Thundersports

Don't Rank Until October

2008-10-12T12:55:00.002-05:00

BCS rankings are flawed. A 17 beats a 4 and only jumps up 9. A 5 beats a 1 and they swap places. Most of the teams that land in the top land there before they play a down of football. This is how speculators in the stock market get in trouble.

I'm a Cowboy fan ... but this is funny

2007-12-22T11:24:00.000-06:00

Per the Jessica Simpson controversy with Romo, a Carolina fan has started a "Ruin Romo" site. I printed my Jessica Simpson mask for my office.

I hope the Cowboys win and Jessica is there. The media caught TO Owen's comments which were blown out of proportion. He was joking, but notice he called and apologized.

Why People Screetch About the BCS

2007-12-03T14:44:00.000-06:00

Ohio State and LSU are playing for the national championship in Louisiana. To get there they shared 3 losses between them. There are lots of ways to look at this dilemma. But let's examine how this is flawed.

First, this ranking is based on a poll taken by sports writers. These guys are going to be loyal to the schools they either write about or are from. In other words this is the House of Representatives of sports. Wyoming gets one vote, but California or New York gets 23. There is no Senate in this scenario to balance things out. Any way you look at this, if there is any kind of vote, then you will be unbalanced in representation.

Second, the computer model is flawed. Ok, some smart guys really put a lot into this. But how can you determine strength of schedule unless someone says, "This team is better than the other team,"? That's pure opinion.

Third, points scored isn't balanced either. What if Oklahoma State and Texas Tech put up a combined 200 points in a game. Let's also say that Ohio State runs through their very tough schedule and only scores a combined total from all games of 100 points. Does that mean Tech and Oklahoma State are better than Ohio State because they scored more points in one game than in the entire season?

We'll come back to this idea of a tournament over and over until the NCAA pulls it's head out and realizes a few things. But it won't change it's mind until it realizes that this is a money making venture.

Here is how it SHOULD work.

First, only one team from each of the twelve conferences goes to the BCS tournament. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that this hosted regionally and each of these games can be bowls. We start with 16 teams. Twelve from each conference and 4 invitation teams based on whatever the NCAA can dream up. Maybe, it's a leftover from the BCS.

For one month, starting in December, after each conference has determined it's champion, a playoff game is played. Single elimination, winner advances, loser goes home for finals.

By January 1st you should have determined your national champion. No questions, no polls, no opinions.

When will the NCAA adopt this? When they realize it is a money making deal. Only then will they adopt it.

Below is a bracket of how this works.

I Would Have PLAYED For This Guy

2007-12-01T16:58:00.000-06:00

I was never a Lou Holtz fan, but I think EVERY professional athlete needs to hear this speech.

It's On!!!

2007-11-29T10:06:00.000-06:00

And for 61% of you who can't get the NFL channel, well, you will suck eggs watching reruns during the writer's strike.

It's a little known fact that this is the second Packer/Cowboy great game to not be televised. The '66 NFC playoff that got the Packers to the first SuperBowl was between the Cowboys and the Packers at the Cotton Bowl. No footage exists of the ENTIRE game. Again, history will not see too many pictures.

I don't watch a lot of football. My stomach, and genetic makeup turn too much Irish turmoil. I watch a few snaps and wait for the morning paper.

Favre is 0-8 at the waining Texas Stadium.

Tonight however, get thee to NFL TV.

Wouldn't you like to be a pepper too ... Art

2007-11-27T15:55:00.000-06:00

It looks as though Art Briles of the University of Houston will become the next ~~victim~~ coach for the storied Baylor Bear football team. My inside information tells me Baylor didn't hire Mike Singletary for a very good reason. Baylor's football program is basically in the dirt. It will take a few years to rebuild. As a result, if Singletary was hired and had to be fired, it would not look good on the Baptists or Baylor.

As a result watch to see Art Briles and his farmer tan hired for a few years. The program will run well and Art will have a "A Coke and a smile*" and move on opening the door for Singletary to move in and take Baylor to the top.

*Note this is only funny if you understand the you can only buy Dr. Pepper in Floyd Casey Stadium and only n plastic bottles.

Well ... that didn't take long ...

2007-11-26T15:45:00.000-06:00

Aggies ... your new head coach ...

