Take for example this post at the Sporting News titled "College football teams in line for a decline in '09." (lack of capitalization earns a [sic].)
Now, this article is almost 2 weeks old. So I'm sure on other college football blogs it's already been ripped to shreds. Especially by foaming BC and Arizona fans. But fear not, my peers, I shall take a looksie at it and see what I can see:
First off, Dave Curtis has Rice as his top team to decline this season. Look, while I appreciate the dark horse pick as the "biggest decline" Rice wasn't exactly a headline grabber last season. Heck, they never even got into the inevitable "BCS Buster" conversation. We might look back on this article and go "Wow, Dave Curtis was so right about Rice!" More likely, however, we'll forget this article and Rice and Dave Curtis unless he writes something totally egregious.
Curtis' next pick is Boston College. His logic is pretty good on this one, and I can't really rip him too badly except for one detail: "A first-to-worst fall is in play for BC." So you're telling me BC's going to finish last in a conference that includes Duke, UVa, and NC State? I doubt this very, very highly.
He's picked Texas Tech to plunge, but come on man! With that offense in a league that literally stopped playing defense sometime around 2002...The Red Raiders probably won't be in contention for the Big 12 South thanks to Oklahoma and Texas. But are they going to lose to Houston? Or Baylor? I have a hard time buying into either of those theories.
Arizona...I'll give them this one. Though the PAC-10 still looks mediocre. Yeah, they were undefeated in bowls. I still hate them. What's this post about again? Oh yeah. Some old article. Let's continue...
Utah's been picked to "plunge" which really isn't fair. I mean, yeah, if they lose one game then this season is worse than the last. I'm not sure that warrants a spot on the "decline" list. Maybe it's just me, but I can totally see the Utes dropping 1 game and still making it to a semi-major bowl. They only really have to worry about Oregon, TCU, and BYU.
Matt Hayes's picks look remarkably similar. BC's at the top of his list, probably due to a lack of Matt Ryan.
Tulsa: (See argument on Rice. Replace "Rice" references with "Tulsa" and "Dave Curtis" with "Matt Hayes" and you basically have what I was gonna type here. Yeah, I'm lazy, get over it)
Missouri is poised for a fall thanks to the loss of Chase Daniel (Yeah, I liked him to win the Heisman last year. I was wrong. My apologies. I will not make this mistake again. My 2010 Heisman winner: Matt Ryan). They also lost a whopping 22 seniors. Good luck, Tigers. I think Mr. Hayes might be right on this one.
Guess what? Arizona appears again. Blah de blah de blah. There. It's the same thing as what Dave Curtis typed, only longer and dealing more with the concept that "momentum" somehow carries from December to the next September.
And then comes Minnesota. Now, while I am totally opposed to ever agreeing with a sportswriter about anything...he's right. Minnesota stank last year, but playing teams like Montana State, Florida Atlantic, and Purdue (rim shot) got them into a bowl. Which they lost by 21. Sooooo, let's just say that I'm not going to disagree with Mr. Hayes on this one.
Well that's all for now. Time to get some coffee
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment