Category: Blog Posts

Posted on

Encore: Court Stormings Do More Harm Than Good

Rob Kinnan: USA Today Sports

Slightly over a year ago, I wrote an article extrapolating on the dangers of storming the court, particularly in college basketball. I likened it to the Running of the Bulls and offered a proposal to combat the growing issue of fan, coach, and player safety in instances of upsets. However, my exposure to these activities was somewhat limited; I had only rushed my high school’s football field twice and while a high school basketball court is 84 by 50 feet, a football field is 360 feet by 160 feet, meaning that there was more than enough room for everyone to get on the field.

And then something happened yesterday that completely proved the point I made last February.

Yesterday, I attended my school’s (Bergen Catholic) state semifinal basketball game. The game was tight, albeit less-than-aesthetically-pleasing, throughout, and the outcome rode on the Crusaders getting one last stop to close out the game. Bergen was up three and, though the defense surrendered a buzzer-beating layup, held on to defeat St. Peter’s Prep, 47-46. Seconds after the final buzzer, everyone in the student section (including myself) stormed the floor (Bergen was the higher seed in the tournament, but whatever).

I was in the middle of the student section and got to the court just after many of my friends did. As we stormed the floor, the central location of the celebration began to move back towards the stands; normally, when fans rush the floor, the central location to which they congregate stays the same. In this case, it did not. When I reached the middle of the floor, where the fans and players were gathered, I was hit either from ahead or behind; I honestly don’t remember exactly what happened. This was the result:

Yep, that’s me in there the middle of the pile, on the floor. The good news is that my entire body was beyond the three-point line. A couple of quick thoughts:

  1. There is a short list of safe places to be during a court storming. “On the ground” is not one of them.
  2. Seeing the bottom of people’s shoes is not what you want to see in a situation like this.
  3. Holy Lord, that was frightening.

In reality, the danger was not overwhelming. But it could have been. I was on the ground for roughly 15 seconds or so. I likely was not in imminent danger of serious injury, but in the moment, I was scared to death. Luckily, one of my friends realized what was going on and helped me up. If he had not done that, I very easily could have been injured. I’m not going to name him, but he saved me from further danger.

This is the problem: while the court storming was fun (I enjoyed myself until I got dropped), it is an incredibly dangerous and inherently unsafe activity. If it’s done right, no one gets hurt and everyone has a great time. That’s an awfully big if.

Another point I must make is that I completely panicked when I hit the floor. However, I wasn’t sure if getting up in that situation wouldn’t have subjected me to more of a rush from the opposite direction. I picked my poison, which was to stay on the ground until I got help. It may not have been the best option, but it worked out in the end.

One more thing I should say: I’m not mad. This is no one’s fault. Students rush the floor because it’s fun and exhilarating. Security at the game didn’t follow through on any sort of protocol because I highly doubt they have one. But the personal experience of literally being underneath a court storming is something I never wish to experience again. No one is at fault, but that doesn’t make it less scary. I’m also not writing this just because it was me on the ground (it does help, though).

Yesterday, I almost became a victim of something that is practiced across the country on an almost-daily basis in the fall and the winter. Thankfully, I was not.

But we must change our thinking on this issue before someone else is.

Posted on

The Lakers Are Taking a Massive Risk in Hiring Magic Johnson to Run Their Front Office

Getty Images

As you probably heard yesterday, the Lakers have decided to fully take the plunge and immerse their front office in something completely new and different:

Magic Johnson.

The team announced this decision yesterday, which included promoting Johnson to President of Basketball Operations, firing GM Mitch Kupchak, and reassigning Jim Buss from his previous role of executive vice president of basketball operations. The move is not entirely surprising; Magic recently said in an interview that he wanted to “call the shots” in the organization and his hiring as an adviser to the owner seemed to suggest that this day was coming. However, the timing of the decision was bizarre, as Johnson was assigned to his new, all-powerful post just two days before the NBA’s trade deadline; this is a time when most front offices would need as much stability as possible to make important decisions in a team’s future.

Instead, the Lakers went in the opposite direction and hired Johnson, a franchise legend who, with this most recent assignment, has now played, coached, owned a stake in, and made basketball decisions for the Lakers. No matter what you think of this hire, that feat is awfully impressive.

However, the decision to put an inexperienced legend in charge of basketball decisions needs to be seriously questioned.

Johnson’s most important job as President of Basketball Operations will be as a talent evaluator. If you want a sense of how that will go, here are some of Johnson’s old tweets:

For as great as those tweets are, though, this one has to be my favorite:

Finally, a prediction Magic was right about! To be fair to Magic, though, saying bizarre and incorrect things on Twitter does not necessarily translate to failure as a front office executive. It just means that, well, his evaluation skills might need some work. That is not the end of the world; for example, the Celtics hired Danny Ainge as President of Basketball Operations in 2003; while he has not been perfect in this role, he currently has the Celtics as one of the best teams in the East and may have casually finessed his way to the #1 pick in this year’s draft. Ainge’s is the blueprint Johnson must follow in his new role.

One would figure that even as he assumes the power of his new role, Johnson would attempt to surround himself with experienced/skilled executives who have been around front offices and can provide a different perspective. If his first hire as President of Basketball Operations is any indication, however, Magic probably isn’t doing that.

In a move that broke yesterday, the Lakers are expected to hire well-renowned agent and Rob Lowe look-alike Rob Pelinka as their new GM. Pelinka also has zero front office experience and, perhaps most significantly, was Kobe Bryant’s agent throughout much of his career; he was also widely regarded as the sixth member of Michigan’s early 90s Fab Five, as he was a reserve guard on the Wolverine team that went to back-to-back national championship games in 1992 and 1993.

Pelinka’s hiring begs this question, though: if Johnson and Pelinka are heading the Lakers front office, how long is it until Kobe Bryant gets involved in the Lakers’ dealings? It is merely speculation at this point, but one would logically think that the Black Mamba would have some type of advisory role in the front office sooner or later, even if it is not an official role.

Also: what kind of responsibilities will Johnson and Pelinka have? One would think that Pelinka would be tasked with more of the day-to-day decision-making and cap expertise. After all, Magic admitted that he does not have a full understanding of the collective bargaining agreement (which, in some cases, is a prerequisite to holding a job like Magic’s) and that is why he hired someone like Pelinka as General Manager. Johnson would likely be more of a figurehead who has final say over roster decisions, the coaching staff, etc. We’ll see how the power shakes out, but the Lakers have now placed two complete neophytes in substantial front office roles. It will be interesting to see what results of this and who else is hired into LA’s front office.

