Bowl Games 12/26-12/31

I've not been doing very well with these picks. In fact, if you are a betting man or woman, the only way you'd be ahead is if you haven't listened to me so far. However, I'm going to stick to it.

The Bowl Season has been pretty lame so far. So many blow-outs. But now we are getting to some better match-ups and hopefully there will some more exciting games.

Little Caesars Bowl: Toledo(pick 'em) vs. Florida International
Winner: Toledo

Independence Bowl: Air Force(-3) vs. Georgia Tech
Winner: Georgia Tech

Champ Sports Bowl: West Virginia(-2.5) vs. North Carolina State
Winner: West Virginia

Insight Bowl: Missouri(-3) vs. Iowa
Winner: Missouri

Military Bowl: Maryland(-7.5) vs East Carolina
Winner: East Carolina

Texas Bowl: Baylor(-1.5) vs. Illinois
Winner: Illinois

Alamo Bowl: Oklahoma State(-5.5) vs. Arizona
Winner: Oklahoma State

Armed Forces Bowl: SMU(-7) vs. Army
Winner: SMU

Pinstripe Bowl: Kansas State(pick 'em) vs. Syracuse
Winner: Kansas State

Music City Bowl: North Carolina(-2) vs. Tennessee
Winner: North Carolina

Holiday Bowl: Nebraska(-14) vs. Washington
Winner: Nebraska

Meineke Bowl: Clemson(-5.5) vs. South Florida
Winner: South Florida

Sun Bowl: Miami(FL)(-3) vs. Notre Dame
Winner: Miami(FL)

Liberty Bowl: Georgia(-6.5) vs UCF
Winner: Georgia

Chick-fil-A Bowl: South Carolina(-3) vs. Florida State
Winner: South Carolina

Thanks for reading

-Michael

The NCAA Is a Joke

I want to start this out by saying that I don't disagree with the suspension of Terrelle Pryor, Daniel Herron, DeVier Posey, Mike Adams and Solomon Thomas. They definitely broke the rules and deserve their punishments. However in the current context, the institution that gives out those suspensions lacks legitimacy.

{Brace for rant}

The NCAA doesn't punish Cam Newton at all even after they said those allegations were right. His amateur status was compromised and the NCAA doesn't care. It's not like the NCAA has proven its self to be a forgiving thing. It has punished people for way less benefit to their parents than what Newton's father sought, $180,000.

Those Ohio State players sold trophies and rings and received discounts for at most $2,500. That isn't right and the NCAA is right to punish them. However, why don't their punishments start right away? Why are the six 'student'-athletes allowed to play in the Sugar Bowl? They broke the rules and you've found out about it now, why not their punishments?

The NCAA doesn't have a history of being forgiving and allowing a player to play in a Bowl Game. Ohio State fans don't even have to look that far back for an example of that. Of course then Ohio State wasn't playing in the most-attractive/most money making bowl game other than the National Championship.

Of course, it is supposed to be a world of amateur athletics, but of course the NCAA allows for the exploitation of them. Last night Arkansas had their biggest basketball crowd of the season, because their football players were signing autographs for fans. Now if one of those players traded an autographed picture for the price of a basketball ticket, they'd be in trouble, but University of Arkansas doesn't have to worry about any consequences.

Perhaps the NCAA should change their name to the Ministry of Truth. Their loyalty is not the 'the Man', but to the dollar.

Thanks for reading and please comment.

-Michael

Bowl Games 12/21-12/24

I went a big fat 0-fer in the last round of picks. Let's see if I can't do better this time around. Also we've got are first decent match up tomorrow night. Boise State v Utah looks interesting, but I don't think Utah is good enough to keep with the Broncos. So here are my winners:

Beef 'O Brady's Bowl: Louisville(-2.5) vs. Southern Miss
Winner: Louisville

Las Vegas Bowl: Boise State(-17) vs. Utah
Winner: Boise State

Poinsettia Bowl: San Diego State(-3.5) vs. Navy
Winner: Navy

Hawaii Bowl: Hawaii(-10.5) vs. Tulsa
Winner: Hawaii

Thanks for reading and please comment.

-Michael

I've Finally Switched Camps

I've been on the fence about Mangini since he was hired to be the Browns' head coach after the 2008 season. I didn't particularly like the hire at the time. It felt like Deja Vu to me. So, were bringing in a former Patriots Defensive Coordinator and a GM who was a personnel guy with the Ravens. Where had I heard of that before? That being said, there was nothing that could be done once the hire had been made. We were going to have to tough it out and give this guy a chance, because like it or not he was the new Head Coach of the Cleveland Browns.

