they took a vote and said no
Recently, I got my laptop back from the good repair people at Circuit City. The good news? The CD player works now. The bad news? The "5," "6," and "-" keys...not so much (this is obviously from another computer). So, as I wait for them to send a mailer box to some place that's not Georgia, I've been taking it to class and jotting down musings that I don't have the energy to invest consecutive hours to. Of course, I'm only human. It's June, "NFL Head Coach" keeps getting its release date pushed back like the Clipse, Rhymefest and Lupe Fiasco were doing the soundtrack, so I'm pretty much one-track mind on college football. Fortunately, my mans an' 'em at Ciskie Blog have reupped with the latest preseason BlogPoll, and I hope you brought some snacks.
Which preseason college football magazine is your favorite?
When I'm drinking, I'm probably doing so to get drunk or win money for feats of strength. Some might say that's the definition of alcoholism, but I'm pretty sure if you're drinking, you probably want to get drunk too. Maybe not drunk enough to write a certain review that Joey is probably soon to ride out on (you know what I'm talking about), but enough to achieve some sort of mind alteration. To paraphrase what Chris Rock once said, he'd see his dad pound sixpacks all the time, but he's never seen anyone drink six glasses of Kool Aid.
Anyways, this leads me to why I don't buy bottles of good liquor. Oh, I like to drink good liquor. And I don't buy shitty beer. But no matter how much forbearance I promise myself to take, Maker's Mark would get polished off as quickly as Ol' Granddad, and I'm thirty bucks poorer for my efforts. And trust me, Top Ramen doesn't fend off hangovers as well as a condor egg omelet. Actually, one of those would be so good right now...
How does this carry over to college football? Well, back in the days when people had waves, Gazelle shades and cornbraids, I used to rock with the glossier preview mags like Athlon and Sporting News and whatnot. Oh, they certainly looked nice; usually written in complete sentences, nice layouts and graphics, some cheesecake shots of cheerleaders. Problem was, since I had them in the summer, a generally obligation-free time for me outside of creating an alternate reality where UVA won three straight NC's despite having a Jewish QB that weighed 155 pounds, I would generally run through them in about three days. Trust me, by the time August rolled around, I had the two or three paragraphs they dedicated to Tulsa's prospects committed to memory.
But now that I've been immersed in the BlogPoll and I have to flex knowledge every now and again, I went with Phil Steele's $8.50 monster and it's CFB rotgut in printed form. It's not pretty, but it gets the job done. Consistently and thoroughly. When it comes right down to it, I think anyone with a ESPN Insider account can do a preview for any given team. And no matter how bleak a squad's outlook is, they're about as lenient in grading as All Music Guide. So why bother with narrative? I don’t think this is a secret, but evaluating the Phil Steele preview as literature is nearly impossible since it's more of a gambling sheet than anything else. A Pitchfork writer's personal hell is an eternity of trying to edit this thing. Run on sentences, overuse and wrongful use of the word "simply"…the list goes on and on. And then there's all the made up facts and self adulation. It's like trying to understand Five Percenter Islam without reading the Wu Tang Manual first. Sure, you'll get the gist of it, but you're missing out on the details that make it so delicious. Oh, it's easy to figure out the "I self lord and master" breakdown. But you'd never know that they believe white man was created by a mad scientist named Yakub. Likewise, I know that Arkansas has a chance to be a sleeper in the SEC West, but don't ask me about shit like "S/" and "VHT #40."
What team is being supremely overrated in the preseason rankings?
Despite being an ACC elitist of the highest order, I didn't have any particular dislike of Florida State. Yes, they were the odd man out for a long time. Generally, an ACC school is southern, but not too southern, well renowned academically (well, except for Clemson), has an impressive basketball legacy (well, except for Clemson) and is filled with the blandly attractive and non-threatening type of girl that probably played field hockey in high school. Except for Georgia Tech, of course.
On the other hand, I'm thinking that Myron Rolle's decision to choose FSU prompted the most hilarious letter of intent signing since Stephon Marbury committed to "Georgia Tech University," the greatest player in Seminole hoops history might be Bobby Sura and they continually get overrated in terms of student body attractiveness on the account of someone who looks like what would happen if Wilson's Leather Store starting making floatation devices.
But then again, if she were to turn her Corinthian pelt into luggage, they'd definitely have to be called "Fun Bags."
Of course, you're probably thinking, "oh, he's just doing that thing where you take down what is generally considered to be a hot girl in order to make you a more sympathetic person." Look, buddy…what is "Sexy Results!" but a constant ploy to alienate any female reader I've ever had with one exception? My problem is that holding up a girl who obviously has fake tits as being some sort of superfox doesn't feel right. Sure, there are upsides to it; I think it's safe to say that any girl who consciously has altered her body via tattoo, non-ear piercing or plastic surgery is more likely to blow you in public. But I can't see how feeling up a fake boob should be any different than caressing a prosthetic leg. How would you feel if your ol' lady made you fuck her with a strap-on? Oh, it's not cool when the shoe's on the other foot and she wants a little enhancement for her pleasure? Of course, that's totally different if we're talking about dudes getting calf implants. Bitches love that shit.
Um, so yeah. Football. Anyways, I didn't mind the Seminoles because without FSU, the ACC is pretty much the Big East during the 1990's. But without the 'Noles, Jim Swofford doesn't get the bright idea of completely altering the ACC to the point of unrecognizability. With no FSU, it makes no sense to bring in Miami. And then it makes no sense for UVA to have to save Virginia Tech from being wasting away with their true institutional peers (West Virginia, Louisville, Cincinnati). And then it makes no sense to split up into unknowable divisions with a championship game that can't even sell out Alltel Stadium. The ACC is now just another behemoth football conference.
FSU and Miami deserve each other, so fuck 'em. The bloom is off the rose so to speak in regards to their Labor Day Weekend tilts, as last year's joint was definitive proof that close games aren't necessarily good games all the time. And it's a little disappointing to know that one of these guys starts off with a conference loss. What that usually means is that one team gets discounted for months until they inevitably run through the ACC battle of attrition (read: FSU loses to NC State, Miami drops an inexplicable one to UNC or GT) and end up right back where they started.
