As not many of you may know, I decided to step in and handle the Big Ten Roundtable for Week 6, on account of nobody signing up for it. By the looks of the response, still not many of those that even responded know. Just to clarify, I’m Vico and I run this subpar Buckeye blog and I’m the one responsible for the unnecessarily wordy questions this week. A lot of confusion on that regard, as, initially, half the respondents thought that Beauford Bixel at The Only Game That Matters was responsible. He was quick to deflect blame, and rightly so. Enlightened Spartan, however, is still not been enlightened to this fact as he thinks that Zombie Nation is responsible. Lots of fingerpointing going on, but again, it’s my fault and I accept full responsibility. So, to take a cue from the image to the right, “get on with it!”.
Here’s who I have as responding to the questions this week, in order of response.
- Paint the Town Orange (Illinois)
- Boiled Sports (Purdue)
- Zombie Nation (Penn State)
- Enlightened Spartan (Michigan State)
- Maize n Blue Nation (Michigan)
- Lake the Posts (Northwestern)
- Off the Tracks (Purdue)
- The Buckeye Battle Cry (The Ohio State University)
- The Only Game That Matters (Michigan)
- Varsity Blue (Michigan)
- The Nittany Line (Penn State)
And without any further adieu, the questions:
01. We’re all basically in conference play now, sans Purdue who played visitor to Notre Dame over the weekend. What did you see in the conference opener that you liked? What did you see that sucked noodles? If you’re one of the Purdue blogs, what did you see against Notre Dame that has you nervous (or even optimistic) for your conference opener against Penn State this Saturday? Oh, and, have fun with that game, by the way.
I think Boiled Sports (hereafter: BS) took offense to my use of leading zeros in single digit numbers. I know, I rely on them alot (a byproduct of computer programming). BS, and Beauford Bixel, also brought up the “sucked noodles” expression. Evidently no one has seen Futurama. That’s cool.
Anyways, on the topic of Purdue, both BS and Off the Tracks (hereafter: OTT) were already waving the white flag of unconditional surrender to the Nittany Lions, though the game yesterday wasn’t that much of a route for the Lions. Both had little, if anything, good to say about the Boilermakers. Further, BS doesn’t seem to have much good to say about them, or the staff, now (Exhibit A, Exhibit B, Exhibit C). For BS, losing as badly as they did to what’s objectively an iffy at best Notre Dame team is crushing. Notre Dame was one of the closest things to a “gimme” on Purdue’s schedule, and it’s not going to get much better afterwards (Penn State yesterday, then @ Ohio State, @ undefeated Northwestern, Minnesota, Michigan). The offense is inconsistent. Painter is not having a good followup season and Kory Sheets, the one constant for the Purdue offense, continues to be hidden by the staff. OTT also draws attention to the refusal to make in-game adjustments.
Elsewhere, things are looking brighter for Zombie Nation (hereafter: ZN) and The Nittany Line (hereafter: TNL). ZN likes how Penn State responded after getting punched in the mouth early by the Illini, and thinks it’ll bode well for the Badgers in their upcoming games against Wisconsin and Ohio State. TNL also calls attention to Penn State’s ability to move the ball at will, execution blunders aside. Both TNL and ZN touch on the same problem for Penn State going forward: defense. ZN noticed how unstoppable Juice Williams was in the first quarter and TNL drew attention to Penn State’s wanging a coverage at least once every while.
Michigan had a lot to celebrate after last week. They also had a lot to try to ignore, though. You can take a wild guess what Maize n Blue Nation (hereafter: MBN), and Varsity Blue (VB) were upset about. Michigan’s first half was nothing to hold a parade for, as VB reminds us of Michigan’s 31 yards of offense and 5 turnovers in the first half. However, for both MBN and VB, the Wolvereenies responded out of the grave they had dug for themselves. They did it with playcalling adjustments and imposing play from the defensive line. The defense in general gets extra kudos from Michigan fans for keeping Michigan in the game in spite of the offense’s best attempts to lose it. The defense holding the Badgers to 4 FGs and 1 TD off of 5 turnovers made the comeback possible.
The Buckeye Battle Cry (tBBC) represents the lone Buckeye blog responding to these questions, though I’ll chip in with my own observations. Jeff didn’t like the playcalling and the overreliance on the rush, thinking that Pryor needed to have the playbook opened a little more to prep him better for Wisconsin. I personally didn’t have as much of a problem with it, since if Minnesota was going to be unwilling to do anything about it, then there would be no reason to go away from it. Purdue fans would probably sing the same tune regarding Kory Sheets. I had a much bigger problem with the defensive line, and I’ll keep harping on this until they can get me 10 TFLs in a game to shut me up for good. The Minnesota game was an improvement from the disaster in Los Angeles, but Minnesota’s front five just aren’t very good… and our front 4 didn’t look much better. Most pressure came from off the edge, which was nice. Jeff and I, Buckeye blog BFFs4eva, both agree, though: Pryor + Beanie = Crazy Delicious.
Elsewhere, Lake the Posts (LTP) is 5-0 and thinking national championship game against Vanderbilt in Miami after it’s crazy win over the Hawkeyes. The ugly win shows Northwestern’s grit and hard-hitting abilities, in spite of some questions about rush defense. The Only Game That Matters (TOGTM) gets brownie points for taking up the Wisconsin point of view. Paint the Town Orange (PTTO) just doesn’t like Illinois’ defense, but loves the offense (especially the running game). Enlightened Spartan (ES) waxes ecstatic about Michigan State and Mark Dantonio, on whom Buckeye fans everywhere want to declare givesies-backsies. However, ES saw no weaknesses to mention, presumably setting up the Spartans for a promotion to the NFL after this season.
02. Ole Miss punked #4 Florida in Gainesville. #1 USC got punked by Oregon State on national television. What’s the underlying theme behind these bizarre upsets? You guessed it: magic. Some kind of hocus-y pocus-y sorcery in the form of “familiarity”. The idea being pitched around is that these upsets come in conference games because the underdog has played the heavily favored team before, and thus isn’t afraid of them nor surprised by anything they do. Should I buy this idea? Or are these upsets more likely the combination of something more conventional, like great/horrendous gameplanning, preparation and execution by the underdog/favorite team respectively?
I was hoping for a stronger response than I got from most people, but here appears to be the breakdown:
- Pro-Familiarity
- Lake the Posts
- Boiled Sports
- Anti-Familiarity
- Off the Tracks
- The Only Game That Matters
- Varsity Blue
- Enlightened Spartan
- Maize n Blue Nation
Not everyone else fits into the rubric. For LTP and BS, there is a kernel of truth to the familiarity argument. For BS, repeated game iterations make it increasingly more difficult for the superior team to keep winning. For LTP, this also holds and creates corrollary atmosphere obstacles for a team like USC to overcome. However, LTP is quick to note this doesn’t happen a lot in the Big Ten. Though not mentioned by LTP, top-tier Big Ten teams do very well in protecting their house. Before last night, Wisconsin last lost in Camp Randall in 2005. Ohio State has only lost once in Ohio Stadium to Big Ten teams in the past 4 seasons.
However, you can probably tell by the way I worded this question that I’m very skeptical of it. Indeed, it just reminds me that most journalists, like that Jesse Palmer fellow, are dumb and feel the need to reduce observable phenomena to some broader, unknowable and immeasurable holistic force. In this case, the “familiarity” claim is tantamount to saying “God did it”. Though I might be the most skeptical, I’m not alone in expressing reservations with the concept. TOGTM makes the very correct observation that if you want to explain wins and losses, such as Ohio State’s near loss to Ohio or Oregon State’s victory over USC, look at offensive lines. The trenches decide everything. ES also mentions that many upsets need not be limited to conference play (see: App State over Michigan). MBN thinks the added hype around games behoove the underdog teams to prepare better. I think OTT makes the most seminal statement after TOGTM in the reference to Purdue. The Boilers have lots of familiarity with Ohio State and Michigan, though it’s accounted for just one win at either Columbus or Ann Arbor since 1966. Simply put, looking at only cases where perceived “familiarity” is associated with a conference upset ignores every other instance where there’s lots of familiarity that still results in an easy win for the favored team. Upsets are rare events and, just like my momma always told me, never select on the dependent variable.
03. Entering the season, Beanie was the Big Ten’s Heisman favorite. After a few games, Javon Ringer had put up the Heisman stats, though I don’t think anyone could’ve believed that Ringer would have the hype machine necessary to get him to New York. Yet, after this week, I see his name mentioned more and more in the Heisman race. Do you think Ringer, at this pace, gets to New York on something more than a courtesy visit (on courtesy visit, see: everyone last year not named Tim Tebow; everyone in 2006 not named Troy Smith)? How about Daryll Clark? Is Daryll Clark of Penn State legitimately in the Heisman race after week 5?
It’s never too early for a little Heisman talk, is it? BS thinks it is. Even then, I guess this question could be turned around into a referendum of who has the been the conference’s top performer so far. Even though LTP says that this question has been asked before, which is honestly not anything I was aware of. MBN doesn’t think this question is worth considering since the Heisman Trophy is for Big 12 and SEC players only. TOGTM agrees. VB thinks putting Ringer in the Heisman talk is possibly idiotic since his performances are a function of how many touches he gets. Sigh… okay, in spite of most respondents taking some kind of offense to this question, there still was some kind of either/or responses coming in.