This is just Texan eye candy.

Franchione Gone ...

2007-11-24T07:29:00.001-06:00

It's time to write sports stuff again. I've let this part of my blog life go too long. There's so much to write about.

In the coming days we'll talk Bonds, Vince Young, Michael Vick, the BCS, Belichick et. al.

But first to Franchione.

How could A&M not have liked Franchione? His amazing story began at TCU in a weak WAC conference. From there he climbed the ladder at Alabama with some astounding wins with other coach's recruits.

From Alabama he quickly packed his things and rode the wave to Aggieland amid the pomp and circumstance of the second coming of Slocum. Alas, no savior was found in College Station. His record speaks for itself - average. More losses to bitter rival Texas and wallowing in defeat even after his own recruits took the field. His kingdom was one of inconsistency at a school that values and encourages tradition. Losing is no tradition at A&M.

But what a way to go out and silence your adversaries. A defeat of an over-ranked Texas team at the unfriendly confines of Kyle field. A win - a win that was too little too late.

Hind sight is 20/20, but honestly, Franchione had no substantial track record to speak of. Short stints and rocket ship rides up the coaching ladder put him where he is leaving now. His storybook days at TCU were against weak WAC or Conference USA opponents. Alabama was less than a year. A&M was five long unhappily married years.

And who follows behind Franchione?

Who's to say? The Aggies make deals about as private as Tom Hicks deals with mega million baseball players. The fear is that A&M is so desperate they won't take the time to thoroughly look at all the candidates even though they are pressured by the end of the season and other coaches looking to make moves.

With histories up in the air, Franchione and A&M have parted with a sister's kiss.

A Worthy Cause

2006-01-31T12:41:00.000-06:00

Since it's Superbowl week I thought I would point your attention to a worthy cause. SouperBowl.Org. It's an organization that collects money for food banks across the country. Since the recent hurricanes have really delpeated the local food pantry, it's only just and fair that we, the privelege get involved and help re-stock those shelves. Please give or your money or time and help those who are a little hard on their luck.

Vince Young Makes His Move

2006-01-09T12:53:00.000-06:00

Should he? Shouldn't he? There are lots of opinions on this and the recent rash of Heisman failures doesn't bode well for greatness in the NFL. Being a top draft pick is NOT a good thing in the current NFL. Staying back in Austin to win the Heisman puts you in the ranks of teams that have high draft picks and low winning percentages.

Vince Young has made a name for himself in college football. The Rose Bowl solidified it, but now he's thrown his hat in the pro arena and "Homie Don't Play" in the pro's. There is something to be said about Vince in the pro's. Look out! He's the prototypical Michael Vick and Donovan McNabb. His style works well in the "little leagues" of college football, these guys don't move as fast and finish their career after the last game. Michael is big, fast and strong, but so is everyone else and they have years on him, defensive coordinators who have studied him and know all his weaknesses. Mike, not good. Injury has plagued Vick and McNabb. A running QB is a moving target.

At best he will turn into a Antwon Randel El of Pittsburgh, which isn't bad, but that's not what Michael wants. I do see him converting into a wide receiver. He will do well to enter the combine and go at a position other than QB. Here's why, who's going to pick him up at QB. Either Arizona or Houston. WRONG!!! And here's why. Those two teams, if smart will build with their draft picks. They will trade the #1 pick for a few 2nd round picks or some #2's and a 1st round. In the new NFL, 1st round pick = JACKPOT!!! It means 1 first round pick equals about 3 2nd round picks or so on and so forth. Teams like th Texans and the Cardinals want to build around people and strengthen. Draft is a good place for that as well as free agency. At best I see Young going early 1st as a backup to QB or traded around.

Others excited about the move are the teams in the Big 12. Yes sir ree bob! The "Other 11" is not too sad to see Mr. Young go. Every defensive coordinator in the Big 12 south and north are salivating right now. Without their big threat Texas may not have what it takes on offense. That's bold to say, but he was a huge piece. Has anyone thought about that? How many returning linemen does Texas have. Have they seen the culmination of the pinnacle of UT football? Maybe, maybe not.

Who isn't excited about Vince Young leaving besides alumni at UT are his team mates. He carried them all year and is now leaving them high and dry. Class Mr. Young, class. You effectively lied to your team mates. But you do what you got to do. Right?