And it continues the cycle based on the basic train of thought is that "they were inconsistent last year…that means they're gonna be awesome this time!" Maybe it's just me, but that seems to be what we've been saying about Florida State ever since Weinke left town. I don't care about Drew Weatherford; they're still trusting their offense to Jeff Bowden. They fucked around too much last year (see: Fred Rouse) for me to feel truly comfortable about their national championship hopes. Same for Miami; I usually don't trust bowl results all that much, but the Peach Bowl revealed that things aren't exactly in order at the highest levels of Hurricane football. Once again, they got bombed in the draft and lost their most dangerous offensive weapons in Devin Hester (can't ignore field position) and Sinorice Moss. No running back has stepped up either, so you're relying on Kyle Wright and Eric Olsen to get the offense moving with a depleted line. The defense is stout, but I can't see what this whole basis for significant improvement is. As was the case last year, if you can put 21 on 'em, there's a good chance you'll win.
And maybe I'm just trying to preempt any sort of doubts about UVA's opening game against Pitt, but how is it that they're supposed to double last year's win total? Take this nugget from Phil Steele...
The offense, despite losing three of their top four rushers and two of their top three receivers, should easily top 2005's ppg.
Wizzle wuzzle? Look, that team went in a weak, weak, weak Big East and beat no team worth caring about. Unless you're Matt. The defense got absolutely ripped apart by any decent team it faced (42 for ND, 37 for Rutgers, 42 for L'ville and 45 for WVU in quite possibly the worst display of run defense I've ever seen. Seriously, it made UGA look like the '85 Bears). And with the balance of power in Pennsylvania shifting back to Penn State, the recruiting advantage that they figured they were getting with Dave Wannstedt is probably negated. I'm a fan of Tyler Palko, and I imagine Pitt can easily get to a inexplicably good bowl game, but even if they improve by three or four wins, they're a good candidate to get blasted in it.
I'll also throw LSU in there, since the Les Miles Regime feels like one long wait for the other shoe to drop. And although I think OSU should win the Big Ten, I can't see an undefeated season. "Yeah, they're replacing their whole defense, but what an offense!" only works in the Pac-10.
I also have to give a nod to Steele's take on WVU. Look, I understand that they beat a very good Georgia team in the Sugar Bowl. But let's not forget how lucky they were to beat a sleepwalking Louisville team and had their asses handed to them at home by Virginia Tech. And the fact that every Big East coordinator has spent the entirety of 2006 studying that game like the Zapruder film. And as far as the Sugar Bowl, if Richt doesn't pull the most baffling punt formation in the history of ever!, we're all talking about the catastrophic meltdown by the WVU defense and the Mountaineers probably don't sniff the top fifteen. Watch out for Maryland to pull an upset special.
Turn the tables. Who is underrated?
Look, I know us BlogPollers are a weak sort. Our knees buckle at NCAA 2007 previews like they were cheap porn on a clipper ship and once late August rolls around, 9 AM is just another way of saying "you should be working on your fourth Sparks." Okay, maybe that's an Ian thing. Either way, when it comes to picking teams that are potentially underrated, we're a sucker for squads for whom the following was true: a couple of guys that a not particularly die hard fan can name off the top of their heads, a record that was tainted by close losses and a storied history. And if there's one team that fits that role, it's Michigan.
Granted, for a Michigan team to be underrated, it's all relative. In any year where everyone and their gay uncle isn't picking them to be top five, they get called "underrated." But although the temptation is there, I'm not gonna put UM here. You know why? Because I don't want to deal with the e-mails from the eight thousand Wolverine bloggers telling me I've been lying about reading their sites. Henne, Hart, Manningham…it doesn't matter. As long as Lloyd Carr has the killer instinct of Mikey from "Swingers," there's no reason to believe that snatching defeat from the jaws of victory isn't a trend so much as it is a way of life.
So if I'm gonna pick a Big Ten sleeper, I like Iowa. Things went a little haywire last year after stratospheric expectations that I knew from the jump they couldn't match. But really, with Tate and an actual running game, they could sneak up on dudes. Like they always do. Really, they're Michigan with a coach you can trust. I'm a little late on this bandwagon, so go here and here for better explanations.
Otherwise, you'll go broke betting on Hokie postseason success, but if Virginia Tech is not on your shortlist for dark horse NC contender, you have one excuse: you haven't seen their schedule. In the past few years, VT has shed their rep of fattening up on cupcakes like so many of their chair-moistening, window-licking students, and they've got LSU and Nebraska lined up for the future. 2006…this is an exception. For the third straight year, they miss out on Florida State during the regular season and they're not even playing West Virginia, which just feels all kinds of wrong, like Seattle moving to the NFC.
And I wouldn't worry about Marcus Vick not being at the controls anymore. When I previewed last year's UVA/VT disaster, I posited that Marques Hagans had a bigger impact than Marcus Vick because Biscuit was single handedly responsible for three Cavalier wins, whereas Vick was never really put in a position to do the same. When they blew out teams like UVA and GT, it was more a matter of defense and special teams and Vick not doing too much to fuck things up. Certainly, he was someone a DC had to gameplan around, but if Beamer Ball was doing its job, all you needed were a couple of big plays. When they lost to Miami and FSU, Vick committed legendary bedshittings. I'm not saying a sophomore like Sean Glennon is going to be rock-steady like Bryan Randall, but I seriously doubt he'll be accused of trying to do too much.
There probably isn't one game that VT will be an underdog for with the exception of a road match against Miami, a place where they've proven that they can win at. And I've already told you I don't really care all that much for the Canes. VT has only three more road games in 2006, all at the least intimidating of ACC venues (BC, WF, UNC). Georgia Tech, Virginia and Clemson all come to Lane Stadium with serious quarterback questions. I'm not saying that the Hokies are among the most talented teams in the country, and last year's Purdue debacle shows how you can't always rely on scheduling quirks, but this is a hand nobody would turn down.
As far as other guys go, I like Indiana only because their quarterback is named Blake Powers. And every day, I drive by a billboard that says: "Temple: the new era of athletics," with Al Golden doing a magnificent, Urban Meyer-referencing "stand and point." So that's gotta count for something.
