Jack’s Blog

When budget numbers from the schools in the BCS are released, especially the ones everyone knows and loves (or loves to hate), there is a public outrage over the exorbitant amount of dollars that are spent - particularly from the football teams.  Granted, the spending wars have escalated over the years, even with the NCAA passing legislation to “even the playing field” and curb excesses.

But, other than coaching salaries, there might be a silver lining.  Now, I’m on record as saying salaries for coaches are way out of whack.  Heck, these guys are doing what they love, and if their salaries were reduced, most of them would do it anyway - and if they balked or quit, the line would be around the block for replacements, some of whom would probably do a better job for less dough.

The other expenditures do help society somewhat - not including the mega-bucks the lawyers get for trying Title IX cases, which are won and lost not on merit, but “better lawyering.”  If a team flies to a game and the travel party is over 100, think of the boom to the airline industry.  Same with the ground transportation once the plane lands.  All that food that’s consumed is being paid to restaurants, fast food joints or catering companies.

As far as equipment, there is a company benefiting from selling a good deal of it to the university and what’s given to the school for free, a) doesn’t cost the school and b) makes money for the donating company.  Don’t think those shoe companies aren’t getting a major return on their investment.  Even the absurd number of people working for an NCAA football squad means employment for a significant number of people.

The college football season is underway and people’s attitudes seemed to be buoyed - even those who have no vested interest in any certain team.  It’s just an attitude that permeates the air when fall is around the corner and the pigskin’s flying.  If you don’t have a little pep in your step on a game day - whatever level, from the little guys to high schoolers to the college pageantry to the NFL - look around you and you’re bound to see other people are livelier.

As Cavett Robert, founder of the National Speakers Association, used to say:

“If you don’t think every day is a good day, just try missing a few.”

With the college athletics landscape in its ever-changing state, who’d have thought that two non-BCS leagues would generate as much controversy as the recent defection of Fresno State and Nevada from the WAC to the MWC?  Allegedly, four days after agreeing to (and, as has been reported, signing in the case of FSU) a new solidarity agreement among WAC members, the Bulldogs and Wolfpack bolted for the greener (but not by much) pastures of the conference which used to be part of it (in fact, most of the Mountain West schools were the original WAC).  It’s been reported that Utah State was offered a spot as well but declined due to - the solidarity agreement.  Confused?

Oh, it gets murkier.  Apparently, WAC commissioner Karl Benson, who presided over the WAC when it was the first mega-conference (16 teams covering four time zones used to be its signature line), was planning a coup.  Benson was left out of the meeting and subsequent secession pulled by eight of the WAC schools (Air Force, BYU, Colorado State, New Mexico, San Diego State, Utah, UNLV and Wyoming) when they decided bigger wasn’t better and formed the nation’s youngest conference affiliated with the NCAA’s Division I FBS.  For those readers who are unaware of why there has been a “play-in” game, i.e. 65 teams in the NCAA D-I basketball tourney, that secret meeting and the conference that was born from it is the reason.

Naturally, there’s been bad blood between the two conferences ever since.  Comparisons over which is the better football or basketball league has been bantered since the break-up, but during the past few years, it’s been evident the MWC has displayed superiority over its former allies.

What’s most difficult for each conference is trying to be a “player” (when it comes to football) when they’re simply not.  For the WAC, Boise State has a been magnificent representative and Fresno State has won a great many games against the “majors” (most of them on the road, making those accomplishments ever more impressive) but each school has been trumped by the Mountain West, which boasts BYU, Utah and TCU - an added member who came to the MWC from Conference USA,  after having been in the WAC (I added that to further cloud this mess).  All three of those have been to a BCS bowl game (Utah & BYU twice each) while the WAC’s only participant in the BCS bowl picture is/was Boise State - who, earlier this year joined the trend of conference-jumping, from the WAC to the MWC.

Benson knew he had to do something - and that’s where the solidarity pact entered into the fray.  Supposedly, someone (Benson?) had convinced BYU it would be in their best interest to go independent in football, a move that wouldn’t exactly sit well with the conference office.  No problem.  Join the WAC - in all your other sports.  A major pick-up for the WAC, especially in men’s basketball because BYU has become somewhat of a powerhouse hoops club.  Since Utah had recently defected to the Pac-8, 10, 12, the addition of Boise helped but doesn’t mean nearly as much had the Utes remained.  Some speculation had UNLV and San Diego State moving back to the WAC - but only if they were solid as a group of schools.

Then, Fresno and Nevada turned the WAC’s plans upside down in a move called selfish by their current (soon-to-be former) commissioner - who apparently isn’t aware of the “pot calling the kettle black” philosophy.  Nothing about this blog has been particularly clear so why change now?

There is a $5 million buyout clause attached to that solidarity pact (talk about getting whacked), plus a $1 million fee in order to become a new member of the MWC.  Six million bucks to join a league that’s not even one of the BCS conferences!  Fresno State might have to drop wrestling and soccer - oh, forget that.  And consider these possibilities - 1) TCU (in the heart of football-crazed Texas) gets gobbled up by the Nebraska/Colorado-less Big 12 (in the future, it might be a good idea to forgo numbers when naming conferences), 2) UNLV and San Diego State get tired of all this tomfoolery - or decide to to increase it, and go back to the WAC after all (with the shape it’s in, there’s probably buy-in money), 3) one of the six remaining WAC schools left, Hawaii, who’s been threatening to go independent in football for years, actually does so (joining Notre Dame and BYU - hey, maybe they’ll find five more schools and form their own independent league - the GDI’s - one of the most popular fraternities on college campuses).

This would leave the Mountain West with seven schools.  Because of the defection of FSU and Nevada, the $5 mil buy-out clause is no longer in effect, so maybe Utah State would consider . . .  Or as Robert McCloskey so aptly put it:

“I know that you believe you understand what you think I said, but I’m not sure that you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.”

Finally out of that intense Las Vegas heat and back to Fresno - where, just to remind us of the fun we had in Sin City, the thermometer is well over 100.

Younger son, Alex, and the undermanned AAU team of kids from Central Cali (Organized Chaos), represented the Valley well, going undefeated (3-0) in their pool and winning two games in the “Championship” bracket (including a 77-51 trouncing of D-1 Sports of NC, led by Quincy Miller, rated by most as the #2 rising senior prospect in the nation) before dropping a two-point decision to Urban DFW in a contest in which OC led most of the way.

Other than getting a chance for my wife and I to watch our son and agonize over every missed shot and turnover, cheer every basket and assist and “help” the officials (some parents more than others - they know who they are), the trip gave me a chance to catch up with some old coaching friends I haven’t seen in a decade or longer.  NCAA rules preclude coaches from talking to parents of prospects at such an event but, because I have what’s referred to as a “pre-existing relationship” with so many of these guys, I enjoyed speaking, without fear of them getting in trouble, with many of the coaches whose profession I used to call my own.  Heck, I’ve known these guys a whole lot longer than I’ve known my son!

To paint a picture of what last Wed-Mon was like, there were three or four tournaments in Las Vegas involving high school prospects.  The one our kids played in (the adidas Super 64) had 40 pools of 4 teams in each pool.  160 teams!  Following pool play, teams were placed in “championship,” “gold,” “silver” or “bronze” divisions, depending on their record against the other three teams in their respective pool.  Then, single elimination tournaments began.  The other events were similar, although their numbers weren’t quite so high, more like 30-60 teams. 

One day, I received a call from a friend and former colleague who I had actually helped get into the business.  He’s currently an assistant coach at a school in a league that would be referred to as mid-major.  He called while travelling from one of the 20 or so sites.  The pace is hectic, as coaching staffs try to see (and be seen by) as many of their “top-line” prospects as they can, evaluate those players they’ve heard about or received interest from (but have yet to see play) and, especially in the case of low-to-mid-majors, maybe find an as yet unknown player whom they’d have a shot at successfully recruiting.

