Week 1 Picks

From King Bee's Hive:

It looks like Quinton and I will have the same record after this week. I'm glad we're not officially picking the Duke-UConn game, then. I think the Devils can win that one, but will miss suspended linebacker Michael Tauiliili. For fun, I'll pick Duke, 24-21, breaking the losing streak and consigning the goalposts to the pond in the Sarah P. Duke Gardens. On to the real games....

Okie State at Georgia. I think the Dawgs should be scared of getting into a shootout. I think if they play a ball-control, pounding game, they'll wear down the cowpokes. But I think it will be tense until late. I'll say Georgia, 28-21.

Tennessee at Cal. I agree with Quinton that Tennessee will have a good year -- I think they can even win the SEC East. But they just have so many little questions for this game, and Cal is not a team to get well against. Coaches always say that teams improve the most between the first and second game, and I think the Vols will prove that. But line problems, receiver questions, and Erik Ainge's finger will stymie Smokey this weekend. Not to mention the sights those Vols will see in the People's Republic of Berkeley. I'm going with Cal by 31-21.

Georgia Tech at Notre Dame. It's been shocking in recent years to see how far Notre Dame has fallen in terms of pure athleticism. Where is the likes of Tim Brown? Are they not paying enough now that Lou Holtz is gone? Whatever happened, it's almost embarrassing to see Notre Dame play against a speedy, talented team like Michigan or USC or LSU. Well, mostly gleefully fun, but also a little embarrassing. We'll see if Charlie Weis goes with Demetrius Jones at quarterback to help level that playing field a bit. I think Weis is going to think too highly of his own alleged genius and do some ill-times QB platooning. I think the Irish won't get into a rhythm, and you know that the Jackets have been scouting this one ever since last year's Notre Dame win in Atlanta. Still, I think it's going to be another snoozy low-scoring affair, with Georgia Tech prevailing in the end, 21-14.

Weekend Picks - September 1

Oklahoma State at Georgia - I'm a homer Dawg fan, but I'm worried. Okie State's offense is potent with solid skill players, an All-American caliber receiver, and the best of everything Boone Pickens can buy. (I think each player was flown to Athens in his own gold G5 while wearing a top hat and lighting fat cigars with $10,000 bills, if media reports are true.) Bobby Reid leads a good/great offense against a bunch of Georgia defenders who are skilled and fast, but who are also young and inexperienced. The saving grace for the Dawgs will be State's defense, which couldn't stop anybody last year and had their entire defensive line depart in the off season. The key to the game is if Georgia's patchwork offensive line can open enough holes to make Okie State fear the run. If so, UGA can grind out some drives, keeping Reid off the field. Oklahoma State 27, Georgia 34.

Tennessee at Cal - S-E-C! S-E-C! I'm afraid that this entire off season, while everyone was talking about how great the conference was, people missed that the SEC doesn't really return a solid BCS caliber team on paper other than LSU. Everyone else has big question marks. UT is no exception. They return arguably the best SEC quarterback when healthy in Erik Ainge, but who will Ainge throw to? A collection of freshmen, unproven back-ups, and JUCOs. Tennessee will be solid this year, but not in this game. Eastern teams notoriously have trouble out west and I'm picking Cal to beat the coon dogs. The talent may be a push or even favor UT, but Cal has all the intangibles of playing at home with a Pac-10 size chip on their shoulder. Tennessee 20, Cal 28.

Georgia Tech at Notre Dame - I will freely admit that I have not scouted this game as I should, but I don't think I need to, plus a get sick after continued exposure to anything Tech related. I think Tech is a solid team, perhaps the second best team in the ACC. Notre Dame, however, has failed to really impress me recently outside of the USC game in 2005. The Domers don't look like they are going to be anything impressive this year either, with a QB derby in fall practice failing to definitively produce a starter. Georgia Tech 24, Notre Dame 17.

I'm going to Athens this weekend and I'll have full report next week.

BCS Predictions

I tried this last year, and they were so bad I'm ashamed to even link to them. Yet I remain undaunted. Here we go again.

National Championship: USC (12-0) v. West (By God) Virginia (12-0). I wouldn't be thrilled about this matchup, but it's how I see this thing going. I think all those SEC teams will cannibalize each other, Texas has too many tough road games, and Virginia Tech will lose at LSU. I think this year's big BCS "controversy" will be the margin between an undefeated WVU and a one-loss SEC team. In the end, while voters were content last year to pick their idea of the most deserving one-loss team, I don't see them jumping a one-loss team over a solid undefeated team. Still, I don't think the Mountaineers have enough defense to hang with the Trojans, so I guess I'm jumping on that bandwagon and picking USC to win it all in a shootout.

Rose Bowl: Michigan (11-1) v. Texas (10-2). Unable to get the traditional Pac-10 v. Big 10 game, I think the Rose Bowl will pick Texas. The Longhorns like going to Pasadena, and I think they'll bring more fans and tv viewers than any of the other possibilities (except maybe Florida). Also, I would love to see a game between these two great powers who don't play each other often enough. Anyway, I think it's a tossup but I'll pick Michigan.

Fiesta Bowl: Oklahoma (12-1) v. Wisconsin (10-2). So yeah, I think the Sooners will win the Big 12 and return to the scene of last year's best bowl game. They'll be ready for the Statue of Liberty this year and will wear down Wisconsin. Oklahoma to win. Still, I think the Badgers are a solid sleeper pick.

Orange Bowl: Virginia Tech (11-2) v. Florida (10-2). This is going to be a fascinating season for the Hokies, no matter what record they end up with. They'll be compelling to watch, and will have so much to play for every week. Still, they're not good enough to beat LSU in Baton Rouge at night next week, and somewhere along the way QB Sean Glennon will go haywire and cost them a game. But they're good enough to win the ACC this year. Florida is better, though, and will win the Orange Bowl.

Sugar Bowl: LSU (12-1) v. Louisville (10-2). I'm really only picking this matchup because I think the Sugar Bowl gets last pick this year. Not that Louisville isn't a decent opponent for the SEC champion, but I don't think they'd travel as many as, say, Wisconsin or Oklahoma. Like I said, I think a one-loss LSU team will get a lot of chatter about a playoff going, but this year I think they'll have to settle for winning the Sugar Bowl, and I'm picking the Tigers. I think they'll be very good, though, and the schedule is favorable -- except for that whole playing-in-the-SEC thing. Florida last year showed just how hard it is even for a great team to get through unscathed. If LSU does that, I have no doubt they'll be playing for the title, and probably winning it.

Okay. Check back in January to see how badly I did at prognosticating!

Notes from Da Bayou

Don't worry State fans. Yes, you are widely thought to be the worst team in the conference. Yes, you are playing LSU, widely thought to be the best team in the conference. According to Sly Croom, State "has a chance." Although the full quote sounds like State "has a chance" to compete, not win. Les Miles says State is a "quality opponent." Respect.

It's always a good sign when the coach has to point out that the team could conceivably win before a nationally televised game.

In other Louisiana-based news, Vince Dooley will miss his first Georgia home game in 43 years this Saturday when Georgia hosts Oklahoma State between the hedges in Athens. Dooley's excuse? He's accompanying his wife to the head coaching debut of his son, Derek Dooley, at Louisiana Tech. Derek is a former LSU assistant. At least he'll still be cheering for some Bulldogs.

Travis Henry: Goldplated Babymaker

Shawn Kemp, move over. Travis Henry, former Vol and NFL running back, has been sowing the seeds of love all over the South. And those seeds are powerful. Powerful enough to produce nine children by nine women in four states. While making nine babies with nine women in four states sounds fun, it also sounds unfathomably expensive. Not for an NFL running back though, right? It would be easy if you didn't blow 15% of you after tax bonus on gold chains. Henry blows so much money that his lawyer argues that he won't be able to fund a $250,000 trust for his progeny.

Playing Catch-up

A few recent items moved me to write, but not in a timely fashion. I'll have my annual pre-season BCS predictions soon. But for now, the hot issues.

