PSU beat LSU on New Year's Day and solidified the fact that the Lions had a real quality season. However, it is now time to consider how the performance of the rest of the Big Ten performed during bowl season. The perception of the strength of a team's conference matters a lot. For example, should it not be perfectly clear who should play in the MNC the voters will try their best to put the team who played in the toughest conference into the title game.
All year the Big Ten has taken a beating over the perception that the Big Ten is down as a conference. Well, it is time again to take a look at the numbers and compare the conferences.
The Big Ten
The Big Ten had seven bowl-eligible teams; Iowa, Ohio St., PSU, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Northwestern, and Michigan St. PSU, Wisconsin, and Ohio State all won their bowl games while Minnesota, Northwestern, and Michigan St. lost. Which, by itself, is pretty interesting. Iowa's win makes it quite clear that the upper echelon teams in the B10 are damned good while the real weakness of the conference is in the second tier teams.
The B10 is sitting at 4-3, this certainly isn't the trumpeting of a return to being a great conference, however, it certainly shows that the conference isn't as terrible as everyone thinks.
The SEC
The SEC got a spectacular 10 teams into post-season play. Right now, five teams were victorious and four teams lost with Alabama yet to play. This is certainly a good record but it isn't exactly setting the world on fire either.
The Pac-10
The Pac-10 got seven teams into post-season play. The Pac-10 only managed to win two of their bowl games with five of the teams losing. Thus far, they are the worst of the BCS conferences. Welcome to the bottom of the pile. Only USC and UCLA managed to win their bowl games while Oregon St., Arizona, Stanford, Oregon, and Cal all lost.
The Big East
The Big East really surprised me. The Big East fielding six teams with four of them coming up victorious. Who knew?
The ACC
Six teams got in from the ACC and the conference went 3-3.
So, the numbers tell us the conference rank as follows:
1. Big East
2(A). SEC
3.(B) Big10
4. ACC
5. Pac10
GO BIG TEN!
Showing posts with label Suck. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Suck. Show all posts
Thursday, January 07, 2010
Friday, April 04, 2008
ESPN's Un-Funny Hackery
Look...ESPN.com sucks. The news is old and the writing is worse than, well, mine, if that is possible. This Page 2 post, however, is the worst fucking thing I have ever seen.
Page 2 has been very "inventive" by capitalizing on the recent news that there will be a class focusing on Joe Paterno offered at PSU this year. They nimbly combined this news with the standard Joe Paterno joke: JOE IS OLD! This Joke repeats itself over and over again. We get it, Joe is 81.
It is as if Page 2 captured Orson, Brian, and Mike; lobotomized the lot of them, threw them into a room, and hurled a pencil and three sheets of paper in after them.
A drunken chimp who had been paying attention to PSU for the last 12 months could have written this fucking drivel! "Look at me! Old people forget things! They call people whippersnappers! They don't like kids on their lawn!! I came up with tired stereotypes all bymyself!!"
These talentless assholes would've been better off just linking to BHGP! FUCK! I mean those guys are really funny, you know why? Because they are original. They actually take the time to think up clever ideas and premises and then run with them. Compare that to the Carlos Mencia style of bloggery over at Page 2 where they simply take overused, obvious and offensive stereotypes and stale, unoriginal "jokes" that other people have done better and try to pass it off as clever or funny. The fact that ESPN employs these untalented cock-wrinkles is an offense to all the talented bloggers who are actually funny!
I took their fucking test! Observe:
No...I have more....
GO STATE! FUCK YOU PAGE 2!!!!!!!
Page 2 has been very "inventive" by capitalizing on the recent news that there will be a class focusing on Joe Paterno offered at PSU this year. They nimbly combined this news with the standard Joe Paterno joke: JOE IS OLD! This Joke repeats itself over and over again. We get it, Joe is 81.
It is as if Page 2 captured Orson, Brian, and Mike; lobotomized the lot of them, threw them into a room, and hurled a pencil and three sheets of paper in after them.
A drunken chimp who had been paying attention to PSU for the last 12 months could have written this fucking drivel! "Look at me! Old people forget things! They call people whippersnappers! They don't like kids on their lawn!! I came up with tired stereotypes all bymyself!!"