This coach remarked to me that he was fully aware his job was to get players, players who, in coaching parlance, “could play,” i.e. make their team better, win more games and get his team into the NCAA tournament - or get fired.  For the most part, that’s the prevailing attitude that exists in Division I now.  Why?

I posted a blog on 11/28/07 entitled The Biggest Problem in College Basketball Today.  My number one answer?  Colleges are paying coaches too much money.  Whether you agree or not, the blog is well worth reading and I suggest you check it out, keeping in mind I wrote it nearly three years ago.  The game - and profession - have progressed but, often, with progress comes problems.  Or in the case of today’s college basketball scene, increased pressure.  While what Gonzaga has done, i.e. seeing them in a Top 10 poll is no longer shocking, is remarkable, the presidents and athletics directors of the other seven teams in the WCC (Gonzaga’s conference) adopt a feeling of “If they can do it, why can’t we?” 

The WCC is a league of eight church-schools, six in California and the University of Portland, in addition to the Zags, so resources would seem to have been relatively equal throughout the league when Gonzaga began its ascent.  Don’t think the prez’s and AD’s don’t have egos.  When their counterparts from Gonzaga walk into WCC meetings, the “have-nots” begin to wonder, “Why not us?”  Changing the coach often becomes the answer.  So, while my friend’s statement about “get players or else” might have seemed a little dramatic, it’s become reality.

Yet, coaches love their profession.  Some for different reasons than others, but working long hours - and many days on the road - is just part of the job.  Consumed is the word that’s used when the coaching profession is discussed.  As a sort of personal experiment, I asked my friend if he knew who Shirley Sherrod was.  Although hers was the lead story in nearly every paper in the nation, he told me he didn’t.  In fact, when he called, he was in the car with an assistant coach from a high-major program (BCS) and he asked him if he knew about Shirley Sherrod.  Same response. 

I am not including this story to disparage nor criticize my friend and his associate.  It’s mentioned because, when I was an assistant (between 1972-2002), I wouldn’t have known about a front-page story like Shirley Sherrod either.  I don’t mean to infer that every coach on the Division I level is ignorant of the Shirley Sherrod story.  It’s just that, because of the consuming aspect of the job, there’s a feeling that nothing else matters other than what you ought to be doing to make your team better and advance your career (or keep from derailing it).  In addition, you get the (absurd) feeling that while you’re reading about that A-1 story, you could be calling a prospect or seeing another game.

My late, brilliant mentor, John Savage, used to say there were some people at opposite ends of the spectrum.  Most coaches were the latter in his statement:

“Some people are a mile wide and an inch deep, while others are an inch wide and a mile deep.”Â

Please read my ideas about the “one-and-dones” in intercollegiate athletics (along with my ideas on aiding the apparent problem).  This post will not be a rehashing of that one but, rather, will tie some of the points I made in it into a bet made by a couple of local athletes. 

Fresno State fans were fortunate for the past couple years (something they might just now be realizing) to have had the opportunity to watch two extremely talented athletes, a football player (Ryan Mathews) and a basketball player (Paul George) play at a non-BCS institution.  Seldom do schools at that level have such gifted athletes, much less at the same time.  Note: Since I was working at Fresno State at the time, I am aware that David Carr, Melvin Ely, Stephen Abas, Nick Watney and Jamie Southern all played for the Bulldogs the same year, so this phenomenon is not a first for the school.

This current fact, though, was validated after this past year’s NFL and NBA drafts.  Both stars were selected in the first round, Mathews picked 12th by the San Diego Chargers, George 10th by the Indiana Pacers.  In an interview with George in yesterday’s Fresno Bee, it was reported that, prior to the NBA selection process that he and Mathews had a $5,000 bet as to which player would be drafted higher.

I have said numerous times before, both in this space and in conversation with others that one of the easiest things to do in life is to spend other people’s money.  So, let me preface my remarks by saying this is not an indictment on either or both of these young guys (neither of whom I know).  Possibly, my reading of this wager (of minute proportions considering what their contracts will be) coincided a little too soon after my reading the cover story on the recent Time magazine (2/28/10).  That issue has on its cover the license plate BNKRPT and the story is about the miserable economic plight of nearly every state in this nation.

Far be it from me to lay guilt on two student-athletes in their early 20s.  It’s just that, after reading the article, it occurred to me that, had these guys - who must have entered college fairly certain that a professional career in their sport was not only a goal, but a distinct possibility - been able to study a course which would have made them aware of the economic condition in this country (as well as others), possibly the bet would have been $5K to the charity of the winner’s choice.  Then again, maybe they were taught that and maybe the winner’s take did wind up as a charitable donation, but the tone of the article didn’t seem as though the bet was made with that purpose in mind.

Hey, I know it’s their money and they earned it (although some may say that remains to be determined).  It’s just that if guys are going to leave school early - or even if they’re not - part of a college education ought to be enlightening the student on national and global issues.  The question can also be asked of me, “What am you doing for others?”  Quite pertinent and while I won’t list my charitable deductions, I can only say I act and agree (admittedly, on an infinitely lesser level) with the feelings of Bill Gates who said:

“Is the rich world aware of how four billion of the six billion live?  If we were aware, we’d want to help out, and we’d want to get involved.”

     Â

The Duke-Butler game (and the story that went along with it) for the right to be called the National Champs could only have happened in college basketball. 

The BCS gives a national champion and, truth be told, it comes closer to presenting to the sporting world the best college football team in the nation.  Duke and Butler each had five losses during the season.  Few people in the know will argue that a match up of Kentucky and Kansas (the likely scenario if college hoops were under the BCS formula) wouldn’t have produced a team more worthy of being called the best team in the nation.

The professional leagues, with their best-of-seven format, would never excite a nation of fans the way last night’s contest did.  Even the NFL, with its win-or-go-home postseason would ever come close to the show the Blue Devils and Bulldogs put on last night.

If ever the cliche, “it’s a game of inches” applied, it was the national championship game.  From Gordon Hayward’s fadeaway which, a credit to him, he did not leave short, to Nolan Smith’s finger roll to Hayward’s final heave - an inch one way or another and . . .

A game like this even makes sane people temporarily lose their minds.  Witness Digger Phelps’ remarks about the bigger schools abandoning the philosophy of recruiting one-and-done’s - players who are so talented they go to college (as opposed to attending college) - because in the words of Digger, “Where’s Kentucky?  Not here.”  Certainly, the one-and-done collegiate player is a farce, brought on, allegedly, by the NBA collective bargaining agreement, but for anyone to think schools will no longer recruit the best available players, even Digger will have to think twice about his brash remark. 

College baseball’s World Series may come close to what we witnessed at Lucas Oil Stadium (it’s just not as popular), but consider: 72,000 people watched it in person; Hinkle Field House was packed; Cameron Indoor was packed, and millions of others watched at homes, restaurants, and any place there was a television.  

Paraphrasing from what is said about a good speech:

“Days, months, years from now, people won’t remember what they SAW as much as how they FELT.”  Â

In this year’s Sweet Sixteen, eleven conferences are represented.  This is an astounding fact, considering the BCS is made up of only six conferences.  What does this mean?  Simply this.  There are more and more good players playing basketball. 

Granted the elite players leave school early and head for the (bigger) money, but still, to have five non-BCS leagues in the Sweet Sixteen, is a testament to the amount of talent around the nation (or the world, in the case of some schools, e.g. St. Mary’s). 

The cause of this is two-fold.  As mentioned, the best players - and sometimes, some good, but not best players - leave school prior to exhausting their eligibility.  Seldom is this the case at lesser known schools, so they wind up with veteran teams.  When a student-athlete whose name is unknown, from a non-BCS school, puts his name in the NBA draft, it’s usually because he wasn’t enough of the student part of student-athlete, i.e. he left the school before they dismissed him.