Speaking of Tech, I guess this is as good a time as any to address the whole Colin Cowherd incident, since I probably won't stop getting e-mail until I do. Before I go any further, I recommend you read this, just to give you a little idea of what we're dealing with...Anyways, to quote Jay-Z, "a wise man told me don't argue with fools/cause people from a distance can't tell who is who." Now, you can wonder who's the fool in this situation, but I think it's a pretty open and shut case when one side consists of an Eastern Washington University dropout claiming expertise about college football atmosphere. Let's just give an example, just a little sample of the rant...
Those guys wear make up to games. That is the biggest bunch of frou frou, daiquiri drinking, non-alcohol beer chugging weenies I've ever seen in my life. Dude, you want to know the most popular drink at tailgating at UVa football...Zima."
Let's go step by step...
"Those guys wear make up to games."
Have you seen the average UVA haircut? Say what you will about our attire, but from the neck up, I'm fairly certain we use toothpaste and that's about it. Anyways, I'm told from the Wikipedia entry that the "sucking cock for meth" man's Jim Rome is obsessed with USC football. Even before we deal with the whole fact that USC's nickname is rightfully "University of Spoiled Children" and it's located in LOS ANGELES, let's just dispense with the fact that hardcore Trojan football fanatics like Will Ferrell, Snoop Dogg and Henry Winkler probably rock more foundation on any given day than the entire Virginia sorority system.
And as for the whole bowtie-wearing thing, it's tradition, albeit one that erodes as the years go by. Understandably, he reacts harshly to concepts of "otherness," unknowing that the Greek population at just about any southern school north of UF (I'd imagine it's too damn hot anyway there) wears formal gear of some sort to their home games and kids in their first two years that are too naive to realize the stupidity of the concept of bringing dates to a football contest do so. You know who else likes to dress up all funny for their games? Army and Navy. Why don't you wear a wig and paint your body, you fucking fruits! Now I know why we haven't totally freed Iraq yet!
"Frou-fou, daiquiri drinking, non-alcohol beer chugging..."
To quote Homer Simpson, "does whiskey count as beer?" I think I speak for my fellow UVA grads that I can't even play as these guys in NCAA 2006 without taking a few pulls of the brownest of brown liquors. No matter how many Orange T-shirts are doled out before home games, the Fourth Year Fifth will still survive.
Anyone care for a belt of scotch?
"Dude, you want to know the most popular drink at tailgating at UVa football...Zima."
There's two problems with this. First, tailgating doesn't really go down at UVA, since there's no real space outside of Scott Stadium to do so. And secondly, it's quite clear he's never actually seen a UVA game, unless he somehow got in back in 1984. He says at some point that we rock ascots, which I would wholeheartedly welcome if for no other reason than to stem the tide of GDI "Sea of Orange"-ness. God, at least watch the last two games your own fucking employer put on TV: this year against Florida State and last year against Clemson.
My problem isn't with Cowherd offering such head up his ass opinions. I just hope he didn't lift them straight from Tech Sideline, considering that's his usual form of research. My problem is with the UVA fans (whether or not they're alumni I don't know) coming out of the woodwork trying to bait him with our "SEA OF ORANGE! TEH AWESOME!" defenses to an unwinnable argument. Arguing Virginia's case for being a hardcore football school is like arguing with a Frenchman who says the U.S. isn't capable of ever winning the World Cup; of course we're not. Since when was it a priority? And yes, it does need to be a priority to have it happen.
Look, I'm guessing you didn't choose UVA because of its madhouse football atmosphere. If you wanted to derive the vast majority of your institutional pride from a football squad, there's this school a couple hours to the southwest I could wholeheartedly recommend. Just make sure you don't stop at the Wendy's on your way. If you go to Princeton Review and look up "students that apply to UVA also apply to...", your results are VPISU, William & Mary, Duke, Cornell and Penn. We choose UVA over Tech because we don't want to come home from our future places of employment smelling of gasoline, UVA over W&M because I'm pretty sure my nickname of the place (Steers & Queers) still holds true, and UVA over Duke because we hate Asians.
Otherwise, you're dealing with a university that competes with the Ivy Leagues for its students. Regardless of how obsessed any UVA student is with the fortunes of Wahoo football, they're going to be considered "soft" by some USC jock-sniffer whose job is to talk for hours on end. Yeah, we're talking football here but if you look at the places I applied to, it's fairly obvious I wasn't making my determination based on football alone. The reason kids choose UVA over a place like Cornell or Penn when they do (or in Wops' case, Harvard...no, he's not a Native American) is because you can get a similar education for far cheaper with the addition of a D-IA sports atmosphere. I'm not gonna resort to the usual defenses (we're good at the sports that are as white as our student body), but when you look at UVA's peer schools, we're doing a whole lot better job than they are when it comes to developing a consistent football following. Even if all of UVA's undergraduate population cared as much about football as I do (and keep in mind, we're like, 10-15% Asian), that would only fill less than 1/5th of Scott Stadium.
It's two sides of a coin; either you're in UVA's situation or you're a Football U. There's no "perfect" football fanbase and I have no idea what constitutes the opposite of a "weak" fan. Throwing dogshit at players like Oregon fans? Burning couches? Yeah, it might be nice if UVA football had the diehard contingency of a UGA or Alabama, but then you reach a point where people who have absolutely no connection to the school whatsoever start influencing public perception of it. I'm sure people at Penn State think UGA is no different than Mississippi State when it comes to the book learnin', but the fact is, it's every bit as demanding for undergrad admission as PSU has becomes, not to mention with better weather and girls who don't look like they're rocking fanny packs by the time sorority rush ends. Unfortunately, to most people outside of the southeast, football is all they can really go on, and there's always a not so silent minority in action.