Johnson also takes over the Lakers at a critical time for the franchise. The team is in its first season with new head coach Luke Walton and most agree that he is the right man to coach the team going forward. The organization has had three top ten draft picks in as many drafts and has converted those picks into Julius Randle, D’Angelo Russell, and Brandon Ingram. All three have been solid, competent players, but none looks like a superstar yet (Ingram likely has the highest potential of achieving stardom and also has the longest way to go to fully develop).

This is going to be Johnson’s job in this draft. The Lakers’ first-round pick is top-three protected this year; if it falls outside of the top three, it goes to the Philadelphia 76ers. The Lakers currently possess the third-worst record in the league and may or may not be tanking to improve their chances at a top pick in the lottery. In such a talented and deep draft, though, having a top-three pick will be enormous for the future of the Lakers. Converting that pick into a superstar is what Johnson must do if the Lakers want to improve their standing in the West.

Even though the new regime only took hold yesterday, the Lakers are already hard at work; hours after the shakeup, the team traded guard Lou Williams to the Rockets for Corey Brewer and Houston’s first-round draft pick, which will likely fall near the end of the first round. This seems like a logical trade, but Magic could have squeezed more out of the Rockets if he wanted to; Williams ranks eighth in the league in points per 36 minutes among eligible players and Houston likely would have surrendered more if the Lakers asked for it. This subtraction will hurt the Lakers in the interim, which probably is not an accident.

Magic Johnson is taking over the Lakers at a pivotal time for the franchise. The team must convert their draft pick into a star in this draft and build an organization capable of attracting star free agents in future years. The Lakers are rolling the dice in tasking him with basketball decisions, and the last time a former player and coach was hired to an executive basketball position he had no prior experience in, it didn’t go so well. I’ll just leave that right there.

But, we must keep an open mind with the hiring of Magic Johnson. After all, the fact that it’s an enormous risk doesn’t mean that there won’t be an enormous payoff down the road.

Posted on

Five NBA All-Star Break Observations

Sue Ogrocki/Associated Press

The NBA season has reached the All-Star break and there are several interesting storylines. The Warriors, replete with superstar Kevin Durant and many others, have emerged as the best team in the league, Russell Westbrook is having a season for the ages, and the Cavaliers have endured a difficult, injury-plagued season in their championship defense.

With the league at the All-Star break, now is as good a time as any to assess the state of affairs in the game and share some thoughts on players and teams. Here are five of my observations on the first half of the season.

A Unicorn Not Named Porzingis

If I were to tell you about a European, second-year big man who is a good passer, rebounder, and three-point shooter, your mind would immediately gravitate toward Knicks forward Kristaps Porzingis. Actually, I’ve got something (or someone) even better for you.

At the beginning of this season, Nikola Jokic was not even starting in a crowded backcourt for the Denver Nuggets. However, after Jusuf Nurkic was benched in mid-December, Jokic has emerged as one of the best big men in the game, averaging just over 20 points and 10 rebounds since assuming his starting role. More recently, he dropped 40 points on the Knicks and put down a triple-double in a 22-point win against the Warriors. In the box plus/minus statistic, a metric used to evaluate a player’s contribution to his team, Jokic ranks fourth in the league behind Chris Paul, James Harden, and Russell Westbrook. Not too shabby.

Sadly, many won’t be able to appreciate Jokic’s contributions unless the Nuggets make the playoffs. Denver is currently in the eighth spot in the West, one and a half games ahead of the Kings for the final playoff spot. And going to the playoffs would likely earn the Nuggets the right to be trampled by the Warriors in the first round. But just going to the playoffs would expose many viewers to Jokic’s diverse skill set, even if his team is wiped out of the playoffs in four games.

Score one for the unicorns.

Scott Brooks, Coach of the Year

That is a phrase you may not have expected to hear after the first three weeks of the season. On November 16th, the Wizards lost at home to the 76ers and fell to 2-8. People may not have been calling for Brooks’ job just yet, but things weren’t looking up in the nation’s capital, either. And then John Wall and Bradley Beal happened.

Wall and Beal combine to average 45 points per game and both are having career years for a Washington team that currently sits in third in the Eastern Conference. Last year, the Wiz were one of the biggest disappointments in the NBA, an outcome that led to the firing of coach Randy Wittman and the hiring of Brooks. Four months into his tenure with Washington, it has become clear that Brooks is the right coach for this team, having gone 32-13 since that devastating loss to Philadelphia.

Not only is Brooks the right coach for the Wizards, he’s the first-half Coach of the Year.

The Jazz Are Taking Care of Business*

Unfortunately, the asterisk must be addressed.

The Utah Jazz are one of the most improved teams in the NBA this season; at their current pace, they would finish the season with 50 wins, a 10-win improvement over last season. But, as I was just saying, we need to take Utah’s success with a small grain of salt.

Consider this: out of their first 57 games, Utah has played 22 of them against teams at .500 or above. In those 22 games, the Jazz are just 8-14. Included in that figure are two losses against the Los Angeles Clippers, the team’s most likely first-round opponent. Granted, the team has gone 27-8 against everyone else in the league, but these struggles are concerning. The fact that the Jazz have struggled against the league’s best teams could be explained in a number of ways; for example, the Western Conference has three of the league’s top four teams record-wise (Houston, Golden State, San Antonio) and Utah is not helped by playing these three teams a combined ten times this season.

This also does not mean that I would want to play Utah in an early-round playoff series if I was in the West. The team has length to burn and Quin Snyder’s bunch also owns the league’s best points per game defense by nearly three points over the second-best team. I’m just pointing out that maybe the hype around their success is just slightly overblown.

Orlando Is Out of Magic

Earlier this week, the Magic finally conceded their disastrous season, trading forward Serge Ibaka to the Toronto Raptors for Terrence Ross and a first-round pick. The move had to be made, as any chance the Magic had of making the playoffs would have been as the seventh or eighth seed in the East. The move is likely good for both teams; Ibaka gives the Raptors some needed length and is a definite upgrade over Pascal Siakam at power forward. For the Magic, it starts Act II of the rebuilding process that began with trading Dwight Howard to the Lakers in 2012.

