Pick Rate:
62.2%
28-17 overall

Week 1 (3-7) picks | wrap
Week 2 (10-1) picks | wrap
Week 3 (6-6) picks | wrap
Week 6 (9-3) picks | wrap
Week 7 (#-#) picks | wrap



I vote in
(click for current week)

Week 1 ballot | at large
Week 2 ballot | at large
Week 3 ballot | at large
Week 4 ballot | at large
Week 5 ballot | at large
Week 6 ballot | at large


Sports Blog Top Sites












Thursday, September 08, 2005

Up to here

That's exactly where I've had it with this idea about certain teams and their so called "Sophistication" and the people who have this idea and push it at the expense of the "non-sophisticated" team's football intelect.

The Big XII is suddenly "fairly incompetent" because they couldn't stop Oklahoma who couldn't stop USC because they weren't "sophisticated" in their offense.

Ohio State's stellar offense is a "pile of mush, held together by a few fine athletes. Same thing with Penn State."

These irresponsible statements are just some of the few rediculous spouts of ignorant football commentary coming from the author of the link at the top of this entry.

To call the Big XII incompetent is just crazy. They know what they're doing. They know how to play football and they do it well on a consistent basis. You don't do that if you're incompetent.

A pile of mush doesn't put up 37 points against anyone, not even division IIA teams.

He says that "Georgia went out and designed an offense" What? Throwing to the tight-end? Amazing. He says Boise State lost that game because they didn't stick to their scheme. Wrong. Boise State lost that game because they didn't play good football and their talent didn't measure up to Georgia.

These excellent teams don't win because they play with a scheme. They win because they play good football with players who are equally or more talented than the other team. A scheme is a plan, and guess what, all teams have plans. It comes down to talent. The "scheme teams" or the the "gang of six" don't win because their scheme lets them play better than teams that have more talent. The only time a lesser talented team wins is a fluke or maybe the talent of the players on the "scheme teams" is just being underestimated!

Teams that aren't there aren't "cavemen." They aren't playing rudimentary football. They aren't incompetent. They aren't ignorant. They aren't piles of mush held together by athletes.

This sickening insulting of the common Div-1A football playing student athlete is really really unnecessary and pretty childish. Plus the arguement you use it in is wrong. So what's the point?