The other rule that’s forced parity is cutting the number of scholarships.  That rule has been in effect for quite a while, but with the influx of foreign talent and the work ethic and contacts of coaches, both head and assistants, very few, if any, good players go unnoticed.  In other words, this year is not an aberration, more of a trend.  I was speaking to an assistant coach at a big-time school (which did not make the tournament field this year)last evening who told me, “Although we lost players to the professional ranks, we have made errors in evaluation.  We took some kids who didn’t pan out and turned down others who have become superstars at other places.”

My response was that, when I was at USC, there was a time (1991-92 when we finished 6th in the country in one poll and 8th in another) when we really had it going.  We were so strong in Southern California, we had our choice of players.  Some we misevaluated, but others we couldn’t take because, . . . you can’t take them all!  A couple of the kids went on to become the leading scorers in the history of the schools where they chose - after we turned them down.  Another one went on to lead his college team to a national championship.  We didn’t miss on these kids.  We knew they were good, but we took other prospects because they were better for our program at the time. 

I don’t pretend we didn’t make mistakes (boy, did we ever in a couple cases), but for many of these guys, they got the chance to showcase their skills a places because those schools had to play them.  While it may have surprised us they played as well as they did, we knew they were talented.  They did what anyone who is talented in an area would do.  They worked at their craft and took advantage of the opportunity.

These guys took the advice of Abraham Lincoln:

“I will prepare and someday my chance will come.”

March Madness is exciting as all get-out.  After spending 30 years in college basketball, I’m prejudiced toward this time of year as the greatest three weeks of sports.  That said, I’ve always maintained that the NCAA National Basketball Championship does not produce the nation’s best team.

Throw out the BCS and its way of determining the national champion in football and replace it with a model similar to college hoops.  This is the cry of the overwhelming majority of fans in the country.  Examine that thought a little more closely.

After the University of Washington won yesterday, play-by-play man Spero Dedes exclaimed, “Washington, an underachieving team for much of the season, has won their ninth straight game and seems to be peaking at the right time.  They move on to the Sweet Sixteen.”  While the quote’s not verbatim, the overall message is.  I’m on record as being a Huskie fan (and, unfortunately, a husky fan as well), but is the tournament about having underachieving teams advance?

Northern Iowa beat - and that’s the right word - #1 overall seed, Kansas, dropping them from the tournament.  For my money - and it seems, the majority of the country - the Jayhawks were the best team in the country.  Not yesterday, though, so this year, another team will wear that crown.  And the winner’s faithful will chant, “We’re number one!”

If the BCS ran college basketball, we’d be watching KU play Kentucky for the National Championship.  Would that not be a better game than what we’re going to wind up with?  I’m not saying it won’t be, just posing a question to ponder.

As I’ve stated many times on this site and elsewhere, the NCAA Tournament gives us the team that played best during the tournament - not necessarily the best team in the country.  Believe me when I say, I’d love to see a final match-up of Northern Iowa and Butler or Gonzaga or, maybe especially, Cornell.

It would give all the cynics who feel the powers-that-be are complete fools for not immediately implementing a playoff system for college football, a different perspective.  “Find who the best team in the nation by playing it on the field, not by some computer method,” has been their mantra.  Well, as we’ve been warned over and over:

“Be careful what you wish for . . . because you may get it.”   Â

In an exciting game that went down to the final seconds, undefeated Boise State prevailed over previously undefeated TCU in the Tostitos Fiesta Bowl.  Boise didn’t make it quite so dramatic as the last time they won in Tempe, but the powers-that-be had made sure of that when they came out with their BCS pairings.

Don’t think for a minute the BCS people didn’t intentionally match those two non-BCS teams in order to avoid potential major embarrassment.  I’m not sure that, had each of them played a BCS school, the “little guys” would have won either or both of the contests.  But, other than Texas, Alabama and Florida, I think Boise and TCU could give any BCS team a battle.  And anything but a blowout by the big boys would make a BCS official look bad, and those guys do not like to look bad.