Inevitably, when fans start talking shit about what awful fans X State are, it's probably dealing with the worst of it. Am I really to believe that Ohio State students are always that bad or are they just OSU fans who live to give Michigan students hell? When I went to the Tire Bowl, I know damn well the fat, mustachioed shirtless guys threatening us weren't WVU students. When Penn State played UVA in 2001, it probably wasn't PSU grads getting bottles broken over their heads because they started shit. How did Alabama fans feel about that Bruno sketch from "The Ali G Show"? It's unfortunate, but that's the risk you take. I would like to think that the kids in my BarBri class who went to Philadelphia law schools a good thirty points below UGA on the US News rankings think of my law alma mater as being a top-flight school with dirt cheap tuition and an unbeatable atmosphere. Instead, those dejected motherfuckers just want to talk about the Sugar Bowl.
And as far as the school itself, UVA's undergraduate population is around 12,000 and our admissions requirements might be the toughest of any public institution in the country. How many schools can you think of that have a similar profile and are renowned for their hardcore fanbase? One...Notre Dame. And just think about how unreplicable their situation is.
Let's not forget that UVA football was historically awful for a good portion of the 20th century. Our history basically begins with George Welsh, and look at what's happened since then. We're a school of 12,000, located in a part of the state that's a few hours removed from where most of our alumni end up (Richmond, DC, to say nothing of the enormous amount of UVA grads in NY, SF, ATL and LA). And yet, last year UVA consistently filled out a 61,000-seat stadium that underwent a big expansion during the death march of George Welsh's last days. That might not sound all that impressive to those from a Big Ten or SEC program, but the only places in the ACC with bigger capacities are VPISU (65,000), Clemson (78,000) and FSU (82,000), all three of which are "all your eggs in one basket" schools (baseball aside). We still have 14,000 more fans in the stands then there are at an average Miami game and I don't hear anyone talking shit about their weak-ass fanbase. Now I just hope Luther Campbell doesn't read this blog.
The truth is, you can't have it both ways. UVA's reputation as being a "wine and cheese" crowd goes hand in hand with the fact that it's an elite school with a reputation of academic excellence. When I think about the people my friends work with in NY or DC, the only graduates they fuck with on Saturdays went to either Texas or Michigan, but keep in mind they also have student bodies which are three or four times bigger than ours and football traditions that go back decades upon decades. Who are you looking to please...the Wall Street firms that recruit on our campus or some asshat who has less education than Dexter Manley?
Which conference will be the best in 2006?
If you're willing to do the research, I'd guess offhand that the Big XII had the best postseason last year, and I expect them to continue. Texas and Oklahoma are legit contenders for a national title, and Nebraska could get their shit together in a very scary way. Let's not forget that Texas Tech will get their 9 wins for certain somehow, and although I have no regard whatsoever for Ron Prince's ingenuity when it comes to offensive playcalling, I think he'll turn things around sooner than later at Kansas State. That guy knows how to field a great offensive line and he's heavy in the game at the crucial JUCO level, so if they get to a bowl this year, I wouldn't be all that surprised. Moreover, Colorado gets a fresh start with Dan Hawkins and Texas A&M could easily start 9-0. I'm not kidding...of course, it warrants mentioning that they're the only team with a worse November slate than UVA (OU, Nebraska, Texas).
I'd like to say the Pac-10 has the chance to establish itself as a power conference, but even after FSU started slipping, it took a few years for the new jacks to really get at them in the ACC. I know everyone likes Arizona State (remember...Blackalicious) and Cal, but I'll see it when I believe it. Moreover, there's too much of a dropoff after those three teams and Oregon and 'Zona might not be there yet. Otherwise, the Big Ten should be very stout despite the outflux (word?) of talent and the ACC is another complete fucking mess.
Which "non-BCS" conference will be the best in 2006?
As expected, this usually comes down to whether you side with the MWC or the WAC, and are even able to tell the difference between the two. Me, I usually just remember that Hawaii's in the WAC and work from there. I have to say I'd rock with the MWC, if only because it's a little more well rounded. Utah should be dangerous this year, BYU is probably better than anyone thinks and TCU will likely be in the Top 25. Plus, SDSU and Colorado State are always competent enough to make you care. But out of the WAC, I like Boise's odds this year, since they learned a serious lesson last year in terms of scheduling (more below). Actually, to quote Captain McAllister, "har...I don't know what I'm doing."
Which non-BCS conference team will have the best season?
Seriously, how do you pick anyone other than Navy? Well, maybe Boise if we're talking about "best year," as opposed to "best team." You'll notice that UGA has been replaced by a slightly more reasonable opening feast (Sacramento State). If they get past Oregon State, an undefeated season is pretty feasible, which sounds like the thing I think about Boise every single year.
Let's get your first read on this one...who will win the H*i*m*n? Oh, by the way, players whose last names begin with the letter "Q" are ineligible.
Jimmy Claussen! Jimmy Claussen! What, too soon?
I'm not quite sold on Adrian Peterson, much like I'm not sold on Oklahoma as a whole. I understand that OU had injury problems and an inexperienced QB, but they never had the slam dunk game that makes me think they're ready to break out. People may be pointing to the Holiday Bowl win, but let's break this down. First off, they scored only 14 points against an Oregon defense whose stoutness began and ended with Haloti Ngata. Secondly, the Ducks were without their top quarterback and never were the sixth best team in the country by any stretch of the imagination. I like the Sooners to top last season's results, but if Bomar continues to struggle, Big 12 defenses can stack up against Peterson.
As far as Ted Ginn goes, I like his versatility, but I think it will work against him in terms of gaining the kind of stats that scream "Heisman." Troy Smtih probably has a good chance, but I wouldn't discount some other Big Ten QB's. Drew Stanton always picks up big stats, but I wouldn't bet on November passing without John L. Smith not being allowed to come within 50 miles of East Lansing, so that's out. Perhaps Drew Tate is the new Chuck Long? And just to torment our Michigan friends, I really think Chad Henne gets it goin' this year! Honest injun!
The Big East has four potential guys who can cop the Heisman, but they play for two teams. I have no doubt that Slaton and White will put up monster numbers for West Virginia and ditto for Bush and Brohm at Louisville. Problem is, unless you have the market power of last year's USC team, there's no way you're going to win the Heisman splitting votes with your teammate.
I'd have to say if Cal beats USC, it might be Marshawn Lynch's to lose. Though his team doesn't quite have the cachet you'd like from a Heisman winner, gaudy, Pac-10 supplied stats and a Top Ten finish (all very likely) would probably make him a greater amongst equals, since it's hard to envision an end-to-end guy.