And really, the Magic front office has been absolutely horrendous over the past five years. Some of general manager Rob Hennigan’s greatest hits include, but are not limited to:

  • Trading Victor Oladipo and Domantas Sabonis to Oklahoma City for 56 games of Serge Ibaka
  • Hiring Jacque Vaughn as head coach in 2012 (he was fired halfway through the 2014-15 season)
  • Hiring Scott Skiles as head coach in 2015 (he resigned after the season because he had philosophical differences and a deteriorating relationship with the front office)
  • Drafting Mario Hezonja with the fifth pick in the 2015 Draft and passing on Myles Turner, Justise Winslow, and Devin Booker, among others
  • Trading Tobias Harris to the Pistons for Ersan Ilyasova and Brandon Jennings, neither of whom are still with the team
  • Trading Channing Frye to the Cavaliers for Jared Cunningham and a second-round pick; Cunningham was waived four days later
  • Signing wildly disappointing big man Bismack Biyombo to a 4-year/$70 million contract because of one good month of basketball (A.K.A the Brock Osweiler of NBA contracts)

So things aren’t going too well in Orlando. At least they still have Disney World, because their basketball franchise certainly is not a Magic Kingdom.

Russell Westbrook is the MVP

Whether you like it or not, Russell Westbrook is having one of the greatest NBA seasons ever.

At the All-Star Break, Westbrook is averaging 31 points, 10.5 rebounds, and just over 10 assists per game. At this rate, he would average a triple-double for the season. If that happens, here is the list of players in NBA history to average a triple-double over the course of a full season:

  1. Oscar Robertson (1961-62)
  2. Russell Westbrook (2016-17)

That’s it. Even more impressively, Westbrook is single-handedly carrying the Thunder to a playoff berth and succeeding without very much help from his supporting cast. It is entirely possible that the Thunder would be in the position of the Los Angeles Lakers or Pheonix Suns if it were not for Westbrook’s heroics. Fun fact: the Thunder’s fifth-leading per game scorer this season is Josh Huestis, who averages exactly seven points per game. Do you want to know why he averages exactly seven points per game? Because he only played in one game this season.

So kudos to Russell Westbrook, for being so great around so much, well, less-than-great. For that alone, he should be the league’s first-half MVP. Oh, and there’s that whole thing about doing something only one person has ever done before.

Have any additional thoughts? Please leave them in the comments section!

Posted on

The Slipper Still Fits, But Gonzaga Is No Longer a Cinderella

Young Kwak/Associated Press

You may not know this off the top of your head, but take a guess at the five longest active streaks of consecutive appearances in the NCAA Men’s Basketball Tournament.

You probably got three teams right away (Duke, Kansas, Michigan State). The fourth, Wisconsin, might have been tougher for you, but you’re not necessarily surprised that the Badgers have made the dance for eighteen years running. But do you want to take a guess at the fifth team?

Maybe you do, maybe you don’t. Either way, I’ll just give it to you: it’s the Bulldogs of Gonzaga.

Yes; Gonzaga has made the tournament in each of the last 18 seasons. They’re going to make it 19 next month, but something feels different about this year’s Zags team.

This year, the Cinderella label does not fit. This year, the Bulldogs are a legitimate national championship contender.

This is arguably the best team coach Mark Few has ever presided over, as the Bulldogs currently sit at 27-0. Their success has catapulted them to national exposure and the #1 spot in the Associated Press poll for three weeks running. In the past, Gonzaga has been characterized as the little engine that could, the David to college basketball’s Goliath, etc. These characterizations are not true this year.

This season, the Bulldogs boast one of the deepest, most talented teams in the country. Washington transfer Nigel Williams-Goss has paced the team in points, assists, and rebounds, leading or tying for the team lead in each of these categories. Williams-Goss has had such a successful season that he made the Midseason Wooden Award watch list in January. The Zags have one of the 25 best players in the country, and it appears very clear that Williams-Goss is one of the most talented players to pass through Spokane on this side of Adam Morrison.

Williams-Goss is hardly carrying the load alone, though. A star has emerged in the frontcourt for the Zags, and it comes in the form of a man who looks less like a center and more like a right tackle. Standing at 7’1″ and 300 pounds, it would be easy to mistake Przemek Karnowski for literally anything other than a basketball player. But Karnowski is a basketball player alright, and a very good one at that.

In fact, his progression and improvement from a season ago, as well as the arrival of Williams-Goss, are the two main reasons for Gonzaga’s success this season. Karnowski is making nearly 62% of his shots from the field and has upped his free throw percentage by 15 points from last season. Karnowski plays within his bounds; he cannot shoot threes and is not a great rim protector, either. But he knows what he is: a very skilled center, disguised as a mack truck, who can give many teams fits come time for the NCAA Tournament.

There have been other contributors, as well. For example, 11 players have appeared in at least 20 games for the Zags this season, and 8 of those players average a minimum of 13 minutes per game; these figures underscore the excellent depth that Gonzaga has. Assuming injuries do not factor into the equation, the Bulldogs should have plenty enough depth to compete with the best teams in the land. While bench contributors Killian Tillie and Bryan Alberts are both hampered by hand and ankle injuries, respectively, the Zags should be okay as their conference tournament will end a full nine, or possibly even ten, days before Gonzaga would play their first round NCAA tournament game. The time off will help them heal from injuries.

The last time Gonzaga was this good, the year was 2013. The Zags were a number one seed in the NCAA Tournament but were knocked out by Wichita State in the second round. Many observers concluded that Gonzaga was a team that could never succeed in the tournament and was overrated all season long. However, as CBS’ Gary Parrish notes, that interpretation should really be viewed as fake news:

In the moment, I agree, it seemed like an embarrassing upset. But hindsight paints a different picture because what we now know is that Wichita State was far from just a plucky little Missouri Valley Conference team. What we know now is that Wichita State went on to advance to the Final Four, where the Shockers played the eventual national champion (Louisville) closer than anybody else.

Also: Wichita State had three future NBA players!

It’s true: Wichita State advanced to the Final Four and was tied with the eventual national champions with three minutes to go in a national semifinal. It’s very fair to wonder if the Shockers would have won the national championship had they held on and defeated Louisville. Wichita State was a 9-seed when they defeated Gonzaga, but they turned out to be far better than their initial seeding. So it is very unfair to characterize that defeat as disappointing; if anything, it’s actually impressive that Gonzaga played the Shockers that closely.

Now, the same overrated narratives are popping up again with the Bulldogs. However, if you look at the data, you will see that they are not overrated at all. In fact, the Zags are ranked #1 in both the Ken Pomeroy and the Jeff Sagarin ratings, and the fact that they are ranked first in two different but effective rating systems should show the country that Gonzaga is exactly where it should be as a potential #1 seed and the top team in the country.

