Being the heroine of an entire franchise is hard work.
Being the heroine of an entire franchise is hard work.
I take back all the kind words I've ever uttered about sports columnist / radio host John Feinstein.
Here's an excerpt from a recent column.
After the game when [Urban] Meyer was asked about [Maurice] Hall’s behavior his answer was direct: “I’m disappointed,” he said. “I’ll take care of it.”
Sunday, he did just that, announcing that Hall would play against Michigan State.
First of all, what Hall did on Saturday is what every hot-blooded Ohio State fan would love to do to the patrons of the Big House. Second, Meyer indicated he would take care of it, and I imagine he did. High fives all around?
Obviously Feinstein thinks anything less than a suspension is actually not taking care of it. Throughout the column he runs that whole “winning is the only thing” flag up the pole. Along the way he throws as much mud as possible at Meyer, calling him “everything wrong in college athletics today.” That's a heavy charge and perhaps
wildly mildly overstated?
Feinstein is supposed to be a professional. He was a respected journalist, by me at least, until recently. That he chose to include the following blows my mind.
“Because he’s a good guy, a fun guy to be around, he’s really smart, he’s charming and he’s a hell of a coach,” [former University of Maryland head basketball coach Gary] Williams said. “And he’s a complete crook.”
Sounds like Williams could be talking about Urban Meyer, or at least Feinstein's version of Meyer, right? Oh no. In pulling out all the stops on his Urban Meyer smear campaign, Feinstein digs up an undoubtedly stale quote in which Williams, undoubtedly still a coach, referred to an unnamed college basketball coach, without any reference to anything even vaguely concerning Urban Meyer. In fact, Williams called the unnamed coach about whom he was speaking “the most dangerous man in college basketball today.” Not sure exactly when “today” was.
I'm no journalism ethics expert, but it seems to me that this out-of-context and misplaced quote violates at least some of them. If nothing else, it clearly demonstrates Feinstein has an agendum against Urban Meyer.
This song popped up during my commute yesterday.
Heart melts, yeah you meant so well but your song's no good round here
The sheer lunacy of it all continues. USA Today today features a column by some crazy person who actually has come up with the standings as to how Ohio State finished in the SEC this year, even though, as we sane folks know, Ohio State does not actually play in the SEC.
Let’s be honest: Ohio State would be no better than the SIXTH-best team in the SEC, behind Auburn, Alabama, LSU, Missouri and South Carolina, without even taking into account the accumulated toll that running the SEC gauntlet would do to a puffed-up team like the Buckeyes. Note that I didn’t even include Texas A&M — is there any doubt that an Ohio State team that gave up 40 to Michigan wouldn’t get demolished by Johnny Football?
Honest? What the hell is that? I don’t know where the overwhelming national disdain for Ohio State comes from, but it is white hot right now.
Son, you’ve gone too far cuz smokin’ and trippin’ is all that you do
I generally tolerate John Feinstein. He normally seems to have things pretty well under control, which is to say he tends to say and write the things I think. Not this time.
The subheading reads,
Florida State, Ohio State are on track for BCS title game, but only one of them deserves it
The trouble with this whole f*cking mess is that it can never be resolved though logic, through banter or otherwise but people still engage in the conversation because it sells advertising, newspapers, page views, etc. I have tried to stay out of it, because I have no way of supporting why Ohio State should play in a “national championship” if they win B1G this weekend just as I have no way to support why they shouldn’t.
Feinstein supports that bold statement above with this gem.
It also is true that Florida State hasn’t exactly beaten Murderer’s Row. But the Seminoles’ 51-14 rout at Clemson is head and shoulders above anything Ohio State has accomplished.
Merely one game out of twelve. We are told to just accept that Clemson is real good, but in games against quality opponents, they lost. In the game against their mostest qualitiest opponent, they were flat out embarrassed by as large a margin as a team ranked as high as they were had ever lost at home before. How good could they be? Feinstein, and the rest of the media, is using Clemson as a measuring stick, but they can’t even say for certain how long that measuring stick is.
Before I get to the BCS discussion, I need to address Brady Hoke’s decision to go for two at the end of the latest version of The Game. Hoke has received praise from the media for the decision. Even Urban Meyer said he would have done the same thing. He’s lying (or he better be anyway) and they’re morons.
The discussion has all revolved around the notion that this two-point conversion attempt gave Michigan the best chance to win. I wholeheartedly disagree.
Now I am no statistician, so grant me some latitude.* I would guess the normal odds of converting a two-point attempt to be roughly 50 percent. There are of course extenuating circumstances that cause the odds to fluctuate wildly. Confusion on the defense and offensive “momentum^” being two of the biggest factors that would skew the odds in favor of a successful conversion. But in this game, Ohio State had just taken a time out and was as organized as was possible. Michigan did have a degree of momentum for having just scored the tying touchdown, but it’s not as if they scored every time the ran a play from inside the five, even as they game neared its conclusion. So, both of those extenuating circumstances were absent.