These talentless assholes would've been better off just linking to BHGP! FUCK! I mean those guys are really funny, you know why? Because they are original. They actually take the time to think up clever ideas and premises and then run with them. Compare that to the Carlos Mencia style of bloggery over at Page 2 where they simply take overused, obvious and offensive stereotypes and stale, unoriginal "jokes" that other people have done better and try to pass it off as clever or funny. The fact that ESPN employs these untalented cock-wrinkles is an offense to all the talented bloggers who are actually funny!
I took their fucking test! Observe:
No...I have more....
GO STATE! FUCK YOU PAGE 2!!!!!!!
Monday, January 28, 2008
Sponsler's Great Post
Todd Sponsler has a great post on the varying wisdom of establishing a succession plan for PSU's impending, post-Paterno era. I liked it when I posted something right on point nearly two weeks ago.
Anyway. I'll say it again. A succession plan is NOT A GOOD IDEA! It limits the university in a number of ways with no real benefits. It is time for the succession talk to end. Speculation is fine, but there is absolutely no good reason to name a successor. A replacement will not help recruiting. A line of succession will not help find the next new head coach. There is no benefit to naming a successor.
GO STATE! LOVE JOE!
Anyway. I'll say it again. A succession plan is NOT A GOOD IDEA! It limits the university in a number of ways with no real benefits. It is time for the succession talk to end. Speculation is fine, but there is absolutely no good reason to name a successor. A replacement will not help recruiting. A line of succession will not help find the next new head coach. There is no benefit to naming a successor.
GO STATE! LOVE JOE!
Wednesday, January 16, 2008
Exit Strategies Suck
Bobby Bowden has an exit strategy. Shit, even Joe Tiller has one ---I would still like someone to explain why Tiller needs an exit strategy, his glorious mustache provides him with all the strategy he needs! However, it remains unclear why are they useful and why does everyone want PSU to have one (an exit strategy, not a mustache)?
Believe me, I get it. But I can only compare this succession process to Ancient Rome, for JoePa is clearly the ruler of the mighty Nittany Lion Empire In Ancient Rome, Augustus was emperor and informed the Senate that he wished step down, but they requested he stay until his death. While that is not quite the situation here, it is not out of the question to think that JoePa will coach until his death. Similar to Augustus, JoePa has outlived many of his supposed successors: Sandusky and Ganter coming to mind. The Romans did not want to have a king, but they did want their next emperors to have an extremely distinguished family tree. In our current scenario, that would lead to only JayPa having the proper ancestral ties. However, as we all can agree, this would more than likely lead to the fall of the Nittany Lion Empire.
Rome soon learned that the key to becoming a worthy successor meant being wealthy and having the support of the military. In PSU's case, this simply means having coaching experience at a prestigious university and the support of the PSU boosters. Rome's emperors,
before their deaths would choose the next successor and begin the necessary transfers of title. However, this sometimes led to anger between relatives/potential successors as to who should take over --- leading to some untimely deaths.
As we can see from this poor and inaccurate look at Roman History, naming the successor is not a good idea because it will simply end up with the senseless murder of Tom Bradley by the overly ambitious Schiano.
Do people want to be able to point to the shadowy figure lingering in the shadows behind greatest coach your school has ever known? Supposedly, this will reassure recruits, satisfy boosters, and, as an added benefit, your team will be much better because of it. Where does any of this stuff come from? Why would that be good?
I think it would be a terrible way to go. For example, I think it would hurt recruiting:
It would hurt the team you are currently fielding. If you have the current head coach, AKA vaguely-god-like-legend, and the guy who is actually going to be coaching the team next year disagreeing over a call who in the blazes do you listen to? Regardless of who you listen to what if the call is wrong? Who gets the flak? Who gets the accolades? Having two head coaches for a couple of years would beg for this kind of situation to arise.
It would hurt, and at the very least severely limit, the search for the next head coach. It would be fine if you wanted to go Jimbo-Fisher-style (that sounds sexy!) and get a coordinator to replace Joe but it would take all the current head coaches off the table. As we know, a lot of people think Greg Schiano wants to come and coach at PSU, (assume for a minute that he would be PSU's choice) why in the hell would he want an announcement to go out that he will replace Joe at the end of 2008, or whenever? He would be finished at Rutgers (as any head coach would be finished at their current job). So he would probably have to step down at that position or remain as a pariah. Who wants that? Would you have him (or whoever the replacement would be) immediately leave his job to come to PSU as an assistant/distraction for a year or two?