But this is all pointless anyway, because when UVA takes the field on July 19th, Spalding Cohen's 350-yard performance against Pitt will be just the beginning of a year for the ages.
Spalding Cohen: tanned (really tanned here), rested and ready!
Which preseason college football magazine is your favorite?
When I'm drinking, I'm probably doing so to get drunk or win money for feats of strength. Some might say that's the definition of alcoholism, but I'm pretty sure if you're drinking, you probably want to get drunk too. Maybe not drunk enough to write a certain review that Joey is probably soon to ride out on (you know what I'm talking about), but enough to achieve some sort of mind alteration. To paraphrase what Chris Rock once said, he'd see his dad pound sixpacks all the time, but he's never seen anyone drink six glasses of Kool Aid.
Anyways, this leads me to why I don't buy bottles of good liquor. Oh, I like to drink good liquor. And I don't buy shitty beer. But no matter how much forbearance I promise myself to take, Maker's Mark would get polished off as quickly as Ol' Granddad, and I'm thirty bucks poorer for my efforts. And trust me, Top Ramen doesn't fend off hangovers as well as a condor egg omelet. Actually, one of those would be so good right now...
How does this carry over to college football? Well, back in the days when people had waves, Gazelle shades and cornbraids, I used to rock with the glossier preview mags like Athlon and Sporting News and whatnot. Oh, they certainly looked nice; usually written in complete sentences, nice layouts and graphics, some cheesecake shots of cheerleaders. Problem was, since I had them in the summer, a generally obligation-free time for me outside of creating an alternate reality where UVA won three straight NC's despite having a Jewish QB that weighed 155 pounds, I would generally run through them in about three days. Trust me, by the time August rolled around, I had the two or three paragraphs they dedicated to Tulsa's prospects committed to memory.
But now that I've been immersed in the BlogPoll and I have to flex knowledge every now and again, I went with Phil Steele's $8.50 monster and it's CFB rotgut in printed form. It's not pretty, but it gets the job done. Consistently and thoroughly. When it comes right down to it, I think anyone with a ESPN Insider account can do a preview for any given team. And no matter how bleak a squad's outlook is, they're about as lenient in grading as All Music Guide. So why bother with narrative? I don’t think this is a secret, but evaluating the Phil Steele preview as literature is nearly impossible since it's more of a gambling sheet than anything else. A Pitchfork writer's personal hell is an eternity of trying to edit this thing. Run on sentences, overuse and wrongful use of the word "simply"…the list goes on and on. And then there's all the made up facts and self adulation. It's like trying to understand Five Percenter Islam without reading the Wu Tang Manual first. Sure, you'll get the gist of it, but you're missing out on the details that make it so delicious. Oh, it's easy to figure out the "I self lord and master" breakdown. But you'd never know that they believe white man was created by a mad scientist named Yakub. Likewise, I know that Arkansas has a chance to be a sleeper in the SEC West, but don't ask me about shit like "S/" and "VHT #40."
What team is being supremely overrated in the preseason rankings?
Despite being an ACC elitist of the highest order, I didn't have any particular dislike of Florida State. Yes, they were the odd man out for a long time. Generally, an ACC school is southern, but not too southern, well renowned academically (well, except for Clemson), has an impressive basketball legacy (well, except for Clemson) and is filled with the blandly attractive and non-threatening type of girl that probably played field hockey in high school. Except for Georgia Tech, of course.
On the other hand, I'm thinking that Myron Rolle's decision to choose FSU prompted the most hilarious letter of intent signing since Stephon Marbury committed to "Georgia Tech University," the greatest player in Seminole hoops history might be Bobby Sura and they continually get overrated in terms of student body attractiveness on the account of someone who looks like what would happen if Wilson's Leather Store starting making floatation devices.
But then again, if she were to turn her Corinthian pelt into luggage, they'd definitely have to be called "Fun Bags."
Of course, you're probably thinking, "oh, he's just doing that thing where you take down what is generally considered to be a hot girl in order to make you a more sympathetic person." Look, buddy…what is "Sexy Results!" but a constant ploy to alienate any female reader I've ever had with one exception? My problem is that holding up a girl who obviously has fake tits as being some sort of superfox doesn't feel right. Sure, there are upsides to it; I think it's safe to say that any girl who consciously has altered her body via tattoo, non-ear piercing or plastic surgery is more likely to blow you in public. But I can't see how feeling up a fake boob should be any different than caressing a prosthetic leg. How would you feel if your ol' lady made you fuck her with a strap-on? Oh, it's not cool when the shoe's on the other foot and she wants a little enhancement for her pleasure? Of course, that's totally different if we're talking about dudes getting calf implants. Bitches love that shit.
Um, so yeah. Football. Anyways, I didn't mind the Seminoles because without FSU, the ACC is pretty much the Big East during the 1990's. But without the 'Noles, Jim Swofford doesn't get the bright idea of completely altering the ACC to the point of unrecognizability. With no FSU, it makes no sense to bring in Miami. And then it makes no sense for UVA to have to save Virginia Tech from being wasting away with their true institutional peers (West Virginia, Louisville, Cincinnati). And then it makes no sense to split up into unknowable divisions with a championship game that can't even sell out Alltel Stadium. The ACC is now just another behemoth football conference.
FSU and Miami deserve each other, so fuck 'em. The bloom is off the rose so to speak in regards to their Labor Day Weekend tilts, as last year's joint was definitive proof that close games aren't necessarily good games all the time. And it's a little disappointing to know that one of these guys starts off with a conference loss. What that usually means is that one team gets discounted for months until they inevitably run through the ACC battle of attrition (read: FSU loses to NC State, Miami drops an inexplicable one to UNC or GT) and end up right back where they started.
