As The Rams Turn

ramsuniIn the latest episode of ‘As The Rams Turn’ the organization announces with mediocre fanfare uniform changes for the 2017 season! Yes, that is right. The Rams are making the return to the glory days of Los Angeles football by re-introducing their blue and white horned helmets. But that is where the good news ends for the Rams, because if you were to look any lower than just the helmet the uniforms may remind you of the Rams organization; a complete mismatch.

The old school blue and white Rams horned helmet was a favorite of mine, even back when they were playing here in St. Louis. The Rams were actually the first NFL team to put a logo of any type on a helmet, doing so in 1948. They moved to the white horned helmet in the late 50’s, wearing it for nearly two decades, the two decades the Rams consider their glory days, of course their ONLY NFL title remains a part of St. Louis history and not L.A. HA HA, sorry I had to get the dig in there, still bitter!

Anyway, back to the main point, bringing the white horned helmet back was really a no-doubter, it was just a matter of when. So when would a good time be to bring back the iconic helmet of the franchise which was last worn over three decades ago during the 70’s, a decade in which they won six division titles. I don’t know maybe a good time would have been in the first year of the team’s return to L.A.?  But what do I know?

The Rams have a great staff of people running their marketing. The same people who

decided to promote the Rams on HBO’s Hard Knocks, leading to the most boring edition of the program yet. Also the same marketing department that in the return of Rams football to L.A. decided to promote an opposing player (Cam Newton) with a giant

billboard by LAX. It is also an organization with Kevin Demoff as its mouthpiece and run by every sport fans favorite Stan Kroenke. The same one that recently w

as actually on a London news report with the reporter stating “Stan lowers babies into coal mines without protection” and “He kills baby rabbits to use as oil for his mustache”. Just watch this VIDEO of Arsenal fans “cheering” him on at their match.


So the Rams obviously have a strong leadership group in place. Maybe that is why their uniforms are such a mess. Moving on past the helmet, which taken as a stand alone is great looking but was brought back a year too late, look at their full uniform together. They also changed up their pants, removing the gold which had been in place since 2000, deciding to go with a full blue stripe. But do you see it? Look at the three DIFFERENT blues on the three separate pieces of the uniform. The helmet is different from the jersey which is also different from the pants. It is a complete joke.

Some people may not find this very interesting or newsworthy. It is just a uniform who cares. And I am quite positive the Rams will unveil a completely new uniform in 2020 when their new stadium opens, which by the way has already been delayed a year…see a trend? But in a league which is all about marketing itself, with an organization trying to build back interest for their return; why are they not putting their best out there? Why are the Rams just going at it half-way? Oh that’s right, because it is the Rams.

Just a uniform? I say dress for success. It is about an attitude. And does this uniform really look like an NFL team or does it look like they went shopping at the nearest Goodwill and pieced together a costume? Leadership is everything in sports, it flows down from the top. And the Rams will be a mess as long as Kroenke remains the owner. At least it is never dull, except for their play on the field, with ‘As The Rams Turn’

Posted in Sports | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Albert; Looking Back


Seeing last week’s historical moment for Albert Pujols got me thinking about his departure from the St. Louis Cardinals and heading out west to join the Anaheim? Los Angeles? L.A. of Anaheim?…..The Angels. First and foremost congratulations to Albert Pujols on hitting the 600th home run of his Hall of Fame career.

Can we take a pause and look at the gaudy numbers that he will produce by the end of his career. Already with 600 home runs, just one of nine players to reach that mark, he should reach 7th place on the all-time list by the end of this season and has a good chance to finish in the top five all-time by the end of his career. He is just over 100 hits away from reaching the 3,000 hit mark for his career. Only 30 players have accomplished that feat, with only three players having reached both 3,000 hits and 600 home runs (Hank Aaron, Willie Mays, and Alex Rodriguez). He is also just over 100 runs batted in away from the 2,000 mark, of which he would be just the fifth player all-time to reach that milestone. Know how many players have accomplished all three feats in the more than 150 years of professional baseball? Two. Just Hank Aaron and Alex Rodriguez. And despite his power numbers he was a great hitter, as evident by the career .308 batting average, and more impressively is that he has never, that is right NEVER struck out more than 100 times in a season. That is unheard of in today’s game.

