For coaches, the amount of time between the final game of the regular season and the bowl game is always too short. For the rest of us, it’s obviously just way, way too long.
As Bobby Petrino prepares his team for what will hopefully be his first bowl victory at Arkansas, the manner in which he’s going about that preparation certainly seems to be even more heavily scrutinized than usual.
Apparently, there’s just so much time before the bowl and so little else for all of us to talk about. (Basketball team? No, thanks.) And the headlines late last week sure amped it up.
“What? Tyler Wilson got most of the first-team snaps on Friday? What’s wrong? Did Mallett break another finger? Has he already declared for the draft? Was he partying on Dickson Street too late again?”
Of course, perhaps it could be that Wilson simply needed the extra work. You would think anyone who saw him regress in a disappointing performance against Eastern Michigan would completely understand. Wilson has always, as the cliché reminds us, been ‘just one play away’ from being the starter.
Then again — if one scrutinizes a little deeper — maybe it was because Bobby Petrino is upset with Ryan Mallett and wants him to quit thinking about the NFL and work harder in bowl preparations. Yeah…that’s much more plausible.
As the chief scrutinizer of statewide sports media, Wally Hall filled his Sunday column (subscription required) with plenty of grist like that for the mill. He also opined about transportation late Saturday night on the fount of free wisdom that is his Twitter feed:
“Ryan needs to get on board and forget his next trip This isn’t a connecting flight. It is the direct one to where he wants to go.”
It’s that kind of succinct advice that we would all aspire to give to “Ryan” via Twitter at 11:40 p.m. on a Saturday night.
Of course, Wally lets us know that it’s all Bobby Petrino’s fault that we’re even discussing this. Petrino could’ve cleared all this nonsense up but nooooooooo…he couldn’t find the time to meet with the gaggle as scheduled on Saturday.
Following scrutinizing logic, that obviously must mean Petrino has something to hide. Hmmm…maybe…stay with me here…maybe he was out looking for a junior college quarterback to come in next month after Mallett goes pro! Yep…we knew it…that must be it…book it.
Ugh…January 2nd can’t get here soon enough.
Wally Hall is an idiot & needs to retire. Some players may not read all the blogs & fan comments but they do pick up the paper. I've been amazed over the years at what Wally is able to say and get away with.
Notice to recruits and current players: Wally Hall does not echo words from the general concensus of the great state of Arkansas and it's loyal fan base! If you happen to read his garbage & are offended, please remember he is old & he simply can't help it.
Wally pulls his BS out of you know where cause it draws readers and conversation. If you go into reading one of his columns with that perspective it's much more tolerable. He is famous for taking an adversarial and unpopular position.
I just hope for Christmas I get one more year of Mallett….and an SEC Championship, a Razorback Heisman winner and a BCS bowl.
Not much to ask for, right?
Yes, Wally Hall is a hack, but most sportswriters are hacks, homers or worse. Sports writers are journalists and as journalists they confuse, spin, misinform or not inform depending on their particular preferences and beliefs. I agree with the poster that if you want to know how things are in Razorback land then read Wally carefully and sometimes between the lines. Now a good example of Wally being a typical journalist was his comment about the Heisman Trophy being awarded for on the field performance, and not from PR campaigns. Baloney. Further read him between the lines when and he mentions that ESPN may have had too much power in the selection process. Wally was being disingenuous, uninformative, and PC. PC because, I suspect from his ESPN comment, he knows what went on but doesn’t want to get in the bad graces with important people in his business. The whole Heisman thing was a fix, and has always been a fix and the idea that the trophy represents the best player doesn’t always hold true. In the past the voting was dominated by the Midwest and Northeast where most of the writers were. Consider that in all of Alabama’s history Ingram is the first ‘Bama player to win it. Outside of Florida few Heisman winners were from the South or Atlantic South. So regional bias has played a role. But Wally’s comment that the trophy was won on the field is not borne out by facts (inconvenient things those facts). Gerhart of Stanford had gained more yards than Ingram and scored more TDs in a conference that is considered close to that of the SEC. McCoy and Tebow are two of the greatest QBs to have played the game and if one doesn’t have a record the other does. Yet between them in 4 years, only one Heisman? I doubt that Ingram will approach either of these players in terms of complete body of work (Of course Ingram may leave early). In terms of which of any of the four mentioned who was most important for his team, who can argue against Gerhart, McCoy, or Tebow. And as it turns out Ingram was playing with 5 first string All Americans. And as was proved in Alabama’s last two victories the guy who stirred the drink for ‘Bama was QB McElroy.