1. There's been buzz all summer over whether the Big Ten might expand. A lot of this tracks back to some statements by Commissioner Jim Delaney regarding the prospects of the Big Ten tv network. Since there was nothing else going on this summer, frenzy broke out. Wild speculation ensued: maybe the Big Ten's twelfth team would be Pittsburgh, Rutgers, Missouri, Texas, Florida, Notre Dame, the Dillon Panthers, Wossamotta U., etc.

I don't expansion is going to happen anytime soon. And I also think that the Big Ten might be contrary enough to go to twelve teams and not play a championship game, unless they can somehow play it the week before the Ohio State-Michigan game. But something to remember is that the Big Ten gets awfully clubby and snooty. The schools' presidents make a big deal about how every conference school is a member of the Association of American Universities.

So it stands to reason that the hypothetical twelfth Big Ten school would also be an AAU member, so the conference can continue to trumpet its academic bona fides. I think the likeliest suspects are Pittsburgh, Rutgers, Syracuse, and Missouri. I think Syracuse makes the most sense, but I still really don't see expansion coming any time soon. But when/if it does, don't look for any schools that aren't AAU members.

2. ACC Nation speculates about the job prospects of Tiny Terry Bowden, who apparently is thinking about getting back into coaching. Could the ACC handle three Bowdens? Good grief. I think Georgia Tech, Arkansas, and Mississippi State (all mentioned in the post and comments) sound intriguing. But I also wonder if a school like those would take a flier on someone who has been out of coaching for so long. It's not that I think he's forgotten much, but if I were an AD, I would want some sign he's serious and is up for the commitment and drudgery of doing the job every day, instead of whatever his current consultant role at FSU is. So I'd like to see him spend a year as a coordinator at a BCS school or head coaching a mid-major. I don't know, somewhere like Memphis if Tommy West has another 2-10 season.

3. This is just typical. Duke finally makes an appearance in the Fulmer Cup standings thanks to the arrest of linebacker Michael Tauiliili, the Devils' defensive leader. Tauliliili was picked up for drunk driving, assault, carrying a weapon, and other assorted charges. And then not only do they get passed in the EDSBS rankings, but then Duke reinstates Tauiliili, although he'll be suspended for the opener against UConn.

I'm not sure what to make of this. On the one hand, the lacrosse case taught us all about the danger of rushing to judgment, and I don't think anyone will be calling for the expulsion of the whole football team, like some did with the lacrosse team. But on the other, there seems to be a lot more evidence against Tauiliili, and it's probably not unreasonable to have a guy ride the pine if he's facing what the Raleigh paper called "a litany of charges."

I'm not saying Michael Tauiliili is Michael Vick, and I'm not saying he's an angel. So what do we do with those players who fall in the middle, especially at a place like Duke that supposedly is interested in more than just winning? And should the school be harder on him because he might have cost the Devils one of their best (only?) chances at winning a game this season?

4. Dan Shanoff is praying that this year will finally be the one to blow up the BCS. Sigh. 'Twon't happen, folks. At least not this year, and probably not in the next contract, either. Shanoff's fantasy scenario is ending the season with USC, Texas, Michigan, and West Virginia all undefeated, and a one-loss SEC champ "arguably better."

First of all, the odds of what Shanoff wants -- an ad hoc, meet-me-next-Saturday-at-high-noon game totally outside the BCS is just ridiculous. Even assuming there were two clear claimants (like LSU and USC a few years ago), and an available stadium, and enough fans willing to make travel plans on a week's notice right after travelling to another bowl game (frankly, one of the biggest reasons not to have a playoff), it's ludicrous to hope that the schools would agree to some sandlot showdown, just so people like Dan Shanoff can rest easy knowing who the "true" champion is. My goodness, are we so afraid of a little controversy and conversation? What would we blog about all summer if all our questions were answered? Why don't we just see if Vince Young and the rest of his championship Texas team will agree to don the Burnt Orange one more time to see if that team was better than last year's Gators? It's about as likely to happen.

