College Upsets

With the Cubs clinching and the Bears spiraling downward, college football provided plenty of entertainment this weekend — with great odds for the underdogs.

The Illini upset #21 Penn State with a tenacious defense and an explosive freshman named Arrelious Benn.  This has the potential to be a turning point in Coach Ron Zook’s program, and my Illini have the surprise upset I believe they need to head toward bowl eligibility.  See more thoughts on this game on my favorite Illini blog. 

The Colorado Buffs made headlines with a 4th quarter comeback over #3 Oklahoma, and I can imagine the excitement of my two favorite CU fans at this step back to respectability.  Elsewhere in the Big 12, Kansas State dominated #7 Texas in Austin,  and Colt McCoy proved he’s not quite Vince’s heir (yet) with 5 interceptions.  These losses should make next weekend’s OU/Texas game pretty intense.

It’s hard to admit that the PAC-10 is looking really good.  Washington challenged USC, and Cal/Oregon was exciting. 

The Big Ten isn’t doing much for its reputation, with Indiana winning at Iowa, Northwestern leading Michigan for much of the game, and Wisconsin just holding on over Michigan State.  Purdue dominated Notre Dame.  However, with all the losses, Ohio State and Wisconsin rose to the top 10.

Auburn’s road victory over #4 Florida was much appreciated, possibly taking them out of the national title picture.  And the Big East is all over the board with West Virginia and Rutgers losing and South Florida, a very young program, shooting into the top 10 for next week.  Notre Dame is an unheard-of 0-5 on the season, and their schedule only gets tougher over the next few weeks.

And all of this reinforces my belief that parity is growing in college football.  Only LSU and USC stand out right now, though the latter has shown some vulnerabilities.

I’m looking forward to next week…

 By the way, congratulations to Brett Farve on setting the new career TD pass record.  I don’t like the Packers, but I can appreciate Farve’s career.  However, it would be poetic for him to set the interception record this season, as well.

The Case for the Cubs (Short Version)

[Depending on how lazy I am, there may or may not be a long version before the playoffs get underway.]

I know there’s talk about how the Cubs “backed in” with the sweep at the hands of the Marlins and the record which is only like 6th best in the NL. And yes, they’ve been up and down this year. Being on both ends of a sweep over the past week might be a good place to start looking at that. And yes, this playoff chase looks to be a long and difficult road. I’m not predicting 11-0 or anything. I’m not even predicting a World Series appearance (yet).

But consider this. Over the last four months, the Cubs have the best record in the NL. And, had they been able to extend their current clip over the entire season, they’d be somewhere in the neighborhood of 94 wins, easily good enough for best in the NL. The biggest thing dragging their record down isn’t the little ups and downs of the last few months. Every team has those. The biggest thing dragging them down is that horrendous first two months. And I don’t think anyone doubts that the Cubs team of those first two months is not the same team we’ve seen over the last four.

While the Cubs haven’t been the best team over the entire haul, I think a case could be made that they are the best team in the NL at this moment in time. And this moment is what counts. I don’t think I’d go so far as to say that they are definitively the current best team in the NL. But I think a case could be made–and certainly a good enough case to put any “backed in” chatter to rest.

Let the (hopefully) long and crazy ride begin.

Carlson vs. Gundy (ding!)

Mike Gundy spun youtube gold when he ranted on in excess of three minutes over a column written by Jenni Carlson. As we all know by now, Carlson questioned the toughness of OK State’s recently demoted QB and Gundy went off.

One issue is the stringency, or lack thereof, that media members should use when covering college athletes. Granted, they are not pro athletes. They don’t get a paycheck, per se, for doing this. They’re kids, all of 19 or 20 years old. On the other hand, they get a free education, numerous other perks, fame and fortune, and the opportunity to obtain a whole lot more fame and fortune if they play well. Having some random columnist write some random column about you seems to be a small price to pay for all that. You can sign me up for that deal. And I’ll bet a lot of other people would take one look at their student loan bills and agree it’s a pretty sweet setup. Despite the media presence surrounding college athletics, college campuses tend to be fairly insular, and it’s much easier to just ignore and rise above the bad press. Much easier than if you’re, say, Rex Grossman, and tidings of your suckage literally land on your doorstep every single morning.

