that Texas Agriculture would have had such a good first season in the SEC. Sumlin (like Art Briles), just seems to be blessed with great college QB's behind center. It took a few games to work out the bugs, but at the end of the season it is quite possible that the Aggies were the best of the best.
No one would have figured that a MAC squad would make a BCS game. NIU may or may not have deserved to be there, but that had a very good season none the less. More than one MAC team should not be taken lightly by anyone.
Who would have thought that San Jose State would have such a stellar season? No one. Utah State also was very good, but that was perhaps predicatable. For the last couple of years they have been a team that might have been able to surprise some top 10 teams on a good day.
What about Vanderbilt? One of the best seasons in history in Nashville. The Commodores probably won't make a play for the SEC Championship, but if they keep up the good work, they can certainly end the season in a major bowl. I would not rule out the Cotton if they stay on track here. If they were in the ACC or Big East they would have at least challenged for the conference crown and a BCS appearance. They don't play in the ACC or Big East though....
A few others come to mind. Kent State had a commendable year as did Louisiana Tech, Arkansas State, ULL, and San Diego State. Even Duke and Rice had good seasons as far as such things go.
Conversely there were some major "disappointments." USC, this season, is perhaps one of the biggest flops in the history of the game. From a team that was ranked number one and two by most major polls and publications to one that ended up finishing with a Sun Bowl loss to a Georgia Tech squad that should not have even been "bowl eligible." Pretty sad. It is not that the team is without talent. They are loaded with it. Has to be the coaching staff. Kiffin is not a qualified HC at the major college (or any) level probably, but to be somewhat fair, Pete Carroll, who took his unscrupulous act to the NFL, is not without some blame for the shambles that the Trojan program has become.
West Virginia showed such promise at the beginning of the season and many folks (myself included) thought that they make make some noise and find themselves in another BCS game. Not to happen. This team imploded and ended up looking like they could do nothing right. They may be a good team next season but there is some major work ahead......
Some believed that the University of Arkansas would make some noise, but they turned out to be less than average. Frankly, I thought it easy to predict that they would have a below par season. The Petrino fiasco left them in shambles and John L Smith was probably not the man to turn things around. He had personal issues and likely could not give his full attention to the team. The Hogs made a pretty good hire with Bielema but I fear that his brand of football may become outmoded for all but a few schools. That would be another "we will see" perhaps..........
LSU is a bit of a disappointment also. Some folk thought that they were ready to challenge the Tide in the SEC but, having watched numerous games, I knew that was borderline ridicoulous. The same (and more) can be said for Florida. This year they were very very lucky to have the w/l record they finished the season with. Very lucky indeed. The Gators were just not a very good football team.
Perhaps you forgot about Southern Mississippi? In one season the Golden Eagles went from the best in CUSA to a winless season. Now that is ridiculous.
All in all it was a pretty fun season and I ended with year with a fairly decent 121-63 w/l record and more importantly, had a lot of fun with it.
I guess it is time to try to get interested in the NFL playoffs and then begin to pay some attention to college basketball. "March Madness" is one tournament that the NCAA actually does the right way.
Monday, January 7, 2013
Another Line In The Sand?
A while back the Obama administration drew a "line in the sand" of sorts on Syrian govt forces possible use of chemical weapons. It just wasn't going to be tolerated you see.
Since this line was drawn, there are reports that there is the possibility that Syrian forces have indeed used these same weapons in limited strikes. Whether true or not is any one's guess. I would imagine that American mainstream media types would shy away from reporting an incident for "political" purposes. At any rate, I am hesitant to believe that this administration is really serious about their implicit threats of military engagement with Assad loyalists over the issue.
The Syrian civil war is a geopolitical danger to be sure. Not your average who cares Mohammedan vs Mohammedan conflict. This one has the potential (however unlikely) to involve major players in an adversarial military relationship. Carl in Jerusalem israelmatzav@blogspot.com has reported that a Soviet err Russian flotilla, including warships and assault elements, is gathering off the Syrian coast. If the report is correct (and I'm sure that it is), this throws an interesting twist into the line in the sand thing that the Obama administration has bleated of.
What if Syrian forces under Assad did use chemical weapons to gain the upper hand in what is becoming an apparently lost situation? In the unlikely event that the Obama regime is serious about getting involved over such an action, would the presence of Russian forces in the vicinity be a deterrent? Probably and rightly so. At this time the Syrian conflict is not worth getting involved with even without the presence of the Russian military in the region. The Russian forces would be swept aside rather quickly if it came to that, but I would imagine that just their presence alone would deter any real military action against Assad. Just not worth the risk.
That might be a good thing. Assad is evil obviously, but he is a well known evil.
It may be best to just let this thing play out the old fashioned way and be prepared to deal harshly with the aftermath if need be.