The only possible choice in this scenario is Bradley. PSU simply couldn't choose someone from outside the program to come in as a successor. This course would provide stability for the program as there would be no radical shifts in ideology. However, this obviously limits the search for a head coach. Maybe Bradley is the right choice, he is certainly an excellent and well-respected coach. Maybe Bradley is the perfect choice for PSU --- playing the Senior instead of looking to see if there is someone younger and more talented at the position.
Can anyone give me some good reasons to want an exit strategy?
GO STATE! ENJOY JOE WHILE YOU HAVE HIM!
Believe me, I get it. But I can only compare this succession process to Ancient Rome, for JoePa is clearly the ruler of the mighty Nittany Lion Empire In Ancient Rome, Augustus was emperor and informed the Senate that he wished step down, but they requested he stay until his death. While that is not quite the situation here, it is not out of the question to think that JoePa will coach until his death. Similar to Augustus, JoePa has outlived many of his supposed successors: Sandusky and Ganter coming to mind. The Romans did not want to have a king, but they did want their next emperors to have an extremely distinguished family tree. In our current scenario, that would lead to only JayPa having the proper ancestral ties. However, as we all can agree, this would more than likely lead to the fall of the Nittany Lion Empire.Rome soon learned that the key to becoming a worthy successor meant being wealthy and having the support of the military. In PSU's case, this simply means having coaching experience at a prestigious university and the support of the PSU boosters. Rome's emperors,
before their deaths would choose the next successor and begin the necessary transfers of title. However, this sometimes led to anger between relatives/potential successors as to who should take over --- leading to some untimely deaths.As we can see from this poor and inaccurate look at Roman History, naming the successor is not a good idea because it will simply end up with the senseless murder of Tom Bradley by the overly ambitious Schiano.
Do people want to be able to point to the shadowy figure lingering in the shadows behind greatest coach your school has ever known? Supposedly, this will reassure recruits, satisfy boosters, and, as an added benefit, your team will be much better because of it. Where does any of this stuff come from? Why would that be good?
I think it would be a terrible way to go. For example, I think it would hurt recruiting:
"Come and play here, sonny. You won't be able to coach for Bear Bryant but rather whoever the poor bastard was who replaced Bear!".Sounds like it would've been really effective for 'Bama.
It would hurt the team you are currently fielding. If you have the current head coach, AKA vaguely-god-like-legend, and the guy who is actually going to be coaching the team next year disagreeing over a call who in the blazes do you listen to? Regardless of who you listen to what if the call is wrong? Who gets the flak? Who gets the accolades? Having two head coaches for a couple of years would beg for this kind of situation to arise.
It would hurt, and at the very least severely limit, the search for the next head coach. It would be fine if you wanted to go Jimbo-Fisher-style (that sounds sexy!) and get a coordinator to replace Joe but it would take all the current head coaches off the table. As we know, a lot of people think Greg Schiano wants to come and coach at PSU, (assume for a minute that he would be PSU's choice) why in the hell would he want an announcement to go out that he will replace Joe at the end of 2008, or whenever? He would be finished at Rutgers (as any head coach would be finished at their current job). So he would probably have to step down at that position or remain as a pariah. Who wants that? Would you have him (or whoever the replacement would be) immediately leave his job to come to PSU as an assistant/distraction for a year or two?
The only possible choice in this scenario is Bradley. PSU simply couldn't choose someone from outside the program to come in as a successor. This course would provide stability for the program as there would be no radical shifts in ideology. However, this obviously limits the search for a head coach. Maybe Bradley is the right choice, he is certainly an excellent and well-respected coach. Maybe Bradley is the perfect choice for PSU --- playing the Senior instead of looking to see if there is someone younger and more talented at the position.
Can anyone give me some good reasons to want an exit strategy?
GO STATE! ENJOY JOE WHILE YOU HAVE HIM!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