Okay, so we have established Albert Pujols is one of the all-time greats. The likes of which fans only see once in a generation. So how did we come to a point where he would leave St. Louis, baseball heaven, for Anaheim? Let’s head back to the fall of 2011. The Cardinals were fresh off the team’s 11th World Series title. On October 31st Tony LaRussa, the man who had managed Pujols for the entirety of his 11 years in St. Louis had announced he was retiring from managing. A little more than a month later Albert announced he was signing a 10-year, $254-million deal with the Angels.

Belief at the time was that it was a smart move for the Cardinals, letting the then 31-year old star first baseman leave and not being tied to an aging slugger that would burden the team for years to come. And as time went on and Albert’s average dropped it only served as more proof as the right move. That move was further solidified in the Cardinals favor when Stephen Piscotty and Michael Wacha became mainstays in the Cardinals lineup. For those who do not know, Piscotty and Wacha were the two players the Cardinals drafted with the compensation picks they received for losing Pujols in free-agency.

Some will also argue that the Cardinals were able to extend Adam Wainwright and Yadier Molina as well as sign Dexter Fowler with the savings from Pujols’ contract. But for our purposes today let’s only deal in reality and facts, Piscotty and Wacha are the only additions linked directly to the Pujols departure.

So last week as I sat here listening to people talk about Pujols’ milestone and almost always include the “yeah but” argument afterward, stating that it was a smart move for the Cardinals to let him go; I got to thinking…was it really a smart move?

I will concede that Pujols is strictly a DH now and has spent the majority of his time at first base in only three of his six seasons with the Angels so who knows how many games he could have played at first for the Cardinals or how playing the field would affect his numbers. But like I said earlier about Piscotty and Wacha, we can only deal in facts and numbers. So let’s take a look at those numbers.

Now I am not a huge fan of analytics but others are so let’s do a quick head to head comparison accoring to WAR (Wins Above Replacement). Albert has a 9.5 WAR in his six seasons in Anaheim. Piscotty has 3.9 in his three years as a Cardinal and Wacha an 8.1, although a pitcher’s WAR is skewed easier. Point in fact Wacha had a high WAR of 2.3 in 2015, which is lower than what Wainwright had last year (2.9), a season in which he was 13-9 with a 4.63 earned-run average. So that would put Piscotty and Wacha duo ahead of Albert head to head 12-9.5, but again a pitchers’s WAR skews higher. Also to point out that while yes Pujols is on the downside of his career, the once promising young careers for Piscotty and Wacha have both seemed to stall. Piscotty has no power to speak of (something the club was aware of when signing him to the six-year, $33.5 million extension this spring) while Wacha has a 4.97 E.R.A. over the last two years and seems to fade as the season, and innings go on due to his shoulder issue. So it seems as though thought of younger is better, might not be so appropriate here.

Now let’s take a bigger picture look at things. People talk about Pujols like he is an out of date, old-beloved uncle that was a star back in the day but just someone hanging on and of no value now. True he is no longer the constant .300 hitter that he was during his St. Louis tenure but he is a .265 hitter with the Angels. Do you know how many Cardinals starters are hitting above that mark this season? One (Jedd Gyrko), two if you include the recently promoted Tommy Pham. Oh that’s just one year you say, well do you know who has a higher mark over their Cardinals career during the six years Pujols has been gone, with a minimum of three years played? That would be just four players: Jon Jay (.282), Matt Carpenter (.280), Matt Holliday (.280) and Molina (.271).

We talked about Pujols being not just a hitter but a power hitter. So how about the power numbers? That group of four that was just mentioned. Do you know how many home runs they have totaled in the 21 combined seasons in the Cardinals uniform over that same six-year span? 250 total; an average of 11.9 per season. Albert alone has hit 155 in six years on the West Coast, an average of 25.8 per season.

Runs driven in? Something the Cardinals have struggled with the last couple of season. Albert is averaging 88.3 per season. Do you know how many players have had more than 88 runs batted in during a single season since 2012? Six. Only six times has a player reached that mark in a Cardinal uniform since 2012; three by Holliday, two by Allen Craig, and one by Carlos Beltran. And that is an average for Pujols. A yearly look shows he has topped 100 runs batted in three times and is on his way to a fourth this season.