And the fact is that these programs need the media just as much as the media needs these programs. Media coverage –> more $$$ for your program –> the continuance of your scholarships along with better facilities plus other bells and whistles –> the improvement and/or continued excellence of your program –> more media
coverage –> etc. Some coaches and athletes may consider the media the devil, but they’ve made quite the deal with this devil.

Now, did Carlson cross a line when she all but questioned Bobby Reid’s virility not just as a football player but as a man? My inclination is to say yes. If I were her editor, I would’ve left the guts of her column in tact but asked her to tone down the opening and few other choice parts (especially given that she didn’t even witness the famed chicken-feeding incident). She could have gotten her point across loud and clear without resorting to a few tactics that are at least borderline bad form. Certain sections of this column don’t so much make her point as obscure it, given that they direct all the rhetorical heat to her choice of words and not to the issue itself.

But then again, Gundy also crossed a line when he questioned her fitness as a mother in his press conference. I think there’s more than a hint of sexism here. If a male columnist had written this article, I doubt Gundy would have questioned that man’s fitness as a father. But Carlson did call into question Reid’s fitness as a man. She was the one who initially threw down this “living up to the burdens of your sex” gauntlet. So it’s not quite the unvarnished, raging sexism that Carlson’s staunchest defenders will claim.

Here’s the big difference and the real problem for Gundy. Writing critical columns is within the professional province of a journalist. It’s her job. Delivering loud, ranting, crazed, ill-timed tirades is not within the professional province of a college football coach, particularly when the focus should be on your team’s crucial win. Carlson may have crossed a few lines, but she at least stayed within the borders of what she’s paid to do, what she’s expected to do, what everyone (coach and players included) knows full well she’s there to do. Gundy just about went off the map entirely, and I think he did Reid and his entire team a huge disservice in doing so. Did they win? Who cares. Is Reid really lacking in mental toughness? Who knows. Is Mike Gundy completely unhinged? Well, at least we know the answer to that one.

Another problem Gundy has is his response to Carlson’s response. After terming the column “fiction,” Gundy was asked to cite the instances where the facts were incorrect. His eloquent response: “I don’t have to.” Come again? If you call someone a liar, you should at the very least be prepared to back up that rather serious assertion. At the risk of wading back into the cesspool that started this whole thing, Mike Gundy really needs to act like a man here, and not some whinging infant beset by an odd mix of arrogance and pansy ass-edness. You want to fling accusations about while popping a blood vessel in front of the whole world? Fine. But at least have the decency and intestinal fortitude to back those words up.

Bowling?

TheWittyOne posed a good question to my last college football post about the potential bowl-eligibility of my Illini.  Let me say I am cautiously optimistic that the Illini could have the required 6 wins at the end of the season that may give us a chance to go to the Daisy.com Bowl in some exoctic locale like Des Moines that no one cares about except the rabid fans that will travel anywhere.  (Note: Should the Illini receive a Bowl invitation, I will be among the group that cares too much.)

However, based on the Indiana game last weekend, I’m feeling a bit more cautious.  The Illini offense was sloppy, but fortunately Indiana made lots of mistakes, too.  Rashard Mendenhall was impressive, with more than 200 yards on the ground, and he is the reason Illinois leads the Big Ten in rushing.  But Indiana’s defense ranks in the middle to the bottom of the conference. 

And although J Leman leads the Big Ten in tackles and Vontae Davis is starting to show the promise he was recruited for, I’m also not convinced the defense is ready for anyone.  They allowed the Hoosiers to move almost at will until they got close to scoring.  They had some fantastic stands, racked up 7 sacks, and did a good job containing Thigpen, but against better opponents, I’m not convinced they will hold as well. 