So how was this fix set up for Ingram? And why Ingram and not Gerhart? My contention was that the writers in the Midwest and Northeast colluded (the Heisman is run by the New York Athletic Club), but not necessarily to get the award for Ingram since Gerhart almost had it, but it was set up to make sure that McCoy didn’t get it. How did they do it? First they substituted defensive lineman Suh from Nebraska for Clemson’s C.J. Spiller. Spiller had been touted all year but when did anybody hear of Suh? And what chance did a defensive player have in a contest that was for QBs and RBs. Glen Dorsey was something of an exception because of publicity especially regarding his decision to stay to win a National Championship. But importantly, what Suh did was to take votes way from McCoy in Big 12 country and to increase votes for Ingram in the Atlantic South which, of course, would have gone to Spiller.
ESPN in their analysis gave themselves away because they couldn’t help themselves to show those who pay attention as to how clever they are. They went over the regional areas, without details, and pointed out that the Midwest went for Ingram because, in part, Ingram was from Michigan. And the Northeast went for Ingram. But most importantly, they pointed out that the Atlantic South went for Ingram and that’s what made the difference over Gerhart.
So the question is why did they finagle to assure that McCoy wouldn’t win. It had nothing to do with football. It’s political ideology. Rush Limbaugh pointed out in his dustup at ESPN about McNabb that it was not about McNabb but with journalists whom he considered to be liberals. He said that journalists are liberals and sportswriters are journalists, ergo, they’re liberal. So why the switch with “Yankee” attitudes from ignoring the South’s players to favoring a player from the South. Simple. The liberal journalists, be they sportswriters or not, hate George W. Bush and Texas. Bush trumps George Wallace and Alabama. Civil rights struggles are long over and the South has progressed and Wallace is ancient history. Bush is today.
This sounds simple minded that sportswriters would allow their personal bias into their judgment. But that’s what humans do and I don’t think that sportswriters are exceptional. However, if anyone thinks otherwise, let me hear your arguement that the trophy was “won” on the field. I know these people and they carry their personal biases into their work. I have no problem with Ingram winning this thing and, for what it’s worth I wish him luck except when he plays the Hogs. I have no cause for or against McCoy or Texas, but ESPN pointed out that the team of the Heisman winner has a recent history of losing the title game. This is not true. I checked the past six winners who played in the title game and it was 3-3. What ESPN was hinting at was maybe McCoy and Texas will be in suicide mode to beat Alabama. Question: Will Texas work on shutting down Ingram like Auburn did and let the QB beat them? And win or lose, will McCoy outplay Ingram to once again, as with last year with Tebow, leave an impression that maybe the wrong player, yet again, won. Unlike many here, I don’t think that Wally is stupid and he understands all of this. He just won’t tell you.
From Petrino's comments in his Monday press conference it seems perhaps Wally did have an idea of what he was talking about.
Ryan Mallett even suggesting he is going to entertain ideas of declaring for the draft is an ego trip that neither the team nor the state needs to be put through. While he may have the physical tools to one day be a great quarterback, he is not there yet. NFL quarterbacking requires much more than just a physical tool set. Him even posturing that he might be ready is a strong proof point that he is not.
If he can't perform against the top defenses in the SEC he has no chance in the NFL. He needs another year – perhaps two. Many people with his physical skills have failed in the NFL – failed rich maybe, but failed.