So do you think could the Cardinals lineup use a .265 hitter with 26 home runs and 88 runs batted in? Someone that while on the downside of their career, still strikes fear into pitchers? I’m pretty sure they wouldn’t mind those numbers or a threat like that. So to those who are saying Albert Pujols is washed up and it was a brilliant move by the Cardinals to let him go. Don’t buy the easy narrative. Albert may not be the man used to be, but he is still The Machine.

Posted in Sports | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Sobotka; The Reunion Tour

On Thursday afternoon many St. Louis Blues fans shared joy in the announced return of Vladimir Sobotka. The enigmatic player that left the organization three years ago to play in the KHL was returning to the Blues for the playoffs with a freshly inked three-year contract. In many ways this announcement reminds me of a reunion tour by a band.

All season long one of the biggest complaints about the Blues was their lack of identity. But since the move to Mike Yeo as head coach the team seems to have found themselves, going 13-2-2 in their last 17 games. They are playing with more energy, thanks in large part to the emergence of several young players like Ivan Barbashev, and have developed a chemistry that appeared to be lacking earlier in the season.

So what happens when you insert a new member onto the team, or welcome back a former player in a band? Will the team miss a beat? Will it disrupt the energy and flow that the team has worked 80 games to build?

Sobotka disappeared for three years (which is a long time considering the average playing career for an NHL player is 5.5 years). He comes back with great anticipation by fans who have been clamoring for his return during the entirety of that span. Fans remember the days of Sobotka in many ways we remember our favorite bands, only the hits (the good times) and we tend to base our judgement on those feelings. But what happens if our memories are not reality?

Take for example a band such as Guns N’ Roses reuniting. We all remember November Rain, Welcome To The Jungle, Mr. Brownstone. We remember the attitude and swagger that Axl Rose brought to the stage. We remember the energy the band had when rocking arenas. But what happens when they come back after years away, and the chemistry is no longer there. They are a bit older. They are a bit slower. They still want to rock the fans but they are just slightly off?

The Blues have under one week left in the regular season when the “real season” starts for the NHL, the Stanley Cup playoffs. How will bringing Sobotka back at this point in the season affect the team? Will Sobotka still be the type of player the Blues and their fans remember or should I say think they remember?

Let’s take a look back on Sobotka’s time in the NHL, a bit of a refresher if you will. He was a high energy player with a career high of nine goals in his seven NHL seasons. He is now a 29-year old third liner that hasn’t played in the league in three years. However, the biggest thing he brought to the team during his career was his ability to win face-offs, winning at a 62-percent clip in his last season in the NHL (which would rank him tied for first in the league this year).

Yes the loss of Paul Stastny looms large for the Blues, losing their top face-off player, and most talented center. And his “week-to-week” injury seems to be taking longer than expected. So conceivably Sobotka will fill a large void left by Stastny in the face-off circle, and even when Stastny returns it will solidify an area of the game for the Blues they would like improve, currently ranking 12th in the NHL in face-off percentage.

But I am left again wondering about the unknown. Do people realistically expect Sobotka to just pick up where he left off in his NHL career? And even if he hasn’t missed a beat, does bringing a third-line player with 35 career goals really improve the team that much? For me I feel that the risk outweighs the possible reward. Bringing in an unknown player with limited upside this late in the stage to a team that finally seems to have found their way is a dangerous game to play.

I think fans remember the energy that Sobotka played with and have gotten caught up in the nostalgia of that time. If you remember during his tenure with the Blues this was during a time when many Blues players were underperforming. In the four years they missed the playoffs once , were eliminated in the first-round twice, and swept by the #8 seed L.A. Kings in the second round. Fans were going through a frustrating time, watching the underperformance of players like Chris Stewart, Patrick Berglund, and T.J. Oshie. They were caught up in the game in and game out energy and effort by Sobotka, that is what they remember. And it is those nostaligic replays that I feel has skewed the fans memories of Sobotka.