We have 3 wins, so we only need 3 more.  When I look at the schedule, I feel pretty good about our chances, but much depends on the psyche of a young team learning to win.  We have some really tough games coming up before we face weaker teams again, so I hope my boys still remember how to win in a few weeks.

Next week Penn State will visit Champaign.  I know JoePa and company left the Big House with a loss, but I think their chances are much better against the young Illini.  Here’s hoping Leman & co. spend quite a bit of time in Morelli’s face, but I still see this as a long shot for the Illini.  Then comes Wisconsin, also in Champaign.  This will be even tougher, and I’m not confident that the home field advantage will be enough.  We proved we could play with the Badgers for one half last year, and although we’ve improved, I think a whole game will be a challenge.  Not impossible, but unlikely.  Iowa on the road will be a stretch, as well.  Although Michigan is improving, we have a shot at them at home, but by that point in the season, this will be a tough game, too.  Then we have Ball State for Homecoming.  I felt really good about this game until I saw that team take Nebraska to the wire.   But still, it’s a big home game, so I will believe the best.  Ohio State at the Horseshoe will be incredibly difficult, but we should be able to take the Gophers in Minneapolis and Northwestern at home. 

I’ve got two more games in the win column, and the attitude and raw talent of this team should beat Ball State and maybe pull an upset in the mediocre Big Ten — provided Juice, Benn, Menenhall, Leman and other key players remain healthy.

And that’s my long answer to a simple question.  Go Illini!

One Word

Unravel.

As it in fall apart. Come undone. Go to pieces.  As in BAD.

The defense is decimated, the offense is inept and disaster is just a loss to the Lions away. I’ll admit I joined those fans chanting, “Griese! Griese!” Or at least I smirked approvingly. But here’s a message for those fans: Griese is not actually that good. I realize that fact tends to get lost. Bears fans are always convinced that the would-be franchise savior is wearing a baseball cap on the sidelines. But an injury riddled defense + a fumbleriffic running game + Griese = about the same number of wins you’d get if you substituted Grossman into that equation. Maybe you get fewer of those spectacularly bad interceptions. Maybe it shows up on the scoreboard. But I don’t think it shows up in the win column.

Not that I’m advocating for Grossman’s job. He’s burned up all his chances and then some. A move to Griese would be 110% justified at this point in time. But realism forces me to admit that’s not going to turn this rapidly sinking ship around. Then again, who knows. The Eagles probably didn’t think Jeff Garcia was their savior last year (though that move was forced by injury) and it turned out he did more than OK for himself.

The only small silver lining is that, if we are going to turn this ship around, the schedule sets up fairly well for that. Our next game is against the Lions, who we absolutely should beat, even if we’re not at full strength. That gives us a game get well, plus either (a) get Griese up to speed, or (b) see if Rex can get his head right. Then we roll on to a showdown with the first-place Packers (oh how that phrase pains me), a make-or-break game for our season. If we can beat the Packers, we’re no more than a game out of first place. And we carry that momentum forward. If we lose to the Packers, then our playoff dreams are probably cooked and we fail to avoid the Superbowl Losers Curse that has has afflicted so many other teams of recent years. If we lose to the Lions…let’s just not even think about that.

The plan for Lovie seems pretty simple. Get the defense back on track. They had one bad half. Don’t let that go to their heads. Get them healthy. And split the first team snaps 50/50 between Grossman and Griese. Rex gets the message. Next week, he’s got a quarter, maybe a half, to save his job. This is the same tactic that they used last season, when Rex appeared to be playing himself right out of a starting job. And it worked, at least temporarily. Rex did OK, we made it to the Superbowl, and he didn’t lose it for us.

But the question now becomes: was that fix only postponing the inevitable? I think the answer is yes. Barring a turnaround of miraculous proportions, the Bears aren’t going to give Grossman the contract he’s after. His career in Chicago seems to be just about over. I’ve always thought the guy got more flack than he deserved. But sooner or later, the blame has to fall to him. He could have outplayed the bad press, like he did for the first several games of last season. But he hasn’t done that with any consistency. As an erstwhile Rex defender, I’m about ready to write his football obituary. With the disastrous combination of deserved bad press and undeserved bad press, no other team is probably going to want Rex except as a back-up, maybe even a third-stringer. What franchise can afford the fan backlash of signing Rex Grossman?