Another interesting stat: since the Pomeroy ratings started in 2002, no team has won a national championship without being in the top 25 in defensive efficiency. Gonzaga is ranked third in the nation in this category. They were ranked 30th in this category back in 2013, so their improvement defensively should be a clear sign that they can compete for a national championship. Few’s team also ranks third in the country in offensive efficiency; they can beat you in a number of ways, and their versatility should help them in the postseason.

Quite frankly, Gonzaga shouldn’t need to prove that they are one of the best teams in the nation. After all, they beat Florida and Arizona, two teams that I view as national title contenders, before conference play began. The Zags have taken care of business on their way to a 27-0 record and a top ranking in most major polls. The Zags will be a force to be reckoned with come March, but many still believe they are overrated. These people are in for a rude awakening.

So while the slipper still fits, Gonzaga doesn’t necessarily need to wear it this time around.

Posted on

The Knicks Are Redefining the Meaning of “Dysfunctional”

Photo Credit: Paul J. Bereswill/New York Daily News

This probably is not going to come as a shock to most of America (or the world), but the New York Knicks are a complete trainwreck.

This organization is a different kind of trainwreck, though. They are the type of trainwreck that redefines the meaning of a trainwreck. The Knicks are a mess. The Browns and Jets are laughing at them. New Year’s Eve Mariah Carey thinks they are spinning out of control.

Last night, though, was a new low, even by Knickerbocker standards.

Last night, the Clippers came to New York and played the Knicks in a primetime, nationally-televised game. The Clippers have been struggling as well, having lost five out of their previous six games and having been without star point guard Chris Paul since January 16th. The potential was there for a less-than-stellar game, but what we got was much more than what we expected.

Midway through the first quarter, with the game tied at 19 and Latvian unicorn Kristaps Porzingis at the line, a disagreement between Knicks legend Charles Oakley and Madison Square Garden security escalated into a fight. Judge for yourself what exactly happened:

Oakley was an integral part of the Knicks’ success in the 1990s, helping lead the team to the 1994 NBA Finals and several 50-win seasons in that time period. During his career, he played just as he behaved on Wednesday night; with an enforcer’s mentality and a reckless abandon. He once slapped Scottie Pippen and tried to end Charles Barkley’s life in a preseason game. The fact that he would get arrested at a Knicks game isn’t exactly a surprise, especially when you consider that he doesn’t have the best relationship with owner James Dolan.

However, there have been two wildly different accounts of how everything went down last night at the Garden.

The Knicks organization contends that Oakley arrived at the game shortly after it started, almost immediately began hurling insults at Dolan (who was seated two rows down from Oakley), and was confronted by MSG security. Oakley, as could be seen on the ESPN broadcast, engaged in a physical altercation with the authorities and was arrested for three counts of assault and one for trespassing.

Oakley, on the other hand, says that he never directed any comments toward Dolan during the game and was escorted out of the game by Garden security for no particular reason. Oakley also added that Garden security asked him why his seat was so close to Dolan’s, forcing Oakley to explain that he bought his own way into the game. The authorities persisted, and that is when the fight escalated. There are multiple witnesses who have backed up both stories, and the truth of what happened is likely somewhere in the middle between the two.

This was the Knicks’ response to Oakley’s ejection from the arena last night. I assure that 100% of this is real:

The last line of the statement is my personal favorite: “He was a great Knick and we hope he gets some help soon.” There is a good deal of irony in that sentence. For example, just two years ago, Dolan received an email from a disgruntled, lifelong Knick fan about how badly the franchise was run. The fan, who at the time had rooted for the team for 60 years, ran through a laundry list of disgraces to the team and urged Dolan to sell the franchise. Dolan responded, suggesting that the fan was an “alcoholic” who was a “negative force” to anyone he came in contact with. But yes, Oakley is the one who needs help in this dispute.

Disparaging those who have given years of service to the franchise, particularly through a statement on Twitter, is not a way to professionally run an organization. Oh, right, Knicks brass already did that just this past Tuesday.

I mean, this franchise is the definition of dysfunctional. Jackson seemingly agreed with an article suggesting that Carmelo Anthony, the best player on the team, has not a care in the world for winning. Subtweeting the other half in a relationship is something you do right before a nasty breakup; Phil Jackson, unless he trades Melo, is stuck with him for another two years. I think his only strategy here is to make Anthony so angry that he waives his no-trade clause and agrees to play somewhere else. There is literally no way this relationship works unless that happens.

Remember when Jackson was brought in as team president to be a steady presence and a beacon of stability for the franchise? Yeah, he’s actually been the opposite. Jackson’s leadership of the Knicks has left the team without much of a direction and, besides from Porzingis, not much of a future, either. Free agents don’t want to play for the Knicks and coaches don’t want to coach for the team, either.

Don’t believe me on that last point? This is what current head coach Jeff Hornacek had to say about the team’s exploits before the organization collectively cratered last night:

“I kind of, not was warned, but it was expected that it was going to be something all the time, and it’s lived up to the billing. It’s been something all year. So, OK, let’s go play a game and try to win.”

That’s spectacular. To an extent, I kind of feel bad for Hornacek; this could be his last opportunity to be an NBA head coach and he is not being allowed to function normally. At the same time, he probably knew exactly what he was getting into with the Knicks, so this probably shouldn’t be too much of a surprise to him, even as the season has gotten more and more out of hand.

Speaking of out of hand, we will likely never know what really happened between James Dolan and Charles Oakley on Wednesday. What we do know is that the Knicks have definitively hit rock bottom…. for now.

Posted on

Scholarship Reneging Is a Problem That Goes Far Beyond UConn

Jessica Hill/Associated Press

Over the past week, it is very likely that you heard the national sports media talking about the story of a high school senior by the name of Ryan Dickens.

Ryan Dickens was offered a football scholarship from the University of Connecticut last June; upon this offer, Dickens (who lives in Raritan, New Jersey, roughly four hours away from the University) immediately offered his verbal commitment to the school over offers from Cornell and Monmouth, as well as interest from other Division I schools. The senior linebacker is in the class of 2017 and committed early to ensure that his future would be locked in.

Then, on December 26, the Huskies fired head football coach Bob Diaco after three years at the school. Two days later, former head coach Randy Edsall was re-hired by the school to the same position. Dickens called Edsall on New Years’ Day to ensure that his scholarship offer was safe, and Edsall reassured him that he was still wanted in East Hartford. Dickens then met with the school’s linebackers coach, Jon Wholley, to discuss his impending visit to UConn (which would have been today).

However, this past Sunday, Edsall informed Dickens that his scholarship had been taken away. He was given no reason why; rather, he was simply informed that the school decided to “go in another direction”.

Unsurprisingly, the national media absolutely pounced, and rightfully so; Edsall’s decision to renege on Dickens’ scholarship offer was collegiate greed at its absolute finest. Those other offers for Dickens? Out the window. His college future? At the time, uncertain (he did receive an offer from Rhode Island days after UConn’s reversal and will most likely play college football next year). Edsall’s job, one that has him making $400,000 this year? Safe.

Here is the problem, though, with our perfect picture of this story: what if this had been Alabama? Or any other major program, for that matter? Would the outrage be nearly this fervent?

Let me first say that this story was covered properly by the sports media. It showed recruiting for what it really is and although the story clearly cast Edsall in a negative light, it needed to be addressed. However, there is an air of hypocrisy about the reaction to this story. For example, Paul Finebaum of ESPN called the pulling of scholarships a “total disgrace” because of the reversal’s close proximity to National Signing Day, which is less than two weeks away. Finebaum is also the author of “My Conference Can Beat Your Conference”, which is a tale about just how great the SEC is. The problem is that Finebaum’s beloved conference is no better about holding their word with high school athletes.

Nick Saban has come under fire in the past for over-recruiting, or signing more than the NCAA-allowed 25 scholarship players in any one given year. In some cases, as in that of Harrison Jones, that means reneging on a scholarship offer at the last minute…. or even well after that. Before the 2010 season, Saban yanked Jones’ scholarship offer after Jones had moved into his dorm room in Tuscaloosa. Because the school had over-recruited and had player(s) become academically qualified shortly before the season, there was no room on scholarship for Jones. That same year, Ole Miss, then coached by Houston Nutt, signed 37 players and needed to rescind the scholarships of 12 of them because they had budgeted their offers that badly.

One would figure that the national response to this would be collective outrage even worse at Alabama than in this case because it happened in August, not January. Instead, there was little to no response from the sports media. This is what Finebaum, who called out Edsall for this reversal, said about Saban when talking about another recruiting fiasco:

Nick Saban has tried to circumvent every rule in the NCAA rulebook and has mostly gotten away with it. I’m not saying he’s breaking rules, he’s pushing the envelope. I once asked a recruiter ‘How do you do it?’ and he said ‘You skirt the rule, you go over the line, and then you get back when no one is watching,’ and that’s Saban, that’s Harbaugh, that’s Urban Meyer.

So when Edsall does it, it’s a “total disgrace”, but when Saban does it, he’s just “pushing the envelope”? Oh. Here’s a pro tip: if you’re going to make a total double standard out of something, don’t veil it this thinly.

Worst of all, Finebaum said this just one year ago, so it is hard to believe that his opinion could have changed this much in just twelve months. His attitudes toward this story, and the issue in general, though, are emblematic of the opinions of the rest of the media. UConn has made one bowl game since 2010 and has generally been a laughingstock of college football for the past few seasons. The fact that they have been so bad makes them a punching bag for sports punditry; after all, it is far easier to criticize a team that waited until three weeks after the season to fire its head coach than it is to to criticize a program that has won four national championships in the past eight seasons.

As for the issues with the NCAA’s amateurism rules, those are ever-present and don’t really need to be stated. Coaches are allowed to do this to student-athletes with no repercussions whatsoever while the student-athlete is left scrambling with just days to go until he must make his college decision. Yes, that seems completely fair from the institution that still claims it is not-for-profit even though its president made nearly $2 million two years ago. This institution also made nearly $1 billion in the 2011-2012 year, the last year the company was audited. Do you want to guess how many of those dollars went to student-athletes? I’ll give you a hint: it was as much as I made playing college football last year. In other words, nothing.

Paul Finebaum is right: what Randy Edsall did to Ryan Dickens is a “total disgrace”, especially considering Dickens never made an effort to rescind his own verbal commitment to the school. However, many of us, including myself, must do a self-examination of ourselves and investigate whether or not this anger would have come to the surface if it was Jim Harbaugh pulling the offer instead of the coach whose most memorable college football moment was this (I can’t embed the Vine anymore; RIP Vine).

So while the media was correct to shred Edsall for his reneging on the school’s scholarship offer, it is unlikely that the criticism would have reached the same level if and when a major program did the same.

We’ll see how the media reacts the next time a top program reneges on a scholarship offer to a high school football program. My guess is that there will be crickets abound.

Posted on

What Happened to Leicester City?

Leicester City
Photo Credit: Getty Images

A season ago, the Foxes of Leicester City were the toast of European soccer.

As you may know, the team overcame 5,000-1 odds (longer championship odds than the Browns‘) to win the English Premier League title in one of the most stunning triumphs in the history of sports. The rest of the world noticed and appreciated their Cinderella performance. I wrote about them, and in that piece, I noted that Leicester earned 22 points in its final nine games the year before just to avoid relegation to England’s Football Championship League. The miracle finish in 2014-15 at least partially precipitated the miraculous title run in ’15-’16.

But halfway through this season, Leicester City may need to harness their relegation-dodging magic once more.

Yes, just a little under eight short months after winning the Premier League title, Leicester finds itself far closer to relegation than it does to defending their championship. Granted, a regression to the mean was to be expected this season; after all, the Premier League has not seen a repeat champion since Manchester United won back-to-back championships in 2008 and 2009. Even with many of the same pieces returning from last year’s team, expecting a similar performance from LCFC this season would be insane.

Still, you would expect them to at least be competitive in the league. So far, their 2016-17 season is slowly morphing from a championship defense to a survival quest just to stay in the league.

At just about the halfway point of the season, Leicester find themselves 16th in the Premier League table. Just as a reminder, the bottom three teams in the Premier League at the end of the season are relegated to the Football League Championship; the Premier League has twenty teams. The top three teams in the Football League Championship (currently Brighton, Newcastle, and Reading) are promoted to the Premier League while the bottom three of the top league are relegated to the Football League Championship, and so on and so forth for England’s lesser leagues, as well.

Leicester played in England’s second and third leagues from 2004 until 2014, the year in which they were promoted to the top level of English soccer. This year, they will have to fight to remain in the top level.

Following a 2-0 home loss to Everton on Boxing Day, opposing midfielder Gareth Barry had this to say about the defending champions’ confidence:

“They’re not the team they were this time last year […] Football is about confidence, it was always going to be tough for them to repeat what they achieved last year. It was once-in-a-lifetime what they achieved.

Barry is absolutely right, but still, these are the defending champions we’re talking about here. In the States, we think that the Denver Broncos had an unsuccessful season after losing one of the best quarterbacks ever and going 8-7 to this point in the season. Imagine if Denver went 2-13 to this point in the year and still had Peyton Manning. That is the equivalent of what has happened to Leicester this season.

There are any number of reasons as to why the Foxes have fallen off from last season. One would be crazy to expect the squad to repeat their dominant performance from last year; anyone could see that last year’s team over-performed under once-in-a-lifetime circumstances. After all, that’s what made the title all the more astounding. However, this season’s failure has been team-wide and systemic, and worst of all, it hasn’t been a fluke, either.

For example, take star forward Jamie Vardy. After a season in which he scored 24 goals for the league champions, Vardy was seriously courted by Arsenal FC. Arsene Wenger’s team, based largely on one productive season from the striker, decided to offer Vardy a £22 million transfer (or a little over $27 million in American dollars). Vardy declined the offer and re-upped with Leicester, citing the decision as an easy one that allowed him to continue his career with the Foxes.

This season, though, Vardy has not lived up to LCFC’s £100,000 per week investment in him. To this point, Vardy has scored just five goals; needless to say, this is a massive decline in production from a season ago. At the halfway point of the season, Vardy is on pace for roughly ten goals, which leaves Leicester fans wondering why the organization overpaid for his services and Arsenal fans feeling lucky that they did not pay up to bring him to Emirates Stadium.

However, Leicester’s failures are not solely Vardy’s fault. One of the biggest reasons behind the Foxes’ championship last season was their defense, one that surrendered just under one goal per game. This year, that figure has ballooned to 1.72 goals per game with virtually the same roster from a season ago. The only starter to leave the organization from a season ago was N’Golo Kanté, who signed a £32 million contract with Chelsea in the offseason. Kanté was a significant loss but that alone does not explain the precipitous decline in performance from last season to this one.

And that’s the frustrating thing. There really isn’t anything that does explain what’s going on. Most of the same team from last year has returned but almost no one has matched their performance from a season ago. Many praised Leicester for the team nature of their victory last season, as the squad came together like we had not seen before.

Unfortunately, that also applies to how they’ve fallen apart this season. The Foxes won as a team last season; this time around, they’ve lost as a team. Unfortunately, things are not getting easier for the Foxes anytime soon. Out of the twenty matches they have left this season, only four of them are against teams currently below them in the Premier League table. Even worse, another six of those matches come against teams in the top six of the league standings. Currently, LCFC finds itself just three points out of the bottom three of the league standings.

Sure, stars like Vardy and Riyad Mahrez have under-performed. But so has just about the entire rest of the team. That has made this long, nightmarish collapse all the more unbelievable: there’s not just one place where manager Claudio Ranieri can look to find a solution to his team’s woes. Their problems are littered all over the field.

The Foxes find themselves in serious danger of something they were able to avoid 21 months ago: relegation.

Who would have thought that would even be possible going into this season?

Posted on

Why Are There So Many College Football Bowl Games?

Photo Credit: Otto Kissinger/Associated Press

The above picture contains two teams you probably wouldn’t be able to identify unless I told you who they were, a blue field, and several completely empty sections of bleachers. If the photo does not perfectly encapsulate what college football’s bowl season is all about, I don’t know what does.

If you aren’t quite familiar with how bowl season works, here is a brief explanation. All teams in Division I with records 6-6 or better are invited to play in a bowl game and there are 41 of those (42 if you count the national championship game). Occasionally, 5-7 teams are invited (like last year, when three such teams went to bowl season and won and this year, when North Texas and Mississippi State were selected). The really significant bowl games are the ones that comprise college football’s four-team playoff, but those don’t take place until New Year’s Eve. The winners of those two games move on to the National Championship Game on January 9th. Four other games combine with the playoff games to comprise the New Year’s Six, games played around the calendar change that are widely regarded as the marquee games of the bowl slate.

So, to recap: there are 82 teams that have played or will play in a bowl game this December or January. There are 42 bowls in total, but only three really count, and only four more comprise the best teams in the sport. So why are there so many of them?

Well, the simple answer to that question is money, as it is with most other things. Television networks, mainly ESPN, are willing to pay large sums of money to the NCAA for the rights to broadcast these games; the network(s) make up this money through advertising revenue and, in the Worldwide Leader’s case, revenue from cable subscriptions. The NCAA and its institutions profit handsomely from the broadcasting of the games as well as the bowls’ sponsorships (such as the Dollar General Bowl, which is on ESPN as I write this article). The players get paid in experience and exposure. The amateurism model is terrible. I digress.

Moving right past that, the bowl games are pretty much made for television. An illustration of that fact comes in the form of this tweet by ESPN’s Darren Rovell:

That game was played earlier this afternoon between Eastern Michigan and Old Dominion in a matchup you would be more likely to equate with a Round of 68 play-in game in college basketball. Those in the Bahamas for the game came out by the dozens to witness it. So while the network and the NCAA profit off the game, the empty seats don’t exactly look attractive to the viewing audience.

Also, the quality of play in these games is not that of elite college football. While some games are fun (Idaho defeated Colorado State last night by a score of 61-50 in the Idaho Potato Bowl) and others are competitive and enjoyable, most of these games are not played at the highest of levels.

And yet, interestingly enough, people seem to be consistently tuning in to watch these contests. According to SportsMediaWatch, all five bowl games carried by ESPN/ABC last Saturday drew over a million viewers. The two highest rated games were the Celebration Bowl, which pits the SWAC champion against the MEAC champion in a battle of HBCU schools, and the Las Vegas Bowl, a San Diego State victory over Houston. Both of these games took place on ABC and were televised consecutively in the afternoon, but the numbers still tell an interesting story: people seem to be enjoying the expansive spread of bowl games.

And while the games may not be played at the competitive level of, say, a playoff game, it is still major college football. After all, Americans have demonstrated time and again that they have little to no time for substandard football; the XFL and Arena Football League learned this lesson the hard way. However, people will watch if the product is even decent; if you build it, they will come.

NFL ratings dipped earlier in the season but they have now rebounded; my guess as to the reason for this half-season dip is that some Americans were more engrossed with this year’s Presidential Election, but it’s really anyone’s guess. However, the NFL product was simply not very good to start this season, and because of this, people tuned out and looked for other options.