If he can’t perform against the top defenses in the SEC he has no chance in the NFL. He needs another year – perhaps two.
You nailed this perfectly with these two sentences!
Wally Hall is an illiterate hack. He writes that way because he doesn't know any better.
The ArkansasNews blog interview with Petrino strongly hints that Mallett was late for practice, nothing more than that.
Mallett is not going pro. He's probably having the time of his life thinking about it, all the money and the women and the bloggers wondering what he's gonna do next. When he comes back down to earth it will be on a football field in a Razorbacks uniform with a blitzing linebacker about to knock his helmet off.
I'm sure he'll get good professional advice on what he should do. Failing that, he can always read Razorbloggers for the definitive answer.
Now, c'mon guys: this is East Carolina. In Memphis. And there's Christmas and New Year's to help you pass the time before the game. Try to contain yourselves.
Merry Christmas!
Things are looking better and better for the Hogs in the Liberty Bowl. Hopefully they don't get overconfident. Rutgers got approximately 500 yards against UCF which had the best (?) defense in Conf. USA. East Carolina allowed 500 yards passing against Houston, a team that does not have the running backs that the Hogs have to balance an attack in the Red Zone. Middle Tennessee beat Southern Miss in the New Orleans Bowl. It was the only other bowl where a Conf. USA team was favored. Houston is favored against Air Force in the the Armed forces bowl, but considering what's happened to Conf. USA Bowl teams I wonder if that line will reverse itself as well as the spread on Arkansas which may go from 7 to 10. (The spread on Arkansas has already gone up 1/2 point and the spread for Florida has gone up the same afer the Kelly announcement). Two games to look at are Ohio (favored) of the MAC vs Marshall of USA in the Pizza Bowl and later Cent Michigan vs Troy in the GMAC Bowl. If Ohio wins and Troy beats CMU then the poster here who said that Conference USA was on the same level as the Sunbelt was unwittingly (I'm sure) insulting the Sunbelt. With only two Bowl games, and if they win both, then the Sunbelt catapults itself above the MAC and USA: and we all know what Arkansas and Florida did to Sunbelt champion Troy. (How did the AP put Central Michigan above SEC teams in their poll? – couldn't be regional prejudice now could it?) Well Troy will give us the answer.
Let me add an addition. In the AP of December 7 Central Michigan was ranked 25, East Carolina 26, Houston 27. Above Ole Miss, Tennessee, and Georgia. Arkansas, Kentucky, and South Carolina were not in the AP top 39 teams being beaten out of 39 by Montana(?). Now the AP unranked Hogs are favored by 71/2 over 26th Carolina. I point out these stupidies because those who want a playoff system have yet to explain how the playoff teams will be chosen and ranked and by whom. Sports writers because of regional preferences have already made a joke out of the Heisman trophy. So the Wally Hall's are going to determine who plays.
jim dogg, I agree that Wally Hall is not stupid. He's just a pathetic writer. He knows that himself. It's a standing joke with him; it always has been. If you are a professional writer who writes like crap but you're not stupid, then what are you? Lazy? Indisposed? Slackaholic?
I like the way you say, "the Wally Halls are going to determine who plays." It makes his ilk sound even ilkier than they already were.
I think my reply may be out of order. How bright is that?
"I point out these stupidies because those who want a playoff system have yet to explain how the playoff teams will be chosen and ranked and by whom."
Now now, JD. We've already had this discussion in another thread. You know how a playoff would work. Just because you don't agree with it doesn't mean there's not a solution out there. As you know, I've come to prefer Wetzel's Playoff Plan: field of 16, 11 of which are conference champions-no one picks them; they play their way in. The other five teams are chosen by a 'Select Committee', which Wetzel doesn't name; he just requires that they be "a group of highly engaged people using common criteria to pick and set the field". These 'at large' selections would allow teams like Notre Dame to get in as well as other deserving squads like, say, Florida this year. There you have it. Pretty simple really. Does this make everyone happy? No, but it goes a damn sight farther towards that than our current system of determining a champion.