And it sucks, because it really couldn’t have happened to a nicer guy.

Parity

The concept of parity is most popular during March Madness, but I expect to hear more of it this fall, given the state of college football.  Quite a few top-25 teams have fallen to unranked opponents, both on the road and at home.  While a few teams have clearly dominated (USC, LSU, Oklahoma, Florida), it seems that the playing field is slowly leveling.

This weekend, as Big Ten conference play opened, Michigan found their defense and capitalized on mistakes to beat ranked Penn State at home.  Syracuse, who ranks near the bottom of major conference schools in most offensive categories, lost to Iowa away and Illinois at home two weeks in a row, and but then beat ranked Louisville on the road.  Texas A&M, ranked in the top 25, visited unranked Miami as an underdog and lost big.  South Florida has appeared on the radar out of nowhere (also known as southwestern Florida).  And Nebraska barely survived a visit from Ball State, while Wofford upset Appalachian State.  Yes, there are still many scores that are as lopsided as expected, but it seems that the number of unexpected upsets is growing.

All this to say that the gap between traditional powerhouses and the rest of the world is narrowing.  And given the number of top-25 teams that have been upset, I am even more uncomfortable with the magic BCS computer/human formula that tries to bring us a national champion.

Week 4 of the college football season brought some fantastic games.  The Illini won at Indiana, and Wisconsin ground out a defensive battle with Iowa.  (Yes, I realize the Big Ten is mediocre at best, but I’m a loyal fan.)  Notre Dame made history with their 0-4 record, though they did manage offensive TDs.  Texas Tech lost to Oklahoma State in a nail-biter.  Georgia overcame the Tide in overtime.  And I finally got to watch College Gameday.  Good stuff!

Sing With Me Now

Do the Milwaukee Brewers have a song? I don’t think they do. I had to make one up last night, upon hearing that Milwaukee had lost, thus putting up 1.5 games up, including 1 game in that all-important loss column. It started off as the Hallelujah Chorus:

Hallelujah! Hallelujah!

But it needed some more words, so I went into the verses.

For the Lord God omnipotent reigneth!
And the Brewers, they su-uck! And the Brewers, they su-uck!

If you don’t know me, you think I’m being funny right now. If you do know me, you realize I really did walk around singing this. Still funny, but also kind of sad.

Even though I honestly don’t consider the Brewers all that hateable, my hatred of Milwaukee as a city is legendary. It is an ugly, pointless city with no discernable reason for existing. So I occasionally like to pop onto the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel’s website just to see what’s going through the little ol’ minds of Milwaukeeans. But I have to admit I actually really enjoyed this article about the up-and-down agony of being a Brewers fan these last weeks. I enjoyed it partly because, if you change a few parts, it pretty much describes the last few weeks months years for Cubs fans as well. Welcome to our ongoing nightmare, neighbors to the north! I found myself agreeing with observations such as:

Shame about the schedule, though. When did the Brewers and Cubs last play each other? 2006?

Because yeah, considering how we whipped them in the season series, it would be nice to bring the Brewers back in for another go-round.

I even enjoyed this part:

You hate the Cubs because they’re from Chicago, period. No other excuses needed. But, just in case, you hate them even more when they start pulling out games in the ninth inning and you watch and hear those Wrigley Field fans who have suddenly put down their cell phones and covered up their tank tops and roar for–good grief, can there be any nickname in baseball lamer than this –the “Cubbies.”

So what if they’ve waited around a century for another World Series title in Yuppieville, Wrigleyville or whatever they call that neighborhood of bars and a ballpark on Chicago’s north side.

It’s nice to see them showing a little spunk. And hey, I can appreciate a little bit of good snark, even if it’s at my expense and even if it’s so completely based on tired and rote stereotypes as to be rendered entirely unimaginative and uninspired.