And it continues the cycle based on the basic train of thought is that "they were inconsistent last year…that means they're gonna be awesome this time!" Maybe it's just me, but that seems to be what we've been saying about Florida State ever since Weinke left town. I don't care about Drew Weatherford; they're still trusting their offense to Jeff Bowden. They fucked around too much last year (see: Fred Rouse) for me to feel truly comfortable about their national championship hopes. Same for Miami; I usually don't trust bowl results all that much, but the Peach Bowl revealed that things aren't exactly in order at the highest levels of Hurricane football. Once again, they got bombed in the draft and lost their most dangerous offensive weapons in Devin Hester (can't ignore field position) and Sinorice Moss. No running back has stepped up either, so you're relying on Kyle Wright and Eric Olsen to get the offense moving with a depleted line. The defense is stout, but I can't see what this whole basis for significant improvement is. As was the case last year, if you can put 21 on 'em, there's a good chance you'll win.
And maybe I'm just trying to preempt any sort of doubts about UVA's opening game against Pitt, but how is it that they're supposed to double last year's win total? Take this nugget from Phil Steele...
The offense, despite losing three of their top four rushers and two of their top three receivers, should easily top 2005's ppg.
Wizzle wuzzle? Look, that team went in a weak, weak, weak Big East and beat no team worth caring about. Unless you're Matt. The defense got absolutely ripped apart by any decent team it faced (42 for ND, 37 for Rutgers, 42 for L'ville and 45 for WVU in quite possibly the worst display of run defense I've ever seen. Seriously, it made UGA look like the '85 Bears). And with the balance of power in Pennsylvania shifting back to Penn State, the recruiting advantage that they figured they were getting with Dave Wannstedt is probably negated. I'm a fan of Tyler Palko, and I imagine Pitt can easily get to a inexplicably good bowl game, but even if they improve by three or four wins, they're a good candidate to get blasted in it.
I'll also throw LSU in there, since the Les Miles Regime feels like one long wait for the other shoe to drop. And although I think OSU should win the Big Ten, I can't see an undefeated season. "Yeah, they're replacing their whole defense, but what an offense!" only works in the Pac-10.
I also have to give a nod to Steele's take on WVU. Look, I understand that they beat a very good Georgia team in the Sugar Bowl. But let's not forget how lucky they were to beat a sleepwalking Louisville team and had their asses handed to them at home by Virginia Tech. And the fact that every Big East coordinator has spent the entirety of 2006 studying that game like the Zapruder film. And as far as the Sugar Bowl, if Richt doesn't pull the most baffling punt formation in the history of ever!, we're all talking about the catastrophic meltdown by the WVU defense and the Mountaineers probably don't sniff the top fifteen. Watch out for Maryland to pull an upset special.
Turn the tables. Who is underrated?
Look, I know us BlogPollers are a weak sort. Our knees buckle at NCAA 2007 previews like they were cheap porn on a clipper ship and once late August rolls around, 9 AM is just another way of saying "you should be working on your fourth Sparks." Okay, maybe that's an Ian thing. Either way, when it comes to picking teams that are potentially underrated, we're a sucker for squads for whom the following was true: a couple of guys that a not particularly die hard fan can name off the top of their heads, a record that was tainted by close losses and a storied history. And if there's one team that fits that role, it's Michigan.
Granted, for a Michigan team to be underrated, it's all relative. In any year where everyone and their gay uncle isn't picking them to be top five, they get called "underrated." But although the temptation is there, I'm not gonna put UM here. You know why? Because I don't want to deal with the e-mails from the eight thousand Wolverine bloggers telling me I've been lying about reading their sites. Henne, Hart, Manningham…it doesn't matter. As long as Lloyd Carr has the killer instinct of Mikey from "Swingers," there's no reason to believe that snatching defeat from the jaws of victory isn't a trend so much as it is a way of life.
So if I'm gonna pick a Big Ten sleeper, I like Iowa. Things went a little haywire last year after stratospheric expectations that I knew from the jump they couldn't match. But really, with Tate and an actual running game, they could sneak up on dudes. Like they always do. Really, they're Michigan with a coach you can trust. I'm a little late on this bandwagon, so go here and here for better explanations.
Otherwise, you'll go broke betting on Hokie postseason success, but if Virginia Tech is not on your shortlist for dark horse NC contender, you have one excuse: you haven't seen their schedule. In the past few years, VT has shed their rep of fattening up on cupcakes like so many of their chair-moistening, window-licking students, and they've got LSU and Nebraska lined up for the future. 2006…this is an exception. For the third straight year, they miss out on Florida State during the regular season and they're not even playing West Virginia, which just feels all kinds of wrong, like Seattle moving to the NFC.
And I wouldn't worry about Marcus Vick not being at the controls anymore. When I previewed last year's UVA/VT disaster, I posited that Marques Hagans had a bigger impact than Marcus Vick because Biscuit was single handedly responsible for three Cavalier wins, whereas Vick was never really put in a position to do the same. When they blew out teams like UVA and GT, it was more a matter of defense and special teams and Vick not doing too much to fuck things up. Certainly, he was someone a DC had to gameplan around, but if Beamer Ball was doing its job, all you needed were a couple of big plays. When they lost to Miami and FSU, Vick committed legendary bedshittings. I'm not saying a sophomore like Sean Glennon is going to be rock-steady like Bryan Randall, but I seriously doubt he'll be accused of trying to do too much.
There probably isn't one game that VT will be an underdog for with the exception of a road match against Miami, a place where they've proven that they can win at. And I've already told you I don't really care all that much for the Canes. VT has only three more road games in 2006, all at the least intimidating of ACC venues (BC, WF, UNC). Georgia Tech, Virginia and Clemson all come to Lane Stadium with serious quarterback questions. I'm not saying that the Hokies are among the most talented teams in the country, and last year's Purdue debacle shows how you can't always rely on scheduling quirks, but this is a hand nobody would turn down.
As far as other guys go, I like Indiana only because their quarterback is named Blake Powers. And every day, I drive by a billboard that says: "Temple: the new era of athletics," with Al Golden doing a magnificent, Urban Meyer-referencing "stand and point." So that's gotta count for something.
Speaking of Tech, I guess this is as good a time as any to address the whole Colin Cowherd incident, since I probably won't stop getting e-mail until I do. Before I go any further, I recommend you read this, just to give you a little idea of what we're dealing with...Anyways, to quote Jay-Z, "a wise man told me don't argue with fools/cause people from a distance can't tell who is who." Now, you can wonder who's the fool in this situation, but I think it's a pretty open and shut case when one side consists of an Eastern Washington University dropout claiming expertise about college football atmosphere. Let's just give an example, just a little sample of the rant...
