It's long, but it's hilarious.

Two of the topics related to FAU's weekend in Austin: No. 10 and No. 6

ERROR: A link was posted here (url) but it appears to be a broken link.

Gump4Heisman

10) Getting into it with 'The Greatest Generation'

‘Sit down.’ ‘We can’t see the game.’ ‘I pay money for these seats.’ ‘I like Ike.’

You’re bound to hear it. You’re at a game. You stand up. You cheer. And, mostly, it goes by unnoticed.

Then, at some point, the grey-hairs in the back start bitching. And rightfully so. The way they see it, they didn’t see their buddies die face down in the Battle of Antietam so young whippersnappers in zoot suits could stand up and act all uppity.

You pay it no mind. You glance back. Finally, the smuggled sock-bourbon forces it out of you:

‘Listen old man, it’s 4th and 1. Either stand up and watch, or just imagine the shit like you did during the golden era of radio.’

And before you know it, you have General Longstreet’s superior officer coming at you with an AARP seat cushion like he’s Sonny Corleone by an open fire hydrant.

The fight will rage on for eternity.

You’ll never see eye-to-eye. And not just because he’s bent over like an on-duty prostitute. Because you’re from two entirely different worlds.

When you were in college, 50 Cent was a rapper. When he was in college, 50 Cent was a damn good salary.


6) Breaking the spirit of the irritating small-school fan

You know that guy in your office, who invariably went to some non-BCS school, that’s more of an annoying cunt than Gilbert Gottfried in a full vagina outfit? You know, the guy who cheers for the impossibly mediocre program yet has unbearably high expectations at the start of every season?

“Man, I don’t know, I just have this feeling this year. If our transfer JUCO QB can come around and the 12 freshmen on our offensive line can step up, I think our brand-new inexperienced coordinator will have a lot to work with and it won't really matter than our only scholarship running back runs a 23-minute 40. Shoot, we might surprise some folks in the [insert conference of choice].”

No, you aren’t surprising anyone. Your team's mascot should be Danny Devito. Your favorite team is a legalized midget. And yet every year you display the same fuck-me-in-the-brain hope syndrome.


And last year only made things worse. Giving these assholes the parity-driven ‘07 season was like handing a homeless guy the keys to a non-existant Jaguar. False hope abounds.

South Florida. Boston College. Appalachian State. Kansas.


Thanks Football Gods. Now, dumb assholes everywhere think teams like the Tulane Green Wave are going to pull a BCS six-peat.


At the start of the season, these small-time dreamers are more annoying than big-school blowhards.


But, come October, when their team is sporting a fat 3-loss lip, the bounce in their step has been replaced by cold, hard, satisfying reality.

If you have a state university coffee mug, this is the time to bring it to work.

Big school, little school, whatever.  I have a feeling the BCS's days are numbered.  It won't be this year or next year, but the general trend in giving more inclusion to the non-BCS schools smacks of appeasement.  And there probably will be more of these efforts – BCS bowl revenue sharing, maybe.  But I'm sure there's a lawsuit coming down in the not-too-distant future to try to end this good ol' boy system once and for all.

When the NCAA has essentially created a system that calls everyone equal, but separates a select few conferences from the pack for the big paydays, while giving everyone else whatever residue remains, it is an inherently unequal system.  It's creates a cycle whereby the powerful schools stay rich and powerful, enabling them to invest further in the football program – nicer stadiums, more revenue, more marketing, better facilities, extra tutoring. (Did anybody notice how many of those APR schools were mid-majors?)

So the guy who wrote #6 can bite me.  Enjoy it while you can buddy.

The said

Big school, little school, whatever.  I have a feeling the BCS's days are numbered.  It won't be this year or next year, but the general trend in giving more inclusion to the non-BCS schools smacks of appeasement.

Pretty much…the NCAA is all about leveling the playing field…and lets face it, one of the big things keeping smaller schools from growing larger, bigger, and better athletically is this very system which keeps the $ in just what you said:

"The good ol' boy network".

It was fine back in the day when there were "big schools" who were big simply "because"…but now, in this day and age, there is no need to allow them to be "protected"…put it out there for the Appalachian States of the world!

Only problem with this stance is that these schools sit on committees and have voting rights, and wil do everything in their power to keep it locked.

Florida_Owl said

It was fine back in the day when there were "big schools" who were big simply "because"…but now, in this day and age, there is no need to allow them to be "protected"…put it out there for the Appalachian States of the world!

Only problem with this stance is that these schools sit on committees and have voting rights, and wil do everything in their power to keep it locked.

I'm not even thinking about the App States because there are some schools that choose to play in lower divisions because it's cheaper – fewer scholarships, less facility upkeep, etc.  I'm just talking about how the NCAA has allowed what has effectively become Division I-A and Division I-a.  Same number of scholarships, same rules, but undoubtedly unequal opportunities.

And yes, they do want to keep it locked up, and that's where we have a problem.  I don't know really know the law, but when they talk about antitrust, it looks a lot like this.