Now, if you really want some good snark at the expense of the Cubbies, you could take a look at our song. We have a real song. And it goes a little something like this:

Baseball season’s underway
Well you better get ready for a brand new day (ed note: a “brand new day” that looks suspiciously like all the old days)
Hey Chicago, what do you say
The Cubs are gonna win today

They’re singing
Go Cubs go (ed note: “as far away as possible” is implied)
Go Cubs go
Hey Chicago, what do you say
The Cubs are gonna win today (ed note: we hope)

Go Cubs go
Go Cubs go
Hey Chicago, what do you say
The Cubs are gonna win today

They got the power, they got the speed
To be the best in the National League (ed note: the NL Central would be a nice start)
Well this is the year and Cubs are real (ed note: laughter optional here)
So come on down to Wrigley Field (ed note: watch for falling concrete, yuppies)

We’re singing now
Go Cubs go
Go Cubs go
Hey Chicago, what do you say
The Cubs are gonna win today

Go Cubs go
Go Cubs go
Hey Chicago, what do you say
The Cubs are gonna win today

Baseball time is here again
You can catch it all on WGN (ed note: shameless)
So stamp your feet and clap your hands
Chicago Cubs got the greatest fans (ed note: just ask Carlos Zambrano)

You’re singing now
Go Cubs go
Go Cubs go
Hey Chicago, what do you say
The Cubs are gonna win today

Go Cubs go
Go Cubs go
Hey Chicago, what do you say
The Cubs are gonna win today (ed note: or Milwaukee’s going to lose…same effect either way)

Surprisingly Useful: Hunter Pence

At one point, theCleverOne and I had discussed the possibility of including Hunter Pence in our “Surprisingly Hot” series. However, we reasoned that it might be too much too soon, given that we’d already spotlighted a young baseball player having a breakout year (see: Hamels, Cole). And honestly, given the fact that he seems to have really good games against us, I wasn’t feeling particularly affectionate toward him anyway (though he is kind of hot in the way that you’d notice your friend’s somewhat younger brother is hot).

But with his game-winning hit last night, a win that knocked the Brewers back down a game behind us, I must admit that he is not only a little bit hot, but occasionally useful. Thanks, Hunter. We owe you!

Lou Is At It Again

This ridiculousness with the rotation is getting, well, ridiculous. Given that Zambrano threw a rather Trachsel-like effort of 4 runs allowed in 5 2/3 innings, let the questioning begin anew.

Phil Rogers, who often annoys me, praised this move as oh-so-gutsy after the Trachsel-on-three-days-rest portion of the plan went well. He liked the fact that Trachsel’s win allowed Zambrano to start against the Cardinals, thereby hopefully stopping those evil redbirds in their tracks (this was back when those Cards still had a chance, remember).

Piniella won his latest gamble, getting five solid innings from Steve Trachsel in a 6-2 victory over the Houston Astros. It moved the Cubs back into first place in the National League Central, giving Zambrano a half-game lead to protect Friday night when he faces the Cardinals in St. Louis.

Piniella messed with his starting rotation when the safe thing to do—the smart thing, probably—would have been to keep his guys in order. He didn’t want to take a chance on St. Louis pounding Trachsel to take a head of steam into Saturday’s doubleheader, so he pitched his fifth starter on three days’ rest against Houston instead.

“Adrenaline can take you a long way,” Piniella said.

He’s right.

But now he thinks it’s a stupid plan. While starting Lilly on three days’ rest (tonight) gets Lilly an extra start before the end of the year, it doesn’t get Zambrano any extra starts. He was getting three more no matter what. And the Cardinal-thwarting part of this plan, once to be praised, is now a minor side benefit we should probably pooh-pooh as not worth the risk.

But the decision to use Trachsel on short rest last Thursday in Houston and Zambrano on short rest Tuesday against the Reds wasn’t a necessary part of this. Had Piniella kept Z on his regular schedule he was going to get three starts in the last two weeks of the season, including the one on Tuesday; he’s still only going to get three starts in the last two weeks of the season. So the only thing that seems to have possibly been gained was that Zambrano started last Friday in St. Louis, in the opener of the Cardinals series, rather than getting a start against Houston the day before.