Another thing that seemed to kill the NFL, though, was over-saturation. With games on Thursday, Sunday, Monday, and even Saturday, many seemed to be suffering from football burnout. That is the issue that college football may have with so many bowl games in such a limited amount of time; however, this is happening over the span of three weeks and not seventeen, unlike the NFL. It hasn’t seemed to hurt the sport yet, but it will be something to follow over the next few years.

And finally, we need to keep this in context: NFL ratings are so much higher than those of college football. The two bowls I referenced earlier pulled in a combined 6.455 million viewers. On September 26th, the same night as the first Presidential Debate, a Falcons-Saints matchup on Monday Night Football drew the lowest rating in the 46-year history of the series. The game failed ESPN so badly that it only pulled in…. roughly eight million viewers.

College football simply does not have this type of ratings power; their way of making up for this is by showcasing their product as often as humanly possible. If that is what works for the sport, then the volume of bowl games is good for the game. However, I do believe that the significance of making a bowl game is significantly watered down when you consider the amount of bowl games and the fact that so many bad teams have made it to bowl season that just this past April, the NCAA placed a three-year moratorium on the creation of even more bowl games. Yes, more bowl games.

Also, the relevance of these games has to be called into question when stars like LSU’s Leonard Fournette and Stanford’s Christian McCaffrey choose to sit out their teams’ contests for fear of injury and hurting their NFLdraft stock. If these games were more meaningful, the chances of McCaffrey and Fournette playing in them would exponentially increase (LSU is playing Louisville in the Citrus Bowl while Stanford plays North Carolina in the Sun Bowl).

This is the central point of the debate: college football, and specifically the NCAA and the broadcasters of the games, will make a ton of money off of college football this month. So while it may seem like over-saturation, the extended bowl season is likely a good thing for the sport. Lower-level programs get necessary exposure, coaches get attention, and recruits get to see more teams in action. The players don’t benefit, but that’s a debate for another time.

There may be a lot of bowl games in the next couple of weeks, but no one said you have to watch them. If you do, know what you’re getting into. If you don’t, know that there will still be plenty of opportunities to get in on the fun this holiday season.

Posted on

Zeke Elliott, the Salvation Army, and the NFL’s Fun Problem

ARLINGTON, TX - DECEMBER 18: Ezekiel Elliott #21 of the Dallas Cowboys celebrates after scoring a touchdown by jumping into a Salvation Army red kettle during the second quarter against the Tampa Bay Buccaneers at AT&T Stadium on December 18, 2016 in Arlington, Texas. (Photo by Tom Pennington/Getty Images)
Photo Credit: Tom Pennington/Getty Images

On Sunday, the Cowboys played and defeated the Tampa Bay Buccaneers by a score of 26-20. Star running back Ezekiel Elliott jumped into AT&T Stadium’s famous Salvation Army kettle after scoring a touchdown in the game. The internet may never be the same.

If you are living under a rock haven’t seen the play yet, this is what Elliott did after a second quarter touchdown:

The celebration was easily the best part of the play, as Elliott casually flipped himself into the kettle and played hide-and-seek with a couple of his Dallas teammates. The act was the seminal act of this NFL Sunday, as it was a fun, harmless moment that even brought attention to a good cause; the Salvation Army has reported a 61% increase in donations since the jump. While it was flagged, even the most jaded football fan could see the goodness in that moment.

And yet, amazingly, it underscored the NFL’s issues with fun and individuality. And yes, this is a discussion many in the sports community have had before.

This is why we’re talking about it: when Elliott did the deed on Sunday night, Steelers running back Le’Veon Bell voiced his displeasure with the NFL over their handling of the incident. The league opted not to fine Elliott (and rightfully so) because he jumped in the pot and drew attention to the object (and a worthy cause) instead of himself. That judgment is more than fair and the league made the right decision. However, this is what Bell said about the NFL’s treatment of him as compared to Elliott:

First of all, we should probably take Bell’s opinions with a grain of salt; after all, he once tweeted this about a “random” drug test he received this past April 20th. Ironically, Bell was suspended for four games roughly three months after sending out that tweet because he missed several drug tests. Interesting.

Anyway, Bell actually does have a point here. On Thanksgiving, he and wide receiver Antonio Brown engaged in a celebration after Brown caught one of his three touchdowns on the game. Bell was fined $12,154 and Brown was docked $24,309 for the incident (Brown had been previously fined for his infamous end zone twerking exercises).

However, there is an argument to be made in favor of Bell’s point. If it’s okay for Elliott to do what he did, why are other stars fined for similarly harmless acts that may not necessarily draw attention to worthy causes? I’m not arguing that Elliott was wrong to jump in the kettle; actually, I’m doing quite the opposite. I’m arguing that players should feel empowered to express themselves like Zeke did this past weekend. However, that clearly isn’t going to happen under the NFL’s current operating system.

And there’s also another point that needs to be covered here: why does the NFL support Zeke’s celebration while undermining the efforts of other players to bring attention to their own causes?

For example, take current Jets wide receiver Brandon Marshall. Marshall has gone through well-documented issues in his life with borderline personality disorder. He’s had a troubled past that includes domestic abuse incidents and disturbances with police. Since coming out in 2011 about having the disease, though, Marshall has turned his life around and used his platform to voice support for mental health awareness. Along those lines, Marshall decided to wear neon green cleats for several games during the 2013 season (bright green is the color of mental health awareness). And shortly thereafter, Marshall was, wait for it, fined a total of $25,500 by the league over the course of the season for being in violation of its dress code. Yes. Seriously.

Two weekends ago, the NFL briefly changed course on their stingy uniform policies, allowing players to wear custom cleats as part of their “My Cause, My Cleats” week. The initiative was met with praise but also with one question: why doesn’t the league let players do this every week? There were no fines during “My Cause, My Cleats” week, with the exception of Dorial Green-Beckham. He was fined for wearing custom cleats in honor something called the “Yeezy Foundation”, which is essentially Green-Beckham’s lame attempt to convince the NFL that Kanye West is a charity and not a rapper. He was fined slightly over $6,000. I personally don’t think it’s possible to legislate stupidity, but I’m happy to amend that opinion in this case.

Anyway, did you notice something? This is what I took from that anecdote: Marshall was fined more for promoting his cause (mental illness) than Green-Beckham was for promoting his (this dude). But that’s not the point. The point is that the NFL has exercised hypocrisy over the past few years when it comes to players and their charitable causes. It shouldn’t be a fine for players like Brandon Marshall who only wish to express support for their causes in their choice of footwear. In essence, “My Cause, My Cleats” should be the NFL’s policy, not just a one-week promotion.