What was wrong with my suggestion that the PLAYERS get to vote on who goes to the playoffs? I thought that was a brilliant, elegant solution (tho I'm no Wally Hall). It didn't even draw a comment. Is that a really dumb idea? Who knows more about the game and the teams: the players or the Wallys?
One more time Hawgfan: Wetzel's plan won't work because the 6 Big BCS conferences won't let the little guys have an equal place at the table. If the Feds try to enforce it then they will simply form their own athletic association. Now there is a so-called freedom of association based on the Constitution but how much attention do the pols pay to that? As of this moment organizations cannot exclude people on the basis of race, gender, sexual orientation, etc. So maybe the 5 minor leagues can horn their way in on the basis being a minority. You did give me my belly laugh for the day with Wetzel's "select" committee of "highly engaged" people to determine at-large bids. What a joke. Clever people learned a long time ago that there is no Tooth Fairy, Easter Bunny, or Platonic philosopher Kings with no agendas. I would love to hear from Wetzel as to who might be a "highly engaged" person of note. Our President, perhaps? One more thing. You are easily fooled if you think that the Wetzels and Wally Halls of the press corp are going to give up what influence they have at the moment, either with the AP poll or what emphasis that the BCS puts on their poll. Wetzel is posturing for the discontents in the Midwest and Northeast. My own configuration for a playoff system was far more realistic. That of merging teams into 8 super conferences and have the league champion and runner up of each make up the 16 competing teams. But that will not happen either unless the Feds decide to take over and reorganize college sports like they have with the auto industry.
But back to Mallet and the Razorbacks. I watched QB Max Hill of BYU pick Oregon State apart last night. Two things: first the announcers gave the excuse that OSU was disappointed in their bowl and weren't playing up to their potential. Understandable considering "Bama's embarrasing performance in their bowl game with Utah. Unless the Hogs are concentrated on this game, they too could be upset. I don't see how the Hogs can lose this game but it may depend upon attitude. Carolina should be coming with their best game. They beat Va Tech last year, why not Arkansas this time? However, East Carolina's record this year against non-conference BCS type foes has not been good. I think that this is an important game for the Hogs and they should be up for it. They are thirsting for a bowl win, any win, any bowl. The game is also important for Petrino who needs his resume bumped up. The 'Backs should be ready but then there is the Mallet factor.
As for Mallet: as I said I watched Max Hill last night and it occured to me that there are a number of quality QBs coming out for the draft, Hill being one of them. But I also wondered how many QBs, other than Sanchez, have come out that early with only one season under their belt. Linemen and running backs are different since their tools and skills are more important than judgment, leadership, and experience. With the exception of Matt Ryan of the Falcons it's unusual that a QB directly out of college, even with 4 years, is going to make an immediate impact (See Stafford of the Lions and Russell of the Raiders). However, Sanchez of the Dolphins, had only one year at the helm at USC, which may have inspired Mallet. Hall, I believe, mentioned Oakland and St Louis as two teams that would be interested in Mallet. I think that Wally ought to lay off whatever he's drinking. If St Louis feels the need for a QB they are likely to take one early on in the draft and more the likes of Hill than Mallet. And later on down the line why would they draft another QB? And if it's further, way further down the line they're not going to give hefty money to a project. Oakland still has an investment in Russell and it looks like they have a good backup in Gradkowsky (similar to Swenson of the Lions, both of whom have patiently waited their turn). However, what do I know? Maybe Jerry will take him (I doubt it, Jerry is Razorback Red).
