Speaking of which, I heard of a furniture store having a Bobby Knight sale ... If you buy a couch, they will throw in a chair for free.
Speaking of free, Michigan fans who stayed in Michigan for the Rose Bowl are probably glad they got to watch that game for free. Even at that, it was overpriced. Of course, several weeks ago, in search of abuse (here and here), I posted that I thought Michigan did not deserve a chance to play for the national championship, having lost to OSU. Should I feel vindicated? It appears, from my angle, that the OSU game was an overachievement. Playing the emotional back of a rivalry game and a "win one for the gipper ... errrr ... Bo" they managed a three point loss after having been pretty well pushed around. Then they show up in Pasadena to be abused ... badly. Not good for Michigan football or Lloyd Carr. Turns out they rode the Notre Dame game a little farther than it should have taken them. They didn't have many impressive wins besides that. Over-rated? That's what the crowd thought last night. And how can we argue with them?
Back then, I thought USC was the second best team in the country. I said,"This is one reason why I think USC has a strong case: Their three non-conference games were Arkansas (#11), Nebraska (#22), and Notre Dame (#12). [Compared to Michigan's Vandy, Notre Dame, Central Michigan, and Ball State). So they [USC] definitely scheduled up, not down." It remains to be seen how well Florida and OSU will play. But USC is not the 8th best team in the country. And Michigan is not the 2nd best.
I asked back then , "If Michigan loses to USC, will you admit that the BCS got it right, even if the method was flawed?" I wonder if someone might offer an answer now? Michigan not only lost, they lost badly. They did not seem to make any adjustments at all. Might it be true that LLLLLLLoyd Carr can't coach the big one?
Speaking of Lloyd Carr. If you remember a few weeks ago, he complained publicly about Florida's campaigning for a spot in the BCS. Now, this just from Michigan Replay:
"As long as you have a president, like they have at Florida, who goes out and campaigns publicly through the media for his school to get in there, rather than allowing the system to work, I think there's going to be a lot of discontent," Carr said of Florida's Bernie Machen, ironically a former U-M provost. "Thank goodness we've got a president at Michigan (Mary Sue Coleman) who is concerned about keeping Michigan as the No. 1 public university in the country."It appears that Bernie Machen knows more about who deserved to play in that game than Carr did. It seems like "the system" got this one right. The discontent should be directed at Carr for his abysmal coaching performance (not to mention his whining).
Speaking of deserving to play, how about Boise State? I am not saying they should play OSU, but you have to admit, that would be an interesting matchup. Playing in the WAC is not impressive, but beating OU in the manner they did is. It had to be the game of the year. Or at least the ninety seconds of the year. When OU tied it, I thought Boise State would come up with a score to win. When OU intercepted on the first play and scored. I thought it was over. Turns out, I underestimated Boise State. The best was yet to come. Sending the quarterback out wide on the tying score, and then pulling the Statue of Liberty out of the bag of tricks to win the game rather than go for the tie was gutsy. And exciting.
Now we have to wait a week for OSU/Florida? Why? Let's end it now. That game should be tonight.
Memo to self: In 2007, take over college football so it will be done right.
Finally , the dumbest rule in college football has to be the rule that penalties on touchdowns are enforced on the kickoff. When the kickoff goes into the end zone on teh kickoff anyway, giving the kicker fifteen fewer yards is hardly equitable. So here's the new rule: Defensive penalties on scores are enforced on the first play from scrimmage after the kickoff.