clock menu more-arrow no yes mobile

Filed under:

Thursday Morning Dawg Bites

The world is a busy place and, if you're like me, you barely have time enough to keep up with it, so, just to help you out a little, here's the quick---like, super-quick, faster-than-it'll-take-you-to-drink-a-cup-of-coffee-quick---version:

I cast my BlogPoll ballot, which drew some feedback, but now the final BlogPoll is out and, thankfully, the 'Dawgs wound up ranked 24th.

The 2006 College Football Blogger Award nominations have been announced. Rocky Top Talk's Joel has done a fine job of overseeing this whole enterprise, which we hope and expect will become an annual affair here in the intercollegiate athletics blogosphere. Fortunately, the Dawgosphere is well-represented and I am pleased and humbled by the fact that Dawg Sports received nominations for the Dr. Z Award, the Keith Jackson Circa 1995 Award, and Best S.E.C. Blog. My gratitude goes out to those who were kind enough to place my name in nomination.

Hey Jenny Slater's Doug Gillett recently began counting down the 50 most loathsome people in college football and the top 20 are available for your perusal if you haven't taken a gander at them already.

Exactly one year ago today, on January 11, 2006, I wrote:

I want to hear the visiting team's band playing "Glory, Glory" in the Big House and "Hail to the Victors" in Sanford Stadium. I want a home and home series between Georgia and Michigan.

So began "The Movement," which has not yet produced the Georgia-Michigan home and home series I sought, but which has established something of a kinship between Bulldog and Wolverine webloggers, including one between Dawg Sports and Maize 'n' Brew.

Accordingly, I am thrilled to be able to announce that SportsBlogs Nation has added its newest college football weblogger . . . and it is none other than our old friend Dave, whose new home base for Michigan athletics is up and running . . . or, rather, it will be . . . no, wait, it is. In any event, welcome, Dave!

Egged on by Burnt Orange Nation's Peter, Sunday Morning Quarterback has argued:

[B]ecause games aren't rematched next week, there are no seven-game series - there is nothing, ever, "clear" at the top levels about which collection of 18-22-year-old men is "better" than any other.

That's a fair point about college football, although the same could be said in any case . . . if we were to replay the national championship game next week and Ohio State were to win, the situation would be muddier still, because there wasn't a third game. A five-game series might produce a different result from a seven-game series. A seven-game series might produce a different result from a nine-game series.

This is why I prefer college football's system, which provides the greatest amount of data from which to draw conclusions by allowing the determination to be made upon the basis of 13 or 14 games played over the course of four months rather than upon the basis of six games played over the course of a couple or three weeks (as in the N.C.A.A. basketball tournament), three or four games played over the course of a month (as in the N.F.L. playoffs), or four to seven games played over the course of a week or so (as in the World Series). Data are always finite, so we have to go with what we have . . . as I tried to do when compiling my rankings. Anyway, SMQ has some good stuff, including his dismantling of the case for Boise State.

Finally, I have begun offering an overview of how my preseason predictions turned out in the actual event. So far, the results are, um, not good. In the meantime, though, I must be doing something right, because, yesterday, Dawg Sports received its 200,000th visit.

See? I told you that'd be quick and painless. . . .

Go 'Dawgs!