Those guys wear make up to games. That is the biggest bunch of frou frou, daiquiri drinking, non-alcohol beer chugging weenies I've ever seen in my life. Dude, you want to know the most popular drink at tailgating at UVa football...Zima."
Let's go step by step...
"Those guys wear make up to games."
Have you seen the average UVA haircut? Say what you will about our attire, but from the neck up, I'm fairly certain we use toothpaste and that's about it. Anyways, I'm told from the Wikipedia entry that the "sucking cock for meth" man's Jim Rome is obsessed with USC football. Even before we deal with the whole fact that USC's nickname is rightfully "University of Spoiled Children" and it's located in LOS ANGELES, let's just dispense with the fact that hardcore Trojan football fanatics like Will Ferrell, Snoop Dogg and Henry Winkler probably rock more foundation on any given day than the entire Virginia sorority system.
And as for the whole bowtie-wearing thing, it's tradition, albeit one that erodes as the years go by. Understandably, he reacts harshly to concepts of "otherness," unknowing that the Greek population at just about any southern school north of UF (I'd imagine it's too damn hot anyway there) wears formal gear of some sort to their home games and kids in their first two years that are too naive to realize the stupidity of the concept of bringing dates to a football contest do so. You know who else likes to dress up all funny for their games? Army and Navy. Why don't you wear a wig and paint your body, you fucking fruits! Now I know why we haven't totally freed Iraq yet!
"Frou-fou, daiquiri drinking, non-alcohol beer chugging..."
To quote Homer Simpson, "does whiskey count as beer?" I think I speak for my fellow UVA grads that I can't even play as these guys in NCAA 2006 without taking a few pulls of the brownest of brown liquors. No matter how many Orange T-shirts are doled out before home games, the Fourth Year Fifth will still survive.
Anyone care for a belt of scotch?
"Dude, you want to know the most popular drink at tailgating at UVa football...Zima."
There's two problems with this. First, tailgating doesn't really go down at UVA, since there's no real space outside of Scott Stadium to do so. And secondly, it's quite clear he's never actually seen a UVA game, unless he somehow got in back in 1984. He says at some point that we rock ascots, which I would wholeheartedly welcome if for no other reason than to stem the tide of GDI "Sea of Orange"-ness. God, at least watch the last two games your own fucking employer put on TV: this year against Florida State and last year against Clemson.
My problem isn't with Cowherd offering such head up his ass opinions. I just hope he didn't lift them straight from Tech Sideline, considering that's his usual form of research. My problem is with the UVA fans (whether or not they're alumni I don't know) coming out of the woodwork trying to bait him with our "SEA OF ORANGE! TEH AWESOME!" defenses to an unwinnable argument. Arguing Virginia's case for being a hardcore football school is like arguing with a Frenchman who says the U.S. isn't capable of ever winning the World Cup; of course we're not. Since when was it a priority? And yes, it does need to be a priority to have it happen.
Look, I'm guessing you didn't choose UVA because of its madhouse football atmosphere. If you wanted to derive the vast majority of your institutional pride from a football squad, there's this school a couple hours to the southwest I could wholeheartedly recommend. Just make sure you don't stop at the Wendy's on your way. If you go to Princeton Review and look up "students that apply to UVA also apply to...", your results are VPISU, William & Mary, Duke, Cornell and Penn. We choose UVA over Tech because we don't want to come home from our future places of employment smelling of gasoline, UVA over W&M because I'm pretty sure my nickname of the place (Steers & Queers) still holds true, and UVA over Duke because we hate Asians.
Otherwise, you're dealing with a university that competes with the Ivy Leagues for its students. Regardless of how obsessed any UVA student is with the fortunes of Wahoo football, they're going to be considered "soft" by some USC jock-sniffer whose job is to talk for hours on end. Yeah, we're talking football here but if you look at the places I applied to, it's fairly obvious I wasn't making my determination based on football alone. The reason kids choose UVA over a place like Cornell or Penn when they do (or in Wops' case, Harvard...no, he's not a Native American) is because you can get a similar education for far cheaper with the addition of a D-IA sports atmosphere. I'm not gonna resort to the usual defenses (we're good at the sports that are as white as our student body), but when you look at UVA's peer schools, we're doing a whole lot better job than they are when it comes to developing a consistent football following. Even if all of UVA's undergraduate population cared as much about football as I do (and keep in mind, we're like, 10-15% Asian), that would only fill less than 1/5th of Scott Stadium.
It's two sides of a coin; either you're in UVA's situation or you're a Football U. There's no "perfect" football fanbase and I have no idea what constitutes the opposite of a "weak" fan. Throwing dogshit at players like Oregon fans? Burning couches? Yeah, it might be nice if UVA football had the diehard contingency of a UGA or Alabama, but then you reach a point where people who have absolutely no connection to the school whatsoever start influencing public perception of it. I'm sure people at Penn State think UGA is no different than Mississippi State when it comes to the book learnin', but the fact is, it's every bit as demanding for undergrad admission as PSU has becomes, not to mention with better weather and girls who don't look like they're rocking fanny packs by the time sorority rush ends. Unfortunately, to most people outside of the southeast, football is all they can really go on, and there's always a not so silent minority in action.
Inevitably, when fans start talking shit about what awful fans X State are, it's probably dealing with the worst of it. Am I really to believe that Ohio State students are always that bad or are they just OSU fans who live to give Michigan students hell? When I went to the Tire Bowl, I know damn well the fat, mustachioed shirtless guys threatening us weren't WVU students. When Penn State played UVA in 2001, it probably wasn't PSU grads getting bottles broken over their heads because they started shit. How did Alabama fans feel about that Bruno sketch from "The Ali G Show"? It's unfortunate, but that's the risk you take. I would like to think that the kids in my BarBri class who went to Philadelphia law schools a good thirty points below UGA on the US News rankings think of my law alma mater as being a top-flight school with dirt cheap tuition and an unbeatable atmosphere. Instead, those dejected motherfuckers just want to talk about the Sugar Bowl.