What bothers me about all this, is that Mallet looking in to going this early or even next year is, from the facts, somewhat unrealistic based on that this is the year of the outstanding graduating QBs (Last year was somewhat leaner with Stafford going first). But what has this business about exploring NFL possibilites this early done in regards to the Coaches and players attitudes toward him. Just before a bowl game? I know that loyalty is for suckers, in this day and age, but what effect will Mallet's doofing around have on the team's mental approach to the bowl game? Seems like over the top self serving to me. Putting myself in the other players' shoes I wouldn't be too happy that just when the future looks bright the "leader" is abandoning ship. I think that Mallet would be best served for himself and everybody else by putting this all to rest, soon. But since I am a conspiracy theorist consider this scenario: Arkansas wins the bowl game but not by much. Play calling by McGhee and Petrino are designed to make Mallet look good, but not too good. Or Arkansas gets ahead by 3 touchdowns and Wilson is bought in to "manage" the game. Or that the OL decides to not quite protect as much in order for Carolina to get some sacks, making Mallet look unable to beat the rush. Mallet does OK but the running game beats Carolina. NFL scouts decide that Mallet isn't ready so Mallet comes back for one year or more. Laugh if you will, but I don't believe in philosopher kings; clever people run the show.
"…Wetzel’s plan won’t work because the 6 Big BCS conferences won’t let the little guys have an equal place at the table."
True, if this were to occur, no playoff would not work. However, that is not the same as saying Wetzel's plan is inherently flawed. Kind of like saying a teacher is a poor instructor if his students don't make any effort and therefore fail. That logic doesn't work here either,
I'm not that up on the legal implications but I have heard a possible anti-trust charge could be made. I'm still far from convinced the pols aren't doing this for anything more than publicity.
"You did give me my belly laugh for the day…"
Glad to be of help…you do make me smile with your cynical viewpoint on people in general. I think you and Diogenes would get along swell. I will also note the more transparent you make any behavior or process, the more honest it will become.
"Our President, perhaps?"
Cute. However, if you mean Obama, I'd say no. The more appropriate recent president for your analogy would be W. Bush, who I understand is putting together his own expedition to locate those pesky WMDs.
"You are easily fooled if you think that the Wetzels and Wally Halls of the press corp are going to give up what influence they have at the moment, either with the AP poll or what emphasis that the BCS puts on their poll."
Other than raging paranoia, your proof for this assertion?
"Wetzel is posturing for the discontents in the Midwest and Northeast."
Again, other than Wetzel's location and your prejudice, what proof do you have for this statement?
Your plan is interesting but you add to the already significant difficulties in this process a major restructuring of the existing conferences. There is no organization which can overcome all that, not even the Feds.
Hawgfan: Thanks again for a daily laugh: You must be an overly sensitive liberal. My suggestion regarding the President was based on his intervening, at least verbally, regarding playoffs, and had nothing to do with his political ideology or policies. But isn't the President supposed to be President for all of us? Therefore his solomonic judgment would presumably be the most neutral. If not, maybe the Pope? Your mention of Diogenes tells me you knew it was sarcasm. I dunno, maybe you could give me your own suggestion of some "highly engaged" people.
Insofar as my "paranoia" is concerned, I think you have misused the word. That people will look after their own self interests is a known fact (except for West Virginia coal miners who vote for a party that wants to outlaw coal). That human characteristic is something you can bet on and take to the bank. It's not a stretch to think that sportswriters who are organized would not readily agree to a loss of their own power through the media. But then again they could be the journalistic equivalent of WV coal miners. No matter what, I can safely predict that whatever system is in effect the sportswriters will complain about it. It's their nature. Hawgfan you write well and seem like an educated, informed, and perhaps a cultured individual as well(a PhD, graduate student, law student, or teacher?) but worldly-wise, no. It's been fun but this is my last post (I promise) on the playoff subject.
"You must be an overly sensitive liberal."
Hardly. Moderate through and through.
"My suggestion regarding the President was based on his intervening, at least verbally, regarding playoffs,…"
That's the problem then: Obama, other than voice his opinion, has done nothing on this front. Your comment regrading 'highly engaged' people and the president made me think you were questioning Obama's veracity. If you're a fan, my apologies. If not, there's always W.
