arsenal aren't even close to where they were last year. they were lucky to beat portsmouth, the don't create anything, and they are more nervous than summers trying to ask christy mazza to the u of r ring dance for the second time whenever they are trying to see out the last five minutes of a game.
bowl games are fun, but not that fun. more fun is being back and seeing everyone i've ever known in a 3 day stretch. richmond is unbelieveable for that.
How bout that pac 10 football? acc isn't bad either, and if it wasn't for the worst college football qb i've ever seen (nc state's 2nd string, (not third string) then NC state would have beat Rutgers handily.
and check this out, who knew there were so many canadians in the nhl. or czechs..
http://redblackhockey.blogspot.com/2007/11/nhl-players-by-nationality-since-2002.html
Sunday, December 28, 2008
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
2001 GMAC Bowl, blast from the past
I was combing through the espn video files and I noticed that they are doing this little 12 bowls of christmas, counting down the 12 most memorable bowl games of the past decade or so. (i'm not exactly sure what the criteria is). Anyway, they did a pretty good job too, not just giving you a 3 minute recap but a full on 20 minute summary.
Anyway, the 2001 GMAC bowl pitted Marshall vs East Carolina and incidently Byron Leftwich vs David Garrard the future Jacksonville teammates. This game had everything, I actually remember staying up past midnight and watching it live. East Carolina was having their way with the Herd in the first half, they must have been up by at least 4 touchdowns at one point. But they couldn't keep the shackles on an already gimpy and lead footed leftwich, who really could zing the old pigskin around back then, and Marshall was always going to be within striking distance for the latter stages of the game.
The end of regulation of this game is one of my favorites in college football. Marshall kicks a field goal to make it a 6 point game with about 2 minutes left. They stop ECU, use all their timeouts, and get the ball back in their own territory with about 30 seconds left and no timeouts. This game should be a blueprint of how not to defend a last second drive, and the constant closeup of the East Carolina defensive coordinator, head in hands, inconsolable as if he knows whats going to happen before the drive even starts, is priceless. Anyway, Leftwich is brilliant, he doesn't panic, and he uses that awesome rule of the clock stopping to move the chains to perfection, and actually scores with 7 seconds so spare to tie the game at 51.
BUT THEN, just when we think its over, this kicker comes along and hits a gross, low extrapoint that misses wide to the right. This was his 7th missed extra point of the year. uhhh, thats not a very good stat to have. Marshall goes on to win the game in OT, but what a classic, crazy fourth quarter that exemplifies the bowl season at its finest.
Anyway, the 2001 GMAC bowl pitted Marshall vs East Carolina and incidently Byron Leftwich vs David Garrard the future Jacksonville teammates. This game had everything, I actually remember staying up past midnight and watching it live. East Carolina was having their way with the Herd in the first half, they must have been up by at least 4 touchdowns at one point. But they couldn't keep the shackles on an already gimpy and lead footed leftwich, who really could zing the old pigskin around back then, and Marshall was always going to be within striking distance for the latter stages of the game.
The end of regulation of this game is one of my favorites in college football. Marshall kicks a field goal to make it a 6 point game with about 2 minutes left. They stop ECU, use all their timeouts, and get the ball back in their own territory with about 30 seconds left and no timeouts. This game should be a blueprint of how not to defend a last second drive, and the constant closeup of the East Carolina defensive coordinator, head in hands, inconsolable as if he knows whats going to happen before the drive even starts, is priceless. Anyway, Leftwich is brilliant, he doesn't panic, and he uses that awesome rule of the clock stopping to move the chains to perfection, and actually scores with 7 seconds so spare to tie the game at 51.
BUT THEN, just when we think its over, this kicker comes along and hits a gross, low extrapoint that misses wide to the right. This was his 7th missed extra point of the year. uhhh, thats not a very good stat to have. Marshall goes on to win the game in OT, but what a classic, crazy fourth quarter that exemplifies the bowl season at its finest.
Saturday, December 6, 2008
was it just me
or did every game i watch this weekend have a crazy ending?
Man U Sunderland, Juventus Lecce, Villa Everton, Sevilla Real, Dallas Pittsburgh, the list goes on...
i was lucky enough to take in a large part of 3 games this saturday, arsenal, man united, and barcelona.