And that brings us back to Elliott. While the league did the right thing when it comes to his incident, that does not fix the league’s mistakes in past years. While it was the right decision, the NFL now has to explain to some of its other players why their actions were finable offenses and his weren’t. Based on precedent, the league should have fined Elliott. Thank God they did not make their ruling based on precedent.

Here’s one final example. Every October, the NFL forces all of its players to wear some pink article of clothing in an incredibly showy and somewhat gratuitous display of breast cancer “awareness”. In fact, the league is so all-in on this cause that much of the memorabilia is sold in the NFL shop on the league’s website. This sends the message that breast cancer is important… but only in the month of October. I’m not saying that breast cancer isn’t an incredibly important cause that should be addressed and honored. What I am saying is that the league should allow players to honor that cause all year long and not shut down their efforts, just like they did to DeAngelo Williams.

Hopefully, in light of the Kettle Hop Heard ‘Round the World, the NFL can re-examine its policies in regard to letting players express themselves and support their own causes.

Unfortunately, something tells me that’s not going to happen.

Posted on

Purple Reign: Why Did Washington Make the College Football Playoff?

Photo Credit: Kirby Lee/USA Today Sports
Photo Credit: Kirby Lee/USA Today Sports

Let’s play a game.

There are two teams in college football. Both of them are in the College Football Playoff, and both have the same record of 12-1. In fact, they are so supposedly similar that they are only separated by one spot in the rankings. There is only one difference between them, though: their out-of-conference schedules. Here they are: one team is Team A, the other Team B.

Team A

 Team B

Bowling Green (W, 77-10)

Rutgers (W, 48-13)
Tulsa (W, 48-3)

Idaho (W, 59-14)
@Oklahoma (W, 45-24)

Portland State (W, 41-3)

As you can see, Team B’s schedule is significantly weaker than that of Team A. By now, you’ve probably guessed it: Team A is Ohio State. Team B is Washington.

Let me preface just about everything I am about to say by expressing that Washington looked awfully good at the end of this season. The Huskies blew through their final three opponents, including a road win against Washington State and a Pac-12 title game triumph over Colorado. However, their best opponent on the schedule (USC) easily handled them on November 12th. Washington checks all of the boxes when it comes to being a Playoff team (one loss, conference champion, talent), but does that mean they should actually be in the Playoff? Let’s take a closer look.

For starters, the three teams that were contending for the final Playoff spot were Washington, Penn State, and Michigan. Penn State and Michigan both had two losses, but the former won the Big Ten Championship Game over Wisconsin. In fact, the presence of those two teams in the conference title game was and is a testament to the strength of the conference; both the Big Ten’s two best teams, Michigan and Ohio State, were unable to make their own conference’s championship game because the conference was just too good. Additionally, the Big Ten had four of the top eight teams in the final Playoff rankings. The Big Ten kinda sorta cannibalized itself at the end of the season, and it’s clear that two of the three teams competing for the fourth spot played in college football’s best conference. As for Washington…. not so much.

The Pac-12 had its fair share of struggles this season, as established powers such as UCLA, Oregon, and Stanford all struggled to some degree over the course of the year. Unfortunately for the Huskies, this weakness manifested itself in their schedule. Washington’s best regular season game was easily a home tilt with USC in week twelve. The Trojans defeated Washington, 26-13, but that’s not all they did: they showed that it is entirely possible to handle the Huskies in all facets of the game, even on their home turf. Even though Chris Pedersen’s team was undefeated at the time, that game should have sent major warning signals to the Playoff Committee. It didn’t.

Instead, the Committee only dropped Washington two spots; in fairness, week twelve also happened to be the week that Clemson lost at home to Pittsburgh and Michigan lost on the road against Iowa. When that is taken into consideration, Washington’s loss is the best out of the three. Also, Michigan did not drop after that loss and Clemson only dropped two spots as well. So the committee was very fair to Washington then, but why were the Huskies that highly ranked in the first place?

No, really, I’m serious: when your best in-conference win is Stanford and your best out-of-conference win is Rutgers, why was Washington the fourth-best team in the country? Granted, they did look very impressive until the USC game, but how could you know for sure that the Huskies could hold their own against any team in America? And let’s go back to the aforementioned out-of-conference schedule. If we’re really splitting hairs, the Huskies’ out-of-conference slate was not as good as Western Michigan’s. And once again, I’m completely serious.

Another facet to the anti-Washington argument is this: should we value winning, the eye test, or a team’s resume in our assessment of said team? Personally, I believe that we should use all three, but we should also use another measuring stick: common sense. And common sense is what takes us back to the last Saturday of November in Columbus, Ohio.

On that day, Michigan and Ohio State squared off in the rivalry so amazing that it is literally referred to as “The Game”. In The Game, the Wolverines and the Buckeyes went back-and-forth and eventually needed overtime to decide a winner. In the second overtime, Michigan kicked a field goal on their possession; Ohio State was faced with a fourth-and-one on their possession and opted to go for it to keep the game alive. The best rivalry in college football hung in the balance. The call was a run up the middle for quarterback J.T. Barrett. Michigan’s defensive line got a push and came in contact with Barrett just short of the line to gain. And then, college football’s game of the year came down to this spot:

Photo Credit: Greg Storer/YouTube

Good luck trying to decipher that one. I thought the spot was correct, but chances are we will never know for sure. Ohio State got the first down and a touchdown on their very next play. The Game was over, as was Michigan’s Playoff chances.

Here is my fundamental point: Michigan was ranked third that week in the Playoff rankings. In watching that game, what in the world could convince you that the Wolverines did not deserve one of the four spots? They went on the road to play the second-ranked team in the country, held their own, nearly won, and the entire game literally came down to that spot! I know that we want every game to count for something, but the result could have been very different if not for just one play. And yet, Michigan tumbled to fifth after that defeat, and their not making the conference championship game doomed their hopes of a national title. Washington, on the other hand, destroyed Colorado (who, full disclosure, is a ten-win team) and held on to the fourth and final spot in the Playoff.

The objective of the College Football Playoff is to get the best four teams, no matter what. Unfortunately, the Playoff committee did not do that this year. Michigan deserved the fourth spot over Washington, regardless of the fact that they have two losses.

They were clearly better than Washington this season, and that shouldn’t change just because of their record alone.