|
|
Post by ExcitableBoy on Dec 9, 2006 23:32:48 GMT -5
Wow, the Ball State faithful must be especially impatient. At least give the guy a YEAR before getting on him about recruiting. Also, the loss to W. Michigan referenced in that article was from LAST SEASON!!! Ball State doesn't play W. Michigan again until January 9, 2007. By "earlier this year" the author must mean "earlier in 2006 when Ronnie Thompson wasn't even the coach yet." Cut the guy some slack, it takes longer than nine games to build a successful program. (They lost last season's game 68-59 according to www.wmubroncos.com/ViewArticle.dbml?SPSID=24353&SPID=1924&DB_OEM_ID=4600&ATCLID=227771) |
|
|
|
Post by ExcitableBoy on Dec 8, 2006 13:52:14 GMT -5
What is the deal with the Wolfpack's program? They seem to churn out draft picks like its their job, but on field results are mixed at best. Is this a program thing or a Chuck Amato thing?
|
|
|
|
Post by ExcitableBoy on Jan 1, 2007 14:57:40 GMT -5
I'd rather watch a baseball game, honestly. There's less breaks in the action. Yeah, those throws over to first base, mound conferences and exciting shots of the reliever warming up help make the action non-stop. Please. I love baseball as much as the next guy, but I'm glad I live in the west where I can watch 4 1/2 hour playoff games and still get 6 hours of sleep before going to work the next day. The breaks in the action in the NFL are due to the networks, not the game itself. There is no football reason why I should sit through a commercial break following the 6-10 Vikings' fourth quarter touchdown "drive" to pull within 27, watch the Rams recover the onsides kick, only to have to then watch more commercials. At least when Mike Mussina throws over to first four times in a row, he is trying to accomplish something related to the game. |
|
|
|
201-78
Dec 5, 2006 12:54:37 GMT -5
Post by ExcitableBoy on Dec 5, 2006 12:54:37 GMT -5
The trouble I have with this is not that one team scored 201 points, but rather they did it by scoring MORE in the second half than in the first.
At what point in the game does the coach make the decision to go for the double century mark? It had to have been a conscious effort, otherwise the Saeds and Kennys would have been in there for virtually the entire second half (even if they were, the fact that the team kept heaving--and making--threes shows that it was a determined effort to reach some arbitrary point total for the game).
It's great for the Lions of Lincoln that they had some fun and set some records, but next time, play an NCAA team at least!
|
|
|
|
Post by ExcitableBoy on Dec 1, 2006 15:08:06 GMT -5
also similar to the way that media is beginning to dump on the Eastern Conference on the NBA only one month into the season (granted they are pretty terrible right now) The same thing happened in 2003-2004. The Eastern conference was terrible that year (4 teams over .500) while the Western conference had only 4 teams UNDER .500 That year's champion? Detroit Pistons. Still owe a buddy $5 over that. |
|
|
|
Post by ExcitableBoy on Dec 1, 2006 15:02:31 GMT -5
Wow, would I love to watch Jim mess with gmac. Also, I'm guessing something embarassing in gmac's past would come up at some point, allowing Michael to spill the beans to the entire office (and warehouse).
|
|
|
|
Post by ExcitableBoy on Nov 30, 2006 11:01:20 GMT -5
SI didnt put Florida on the regional cover because their theme ("Big is Back") called for one big to be put on the cover. Joakim & co. don't do individual photos - only buddy photos that they can all be in, you know like in youth sports.
|
|
|
|
Post by ExcitableBoy on Jan 1, 2007 15:08:05 GMT -5
Mason brought back a program from obscurity but managed to do so while also instilling the will to lose in epic fashion. This is quite a feat. In 2003, for example, he lead the team to its first ten-win season since 1905 (!) AND, despite rushing for 424 yards, managed to blow a 28-7 fourth quarter lead against visiting Michigan. Simply stunning. |
|
|
|
Post by ExcitableBoy on Dec 8, 2006 13:28:36 GMT -5
This is one of those rare years where this idea would actually simplfy things. Ohio State would play USC in the Rose Bowl and, with a victory, would still be declared the national champion. In fact, the whole "who should they play" debate wouldn't happen, thus making everything simplier and easier. End of story, case closed. Last year, however, USC would have played in the Rose and Texas in the Fiesta. This wouldn't have been so hot. Last year's game was the exact situation that the BCS was created for, and it did what it was supposed to do. (Not to say there wasn't ANY controversy last year, but BCS or no BCS there will always be teams that get hosed.) Also, see 2004 & 2002. Disagree the BCS would have been better than the old bowl system in 2002 and 2004. I think SC would won the MNC in 2004 anyway by blowing out a flawed Michigan team in the Rose Bowl. In 2002, Miami would have probably played OU in the Orange Bowl, won, and the best team in CFB that season would have been crowned National Champion. I'm not quite sure I understand how you can claim that Miami was the best team in cfb in 2002 when they played, and lost to, Ohio State. Yes, the pass interference call was harsh and (if you are a Miami fan unjustified). But the point is, the BCS matched up the two undefeated teams from the regular season in a single game to decide the national championship. How is this not an improvement over a bowl system that does not attempt to do this? |
|
|
|
Post by ExcitableBoy on Dec 5, 2006 14:15:02 GMT -5