Last year the team was pathetic for most of the season. Only winning one of its first twelve games and that victory was in perhaps the most ugly game of Professional Football in recent times. However my feeling toward him weren't entirely hostile during that stretch. That was largely due to the fact that he got rid Braylon Edwards, but the happiness that move brought me was beginning to wear off. Then the strangest thing happened. The team that had looked no better than a bad college team playing in the NFL started winning. Most importantly, Mangini coached the Browns in their victory over the Pittsburgh Steelers*. The late season success almost forced the new President Mike Holmgren to keep him.

The late season victories of last year had created a moderately high level of expectations for the Browns coming into this season. Those were quickly dashed by embarrassing losses to Kansas City and Tampa Bay**. After starting 1-5 there were two surprising victories against two of the NFL's best, New Orleans and New England. Suddenly the Browns looked like they might make a run and became playoff contenders. However those games seem to be flukes and evidence of this team's playing to the level of their opponents.

Yesterday's performance was made me finally decide that Mangini needs to go. The Bengals had no business competing with the Browns, but Cleveland fell into their usual cycle. Although it ended up being much worse yesterday, because the defense looked porous. So, the offense went stagnant after some early success, but the defense wasn't there to fall back on. Given how good the defense has played this season, the only reason I can think for how Cincy was able to man-handle them is lack of effort. That's coaching.

The fact is a team in the NFL shouldn't fall into the cycle on the field that the Browns' have this season. A few good series by the offense and then stagnation for the rest of the game. The defense then eventually fall apart because they've been on the field too much. Considering the Browns' most successful plays have been trick plays and due to Peyton Hillis' beastliness, coaching is a serious issue. You shouldn't have to use gimmicks in the NFL.

I'm hesitant to think Mangini should be fired, but it is what will be best for the Browns. He hasn't had much time and has probably the one of the last talented rosters in the NFL. Plus, I personally kind of like the guy. He's like Belichick, only not such a douche-bag. It's like Belichick was in Slytherin and Mangini was in Ravenclaw***. Still, it's time for the Browns as an organization to move on without him. Allow Holmgren to select a coach and work to build a better talent base without having to appease Mangini's standards.

So, I am now firmly in the Fire Mangini camp.

Thanks for reading and please comment.

-Michael
*That still makes me happy
**I don't care what their records are now, the Browns should have won those games against inferior opponents.
***Putting him in Gyrffindor would be too much credit and into Hufflepuff**** not enough.
****Hufflepuffs FTW

Today's Bowl Games- 12/18/10

Today's match-ups are some of the least attractive match-ups college football could imagine. A day with three bowl games shouldn't suck so bad, which makes me think there might just be too many bowl games. I get that it means a lot to the smaller programs to go Bowling. It just doesn't seem that there should be bowl games played in front of mostly empty stadiums between teams that honestly don't deserve to be rewarded.

I don't think 6-6 should be bowl eligible period, but I get that if you want to play 34 bowl games a year* that you must allow that. However if 6-6 teams are allowed I think there should be some stricter rules about it. First, bowl eligibility should require 6 wins against FBS opponents. Also I believe 6-6 teams should have to get in line, so to speak, and not be allowed any bowl invites until every team with a record above .500 is in a bowl. The only pass around these new rules should a conference championship**.

Anyway, Here are today's match-ups and winners for them:

New Mexico Bowl: BYU(-11) vs. UTEP
Winner: UTEP

uDrove Humanitarian Bowl: Northern Illinois(-1.5) vs. Fresno State
Winner: Fresno State

R+L Carriers New Orleans Bowl Ohio(-2) vs. Troy
Winner: Ohio

Thanks for reading and please comment.

-Michael
*I expect that number to keep growing until there is a playoff.
**I'm looking at you, Sun Belt Conference***.
***Hold on, How did a FCS conference get into FBS.

Eric Mangini

I've had a hard time trying to figure out how I should feel about Eric Mangini. The Browns could be 9-4 right now and this team shouldn't even be able to sniff that type of record. Then again the team isn't and have embarrassing losses, including last week against Buffalo.

I think this weeks game against Cincinnati is a game that Mangini has to win to have a chance to keep his job. The Browns have played down to their competition this season. While this team has beaten New England and New Orleans, but totally fell on their face against Kansas City, Tampa Bay, Jacksonville and Buffalo. A loss against Cincinnati would be another loss that this team shouldn't have. A win against the Bengals probably wouldn't ensure Mangini another season, but it would delay a final decision on his fate until after the games against Baltimore and Pittsburgh.

If Mangini does coach the team to victory against Cincinnati, the Browns still need to be competitive against the Ravens and Steelers for him to be able to hold onto his job. One of the Browns' biggest problem has been their poor record against the division. Showing progress against Baltimore and Pittsburgh would be a good sign for Mangini.

Another consideration would be if Mangini would be willing to fall on the sword for Offensive Coordinator Brian Daboll. No matter what, Daboll should be fired. The offense this season has been pathetic. I know there have been flashes of brilliance, but mostly those are way more due to Peyton Hillis' beastliness. Otherwise the Browns' offensive has sputtered, being 30th in the league in scoring. The offense has failed to take advantage of the turnovers the defense has provided. It has become totally stagnant in the 2nd half of many games, which is the primary reason why the Browns' record is so bad. Of course there is a dramatic lack of talent in the receiving core, but the offensive schemes are lacking as well.

Also there is a major question looming over the entire league. That is the potential lockout coming next year. A coaching change might not be advisable in that environment. A new coach doesn't mean much when the players aren't allowed into the building for coaching and no league business, like free agency and the draft, is going on.

Thanks for reading and please comment.

-Michael

The Death Penalty

I didn't even bother watching the Heisman presentation last night. I tuned in about a minute to nine and Newton was still going. All I was really interested in finding out about was the voting results. It was as everyone knew, overwhelmingly decisive for Newton. I was particularly curious to find about the results from the west region, which were closer than the other regions, but still Newton won convincingly.

What I was really interested in watching last night was the 30 for 30 documentary that followed the Heisman presentation, "Pony Excess." I've watched most of the 30 for 30's thus and they have been excellent films. I've skipped the ones that I had no interest in like the one about Marion Jones, but other than that I've watched them all. Even the one about the Baltimore Colt's Band, event though in a lot of ways it pissed me off to no end.

The one last night was about the football program at SMU leading up to and after the 'Death Penalty.' I want to discuss the implications of that ruling, whether or not it alone set SMU back 30 years and what would happen to a program if that ruling were made today.

One of my favorites bits in 'Pony Excess' was after the football program was terminated, loads of other college football coaches were down in Dallas, basically picking at the carcass of SMU by trying to get the football players to come to their school. It think that is indicative of how significant and crippling the 'Death Penalty' was. I don't think the NCAA knew how bad their new penalty would be until they had finally issued it.

It's interesting to think about where SMU would be had the 'death penalty' not been issued by the NCAA. It terminated the program for one full year and effectively and terminated the team for a second year. Of course it made SMU start from scratch, but it also made SMU start from scratch at a particularly bad time. The Southwest conference was not going to last much longer and SMU had basically turned from a division 1 power into a high school team. When teams started bolting from the old Southwest Conference, SMU was very unattractive to any of the major conferences because of the stigma and the fact that they weren't anywhere close to winning. They were left to become the doormat of Conference-USA.

Let's say the 'Death Penalty' had never been issued to SMU. Their football probably would have gone through a rough patch due to heavy sanctions from the NCAA. Still, let's assume they still had a football program and that it was about a .500 program. In 1992, when the Southwest Conference fell apart, Texas, Texas A & M, and Texas Tech went to what had been the Big 8 conference. They were joined by Baylor in the new Big 12, but had SMU not been given the 'Death Penalty' would they not be the forth team to join the Big 12 from Texas ahead of Baylor?

So, SMU was left out and went from the prestigious Southwest Conference and was joined Conference USA. That transition was what made the 'Death Penalty' so bad. Had SMU remained in a major conference it would have been a 10-15 year process. Instead they were shifted to Conference USA and became a nobody in a nobody conference, which turned recovery into a 25-30 year process.

We are entering another period of conference realignment. Also, to put it mildly, issues with the amateur status of student-athletes seems to becoming a more rampant problem again*. So, what if a major program were given the 'Death Penalty' today. I'll use USC as the sample program, because they're already in trouble and you never know with Lane Kiffin around.

Let's pretend at some point during the coming offseason, SC is given the death penalty. All sudden all of the talent USC has is gone. Gone to other schools and a lot of them would probably end up at other Pac-10 schools. Southern Cal isn't allowed to have a football program at all in 2011 and in 2012 it'll be so handicapped that it isn't worth playing games. That's two years with no recruitment and absolute of any base of players to build from.

It's hard to say in this hypothetical case, but I doubt USC would be able to get high-level talent for at least 5 years once they emerged from the death penalty and would end up being at the bottom of the new Pac-12 conference. Now, USC is a much stronger brand name than SMU and once some of the initial shock to what had happened wore off and the kids being recruited were to young to really remember what had happened SC would probably see it's recruiting base recover and return to being a competitive 1a program.

I couldn't imagine the NCAA issuing the 'Death Penalty' again though. It is fitting though to have that documentary on after Newton wins the Heisman.

Thanks for reading and please comment.

-Michael
*More likely it is just getting noticed again

Cleaning Up Some Old Business

It's been more than two weeks since I discussed sports at all. A lot has happened in that span and there are somethings that I want to address from my other blog, so I won't have to link back and forth each post. So, a bit of warning, this post may get a bit lengthy.