Or maybe Mr. Young is reading a lot of his own press in the American Statesman!

Prediction: Bush and Leinart go higher and do better than Young.

College Football - Playoffs or No Playoffs?

2006-01-03T10:30:00.000-06:00

If you want to have a national champion, you have to have some sort of playoff system. This currently isn't the case. The BCS is simply opinion and some numbers thrown in to make it look good. It's like everything else that needs to be hyped, it doesn't have much substance. If this is really a determiner of who is and who isn't "good" as far as college football goes, then can anyone name me the #3 team for the last few years we have used the BCS.

The NCAA has done one thing wrong in it's existance - it has failed to plan. It has failed to plan for expansion of the bowl game. Good gosh how many bowl games do you need? Remember the Purolator Weedeater Bowl? I shouldn't be shocked, if there is a stadium, you can have a bowl game. It's a money maker for the host and the sponsor and the schools involved. But do the bowls really tell you anything more than a regular season game does? No, but that's not their point.

The NCAA also failed to plan for a way to determine a real champion. For years we wondered who would be the big winner. Was it Notre Dame or Colorado? USC or Florida? Then, when they had the chance, they dropped the ball, pun intended, and did not structure a playoff system. Instead they chose the BCS or BS as I like to look at it. A playoff system is easy to arrange. Ask your local junior high tennis coach who draws up brackets for tournamets weekly. The different conferences allow an easy way to determine conference champions. As such, you can easily seed teams and place them in a bracket. The Big 10 sends it's champion and #2 team as well as the Pac 10, Big 12 etc. You have 4 weeks for teams to win a spot at a BCS bowl. The farther you go in the tournament, the better your bowl appearance.

So this is easy, right? Yes it is, when will the NCAA wake up and make the needed changes it should have years ago?

We're Raising Wusses ... Or Are We?

2005-12-15T13:06:00.000-06:00

Welcome to Thundersports! Our inagural post. Here you will find all things testosterone and sports related. Or as a a local sports station says, "Sports and all that implies." You will get sports opinions mostly and maybe some other sports stuff and always a bikini girl with each post. Don't expect a dily post just one now and then to keep you interested. On with the opinion.

Last night I listend to a discussion about a youth church basketball league. Some of the rules:

1. No score keeping for younger kids
2. Colored wrist bands so kids of equal talent can guard like skilled opponents
3. No records of wins and losses.

At first glance this looks like a nice safe place for kids to play and not have to deal with the highly competitive leagues that are out there. No insane parents to deal with, lots of encouragement and instruction. A nice "family" place to play. I have to admit, it sounds pretty good if you have ever visited a ballpark, court or gym where parents want the mark in the win column more than the kids do.

I coached a little league team this year, actually helped coach it. This was the team's first jaunt into competitive waters. They came from a YMCA league to a "City" league. This was the first time they really had to compete. Since this was the first time that they broke into competition we tried to be more up on learning than winning. It was tough when select teams played in the league and clobbered you with run rules in two innings.

And this brings us to the point. Are we really helping kids with learning what sports teaches or are we hindering the life lessons of athletics? We learn so much from losing. We learn the value of hard work and commitment. We learn a victory can come easily and mean little or victory can come at a huge cost, but victory is still sweet. We and we learn most importantly of all that winning isn't everything it's how you play the game.

Are we robbing these kids and teaching a generation that they can get the trophy without the effort and be the "player with the best socks". Next week you get another senseless award. Will this generation want it handed to them. Will they get to corporate America and want it all handed to them. Or better yet, get to junior high and not make the team and cry like a suck baby?

Or are we geniuses? Athletics is a worldwide business now. Are these leagues really instructional leagues to finally help our kids learn the game in a controlled environment. People consider Billy Beane of Oakland a genius for doing business a different way. Maybe we need to think about this more. Mike Leach at Texas Tech gets wins in the win column, but does it in a way that is so untraditional.

We have to do things with the mind set of, "Is this the best way to do things?" Meaning, is this the best way for kids to learn sports? A few years of instructional leagues and then the heavy competition. High skill training and fundamentals and then introduce them to the competition? You would get a world of great memories and you can start to identify if you want to go on or not and you learn the sport.

My vote is that this is good, but we need to work on it some more.