clock menu more-arrow no yes mobile

Filed under:

Thursday Morning Dawg Bites

I don't know how in the world it got to be the last day of November all of a sudden, but, sure enough, here it is, and there is a great deal going on in the blogosphere, so, just in case you might have missed a point of interest along the way, here is your five-minute rundown of everything you need to know, supplied in the time it takes you to put away that crucial first morning cup of coffee:

It's BlogPoll award time! Over at Rocky Top Talk, Joel is looking for ideas for the names to give the various awards of excellence recognizing outstanding achievement in the intercollegiate athletics blogosphere. Be sure to pay Joel a visit and offer your suggestions.

Also, while you're there, be sure to remind Joel that, when he's making the seating arrangements for the BlogPoll awards gala, he should be sure to reserve a spot for Kristin Davis at the Dawg Sports table.

As usual, Paul Westerdawg has all the news that's fit to print regarding the Bulldogs' bowl prospects. Paul projects a Georgia-Virginia Tech Peach Bowl. The Bulldogs and the Hokies tangled twice in the early '30s, during the waning days of the old Southern Conference, but the Classic City Canines have not crossed paths with V.P.I. since 1932. Since the 'Dawgs seem destined to repeat 1973 this season, let me go ahead and put a prediction on the record:

If Georgia faces an A.C.C. team in the Peach Bowl, the Red and Black will emerge from the Georgia Dome with a one-point win.

You heard it here first. If that forecast sounds a bit bold to you, please bear in mind that my son predicted a Peach Bowl bid for Georgia on Labor Day weekend.

No one in the Dawgosphere is having a better week than Doug Gillett, who offered a fine postgame report following last weekend's win over Georgia Tech, followed it up with a line of commemorative posters, and gave Alabama fans a prudent suggestion.

In the past, I have argued that, if my id had a blog, that blog would be The Corporate Headquarters of the San Antonio Gunslingers, but now I am starting to think that, if the most irreverent part of me were younger, hipper, significantly farther to the left, and capable of convincing itself that it is possible to use styling gel yet still be masculine, it would be Doug. (There is a compliment struggling to find its way out of that sentence, but you have to hunt for it.)

Unlike Corey Haim, Doug puts as much thought into his humor as he puts into his hair care regimen . . . and that, my friends, is saying a lot.

While I watch the Texas-Texas A&M game with interest each year, I don't really have a dog in that fight, so I am not emotionally invested in the outcome. However, dimwits like the Aggie fan who compared Colt McCoy to Stephen McGee are doing their darnedest to make Longhorn sympathizers of us all.

When you read this piece, imagine that Georgia Tech had beaten Georgia, then substitute "Reggie Ball" for "Stephen McGee" and "Matthew Stafford" for "Colt McCoy," and you'll see how preposterous this is.

This week's BlogPoll and MaxwellPundit standings have been released.

This summer, I will be devoting my energy to promoting Matthew Stafford's candidacy for the 2007 MaxwellPundit Award.

The comments affixed to my MaxwellPundit ballot are apt to produce some changes in my voting next week, but, fortunately, my BlogPoll rankings drew no rebukes from The Lawgiver, so it will not be necessary for me to defend myself again.

Ian Smith has been arrested in another alcohol-related incident. These offseason (or, in this case, postseason) shenanigans make me nuts and, this time, he's not getting any more free legal advice from me.

Over at the Rakes of Mallow, C.W. has argued for giving Notre Dame a B.C.S. bowl bid not because the Irish are worthy, but because there is no better option available.

That's a pretty good point, which illustrates how the Bowl Championship Series was diluted by the addition of a fifth game, when, clearly, there are not 10 teams deserving of the most major of major bowl slots this season.

I would, however, make an argument in favor of a couple of the Golden Domers' conference mates (in basketball, at least) in the Big East. If Rutgers qualifies automatically by beating West Virginia, a one-loss Louisville team with wins over Kansas State, Kentucky, Miami, and West Virginia would boast a better resume than a two-loss Notre Dame squad with wins over Georgia Tech, Navy, Penn State, and Purdue, so U. of L. would deserve an at-large bid more than the Irish would.

Moreover, T.V. ratings could be affected adversely by the fact that Charlie Weis is ugly and his college dresses him slovenly. (Photograph from M.S.N.B.C.)

If, on the other hand, the Scarlet Knights lose to the Mountaineers and the Big East's automatic berth goes to the Cardinals, the State University of New Jersey arguably would have a better claim to an at-large spot than a Notre Dame team with an identical record. Rutgers's two best wins, after all, will have come against Louisville and Navy, whereas the Golden Domers' will have come against Georgia Tech and Navy. The Knights would have at least a plausible case to make. C.W.'s overall point, though, is well worth considering.

Finally, Sunday Morning Quarterback paid me one of the great compliments I have received in a while when he wrote:

I'm not sure I want to get too deeply into the playoff debate here, since I challenged Kyle to a postseason "bowls vs. playoff" debate way back in August . . . and it's never wise to back out of a date with the mayor.

So I've got that going for me.

Go 'Dawgs!