What is the one thing the fans and analysts have been asking for the Blues to do? Add offensive punch up the middle, instead the bring in yet another third line player. I was a fan of Sobotka on his first go-round with the Blues. And I don’t think his play will necessarily hurt the Blues. But is it really energy that the Blues need? Haven’t they found that under Yeo?

One thing Yeo has shown since he took over is that he is willing to give players a chance, young or old. He does not necessarily stick to the veterans or high-priced players. He has constantly allowed players like Barbashev, Dmitri Jaskin, Zach Sanford to show what they can do in various situations from regular ice time to power-play or short-handed units. But I am worried about where he goes in the lineup. Does he replace everyone’s favorite beating stick Jori Lehtera or will he take time from one of the younger players that have worked hard and responded to the confidence Yeo has shown in them?

We will see soon enough how the Sobotka reunion tour will play out. I hope to hear more Welcome to the Jungle than Bad Apples this playoff season.  But as with many reunion tours, I am not expecting a whole lot.

Posted in Sports | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

The Baseball Hall of Huh?


This past week the Baseball Hall of Fame announced its 2017 class which includes Jeff Bagwell and Ivan Rodriguez. Oh and by the way former commissioner Bud Selig will also go in this summer as elected by the “Today’s Game Era” committee. All of this comes a year after inducting Mike Piazza and a year that saw Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens make significant jumps in their vote totals, which will inevitably lead to their Hall of Fame induction. So what does all of this mean? What happened to the steroid outrage?

Back in 2005 when news of the juice-era in baseball broke thanks to Jose Cancesco’s book Vindicated steroids was at the forefront of all sports media. Writers and fans were outraged. They felt cheated by the players and by a league that turned a blind eye. But just a decade later the Hall of Fame, and the writers that vote players into the shrine to be memorialized, have changed their minds. Writers have spent the past two years putting players, and a commissioner, into the Hall of Fame while also seemingly caving and allowing Bonds and Clemens to make their climb to enshrinement.

From the start, when the news about steroids broke, I felt that people were being too judgmental. Not in the fact that what the players did was wrong, but in the fact that the writers were attempting to hold out players from the Hall of Fame because of steroid usage. My contention was that you did not know who was using and who wasn’t. What was first thought to be beneficial only to hitters as actually shown that pitchers were just as guilty of using. And with a percentage that was likely around 70-percent of players using, all offensive numbers that were affected were countered because pitchers were just as guilty.

What I did not like was writers discounting certain players because of their connection to steroids while allowing others. Why was Mark McGwire dismissed so easily? Was he not the most feared hitter during his playing days? McGwire had 12 seasons of 30 or more home runs, amassing the 11th most home runs in baseball history, and had seven seasons of 100 or more runs batted in. He helped define an era of baseball. True he was not a great hitter but no one can argue his impact on the game. Not all players are well-rounded hitters, some are power hitters like McGwire and some slap the ball into spots like Wade Boggs. There should be enough room in the Hall of Fame for both. Mark McGwire still ranks 7th in slugging percentage and ninth in OPS with 12 All-Star game appearances and four times leading the league in home runs.

Quick side not on McGwire. I still stand by that he was taking Andro, which was legal in both the United States and MLB at the time. In addition Andro is a product that allows for recovery, something that was needed for McGwire due to his numerous injuries, but is not a product that automatically creates muscle. You still need to work hard in the weight room to benefit from the product. Unlike Bonds and Clemens who were associated with HGH, a product that changes your physical structure on its own without hard work, at a time when the product was illegal in both the U.S. and baseball. It was against MLB guidelines and they still used steroids. To me that is different.

The steroid situation also dovetails into the Pete Rose dilemma. The Hall of Fame is now allowing players who cheated the game but remain solid on keeping Pete Rose out of the Hall. Why? Pete Rose would go into the Hall of Fame as a player not a coach. His gambling occurred when he was a coach. Therefore why should he be held out? In my opinion using steroids at a time when it is banned is a worse offense than betting on your team to win.

The Hall of Fame is walking a dangerous line right now. Do they want to show their integrity and say anyone that cheats the game does not get its highest honor? Do they want to acknowledge the era of baseball that was shaped by the long ball and steroids? I have no problem with them doing either but they can not pick and choose. A decade ago a line was drawn but now voters have kicked dirt over that line like a hitter stepping into the batters box and the guidelines are blurred. If you are letting players who are associated with steroids in, and voting for players that defied rules and openly used steroids, and inducting the man in charge of the game that oversaw the rise in usage of steroids, then you have to welcome every player with open arms. Right now voters are acting like a pitcher facing Mark McGwire, scared to face the problem head on and just giving a pass, walking away from it. Voters need to step up and determine what it is they believe in. Because right now I am confused.

Posted in Sports | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

The “ME” Culture of Sports

000-football-money3-700x400There is no “I” in Team but there is  a “ME”. And on Monday morning Stanford University star running back Christian McCaffrey became the poster boy for a trend that is becoming more and more popular and one that is only likely to grow in the near future. McCaffrey is the biggest name in college football thus far to not just forgo a year of eligibility but to walk out with games still on the schedule during the season. McCaffrey announced that he would be skipping the Sun Bowl to begin preparing for the NFL Draft, which he stated last month he was entering early.

With the McCaffrey announcement the immediate discussion of whether or not this is a good move began making the rounds. I will not sit here and try to say whether a player should or should not risk their future earnings by playing. It is the players right to make that decision. So I will not be talking about the monetary aspect of this argument. But a quick sidenote, many of these star players take out insurance policies to protect themselves in case of an injury. So while it is not the “big” money they could make without an injury, they still would be set. Christian McCaffrey in fact would have received $5 million on his policy. But rather than talk about the money aspects of this situation I want to focus on the heart of the matter, and that is the perfect sentiment…heart.

Ask anyone that has played a team sport and they will talk about their teammates. The players they sweat and bleed with. The same men they spend early morning workouts or late nights traveling with. It is their teammates that ex-athletes, from all levels, will say they miss after they have moved on from the game. That commradery, that bond, the shared pains and joys of being a teammate. That is what it is all about. Working together as a team, putting your heart into it. And this is where I think the argument on McCaffrey and others should be focused on. Take a look at a tweet from Ezekiel Elliott on Monday in regards to the topic.


Of course in the day of social media people immediately jumped on Ezekiel, mentioning that he skipped his senior year to enter the NFL Draft. But I think they missed the point of his tweet. As I mentioned earlier I have no problem with players forgoing a season. But what Ezekiel and I am talking about are the players that are leaving DURING the season. Just as McCaffrey is leaving without finishing the season, LSU start Leonard Fournette is skipping his team’s bowl, although his situation is different because he has battled injuries all season long and in fact missed LSU’s last game of the regular season. But earlier Oklahoma’s Charles Walker left the team back in November, although he was out at the time with a concussion, but he still left the team with more than a month left to focus on the draft.

The same discussion has even worked its way into the NFL when Adrian Peterson announced last week that he was considering not returning from his injury to play in games unless the team was in playoff contention. He did in fact return this past Sunday, to a lackluster performance, but it opened the question that if he was healthy enough to play shouldn’t he be on the field no matter what?

The issue is when a player, a healthy player, leaves his team. Walking away from the same guys he spent the last few years with on the field and committing to. When a player decides that they are more important than the rest of the players on the field that is an issue. Yes I understand the injury questions. But I have always said that is one of the weakest arguments brought up by anyone because injuries can happen at any time. There is no magical amount of time spent on a field that lowers risk of injury. Are there more chances for a player to get hurt? Yes, but it is still not quantifiable in terms of statistics because there is no proven point of injury.

To see players like McCaffrey walk out on their teammates is disappointing. It is only furthering the business aspect of sports. I will not claim that college athletics is pure anymore, it is most definitely a business. But the fans do not watch sports to see how big budgets can grow or what type of investments players make.

We watch sports because we are passionate about the teams we follow. And seeing players walk away with games remaining on their schedule, brings the ugly side of business to the forefront. As I’ve said this is not money this is about heart. Fans will do most anything for our teams, including spending large amounts of money for our teams. It is too bad that the players on those teams won’t do the same and simply care more about themselves than the team.

