Late Night Dawg Bites: Random Thoughts Unrelated to Urban Meyer
This is a busy time of year, personally and professionally as well as athletically, and that set of circumstances lends itself to random half-formed thoughts. Sometimes, this causes me to make dated references and mathematical errors in the midst of instantaneous reactions; other times, it leads me to share a collection of nuggets such as these:
- It is no secret that I am no fan of the Heisman Trophy, but college football’s most overrated award occasionally lurches uncontrollably into the correct result by anointing the student-athlete who actually has a credible claim to being the most outstanding player in the sport that year. It appears this will be one of the years in which the Heisman Trophy actually goes to the person whose performance on the field merits the accolade. That being the case, why are we engaging in the pretense that there are four "finalists" for this award? LaMichael James, Andrew Luck, and Kellen Moore have front-row seats to see Cameron Newton win the award he deserves to win. The only drama will be whether he breaks O.J. Simpson’s record for biggest landslide victory in the Heisman Trophy balloting. Cam Newton is the most outstanding player in college football this year; his receipt, vel non, of this award will not make the foregoing statement any more or less true, but ESPN’s silly hyping of this sillier award is unseemly. Recognize the guy for his achievements, but cool it with the dog and pony show, all right, Worldwide Leader?
- An inconsequential math error in the final BCS standings has caused a bit of an uproar, resulting in descriptions of the situation as "dumbfounding," questions whether the computer polls could "be intentionally manipulated," and this claim by the fellow who caught the mistake: "The BCS owes us an entire system that is open, accountable and verifiable." Why is this so? The deliberations of the NCAA Tournament selection committee are not open, accountable, and verifiable; neither are the deliberations of trial juries, grand juries, or the U.S. Supreme Court. Plenty of widely accepted and implicitly trusted results come to us from systems that lack openness, accountability, and verifiability from start to finish; in fact, rare is the system that provides those features throughout the process. Many perfectly reasonable college football fans dislike the BCS; I am one of them, in fact. The notion that we are "owe[d]" a wholly open system, though, is ludicrous, and the claim that we are entitled to any such thing is utterly hypocritical coming from anyone who does not make similar claims about much more important matters, or even about other NCAA-sanctioned sports. It was a minor math error that affected absolutely nothing. Fix it, forget it, and focus on the actual matter at issue.
- In games decided by seven or fewer points, Central Florida went 1-2 in 2010, whereas Georgia went 0-3. In games decided by ten or fewer points, Central Florida went 2-3, while Georgia went 1-3. In the last four Liberty Bowls, the SEC representative has beaten the Conference USA champion by eight or fewer points, as the margins have gotten closer year after year. Something’s got to give.
- Finally, friend of the blog Josh D. Weiss sent me some of his photographs from Tuesday night’s Georgia-Georgia Tech basketball game, three of which are visible below and the rest of which may be seen here:



Go ‘Dawgs!
5 comments
|
Do you like this story?
Comments
RE: Transparency with the BCS
While you cite examples of our legal system providing for private deliberations, you surely would agree as a distinguished member of the Bar that checks & balances exist. If we merely argue that the BCS is a private business enterprise (yes and no if we get into the whole state-funded institution participation) then as consumers of the product, we should vote with our dollars. But it seems reasonable from a consumer advocacy standpoint to be able to “demand” transparency in how the product is developed and delivered.
Sadly, neither the judicial nor business model truly reflect the exact nature of the BCS, and I, for one, really hate the use of these computer polls since I do not believe they can properly evalute what really happens on the field of competition.
Caveat Emptor indeed!
Run Lindsay Run!
Granted.
I just think the lack of transparency is a weird reason for criticizing the BCS. It’s like arguing against the direct election of U.S. senators based on the existence of the secret ballot. There are good historical and prudential reasons for letting state legislatures, rather than the general public, elect a state’s representatives in the U.S. Senate, but a generic opposition to the secret ballot isn’t one of them, because it applies a sweeping generalization to a minute area without acknowledging the cognitive dissonance involved in such a narrowly-tailored opposition to such a prevalent principle.
I’m all for getting the computers out of it altogether, but, if transparency regarding the polls (e.g., the release of the final coaches’ balloting; the reporter who assumed a losing team had won when casting his ballot) hasn’t helped, why would we benefit from transparency regarding computer models most of us couldn’t understand, anyway? Would anything the computers told us convince us that Nebraska should have gone to the national championship game in 2001? That kind of mathematics, which flies in the face of common sense (you can’t be the best team in the country if you aren’t the best team in your conference), falls squarely in the “lies, damned lies, and statistics” category.
Go 'Dawgs!
because it applies a sweeping generalization to a minute area without acknowledging the cognitive dissonance involved in such a narrowly-tailored opposition to such a prevalent principle.
Well played, sir. A sports blogger who crafts prose such as this is distinctly different from the ill-informed masses. Bravo.
I think Mike Leach said the same thing in responding to a question about his offensive scheme.
Run Lindsay Run!
Every year that the BCS gets it right someone out there needs to create some controversy
to invent reasons it doesn’t work. I’ll save my criticisms for when it doesn’t work.
by hbtd on Dec 9, 2010 12:34 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
Current international controversies have convinced me
that some people grossly misunderstand the Bill of Rights to mean they have the right to know whatever they want about whoever they want, consequences be damned.
"They've just discovered a new use for sheep over there at Clemson... wool." - Lewis Grizzard
by GwinnettGamecock on Dec 9, 2010 8:53 PM EST reply actions

by 

