The controversy and the "mess" won't end with a playoff system. As I've said before, the best thing to do is scrap the BCS and return to the old system, which will never happen. This is one of those rare years where this idea would actually simplfy things. Ohio State would play USC in the Rose Bowl and, with a victory, would still be declared the national champion. In fact, the whole "who should they play" debate wouldn't happen, thus making everything simplier and easier. End of story, case closed. Last year, however, USC would have played in the Rose and Texas in the Fiesta. This wouldn't have been so hot. Last year's game was the exact situation that the BCS was created for, and it did what it was supposed to do. (Not to say there wasn't ANY controversy last year, but BCS or no BCS there will always be teams that get hosed.) Also, see 2004 & 2002. In no way, shape, or form is the BCS a perfect system, but compared with having split national champions for as many as four years in a row (2002-2005) isn't perfect either. I say we let a panel of experts, preferably those posting on Hoyatalk, decide the final format for each year. In years such as this, Ohio State plays in the National Championship game against the winner of the Michigan-Florida bowl. In years like last year, USC plays Texas straight up. If a bunch of sports writers are going to name one team their champion each year despite a lack of any measured metrics for their decisions, we might as well have an arbitrary system that determines who gets to play for these championships. |
|
|
|
Post by ExcitableBoy on Dec 1, 2006 14:57:58 GMT -5
This is a tough call. The Gator is a bowl of long standing that often has pretty good matchups, and I think Texas - ACC sounds ok. On the other hand, I would expect Texas to be a big draw in the Alamo Bowl. Texas - Iowa sounds like a stinker, but I would think that Texas's appearance would assure a good crowd. Amazing how quickly a team's fortunes can change. Three weeks ago some talking heads have them as the best one-loss team in the land. Now they are seemingly Alamo Bowl bound to face an Iowa team that really limped home - losing 5 of 6 including the powerhouses at Minnesota, Indiana, and Northwestern. Ouch. |
|
|
|
Post by ExcitableBoy on Mar 1, 2007 14:13:21 GMT -5
They took care of business handily beating a good St Joseph's team 6-1. Everybody who played was a nonsenior so the future looks bright. Unless they all go pro early!  Bubb, don't you know ANYTHING about how tennis works!!?? The really good players go straight to the pros, skipping college altogether. |
|
|
|
Post by ExcitableBoy on Nov 16, 2007 9:53:17 GMT -5
Your logic is irrefutable. Mergers could never result in eliminating market inefficiencies. But who gains from eliminating "market inefficiencies"? Who loses? Mergers can be great for the airline - it eliminates a competitor and gives you more monopoly routes. But monopoly routes suck for the consumer. Remember when the Hoyas made the Sweet 16 in Minneapolis? I wanted to go to the game, but I couldn't find a plane ticket for under $1000 since Northwest is the only airline who flies DCA-MSP direct. I wanted to go visit a friend in Charlotte, but DCA and CLT are both US Airways hubs so the fares are outrageous. I think you are mixing things together here. Yeah DCA-MSP flights were about $1,000, but that's because you tried to buy seats a week in advance on a crowded market that had already been driven up in price by the sweet sixteen. I mean, I can't find any cheap flights to Beijing next August!! This must be because United has a monopoly on this route, right?? You are really arguing against the hub and spoke system, not monopolies. Just ask Larry Craig how one would get from the upper rockies to DC--it's almost always via MSP or DEN. |
|
|
|
Post by ExcitableBoy on Oct 26, 2007 12:38:34 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by ExcitableBoy on Oct 26, 2007 9:26:11 GMT -5
Elliot and his gang also spoiled a perfectly good Tuesday evening at Rosecroft Raceway by bringing a brigade of bozos to race ATVs around the track.
No part of watching moderately overweight adults ride around an enormous dirt track on go-kart style ATVs was remotely close to entertaining.
(For those who have never been, Rosecroft Raceway is a phenomenal experience--even though the races happen to be "fixed" sometimes.)
|
|
|
|
Post by ExcitableBoy on Oct 18, 2007 15:08:41 GMT -5
I love Marion Barry's response in this Washington Post article: Ohh the humanity!! How can we allow this to happen to people who live in one corner of DC and want to travel to the other corner of DC!!?? Heaven forbid patrons pay a rate based on how far they travel! |
|
|
|
Post by ExcitableBoy on Sept 18, 2007 11:40:12 GMT -5
Bubbrubb, you must live in the worst building in the world.
|
|
|
|
Post by ExcitableBoy on Aug 29, 2007 13:19:32 GMT -5
I guess I'm just not sure what all the hullabaloo is over whether or not Craig is gay. If he is, great, if not, great. I'm guessing his wife doesn't think its "great" that he is gay... Exactly my point. If he is gay, there are really only a handful of people who it would affect. Why does CNN feel the need to inform me of the "Developing Story: Sen. Craig says he's not gay"? |
|
|
|
Post by ExcitableBoy on Aug 29, 2007 9:39:20 GMT -5
I guess I'm just not sure what all the hullabaloo is over whether or not Craig is gay. If he is, great, if not, great.
What I am pretty offended about though, is that he committed "lewd behavior" in a public restroom. He could be gay, straight, or asexual but it still wouldn't change the fact that what he admitted to doing was wrong, illegal, and creepy.
|
|
|
|
Post by ExcitableBoy on Aug 17, 2007 10:00:37 GMT -5
I snuck away from work the other day and tried to play the White at Haines Point, it was laughable. Half of the greens are what used to be the fairway so you are pretty much putting on long grass. I decided not to putt any of those holes. They've also turned #1 on the White into a 105 yard par 3 where you hit PW into what formerly was #2 tee box. It really is a joke. What they've managed to do to that course is simply stunning. How an alleged 'professional' can mix up fertilizer and herbicide is beyond me. |
|