We have seen the devaluing of teams over the years. It is now about the stars; from star players to star programs and star coaches. It is a “ME” culture. I don’t want to sound like an old-timer talking about the good old days but maybe we need to bring back the phrase about “players that spend more time worried about what’s on the back of the jersey than on the front”. I for one do not want a player more worried about himself than about the rest of the team. Because even though they may be super-talented we know that talent alone does not win; it takes a team. And I want players focused on winning on the scoreboard not on their bank account.

Posted in Sports | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Dexter Fowler: A Hit Or Foul?

ct-dexter-fowler-cardinals-contract-20161209This week expectations finally became reality. The St. Louis Cardinals announced the signing of Dexter Fowler. Fowler’s name had been long mentioned, even late in the season when it became apparent the Cardinals needed an outfield upgrade with Matt Holliday’s departure, and was the known prime target for the Cardinals during the off-season. We know what Fowler received, five years and 85 million dollars. But what will the Cardinals receive from Fowler?

Dexter Fowler is a 30-year old center fielder, coming off a career season that was capped by winning the World Series. Last year Fowler played himself into the big money contract from the Cardinals by hitting .276 with 13 home runs and 48 runs batted in while maintaining a .393 on-base percentage and playing solid defense. But as already mentioned, that was a career year for Fowler. This is likely not what we will see from Fowler during his five years here in St. Louis.

To get a better idea of what to expect we need to look at Fowler’s entire career. During his career his 162 game averages are a .268 batting average, 12 home runs, 52 runs batted in, and a .366 on-base percentage. As you can see those numbers are not too far off from last year’s totals during his career year. Fowler has been a pretty consistent hitter during his career; which is something that the Cardinals batting order needs with its numerous hot-and-cold hitters. But the constant refrain from fans after Fowler’s signing is about his on-base percentage and defense. Let’s take a closer look at those two points and see what we can expect.

Fowler led off for the Chicago Cubs last year, with a talented and deep lineup behind him, working his way to a .393 on-base percentage; the best by a leadoff hitter in the majors. However that was his highest mark during his nine-year career and he will be coming to a lineup that is not nearly as deep and dangerous. So we shouldn’t expect him to reach that level again but he should get on enough to still set the table for the lineup. His career mark of .366 would have been third on the team last year, just behind Aledmys Diaz’ .369 mark.

As far as Fowler’s defense goes, it is a case of recent memories. Fowler was a plus glove for the Cubs last year in centerfield but just as last year was a career year at the plate for Fowler, so too was his defense at an all-time high. Last year marked the first time in his career that Fowler finished with a plus UZR rating (a metric that measures runs saved). In fact for his career Fowler is -63.1 in UZR. Now granted he has played center in some of the quirkiest parks (Colorado, Houston, and Chicago) but the narrative that he is a significant upgrade in centerfield for the Cardinals is false. But there is also the fact that Fowler began playing a deeper centerfield last year, and consequently saw his best defensive performance. Did the shift to a deeper position for Fowler lead to improved defensive performance and will it start a new trend for him? That could be. But still he is not the conversation as one of the game’s top defensive outfielders, but just like at the plate he is an upgrade over the past for the Cardinals.

So where do I stand on the Fowler signing? Given the words and information laid out above it may not seem like I am a fan of the deal. But I am. I just want people to truly understand that player the Cardinals signed. I will relate it to another recent signing from the other professional team in St. Louis, Paul Stastny. Fans were ecstatic for his signing, believing they were bringing in a top play-making center. But in reality Stastny is simply an above average center that does a lot of the little things needed to win. That is what I feel Fowler will do for the Cardinals.

He will get on base, he is an upgrade in center defensively, he is an above average base runner, etc. I actually think his biggest asset may be his personality. From listening to his press conference he seems like he has an upbeat, outgoing, and candid personality. Something that has been missing from the team over the last few years. He will no doubt be a media darling here in St. Louis, but hopefully he can also bring some spark and fun into a Cardinal clubhouse that many times seems business like (outside of Adam Wainwright and Carlos Martinez antics). So was the Dexter Fowler signing a hit for the Cardinals or a foul one? I think the signing is much like Dexter Fowler the player. It’s not a home run but it’s not a strikeout. It’s a solid single up the middle.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Eight Would Be Great, End The Debate

grab-2016-12-04-11h32m58s194It’s December and after three months of weekly who deserves to be ranked where we finally get the culmination all college football fans were waiting months for, the field of four for the 2016 College Football Playoffs. This year’s field will include traditional powers Alabama and Ohio State, one of the preseason favorites in Clemson, and a resurgent Washington team that has finally capitalized on years of promise. But are those the correct four teams?