It almost seems silly to write about this now, ( i began this post on sunday, but since i've gotten sick, i didn't get back to it until now).
There's no question which one of the aforementioned was the most impressive. Barca. They're in a class by themselves at the moment. Dani Alves could probably play anywhere on the field, but he just so happens to be probably the most dangerous right back the world has ever seen, how convenient. He combines so well with Messi, who is just Messi, and I have to mention again how him and Ronaldo are polar opposites when it comes to how they handle their treatment. Granted, Ronaldo's style does lend itself to him being in some more all or nothing situations which ronaldo is right to go down if he does lose the ball. but my case and point was illustrated sunday when Ronaldo went grimacing off with his trademark overembellishing of an injury after 64 minutes, whereas Messi just shrugs off challenges like there is no tommorow and lets the ref do his job.
Still like the bcs texas fans?
Man U Sunderland, Juventus Lecce, Villa Everton, Sevilla Real, Dallas Pittsburgh, the list goes on...
i was lucky enough to take in a large part of 3 games this saturday, arsenal, man united, and barcelona.
It almost seems silly to write about this now, ( i began this post on sunday, but since i've gotten sick, i didn't get back to it until now).
There's no question which one of the aforementioned was the most impressive. Barca. They're in a class by themselves at the moment. Dani Alves could probably play anywhere on the field, but he just so happens to be probably the most dangerous right back the world has ever seen, how convenient. He combines so well with Messi, who is just Messi, and I have to mention again how him and Ronaldo are polar opposites when it comes to how they handle their treatment. Granted, Ronaldo's style does lend itself to him being in some more all or nothing situations which ronaldo is right to go down if he does lose the ball. but my case and point was illustrated sunday when Ronaldo went grimacing off with his trademark overembellishing of an injury after 64 minutes, whereas Messi just shrugs off challenges like there is no tommorow and lets the ref do his job.
Still like the bcs texas fans?
about that time...
for my annual BCS rant.
Ok, I know everyone already hates the bcs, and i'm not trying to beat a dead horse here, but there are some interesting aspects of this debate that rarely get mentioned, that I’d like to elicit here.
i'd say your typical auburn 2006/7? Oregon 2002/3, and all the other schools' fans that have been hard done by the bcs might have a conversation that goes something like the following..
fan1: "hey so how bout that bcs? bullshit right?"
fan2: "hawwwww, (incoherent rant) (dey took our trophyyyy." (end of rant).
but it usually doesn't go any further. People just run around like chickens with their heads cut off screaming for a playoff, but can they actually defend the concept? Do they even know what their argument is? Is their argument even a sound one? These aren’t easy questions. And neither was deciding what to do with kramer’s girl’s bike, but Newman found the answer.
Somewhere along the line, we decided that the human opinion after all the traditional bowl games wasn't enough to crown a rightful champion, and often times we were left with co-champions, (which nobody likes, but ironically wasn't fixed by the BCS). In theory the BCS was put in practice to determine the best two teams from division 1 to play in the championship. Whether or not it does this adequatley or not, is beside the point, (for now).
So initially, the BCS was looking good, 2 teams to play for it all. But come on, how little foresight can you have? How hard was it to figure out that eventually there was going to be 3 undefeated or comparable teams, whose differences might be able to be deciphered by the slightest of margins through computers, but not by any disinterested college football spectator.
So, here we are, if you are a proponent of a playoff, as Mr. Obama apparently is, where then do we draw the cutoff for who gets to play? The logical number is 4, or 8, if you want to be safer, but either way, aren’t we just enlarging the same dilemma? (assuming we keep the rankings to determine these teams). I won’t get into the merits of the actual system of rankings, because although they are surely flawed, the formula is likely not going to be tinkered with, and that I can accept. BUT, there’s always going to be a legitimate gripe from that number 5 or 9 team, that they were robbed of a rightful place in the playoffs and who are we to tell them otherwise?