And as far as the school itself, UVA's undergraduate population is around 12,000 and our admissions requirements might be the toughest of any public institution in the country. How many schools can you think of that have a similar profile and are renowned for their hardcore fanbase? One...Notre Dame. And just think about how unreplicable their situation is.
Let's not forget that UVA football was historically awful for a good portion of the 20th century. Our history basically begins with George Welsh, and look at what's happened since then. We're a school of 12,000, located in a part of the state that's a few hours removed from where most of our alumni end up (Richmond, DC, to say nothing of the enormous amount of UVA grads in NY, SF, ATL and LA). And yet, last year UVA consistently filled out a 61,000-seat stadium that underwent a big expansion during the death march of George Welsh's last days. That might not sound all that impressive to those from a Big Ten or SEC program, but the only places in the ACC with bigger capacities are VPISU (65,000), Clemson (78,000) and FSU (82,000), all three of which are "all your eggs in one basket" schools (baseball aside). We still have 14,000 more fans in the stands then there are at an average Miami game and I don't hear anyone talking shit about their weak-ass fanbase. Now I just hope Luther Campbell doesn't read this blog.
The truth is, you can't have it both ways. UVA's reputation as being a "wine and cheese" crowd goes hand in hand with the fact that it's an elite school with a reputation of academic excellence. When I think about the people my friends work with in NY or DC, the only graduates they fuck with on Saturdays went to either Texas or Michigan, but keep in mind they also have student bodies which are three or four times bigger than ours and football traditions that go back decades upon decades. Who are you looking to please...the Wall Street firms that recruit on our campus or some asshat who has less education than Dexter Manley?
Which conference will be the best in 2006?
If you're willing to do the research, I'd guess offhand that the Big XII had the best postseason last year, and I expect them to continue. Texas and Oklahoma are legit contenders for a national title, and Nebraska could get their shit together in a very scary way. Let's not forget that Texas Tech will get their 9 wins for certain somehow, and although I have no regard whatsoever for Ron Prince's ingenuity when it comes to offensive playcalling, I think he'll turn things around sooner than later at Kansas State. That guy knows how to field a great offensive line and he's heavy in the game at the crucial JUCO level, so if they get to a bowl this year, I wouldn't be all that surprised. Moreover, Colorado gets a fresh start with Dan Hawkins and Texas A&M could easily start 9-0. I'm not kidding...of course, it warrants mentioning that they're the only team with a worse November slate than UVA (OU, Nebraska, Texas).
I'd like to say the Pac-10 has the chance to establish itself as a power conference, but even after FSU started slipping, it took a few years for the new jacks to really get at them in the ACC. I know everyone likes Arizona State (remember...Blackalicious) and Cal, but I'll see it when I believe it. Moreover, there's too much of a dropoff after those three teams and Oregon and 'Zona might not be there yet. Otherwise, the Big Ten should be very stout despite the outflux (word?) of talent and the ACC is another complete fucking mess.
Which "non-BCS" conference will be the best in 2006?
As expected, this usually comes down to whether you side with the MWC or the WAC, and are even able to tell the difference between the two. Me, I usually just remember that Hawaii's in the WAC and work from there. I have to say I'd rock with the MWC, if only because it's a little more well rounded. Utah should be dangerous this year, BYU is probably better than anyone thinks and TCU will likely be in the Top 25. Plus, SDSU and Colorado State are always competent enough to make you care. But out of the WAC, I like Boise's odds this year, since they learned a serious lesson last year in terms of scheduling (more below). Actually, to quote Captain McAllister, "har...I don't know what I'm doing."
Which non-BCS conference team will have the best season?
Seriously, how do you pick anyone other than Navy? Well, maybe Boise if we're talking about "best year," as opposed to "best team." You'll notice that UGA has been replaced by a slightly more reasonable opening feast (Sacramento State). If they get past Oregon State, an undefeated season is pretty feasible, which sounds like the thing I think about Boise every single year.
Let's get your first read on this one...who will win the H*i*m*n? Oh, by the way, players whose last names begin with the letter "Q" are ineligible.
Jimmy Claussen! Jimmy Claussen! What, too soon?
I'm not quite sold on Adrian Peterson, much like I'm not sold on Oklahoma as a whole. I understand that OU had injury problems and an inexperienced QB, but they never had the slam dunk game that makes me think they're ready to break out. People may be pointing to the Holiday Bowl win, but let's break this down. First off, they scored only 14 points against an Oregon defense whose stoutness began and ended with Haloti Ngata. Secondly, the Ducks were without their top quarterback and never were the sixth best team in the country by any stretch of the imagination. I like the Sooners to top last season's results, but if Bomar continues to struggle, Big 12 defenses can stack up against Peterson.
As far as Ted Ginn goes, I like his versatility, but I think it will work against him in terms of gaining the kind of stats that scream "Heisman." Troy Smtih probably has a good chance, but I wouldn't discount some other Big Ten QB's. Drew Stanton always picks up big stats, but I wouldn't bet on November passing without John L. Smith not being allowed to come within 50 miles of East Lansing, so that's out. Perhaps Drew Tate is the new Chuck Long? And just to torment our Michigan friends, I really think Chad Henne gets it goin' this year! Honest injun!
The Big East has four potential guys who can cop the Heisman, but they play for two teams. I have no doubt that Slaton and White will put up monster numbers for West Virginia and ditto for Bush and Brohm at Louisville. Problem is, unless you have the market power of last year's USC team, there's no way you're going to win the Heisman splitting votes with your teammate.
I'd have to say if Cal beats USC, it might be Marshawn Lynch's to lose. Though his team doesn't quite have the cachet you'd like from a Heisman winner, gaudy, Pac-10 supplied stats and a Top Ten finish (all very likely) would probably make him a greater amongst equals, since it's hard to envision an end-to-end guy.
But this is all pointless anyway, because when UVA takes the field on July 19th, Spalding Cohen's 350-yard performance against Pitt will be just the beginning of a year for the ages.
Spalding Cohen: tanned (really tanned here), rested and ready!
posted by Ian at 2:33 PM
<< Home