So the game was close.  What does that mean?  Nothing.  Are both great, both good, or are they simply competitive with each other because they’re just a notch below the big guys? As we all know, things that are out of the ordinary happen during bowl games and last night’s Fiesta Bowl was no exception, with it being the only game TCU’s highly efficient QB Andy Dalton threw more than one interception (he threw three). 

What else can happen, and when Boise State plays, it usually does, is some trick play to captivate the audience (as if something was really needed - after all, it was the only football game in the land).  Inspector Gadget, aka Chris Peterson, pulled out a fake punt/pass by kicker Kyle Brotzman to a (naturally) wide open Kyle Efaw on fourth down, which turned out to be the key play in the game.

Does this mean we need a playoff?  Like I’ve posted on numerous occasions, a playoff does not give the fans a true number one team in the country.  Does anybody think Jimmy V’s NC State team was the best team in the nation in ‘83 when they beat Houston?  It was great drama - but they were no more number one than the ‘85 Villanova Wildcats.  Yet each of those teams wound up National Champions.

And Stuart Scott!  C’mon, dawg (you have no idea how much it pains me to type that lingo), you must have been concussed from your beloved Tarheels’ loss to the College of Charleston when you said you thought the winner of the game Thursday night ought to play Boise State for the National Championship.  If there were a playoff (which Stu advocates), that would be matching #1 vs. #2 in the semi-finals against the winner of #? vs. #?

Besides, if there were an eight team playoff (how many more could there be without cutting regular season games - hurting about 115 of the D-I’s, or whatever the BCS people call them now), do you really think both TCU and Boise would have been invited?  Let’s see, there are six BCS conferences.  Does anyone out there really think the champs of each of those wouldn’t be in the mix of eight?  So, then, who gets left out this year - Florida?  A playoff without the University of Florida would be a bigger joke than one without the Broncs or Frogs.

So what, put all the undefeateds in (Ala, Tex, Cin, Boise, TCU), plus Florida - and pick two of the remaining three BCS champs (ACC, Big 10, Pac-10)?  If you think a BCS champ will be left out of a playoff, you’re as naive as the BCS bigwigs are arrogant.  And that’s about as extreme a statement as could be made.  An Arabian proverb of three words says about arrogance all that needs to be said about it:

“Arrogance diminishes wisdom.”Â

As a coach, you know your fans want you to win.  Even if they hate you, they still want their team to experience the taste of victory.  Then, your detractors can always dream, maybe you’ll get another job - or even better, maybe you’ll do something foolish (verbally abuse your assistants, players, secretary, somebody else’s wife, or even your own body) and get caught on a morals charge so, not only can the team win, but you’ll be dismissed.  To a disgruntled fan, that is the true daily double.

All coaches know this and live with it.  Maybe they upset a fan because the coach was about to miss his plane, so he blew off a request for an autograph or picture.  Or, maybe the coach is truly an egomaniacal butthead.  Whichever, the coach realizes pissed off fans come with the job.

But how about when your own people start rooting against you.  Example: Last night, Utah State played a football game against Boise State.  Each of the first two times the Aggies scored, it was to tie the game.  There was utter and complete jubilation for those pulling for USU.  Wait!  What exactly do you think Karl Benson, the WAC commissoner, who’s been politicking (as he should be) for Boise State to get into a BCS bowl, was thinking?  “C’mon, Aggies, play hard, play well, but don’t you know what the impact of you guys winning would do to our league?“  His fears were unfounded as Boise ripped off the next zillion points in a row on their way to another blowout (albeit of a WAC school, providing the double-edged sword that, sure the Broncos are good, but look at how weak the rest of their league is).