One thing that's happened is that the college football regular season came to an end. It went out with a bit of a whimper considering how the rest of the regular season went.

Before the season I made some predictions and depending on your perspective I was either way off or more way off.

BCS Conference Champions

ACC- Georgia Tech Actual Winner- Virginia Tech
Big East- West Virginia Actual Winners- Connecticut, West Virginia, Pittsburgh
Big Ten- Ohio State Actual Winners- Wisconsin, Ohio State, Michigan State
Big 12- Texas Actual Winner- Oklahoma
Pac 10- Oregon State Actual Winner- Oregon
SEC- Alabama Actual Winner- Auburn

I only kind of got two right. The teams I predicted in the Big East and Big 10 are technically co-champions even if they didn't earn the BCS birth for their conference. I'm going to take that as a win considering how wrong the rest of them are.

BCS Title Game

Alabama vs. Ohio State

Just Wrong

National Champion

Alabama

Again, That's just wrong

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The NCAA/Auburn Shenanigans

That entire situation smells of orchestration and bullshit. Auburn would have no reason to declare Newton ineligible just before the SEC championship game unless they had known that the NCAA would give the all clear* shortly there after. I mean at this point even if Auburn knows that Newton will eventually be ruled ineligible, they would just ride it out and deal with the ruling once it comes.

I'm usually not one to buy into conspiracy theories, but the way this entire he's eligible then ineligible then eligible again thing went, it seems something was going on. The NCAA and SEC both ignored pretty straight-forward bylaws about parents receiving benefits. It would be one thing if the NCAA had ignored those bylaws before and accepted the 'ignorance' of the student as a defense, but the NCAA has come down hard on 'student'-athletes before for amazingly similar things to what Newton is involved in.

The only reasonable reason I can think of for all this is that the NCAA wanted to make sure TCU would not be involved in the BCS Title Game. As an institution the NCAA is corrupt and has it's head pretty far up it's own ass, so the Auburn-Oregon title game was the most attractive option. There's way more money in that game and it also protects the bowl system as it stands now. If TCU showed up and knocked off a big school in that game, a playoff is likely hastened.

I also don't understand why any of this had to happen. The NCAA is great at having super long investigations. Why did a ruling have to be made either way? I'm still convinced Newton will be ruled ineligible eventually, but only after the money has been made.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Urban Meyer 'resigns'

I still find it hard to really believe him. I think it's totally fair to be skeptical given the entire episode we went through last year. Everyone is talking about how legit this feels, but last time it totally felt legitimate too. I have also learned to not trust head coaches, just as a general rule. There are two examples in the SEC that are good enough reasons not to believe anything a head coach says about his current job or other job openings.

I see two possibilities here. He means it and will be 'retired' for a few seasons and then return in a few years. Hell, the Notre Dame** job will probably be open in a few years. The other and slightly more hair-brained theory is that he will be named the head coach of the Denver Broncos and be reunited with his man crush, Tim Tebow***.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Heisman Talk

It's pretty obvious that Cam Newton will win this award. If not for all the shenanigans that surround him****, I think he would win by a margin similar to Troy Smith and O.J. Simpson. It's nice to know that it's going to become a new tradition that every 5th Heisman will have to be vacated.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pasta's Player of the Year Rankings

4. Andrew Luck, QB, Stanford
3. Kellen Moore, QB, Boise State
2. LaMichael James, RB, Oregon
1. Cam Newton, QB, Auburn

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pasta's Top 5

5. Stanford
4. Wisconsin
3. TCU
2. Auburn
1. Oregon

Thanks for reading and please comment.

-Michael
*Sort of
**Yea, Notre Dame refuses to accept the reality that it is an 8-4 program at best, so they will keep going through coaches.
***Boooooooooooooooooooooooooo
****He totally deserves them though.

Intro

Hello. And Welcome. My name is Michael, but my online moniker is Pastafarian07. This is my sports blog. I used to discuss these things on my other blog, but have decided those posts deserve thier own site. So allow me to introduce myself as a sports fan and tell you some of the plans I have for this blog.

My primary focus on this blog will be professional and college football as well as college basketball. Those are the sports I follow most religiously. Discussions of International soccer will probably pop up from time to time too.

I'm a huge fan of the Cleveland Browns and the Ohio State Buckeyes. That is the perspective that virtually all of my posts will come from. So obviously, I'm not an unbiased observer. In many posts I will try to put forth a fair view point, but I'm not going to hide from you the teams for which I cheer.

Probably the biggest thing about this blog for me is that I don't want to do it alone. I would love to have other posters with different perspectives and different sports that they follow.

Any questions comments or concerns can be emailed to LHrulz2007@gmail.com.

Thanks for reading.

-Michael