In my opinion these are likely the four best teams in college football this year, but I do have a problem with how they ended up here. The reason for my issue is because of the ever-changing guidelines that the committee deems important not just from year to year but from week to week. I will be honest, do I think that Penn State is a better team that Ohio State? No. But Penn State did beat Ohio State head to head, and did win the conference championship game.

When the committee decided to keep Ohio State up high in the weekly playoff rankings it showed that they were putting more of an emphasis on the eye test. But is it really an eye test or is it a “program” test. Do you think that if the roles were reversed, with exact same schedules and seasons switched between Ohio State and Penn State, that Ohio State would be on the outside looking in? No, I think they got the benefit of the doubt because they are THE Ohio State. And that is the big issue here. We heard how Michigan should have gotten consideration over Washington, why?

Two years ago TCU was left out of the final four, in addition to Baylor, because the Big 12 did not have a championship game. TCU, which was ranked #3 in the final regular season playoff rankings, defeated Iowa State 55-3 in their final game yet dropped out of the final four. All because they did not have that 13th game and a championship title. This year however Ohio State, which did not even win their conference division, was a shoe-in and Michigan, who failed to win the division as well, was deemed a worthy choice as well.

Yes these games are the money makers, and Ohio State and Michigan bring in large viewership ratings and fans that travel. But when College Football decided to institute rankings to better determine a national champion, beginning with the original plus one format from the BCS days back in 1998, I am pretty sure that program prestige was not included among variables used for the ratings.

The playoff committee needs to be more transparent. Why are they ranking teams where they are? Is it simply the eye test? Clemson has six games this year of wins under 10 points, not including their loss to Pitt. Does strength of schedule matter? USC was playing perhaps the best football of anyone in the country and had a S.O.S. of 5th in the country but they weren’t considered like Michigan, Penn State, or Wisconsin. What about non-conference opponents? Take a look at Washington’s non-conference opponents (Rutgers was their biggest non-conference win). Does a conference championship matter or not? Because it did in 2014 but in 2016 it’s obvious that it doesn’t. So what are the criteria that the committee is judging by?

There is of course one simple solution. Expanding the playoffs to eight teams. That is the number that should have been put in place when they moved from the BCS to the current format. But you know how people are, afraid of change. It took them how many years to get to the BCS from the bowl format. And it took them almost two decades to go from the BCS to the four game playoffs. I understand that argument that no matter how much you expand you will be alienating those next tier teams that will have an argument to  be in. Expand to eight and teams nine and ten will argue, expand to 16 and teams 17 and 18 will be upset. But that’s only if you are expanding for that purpose of including more teams. My reasoning isn’t to just include more teams but to choose the teams who HAVE a right to be included in playoffs, the conference champions.

Eight is the perfect number because you could give the five power conference champions an automatic bid into the playoffs. A conference championship should mean something. Then with the three remaining spots you give one to the highest ranked non-power five team and then have two wild card spots which go to highest remaining ranked teams, whether that be a power five team or not. Doing this would also put more emphasis on the conference championships. It is unlikely that had Colorado defeated Washington in the Pac-12 championship game that the Buffaloes would have been in the final four. But why is that? Why shouldn’t they have had that opportunity. Same goes for Penn State who won their conference championship AND defeated a team that is in the final four (Ohio State).

By expanding the playoffs to eight teams you are eliminating the debate over which conference is better than the other. In a four team format at least one power five conference will always be left out. An eight team format also allows for teams that may have got off to a slow start this season (USC) to fight for a national title. The conference championship games in essence become part of the playoffs too, giving an automatic bid for a chance at the trophy. But this only makes too much sense. We have seen how hard it is to change the minds of those that run college football. Why would they want to make things simple? In fact I kind of think they like the chaos that surrounds the playoffs. Because who cares if it’s a fair system or that they get it right, there is no such thing as bad press right?



Posted in Sports | Tagged , , | Leave a comment