"Therefore his solomonic judgment would presumably be the most neutral. If not, maybe the Pope?"
I don't require the president's judgement be neutral (he'd never get anything done…); just that he weigh all sides equally before making his decision.
What does the pope know about American football?
"Your mention of Diogenes tells me you knew it was sarcasm."
My comment about Diogenes concerned, as I said, your cynicism regarding people in general.
"…maybe you could give me your own suggestion of some “highly engaged” people."
Nope, not my job. I still reserve the right to require these folks, whoever they may be, be transparent in the selection process.
"Insofar as my “paranoia” is concerned, I think you have misused the word."
Perhaps…perhaps I should have used the word 'obsession' instead. You seem fixated on Wetzel's so-called 'regional agenda', of which I see no evidence.
"It’s not a stretch to think that sportswriters who are organized would not readily agree to a loss of their own power through the media."
Agreed re people pursuing their own interests, and in the case of sportswriters, it wouldn't be a stretch except I seen no reason for them to defend their prerogatives here. I just don't see their 'power' in this area, therefore see no threat to it. Certainly they will complain no matter what; they do need to 'sell' their services.
Thank you for the compliments. I am educated and a teacher but I've also seen more than a bit of the world. I didn't go back to school until my late thirties after having spent time in many occupations (janitor, factory-worker, salesman, and soldier among them). I'm also a cynic and a skeptic. However, not so cynical or skeptical that I can't see the possibility for improvement in a given situation.
Thanks for the opportunity to debate. I've enjoyed it. I look forward to your comments in the future, no matter the topic.
With respect to the both of you and your comments, there could be one mynute detail being forgotten here. Greed.
Greed is the most influential intity for any of these scenarios, and will always come first and formost from the powers that be.
Greed is THE reason we are even having this discussion. (We now have 34 bowl games.) It will never go away and it's undenying power has to always be evaluated into the equasion first.
With so many hands in the cookie jar, it's the only fact that even exist.
All else is pure speculation. All good speculation, mind you, but still speculation.
As far as the Mallett situation is concerned, it's really easy to get caught up in all of the talk.
I was listening to the Bo Mattingly show yeasterday and ESPN's Chris Mortenson was a guest on the show. When asked about what he thought Mallett was going to do, his opinion leaned toward Ryan Mallett actually going pro. The flip side to the comment/opinion was that he also maintained it would be a major mistake. I agree with that asessment 100%.
The very worst thing that could happen for Razorback recruiting at this point would be for the Hogs to lose to ECU and then for Mallett to actually go ahead and leave.
Do not worry about ECU. Hogs will roll. Many QBs will go pro early after what happened to OU QB. Bradford could have gone high last year but now is anyone's guess where he will go in the NFL draft. Perhaps, that is on Mallett's mind other than ego. Only Mallett knows.
As far as Wally, it is not old age. He just looks old and bad but his problem is he was trained by the bad-mouthing Robert Starr, both are or were poor fiction writers. They both try to stir fans to get more readers. Dishonest? In my opinion yes. (We read the newspaper but not his column) but Hall is riding a dead steer in the newspaper business. The paper gets thinner and thinner and the young people by and large do not pick up a newspaper and they (it is predicted) will take that into their adulthood. Now Hall's newspaper wants you to buy the article in order to read it. Could you see someone buying into every article that they want to read? Forget that! There is too many other ways to get the information, news and even advertisements where they get 85% of their income. I do not know the solution for the newspapers but their gradual demise (for some their demise is imminent). Bottom line is be grateful for blogs such as this one. Admittedly, some blogs are bad but so are most newspapers.
Speaking of being grateful, I'm very grateful to have access to Razorback news, provided by this blog.
I hope the RazorBloggers Network is around for many years to come. You guys do a great job.
Many thanks, Merry Christmas and a happy 2010.
Thanks Gonzo!
Hey jimm dogg
I was wondering what does Rush Limbaugh, George W Bush, and George Wallace have to do with sports?