Not to belabor you with the overtime rules, but each team gets alternate possessions from the opponent’s 25 yard line. Four downs to get inside the 15 or score. From there, another four downs to get inside the 5 or score. From there, four more downs to score. Both teams. In other words, many chances to score. Many chances for disaster. Throw in that Michigan is at home (an advantage Hoke pissed away), and I would say hands down that overtime gave Michigan the best chance to win.
Well, you are thinking, perhaps out loud even, “What if Michigan was successful? Then you’d be saying Hoke was a genius.”
Not exactly. In the alternate universe where Brady Hoke’s two-point idea worked, Ohio State scored in the 32 seconds they had left and Michigan lost anyway. Actually, I am saddened we didn’t get to see that.
We don’t ask too many questions on the winning side…
Notes:*I have posed the question to my nephew who holds a PhD in mathematics. I will post his reply when and if it is forthcoming. He’s a Michigan fan, so we won’t be holding our breath.
^Momentum in this case means the offense has a strong mental edge over the defense. Think of The Little Engine That Could.
Not the greatest, but my Cleveland Schadenfreude requires me to post this.
via Kissing Suzy Kolber.
Mark and his daughter Josie lived through last Sunday's tornado in Washington, Illinois. Their house, well not so much. M Night would be proud as this reminds me of the basement scene in Signs. The imagination is far more frightening than reality.
B1G football has taken a national hit. I think we need to look at it from a psychological point of view.
If the subject isn’t very important to you or you have other things on your mind, misinformation is more likely to take hold, according to the researchers. They point out that rejecting false information requires more cognitive effort than just taking it in. That is, weighing how plausible a message is, or assessing the reliability of its source, is more difficult, cognitively, than simply accepting that the message is true. In short, it takes more mental work. And if the topic isn’t very important to you or you have other things on your mind, the misinformation is more likely to take hold.
By no means am I suggesting that this isn’t important, but for people in different regions of the country, the quality of football in other regions, is, well, less so than the quality of football played in their own region.
when you do take the time to valuate a claim or allegation, you’re likely to pay attention just to a limited number of features, the study found. For example: Does the information fit with other things you already believe? Does it make a coherent story with what you already know? Does it come from a credible source? And do others believe it?
And to the extent those questions affect believability, your response to them may also reflect the impact of what Eli Parisner calls the “filter bubble:” Your information milieu may reinforce information consistent with what you already “know” or are selectively exposed to. Similarly, as the researchers concluded, lies and misinformation may become deeply rooted when it conforms to preexisting political, religious, or other views.
This works both against B1G and for the SEC, among others. Do you wonder why the SEC has won six titles in a row, or whatever it is at this point? The main reason is that at least one team from the SEC has played in the championship. And why is that?
Perception, misinformation and lies. These things are like snakes or worse, brain worms, that weave themselves in, become completely entrenched in our psyche.
I was browsing the Big Blue this morning and ran across a post lamenting the closing of Blockbuster video stores in the voice of a Nebraska-era Bruce. There were fewer than a dozen comments, and this one caught my eye.
I don't see anything wrong with a once mighty capitalist giant being undone and humbled by innovative and generally cut-throat competition. Seeing another corporate dinosaur being brought to extinction is even what one might call progress. Every time the brick and motar (sic) business model falls victim to cyberspace, this means fewer trucks and cars on the road to achieve the same ends.
There are two things going on in this paragraph and I want to separate them.
I don't see anything wrong with a once mighty capitalist giant being undone and humbled by innovative and generally cut-throat competition. Seeing another corporate dinosaur being brought to extinction is even what one might call progress.
What defines a corporate dinosaur, exactly? Am I wrong to think of corporate dinosaur in a derogatory fashion. Blockbuster was a big company with a wide reach, utilizing technology that ultimately evolved in a different direction in a few short years. Does that make it a corporate dinosaur? The truth is what probably lead to its downfall, more than anything else, was the late fee. Blockbuster was a bastard over late fees, and Netflix used that to their advantage in the early days of the DVD by mail.
I'm just not so sure we can designate something progress that puts one company out of business for the favor of others, with nothing really to show for it from a societal point of view. So we now obtain our home movies from a different system. I'm just not so sure it's what I would call progress.
Every time the brick and motar (sic) business model falls victim to cyberspace, this means fewer trucks and cars on the road to achieve the same ends.
Except it doesn't really. That's the fallacy. It for certain doesn't offset the economic loss to a community when a brick and mortar business goes under. Other than the physical structure, the business goal is the same. It's retail, after all.
I think the writer of this comment thinks that brick and mortar is inherently a bad idea and judging from the previous sentences it would seem that the writer also believes brick and mortar to be the stuff from which corporate dinosaurs are made.
I am lumping all brick and mortars together and certainly a locally-owned bookstore and a Circuit City are vastly different animals, but cyberspace retail did them in just the same.
Cyberspace retail isn't what I would call progress. In many ways, it is the opposite.
Here's a very underrated band from Australia, speaking of progress.
Some say that's progress, I say that's cruel