Since this line was drawn, there are reports that there is the possibility that Syrian forces have indeed used these same weapons in limited strikes. Whether true or not is any one's guess. I would imagine that American mainstream media types would shy away from reporting an incident for "political" purposes. At any rate, I am hesitant to believe that this administration is really serious about their implicit threats of military engagement with Assad loyalists over the issue.
The Syrian civil war is a geopolitical danger to be sure. Not your average who cares Mohammedan vs Mohammedan conflict. This one has the potential (however unlikely) to involve major players in an adversarial military relationship. Carl in Jerusalem israelmatzav@blogspot.com has reported that a Soviet err Russian flotilla, including warships and assault elements, is gathering off the Syrian coast. If the report is correct (and I'm sure that it is), this throws an interesting twist into the line in the sand thing that the Obama administration has bleated of.
What if Syrian forces under Assad did use chemical weapons to gain the upper hand in what is becoming an apparently lost situation? In the unlikely event that the Obama regime is serious about getting involved over such an action, would the presence of Russian forces in the vicinity be a deterrent? Probably and rightly so. At this time the Syrian conflict is not worth getting involved with even without the presence of the Russian military in the region. The Russian forces would be swept aside rather quickly if it came to that, but I would imagine that just their presence alone would deter any real military action against Assad. Just not worth the risk.
That might be a good thing. Assad is evil obviously, but he is a well known evil.
It may be best to just let this thing play out the old fashioned way and be prepared to deal harshly with the aftermath if need be.
Saturday, January 5, 2013
Zero Dark Thirty Debate
It seems that some "lawmakers" are concerned that the film Zero Dark Thirty gives the "wrong impression" about the hunt for Bin Laden. I suppose that the main bone of contention is the depictions of "torture" that are included in the film......
Number one the film is not a documentary and the film makers do not try to sale it as such, and number two, if anyone thinks that a little bit of good old fashion "arm twisting" was not used trying to capture or kill the mastermind of 911 then I have a bridge for sale. Cheap.
I am sure that in addition to offending some in the political class, that the film also will offend some followers of the Prophet. So be it. It is not like they will put anyone in jail for offending Mohammedans.......Oh wait.
Number one the film is not a documentary and the film makers do not try to sale it as such, and number two, if anyone thinks that a little bit of good old fashion "arm twisting" was not used trying to capture or kill the mastermind of 911 then I have a bridge for sale. Cheap.
I am sure that in addition to offending some in the political class, that the film also will offend some followers of the Prophet. So be it. It is not like they will put anyone in jail for offending Mohammedans.......Oh wait.
Friday, January 4, 2013
Do Professional Sports Teams Benefit The Locals?
Are Lockouts Beneficial To Local Economies?
I saw this on Yahoo Post Game and found it interesting. I have often wondered if a professional sports team really benefits the local economy and have come to the conclusion that any benefit may be minimal at best.
Of course there is some local benefit - the people who do real work at the venue do rely on the extra income that is generated game time. But what about the local economy as a whole?
Take the NFL for instance. Are there really that many fans who come to the game from out of town? A few to be sure, but for the most part it is the locals that show up. They spend their money, stimulate a small segment of the economy, and go home. As far as I can tell, the other major professional sports are little different. Local folks supporting the home town club, with a sprinkling of tourists and camp followers.
Contrast that with the college football. There are quite a number of teams whose fans "travel well." If you have ever been to a KSU away game you will see a sea of purple. These people travel, rent hotel rooms, spend money of food, etc. etc. I once went to a Rice/Hawaii game and there was bus load after bus load of Hawaii fans coming to cheer their team on (to defeat as I recall). All had to spend some money somewhere along the line in the Houston area.
I don't subscribe to the notion that a pro sports team may be a drag on the local economy, as the author of the article seems to, but I don't see much more than minimal benefit.
Anyway read the article and see what you think.
On a side note, there may be one exception to the rule and that is the sports teams (Saints in particular) in the city of New Orleans. NOLA is a destination city for tourism and at all Saints games there are curious tourists and die hard followers of the opposing team. For that city the Saints are a tourist attraction and it would be detrimental to the economy should they fold, move, etc.
An NFL lockout, strike, whatever would hurt the NOLA area economy. Most other cities? Probably not so much.
I saw this on Yahoo Post Game and found it interesting. I have often wondered if a professional sports team really benefits the local economy and have come to the conclusion that any benefit may be minimal at best.
Of course there is some local benefit - the people who do real work at the venue do rely on the extra income that is generated game time. But what about the local economy as a whole?
Take the NFL for instance. Are there really that many fans who come to the game from out of town? A few to be sure, but for the most part it is the locals that show up. They spend their money, stimulate a small segment of the economy, and go home. As far as I can tell, the other major professional sports are little different. Local folks supporting the home town club, with a sprinkling of tourists and camp followers.