But to answer Shanoff's fauxpocalyptic heartrending question, "Uh, THEN what?," the answer is pretty clear. Whichever of those four undefeated teams finished first and second in the BCS rankings would play for the national championship. The other two might -- might -- play in another BCS game, but maybe not. For simplicity, let's say USC and Michigan finish #1 and #2, and Texas, West Virginia, and LSU finish #3-5, with LSU having the only loss in there. The Trojans and Wolverines would play for the title, and chances are Texas and LSU would play in a game, and the Mountaineers would be stuck with the ACC champion. The USC-Michigan winner would be the BCS champion, and the AP would have the opportunity to award a split title to either the Texas-LSU winner or WVU if they looked more impressive. (Or, to the Texas-WVU winner if they were paired up.)

Why is this so hard to deal with? Sure, some people would assert that a team other than the BCS champion was the best in the country. And sure, some people would like to see some kind of runoff if we ended the season with two outstanding undefeated teams. Heck, I would too, because I love college football. But I don't cry myself to sleep and put a rose, an orange, a sugar cube, and, uh, a fiesta under my pillow dreaming that the Playoff Fairy will miraculously appear the second week of January.

I agree with Shanoff that "the only ones worthy of being laughed at are the people who keep bleating about a playoff like their complaints will change things." Maybe I'm misreading him, though, but Shanoff kinda throws in with that lot. (And he's just plain wrong to call a multi-undefeateds scenario "unprecedented.") A playoff might happen one day, but it will be the sort of NCAA-sanctioned, bureaucratized-to-death contraption that we'll see lumbering along well in time. It won't happen overnight, no matter who finishes this season undefeated.

Shiny Pants Wants Pocket Passers, Not Class Passers

Shiny Pants is complaining again. No, not complaining about the refs. No, not working to loosen Carolina's drug testing policy. This time he's complaining about South Carolina's tough academic admissions standards. Spurrier is upset that SC's admissions department denied two of his recruits admission to school. Michael Bowman and Arkee Smith, two members of Spurrier's touted recruiting class of last year, were cleared by the NCAA, but denied by SC's admissions department. Andrew Sorensen, South Carolina's president (and former Alabama president) has assured Spurrier that he will see to it that such denials won't happen again. Of course he will. Spurrier has threatened to leave if his recruits don't get in school.

Isn't this super coach, Steve Spurrier? The guy that could win at Duke. I'm guessing Duke didn't let every jock that could run a 4.5 into its hallowed halls. Spurrier would no doubt argue that to win in the SEC he needs lax admissions standards to win. But, he won at UF where admissions standards are higher.

I know UGA has had the same thing happen to them on Michael Grant and Jamar Chaney, both of whom went on to start at other SEC programs. And believe me, UGA's president isn't going to promise Mark Richt to loosen things up for his recruits. So, Spurrier doesn't need a level playing field, he needs the field slanted in his favor.

Spurrier argues that the denials impair his credibility on the recruiting trail. How can he possibly be trusted after two of his guys that he promised admissions didn't get in? I think this argument is simply cover for Spurrier to get some more special treatment from the SC administration. The recruit can always screw up his academics after signing his letter of intent. If you recruit for a school that requires higher standards than the bare minimums required by the NCAA, then you should tell the kid that. If they can't meet those requirements, it's not the coach's fault, it's the kid's fault. Playing for a college program is never guaranteed. Admission to the school of your choice isn't either, no matter what coach says.

I understand that athletes may need some special exemptions for admission to many SEC schools, especially as the admission standards of many schools are drastically rising. But should athletes receive a complete exemption from heightened standards? If so, the university presidents should just let the NCAA set their core curriculum and graduation standards. Why should universities vary their standards when football is involved? After all, we must have a level playing field, right?

Dogs Strike Back

I've avoided the Mike Vick fiasco mainly because of its complete unseemliness and secondarily because it happened during my summer hiatus. It has obviously angered many, many people. But, the anger doesn't stop there. As you can see here, dogs are also upset.