You think Benson (closet) cheering for the Broncos is bad?  What do you think was running through the minds of Utah State’s administration as dear ol’ USU was showing they weren’t about to back down to one of the nation’s top teams?  By administration, I mean from the prez on down.  Unless the financial condition of institutions of higher learning in Utah are drastically different than that of other states (like every other one in the union), the financial hit Utah State would take if a WAC opponent (since that’s all they’ve got left) beats Boise State and thwarts their chance of going to a BCS bowl, is astronomical.  Not only for Boise (who would take the major brunt of the financial loss), but for the rest of the WAC schools too.  The mere pittance each of the other WAC schools would be awarded (compared to what the BCS schools divvy up - even those whose football team has won once - and probably against a D-II squad - in OT) is a big-time line item for schools in the WAC, Mountain West, Conference USA, MAC and whoever else I’m leaving out due to the fact, well, they’re just not as well-known as the BCS fellas.  It stands to reason that every other AD is pulling for Boise State to win each week, if for no other reason than financial, why is it so far fetched an idea that the director of athletics of the “opponent of the day” would be able to switch loyalties so easily.  After all, isn’t it, ultimately, the AD’s main job to balance the budget.  So, it stands to reason that if he wants to keep his job, the logical choice, in terms of his preference for the outcome of such a game . . .

Throw in the loss of publicity (if the Broncos do make it, everybody - with the exception of Goliath’s faithful - will be pulling for David and if they don’t get in, they’ll be the national martyr of the year - again - for getting snubbed) and it’s a wonder there’s not an unwritten rule among the WAC teams.  Coaches, though, being the rather competitve sort, know that beating Boise State will do wonders for their recruiting (or so they’ve led themselves to believe). 

Having been on the coaching side, while sitting on the Executive Committe of the Fresno State athletics department (by invitation of the director), I had my eyes opened to the reality of conferences trying to play with the big boys without the big boy weapons.

Maybe satirist Kin Hubbard said it best:

“It’s no disgrace to be poor, but it might as well be.”    Â

One of the biggest debates going on right now is “Which team should be ranked higher, Oregon or Boise State?”  There are strong points to be made for either side.

Boise’s case, as well as their fans and all the people out there who root for the Davids, is they beat - soundly - the Ducks in the season opener on the Blue Smurf turf.  When someone claims to a Broncos’ fan (their mascot is the Broncos, not the Davids) that they have an unfair advantage wearing blue uniforms on the blue turf, they reply, “What about the teams that wear green on green turf - like, uh, say, Oregon?”  Besides, their advocates continue, “beat“ is only half of the term that describes the opening contest, with “down” finishing off the verb.  The only weak link Boise State had that night was their D-lineman’s glass chin - and the Ducks didn’t take advantage of that until after the game had already been decided.

However, counter the Oregon faithful (as well as those who just wish David would go back and play with kids his own size), that was a long time ago and Oregon is a much different - and better - team now.  I heard one of the nicely coiffed ESPN guys (I believe it was former SMU running back Craig James, who being a former “pony” you’d think he’d be on the aquine’s side of the argument) go so far as to say, “If the Ducks and Broncos were to play today, Oregon would beat Boise State handily.”  Then again, we won’t know that - unless they meet in the Humanitarian Bowl at season’s end - a game that would be tremendously disappointing for both schools - and probably the entire country (with the exception of the schools that leapfrogged in the standings because of each squad’s collapse - and maybe, the director’s of the most popular bowl played in Idaho).

If they do get to play again, Chip Kelly might have second thoughts about reinstating LeGarrett Blount.

It may come down to what the polls (voters) say as to which team is ranked higher (assuming they each win out).

And people actually wonder why the BCS schools don’t want to play non-BCS schools - especially in the little’s guy’s arena?

Several of the major, MAJOR  schools are talking - mostly behind closed doors, so some of my (not so reliable) sources tell me - about waging a war (in which money will be the most deadly weapon).  If that’s true, look for Jean-Paul Sartre’s statement to come to fruition:

“When the rich wage war, it’s the poor who die.”  Â