Also, as Rogers points out, even with the quasi four-man rotation, we’ll still need one more spot start (probably from Trachsel) near the end of the season.

Also, as TheSassyOne demonstrated last week, there was a way to get Zambrano against the Cards while still keeping him and Lilly on normal rest: by starting Trachsel last night and having Z go tonight instead. On this plan, Zambrano would also start on Tuesday the 25th (with an extra day of rest due to the two off days) and then be in line to start the final game of the season on Sunday the 30th. So he still gets his three starts. Everyone else goes pretty much in order except that Trachsel would take a spot start at some point, probably Friday the 28th in my reasoning.

The only drawbacks are the aforementioned one less start for Lilly and the fact that using Zambrano in the last game of the season means he won’t be available until at least game 2 of any NLDS the Cubs might be playing in. However, I don’t know that these are really powerful drawbacks. First of all, if we’ve managed to wrap the division up before the last game of the season (please, dear God) then there’s no drawback at all because we don’t need that last game and therefore don’t need to start Z. And we’re set with Zambrano and a rested Ted Lilly to go in the first two games of the playoffs. However, if we do need that last game, who better to start it than your purported ace? And we’ll still have a rested Ted Lilly to start the playoffs for us. Lilly’s been at least as reliable as Zambrano, often more. Of course, if we need that magical game 163 to make the playoffs, then we’d be kind of screwed, because we’d have to burn up Zambrano on 162 and Lilly on 163. However, Piniella’s plan has the same drawback, except that we’d use Lilly on 162 and Zambrano on 163. And really, you have no choice. It’s kind of foolish to try to protect your playoff rotation if you haven’t even made the playoffs yet.

I realize all this sounds like a lot of planning and re-planning and moving and re-moving guys around. But actually, this plan requires the LEAST amount of rearranging. In this plan, the only oddities are starting Trachsel on three days’ rest last week (already done) and giving Trachsel a spot start a week from Friday, which has to happen anyway. And blame the schedulers for that, giving us several extended stretches of multiple games and then two days off within the last week and a half of the season. That’s going to jack with your rotation no matter what. Everything else proceeds as normal. 

Piniella is the one moving the performing monkeys here, there and everywhere. And so far, I think it would be charitable to describe those results as mixed.

PS: How much does Houston suck? I guess there’s no shame in throwing games when you’re really just as pathetic as they are.

Update: Well, during our discussion on Jim Hendry I remarked that Ted Lilly was making Hendry look like a genius. Now it’s his turn to make Lou Piniella look like a genius. Ted Lilly: $40 million and so far he’s been worth every last penny of it. Lou also announced that Marquis will actually be starting game 163, should it be required (dear God, no!). This actually makes more sense–in Lou Piniella Land, that is.

Friendly Advice

Dear Charlie,

It’s called an offensive line — those guys lined up in front of Jimmy.  Their job description, in basic terms, includes (though is not limited to):

1. Snapping the ball; preferably to the QB — not past him
2. Preventing the QB from spending the entire game on his rear; seriously, 22 sacs in 3 games might start to get to the QB’s head, especially a true freshman
3. Pass protection; you may or may not realize that it takes receivers a few seconds to run their routes and the QB a few seconds to find them, but the defense rarely waits politely for the pass to be completed before attacking
4. Blocking for the run; it’s easier for the ball carrier to gain yards if defenders aren’t in the way
5. Intimidation; you want the opposing defense to take these guys seriously, they should be big and it should hurt to hit them

As you are well aware, your team has not quite lived up to Notre Dame expectations this season, and you have a tough schedule.  An O-line would make quite a difference, especially in the painful highlights that we watched over and over and over on Saturday — you know, the one where Jimmy is surrounded by Wolverines in the backfield, with not a white jersey in sight.

I hope you and your boys are having fun at “Training Camp!”

Sincerely,
TheCleverOne