I myself have never been a big proponent of an end of season winner take all tournament to decide who is a “league” champion. For example, in NCAA basketball, if you play in a bottom feeder conference that is only going to get one bid no matter what, your regular season is essentially worthless. (if all you care about is trying to win a nat’l championship, which in theory is what all D-1 teams are playing for). Is it not fair to say that the best team will always have the best record in the league if everyone plays an equal number of times? Thus, I believe that this regular season champ should have the honor of representing the conference in the big dance.
I’m not exactly sure how this tradition started, and I’m too lazy to research it, but this is clearly become the benchmark for how titles are decided in American sports. Nowhere is this more evident than in the MLS which inexplicably does not crown their regular season table topper the champion, as is the case in every other soccer league in the world that I know of, but prefer to “let them play it out,” in a somewhat comical MLS cup, where the quarterfinals are 2 legged and the semis are not! What?! Even the grueling 162 game baseball season in belittled to a play-off, and no one blinks.
How is this relevant to the BCS you ask? Well, in some ways it isn’t. And there is no easy solution to the college football problem. I guess what I’m trying to say here is that perhaps we need to re-examine the way we evaluate our awarding of championships based on the entire course of a season, and not just on one game.
Ok, I know everyone already hates the bcs, and i'm not trying to beat a dead horse here, but there are some interesting aspects of this debate that rarely get mentioned, that I’d like to elicit here.
i'd say your typical auburn 2006/7? Oregon 2002/3, and all the other schools' fans that have been hard done by the bcs might have a conversation that goes something like the following..
fan1: "hey so how bout that bcs? bullshit right?"
fan2: "hawwwww, (incoherent rant)
but it usually doesn't go any further. People just run around like chickens with their heads cut off screaming for a playoff, but can they actually defend the concept? Do they even know what their argument is? Is their argument even a sound one? These aren’t easy questions. And neither was deciding what to do with kramer’s girl’s bike, but Newman found the answer.
Somewhere along the line, we decided that the human opinion after all the traditional bowl games wasn't enough to crown a rightful champion, and often times we were left with co-champions, (which nobody likes, but ironically wasn't fixed by the BCS). In theory the BCS was put in practice to determine the best two teams from division 1 to play in the championship. Whether or not it does this adequatley or not, is beside the point, (for now).
So initially, the BCS was looking good, 2 teams to play for it all. But come on, how little foresight can you have? How hard was it to figure out that eventually there was going to be 3 undefeated or comparable teams, whose differences might be able to be deciphered by the slightest of margins through computers, but not by any disinterested college football spectator.
So, here we are, if you are a proponent of a playoff, as Mr. Obama apparently is, where then do we draw the cutoff for who gets to play? The logical number is 4, or 8, if you want to be safer, but either way, aren’t we just enlarging the same dilemma? (assuming we keep the rankings to determine these teams). I won’t get into the merits of the actual system of rankings, because although they are surely flawed, the formula is likely not going to be tinkered with, and that I can accept. BUT, there’s always going to be a legitimate gripe from that number 5 or 9 team, that they were robbed of a rightful place in the playoffs and who are we to tell them otherwise?
I myself have never been a big proponent of an end of season winner take all tournament to decide who is a “league” champion. For example, in NCAA basketball, if you play in a bottom feeder conference that is only going to get one bid no matter what, your regular season is essentially worthless. (if all you care about is trying to win a nat’l championship, which in theory is what all D-1 teams are playing for). Is it not fair to say that the best team will always have the best record in the league if everyone plays an equal number of times? Thus, I believe that this regular season champ should have the honor of representing the conference in the big dance.
I’m not exactly sure how this tradition started, and I’m too lazy to research it, but this is clearly become the benchmark for how titles are decided in American sports. Nowhere is this more evident than in the MLS which inexplicably does not crown their regular season table topper the champion, as is the case in every other soccer league in the world that I know of, but prefer to “let them play it out,” in a somewhat comical MLS cup, where the quarterfinals are 2 legged and the semis are not! What?! Even the grueling 162 game baseball season in belittled to a play-off, and no one blinks.
How is this relevant to the BCS you ask? Well, in some ways it isn’t. And there is no easy solution to the college football problem. I guess what I’m trying to say here is that perhaps we need to re-examine the way we evaluate our awarding of championships based on the entire course of a season, and not just on one game.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)