Mike Adams Takes His Schtick On The Road. Is Myles Brand Buying A Ticket?
In the wake of a series of BCS games that was at best underwhelming and at worst nearly unwatchable, the siren song of the playoff is again echoing through the land. The guy blowing the trumpet this time is none other than our own President Michael Adams, who yesterday went on the record in reversing his 11 year aversion to a playoff in Division I-A football (or FBS, or NSA, or whatever they're calling it these days).
I've made no secret that I'm generally opposed to a playoff. I've also made no secret of the fact that I think that like global warming, a college football playoff is inevitable, and that the real question is how we manage and adapt to it. The fact is that in any given year there are only so many teams with a realistic shot at the title. One gets the shaft every year, and every year at least some of the supporters of the shaftee jump on the playoff bandwagon. That can only go on so long before the wagon starts overflowing.
Adams' recent conversion stems, I think, from two stimuli. One was watching Georgia do everything that you are supposed to do to get to the BCS Title Game (except win the SEC, or at least the SEC East) then not actually getting the call. ESPN quotes El Presidente as saying:
"The television networks ... have grown too powerful in deciding who plays and when they play, and indeed, whom they hire to coach. The Bowl Championship Series has become a beauty contest largely stage-managed by the networks, which in turn protect the interests of their own partner conferences. The situation may not quite rise to the level of collusion, but it leaves an air of dissatisfaction with the fans of most institutions, even as they celebrate successful seasons. I believe the time has come for the NCAA to take control of the college football postseason, and in so doing to create a system that our players, coaches, friends and fans can support and appreciate."
Ya think? Haven't smarter people than Mike Adams been saying this for some time now? Putting on my lawyer hat for a moment, Adams now reminds me a little of the people I know who love the idea of "tort reform". They think that it's insane that "greedy trial lawyers" can drive doctors out of business through medical malpractice litigation, and that there should be limits on that sort of thing. Until they, their mother, or their spouse is the one who has the wrong appendage operated on. Then they want the bastards to pay through the nose. The doctor bastards, that is. Not the lawyer bastards. OK, maybe both. In other words, even if his message makes sense, his timing seriously damages his credibility on this point.
The point is that Adams may be right, he may be wrong, but he's definitely transparent. If the man's not squashing sour grapes, he's tip-toeing on grapes that are slightly past their prime. The fact that he chose the day of the BCS National Championship to make these comments is not coincidental, either.
The second stimulus for our fearless leader's conversion? I'll let the bowtied one himself spell it out: "Colleges need to regain ownership of their football teams." Adams realizes that he and his colleagues are staring down the spiget that controls a river of cash. They've let Fox and CBS tinker with the plumbing to goose the water pressure, but by golly, they're going to control who gets to fill the buckets in the future. They realize that there is widespread discontent with the BCS, and that in some ways the constant criticism has created a self-fulfilling prophecy. The arguments for and against any one team playing for the MNC have become incredibly complex, to the point that everyone has a beef eventually. Except for Duke, I suppose. They don't really have a horse in this race.
I'm not certain that America's college presidents and the folks at the NCAA really ever thought that the BCS would move from becoming an athletic spectacle to a full-on entertainment spectacle. And some of the staid academics among them must be genuinely repulsed by what they have wrought. But nothing is free. If you take the Mouse's cash, you have to give Kirk Herbstreit the microphone. Because he knows more about football than other announcers? Heck, no. Because he's telegenic and knows enough football to avoid embarassing himself on camera so long as the viewer doesn't look too deeply into what he's saying(HT: Paul Westerdawg). As Paul points out, the problem is not allowing Disney and Fox access to the sidelines, locker rooms and meeting rooms. It's allowing them to play kingmaker. I don't know if the solution is a playoff, but I imagine an eight team tournament looks like an awfully appealing option to the Baudrillard and merlot crowd who feel just a little dirty about the current state of affairs.
I rarely applaud Michael Adams, and perhaps that colors my belief in his motives. I'll grant that he has a difficult job, but it's one which I believe he often fails miserably at, especially when he turns his wandering eye to athletic issues. That same overreaching tendency is evident under this plan. Adams' proposal would call for a seeding committee, much like the one used in basketball, to place the top 8 teams in each of the 4 "major" bowls. But what happens if one of them, say, the one named after a flower that isn't the poinsetta, didn't want to participate? Quoth the sage of Milledge Avenue "If one of those bowls chooses not to participate, another game could be found to fill the void." In other words, there's nothing sacred about the Rose Bowl. Outside of a pretty sweet parade, it might as well be the Cotton Bowl, the Chik-Fil-A Bowl, or the Starbucks Bowl for that matter.
Am I being too harsh on the guy? Or is this just another prance into the limelight by a guy whose motives always seem suspect, even among those in red and black?
9 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
well...
By the way, I'd like to hear your opinion on ESPN spending the whole day comparing UGA and USC for #2. Setting aside the debate of whether or not LSU deserves #1 (I think they do), is there any reason to rank USC ahead of us?
1)They play in a weaker conference
2)They played a weaker out of conference schedule
3)They have much worse losses on their record
4)They went into the bowl games ranked lower than Georgia
5)They won their game against #13 ranked Illinoise, while Georgia beat #10 ranked Hawaii
The only reason there is even a debate is because USC has been a media darling all year long, and ESPN still hasn't forgiven Georgia for beating a worse, but much more popular Florida team. I even heard Lou Holtz on College Football Live go so far as to say that Florida should be ranked above Georgia in preseason poles next year (this after the bowl games), but I will set that aside since Holtz is obviously too senile to even know where he is most of the time.
On a somewhat related note, if Tebow and McFadden had switched teams this year, what would the Heisman race have looked like?
by ElectricSweater on Jan 8, 2008 7:34 PM EST reply actions
Re: USC
USC's win over Illinois was very, very impressive. Remember, the Fighting Zookers pulled out a win against the same Ohio State team that LSU beat last night. Illinois isn't LSU, but they weren't Duke, either.
The fact is until we go all the way and win a championship, we won't get the breaks in those situations. Like Michael Jordan driving the lane, Pete Carroll gets the benefit of the doubt at the Worldwide Leader.
The best news for us is that USC's defense loses a minimum of 4 and a maximum of 8 starters on defense, while breaking in a new starting quarterback and both starting offensive tackles.
The only thing better than an eight team playoff..
Michael Adams' motivations, whatever they may be, are irrelevant, and questions about his motivation within the dawgosphere should be trumped by Mark Richt's support.
If we must speculate, my guess is that Adams' concern is prospective rather than retrospective. UGA will be more likely to win a championship via playoff than go undefeated and risk being left out of the BCS championship game in the near future.
even with an 8 team playoff...
i don't mind the controversy, LSU is the Champ,
the reality is, ESPN manipulates all of us into thinking there is a huge controversy, just like they play the poll voters every week from Sept. 1st until Jan 7th.
if you guys think Herbie the love Bug or Mary May isn't coloring your feelings on this, you've already watched too much CFB Live.
...or drank too much ESPN koolaid.
PS- there's a reason we refer to CUM as Urban Cryer.
plea deals are barely acceptable for Mike "dog-fightin" Vick, and certainly not for UGA President Mike "el Jefe" aDAMs.
as a college king, he should deal with this in an appropriate manner behind closed doors, not with a press-release.
who is he, Coach Van Gundy? Roger Clemens? Bill Clinton? -ha
CUM?
by ElectricSweater on Jan 8, 2008 11:29 PM EST reply actions
Adams
Mickey Mouse and his TV
Adams
And I still think the cocktail party name thing and the family-friendly zones were BS. That said, I do think he had made some great decisions, each of which - at the time - I disagreed with.
Case 1: Fire Jim Donnan
At the end of the 2000 season, we were coming off of a second 8-4 outing and finishing up Donnan's 5th season with an overall record of 40-19 and a top 20 ranking in each of the previous 4 years. The Dawgs were not a top 5/top 10 team, we were not in the hunt for National Championships (or even SEC East championships), but we were a solid program in the upper echelon of the SEC and consistently turning out pro players. All of this was coming off of 7+ years of mediocrity under Ray Goff who posted a 46-34-1 and only having 2 ranked teams in his tenure. In comparison, I thought things were looking good. I didn't understand how firing a coach who had elevated our play to the level that it was would be good for the program. I didn't see a way for a new coach to do any better.
End Result: CMR
Clearly I was wrong. CMR took what Donnan had established and shoved UGA in the national spotlight. In his first 7 years CMR has posted a 72-19 record including 2 SEC Championship rings, 3 BCS game appearances and top 10 rankings 5 times. Not to mention the manner in which he conducts himself is admired by even our opponents.
Case 2: Not renew Dooley's AD contract
Vince Dooley is a legend. Vince Dooley is, and always will be the iconic UGA football coach. And in his 25 years as AD, he guided the program into the era of big time college athletics and established UGA as a major player. To be honest, I don't really know what an Athletic Director does, but I knew that Vince had been ours for basically my entire life and I was pretty proud to be a Dawg so why change what's not broken? On top of that, Vince didn't seem to want to go and you just don't kick a legend out on the street.
End Result: Damon Evans
Damon has led the program to not only unprecedented success on the athletic fields, but also financially. As of 2006, the University of Georgia Athletic Association had a $65 million budget the largest operating profit among collegiate athletic programs at US$23.9 Million from a gross profit of US$68.8 Million (FY05). He has also instituted student athelte policies that are being copied by programs across the country. I get the feeling that under Damon's control, the Athletic Association has become a well oiled machine.
Each of those decisions/hirings have turned out to be much better that I ever imagined and for that, I give Michael Adams credit and admire his long term vision. I do think the Harrick hire was (obviously) playing with fire and Felton hasn't really done much to elevate the basketball program -but in the grand scheme of things, it pales in comparison to how we feel about the football program. In addition to the athletic stuff, Adams has kept UGA on an upward path in the academic arena - and as he maintains this ascension, I give him more credit that than I used to (although I still believe that the HOPE scholarship is the biggest factor in that rise).
And that leads me to the instigator if this post - Adams advocation for a playoff system. Again, his timing and rhetoric was not as smooth as I would have liked and I do think it comes off as pompous and a bit of sour grapes, but I am glad that he, of all people, is taking this position. He has been viemently against a playoff in the past, but I think his change of stance - given his regard among academia - is a strong catalyst for change. And this is a change I think we all want to see. I'm not claiming that the Dawgs got screwed this year, but I do think that had we the opportunity to play it out on the field, we would have had a pretty good shot - in addition, UF was close to getting the shaft last year and I do believe that Auburn had a legitimate claim to be in the game in 04. Not to mention the non-SEC teams like USC this year, Michigan last year and the split title in 03.
Much how I was adverse to change in the Donnan and Dooley situations, I'm not really sure what can be done to make it better - because the regular season does need to mean as much as it does right now, and the Bowls do need to be important. But this time, I can see that what Mike Adams wants is also what I want - to legitimize the words "national champion" and to not have Kirk Herbstreet, Mark May and those who pull their strings determining the landscape of college football.
So, on this day, I applaud Michael Adams and I hope that the changes that his actions bring about are for college football are on par with the success of the changes that he has brought to UGA and the football program.

by 