Maybe if you took away all the rules, the college football landscape would look the same.  Fair enough.  But the divide between the haves and have-nots would probably stop growing, and for some schools it would shrink as they could gain a little momentum, like a Boise State, which would translate into revenue, better facilities, and all that other stuff I said before.  If nothing more, it would be more honest, without all the "if"s of the BCS – if this and that and that and this and the other thing, maybe we'll let a non-BCS team into the show.

Twenty years ago, a mid-major could make a run at the title.  BYU won it in '84 out of the WAC, Air Force made a run in '85 and was in serious consideration for an Orange Bowl slot until losing to BYU.  Miami was arguably a mid-major when it won the title in '83, and FSU probably was when it went to back-to-back Orange Bowls in '80 and '81, playing what was then the equivalent of a CUSA schedule. (Of course, those were the days of the independents.  Ahh, those were the days. :D )  And Miami and FSU were able to make up a lot of ground quickly, largely because they weren't locked out of a system that is owned by six conferences.

But how many times since, say, 1990 has a mid-major made a serious run?  Certainly not in the BCS era.  Utah and Boise never had a real shot at the title, locked out by the advanced calculus that determines who plays in the big game.  And furthermore, they will have to continue to jump through the BCS hoops, and likely won't have a chance at improving their lot much under the current system.

You're absolutely right – there no need for the protection of the BCS other than to keep the pot of gold where it is.

The said

And yes, they do want to keep it locked up, and that's where we have a problem.  I don't know really know the law, but when they talk about antitrust, it looks a lot like this.

Twenty years ago, a mid-major could make a run at the title.  BYU won it in '84 out of the WAC, Air Force made a run in '85 and was in serious consideration for an Orange Bowl slot until losing to BYU.  Miami was arguably a mid-major when it won the title in '83, and FSU probably was when it went to back-to-back Orange Bowls in '80 and '81, playing what was then the equivalent of a CUSA schedule. (Of course, those were the days of the independents.  Ahh, those were the days. :D )  And Miami and FSU were able to make up a lot of ground quickly, largely because they weren't locked out of a system that is owned by six conferences.

Good point on the antitrust…i wonder why they dont look at it that way…in essence, that is basically what it is…

I guess because most lawmakers dont view college athletics a sa "for profit" institution??

Interesting…….

To get back on topic here,  Good find Smitty!  I was cracking up here in the office reading that.  I love the #1 rant about ESPN.

ESPN hates your dad, unless you hate your dad, then ESPN loves your dad.

The said

Florida_Owl said

It was fine back in the day when there were "big schools" who were big simply "because"…but now, in this day and age, there is no need to allow them to be "protected"…put it out there for the Appalachian States of the world!

Only problem with this stance is that these schools sit on committees and have voting rights, and wil do everything in their power to keep it locked.

I'm not even thinking about the App States because there are some schools that choose to play in lower divisions because it's cheaper – fewer scholarships, less facility upkeep, etc.  I'm just talking about how the NCAA has allowed what has effectively become Division I-A and Division I-a.  Same number of scholarships, same rules, but undoubtedly unequal opportunities.

And yes, they do want to keep it locked up, and that's where we have a problem.  I don't know really know the law, but when they talk about antitrust, it looks a lot like this.

Maybe if you took away all the rules, the college football landscape would look the same.  Fair enough.  But the divide between the haves and have-nots would probably stop growing, and for some schools it would shrink as they could gain a little momentum, like a Boise State, which would translate into revenue, better facilities, and all that other stuff I said before.  If nothing more, it would be more honest, without all the "if"s of the BCS – if this and that and that and this and the other thing, maybe we'll let a non-BCS team into the show.

Twenty years ago, a mid-major could make a run at the title.  BYU won it in '84 out of the WAC, Air Force made a run in '85 and was in serious consideration for an Orange Bowl slot until losing to BYU.  Miami was arguably a mid-major when it won the title in '83, and FSU probably was when it went to back-to-back Orange Bowls in '80 and '81, playing what was then the equivalent of a CUSA schedule. (Of course, those were the days of the independents.  Ahh, those were the days. :D )  And Miami and FSU were able to make up a lot of ground quickly, largely because they weren't locked out of a system that is owned by six conferences.

But how many times since, say, 1990 has a mid-major made a serious run?  Certainly not in the BCS era.  Utah and Boise never had a real shot at the title, locked out by the advanced calculus that determines who plays in the big game.  And furthermore, they will have to continue to jump through the BCS hoops, and likely won't have a chance at improving their lot much under the current system.

You're absolutely right – there no need for the protection of the BCS other than to keep the pot of gold where it is.

I know I will be pulling for ECU and Fresno State to get it done this year just to crash the party.

ECU still has West Virginia and Fresno State plays Wisconsin. If they can both win those games against really tough teams and then win out they should have a serious case for a BCS game. Utah also should have a chance. It would be great to see a team from CUSA and a team from the WAC both get into the BCS.

GO OWLS!!!