Contrast that with the college football. There are quite a number of teams whose fans "travel well." If you have ever been to a KSU away game you will see a sea of purple. These people travel, rent hotel rooms, spend money of food, etc. etc. I once went to a Rice/Hawaii game and there was bus load after bus load of Hawaii fans coming to cheer their team on (to defeat as I recall). All had to spend some money somewhere along the line in the Houston area.
I don't subscribe to the notion that a pro sports team may be a drag on the local economy, as the author of the article seems to, but I don't see much more than minimal benefit.
Anyway read the article and see what you think.
On a side note, there may be one exception to the rule and that is the sports teams (Saints in particular) in the city of New Orleans. NOLA is a destination city for tourism and at all Saints games there are curious tourists and die hard followers of the opposing team. For that city the Saints are a tourist attraction and it would be detrimental to the economy should they fold, move, etc.
An NFL lockout, strike, whatever would hurt the NOLA area economy. Most other cities? Probably not so much.
Thursday, January 3, 2013
Sugar Not So Sweet For the Gators
Although I am running about 60 percent (or so) on predictions for the college football post season, I certainly pegged the outcome of the Sugar Bowl. Even though Florida has had a very good season in the won vs loss department, anyone (except the faithful) who watched them had to come to the conclusion that they just were not as good as their record or ranking. Of course there is always (well usually) a bit of luck involved in having a great season (look at Notre Dame), but at some point luck will run out........Florida was not even on the same level as Bridgewater and Co. last night. Not even close.
I am beginning to wonder if the dominance of the SEC is becoming a thing of the past. It is proven that most of the power programs of that conference have a bit of trouble when faced with quickness. Right now Texas A&M is the best team in the SEC. It took a few games to work out the bugs to be sure but no one would want to face the Aggies offense right now. Kevin Sumlin has brought a different brand of football that is normally seen in conference. The SEC (along with the Big Ten) tend to favor power over speed offensively with hard nosed defense to stop the same. It could be that brand of football is becoming (for the most part) obsolete.
We will see.
I am beginning to wonder if the dominance of the SEC is becoming a thing of the past. It is proven that most of the power programs of that conference have a bit of trouble when faced with quickness. Right now Texas A&M is the best team in the SEC. It took a few games to work out the bugs to be sure but no one would want to face the Aggies offense right now. Kevin Sumlin has brought a different brand of football that is normally seen in conference. The SEC (along with the Big Ten) tend to favor power over speed offensively with hard nosed defense to stop the same. It could be that brand of football is becoming (for the most part) obsolete.
We will see.
Wednesday, January 2, 2013
The 2012 Sun Bowl Should Have Not Even Been Played
The Sun Bowl has a rich and storied past. It is not a "major" bowl such as the Rose, Sugar, Cotton. or Orange but it certainly has its place in the college football post season. The game this year though was borderline ridiculous.......
The contest was a farce from the beginning. The USC people obviously did not want to be there and the Georgia Tech group, coming in with a losing record, shouldn't have been there. Period.
We certainly learned a couple of things though. USC needs to immediately fire their incompetent head coach, and the NCAA is even more corrupt than some of us realized. There are too many bowls anyway and allowing 6-6 teams to be part of the post season is absurd. It rewards mediocrity. Such are the rules though. Allowing Georgia Tech to play with a losing record ensured that one "deserving" team was left out of the mix. It probably would have been the University of Ohio had the administration at Louisiana Tech stupidly balked and stalled about playing in the Independence Bowl. As it was the Bulldogs, with a 9-3 record, were on the outside looking in.
Yes I know that Georgia Tech beat the Trojans but that says a bit more about the quality of the staff at USC than it does about the Yellow Jackets prowess on the grid iron.
The Sun Bowl has been the biggest joke (thus far) of the 2012 college football post season.
That says a lot.
The contest was a farce from the beginning. The USC people obviously did not want to be there and the Georgia Tech group, coming in with a losing record, shouldn't have been there. Period.
We certainly learned a couple of things though. USC needs to immediately fire their incompetent head coach, and the NCAA is even more corrupt than some of us realized. There are too many bowls anyway and allowing 6-6 teams to be part of the post season is absurd. It rewards mediocrity. Such are the rules though. Allowing Georgia Tech to play with a losing record ensured that one "deserving" team was left out of the mix. It probably would have been the University of Ohio had the administration at Louisiana Tech stupidly balked and stalled about playing in the Independence Bowl. As it was the Bulldogs, with a 9-3 record, were on the outside looking in.
Yes I know that Georgia Tech beat the Trojans but that says a bit more about the quality of the staff at USC than it does about the Yellow Jackets prowess on the grid iron.
The Sun Bowl has been the biggest joke (thus far) of the 2012 college football post season.
That says a lot.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)