PTTO is sold on Clark after watching him gut the Illini defense, though Ringer will lack the hype machine that could get him to New York. BS doesn’t think either Ringer or Clark go to New York, but that Clark has the best chance of the two. LTP thinks that the Spartans can only afforded one loss through October and that Ringer will need at least one 200+ effort in a marquee game to get an invite. Clark, likewise, will need lots of style points and a top 5 finish for the Lions to get a courtesy invite. OTT is sold on Ringer, but still needs to see more of Daryll Clark. tBBC echoes LTP on Ringer’s chances, saying that big games + big wins for Sparty gets Ringer to New York on something more than a courtesy invite. Clark, however, will suffer from having great talent around him cloud his individual achievements. TNL thinks that Ringer’s current pace will get him to New York, but that Clark has no chance. ZN and ES put on their partisan hats for this response.
04. With the nonconference schedule basically over, do you think the Big Ten collectively bettered its standing from the maligned position it was in before the season began? For every Wisconsin victory over Fresno State and Penn State thrashing of Oregon State, there’s Michigan’s turnover bonanza against the Irish and Ohio State’s neutering by USC. Long question short, what sticks out more: the positives or the negatives for the conference?
MBN took offense to this question, citing that only people in Columbus obsess about the conference as a whole, apparently. ES went on some kind of tangent about how Michigan and Ohio State’s woes could be some kind of casus belli for this “change” thing I keep hearing so much about.
Moving on: the consensus appears to be that the nonconference performance of the Big Ten did nothing to acquit itself of the inferior label afforded to it by those mouthbreathers at the WWL. PTTO draws the unmistakeable link between the conference’s two traditional heavyweights (Ohio State and Michigan) and their awful performances. tBBC agrees, noting how the negatives were big games put on national television whereas the positives were carefully tucked away into regional game status. BS and TOGTM answer with an emphatic no to the idea that the Big Ten bettered its perception. VB makes the astute observation that there’s nothing objective about the Big Ten’s performance. If you already had the preconception of Big Ten inferiority, all you gained was new ammunition this season.
However, a few brave souls among us did look at the bright side. ZN argued as such by looking explicitly at the positives, and how Ohio State has rebounded under Pryor, Michigan State’s new Heisman contender, and Penn State and Northwestern’s hot starts. A few others, however, chose to add caveats to their answers. For example, TNL looks at the caveat that Pryor didn’t start and Beanie didn’t play against USC (ed note: with our defensive line, it wouldn’t have mattered much). VB looks at Wisconsin’s well-earned victory in Fresno, Penn State’s humiliation of all foes and Northwestern and Minnesota’s surprising starts. tBBC and BS also note that what’s important is that we know the Big Ten is competitive and that we know where it stands vis-a-vis the other BCS conferences: middle of the road? And why? Because the Big East and ACC did us lots and lots of favors this young season. Much appreciated, boys.
LTP also gets bonus points for bringing up what I’ve been bitching about for a while now: Big Ten teams play road games for bowl games. The only exception is the Motor City Bowl, which is less a bowl game and more a punishment. Let’s bring one of those pansy warmweather SEC teams up to Lambeau Field for a bowl game and see what happens.
05. As I’m sure you may have seen on your moving pictures box, the Ernie Davis movie has been getting a lot of publicity for its imminent release to theatres. The story, of course, centers around the first African-American Heisman winner and some of the trials that come from being a black athlete, playing before the Civil Rights movement and playing in the Cotton Bowl. Does your football program have an uplifting story that you think is movie-worthy? If so, please share it.
Lots of good responses here, which give very interesting looks into the lore of the other programs around the conference. The obvious exception here is PTTO. PTTO couldn’t think of a movie worthy story around Illinois’ program and opted instead to pitch one based on UofI alum Hugh Hefner. I might watch it.
Most surprising for me was that one already exists for Penn State fans. Something for Joey (1977) is the story of Penn State Heisman winner John Cappelletti and his younger brother Joey, who’s afflicted with leukemia. I never heard of the movie and I might have to go find it and take a looksie. TNL also thinks the story of Adam Taliaferro, who was nearly crippled after a brutal hit in a 2000 game in Columbus, only to resume a normal life and earn a law degree, is movie-worthy as well. Former Penn State tackle and macrame enthusiast Rosey Grier also has lived an exciting life that merits consideration for a movie.
The Purdue bloggers both gave insight into the walk-on program at Purdue under Joe Tiller. I had no idea that there was a Nebraska-ish tradition to the walk-on program. This same tradition at Purdue sets up their version of the story of Seth Morales, a walk-on transfer from Butler University who ended up reeling in a bomb from Drew Brees to upset the mighty Buckeyes. Of course, I’m a mean-spirited person, and still think of that as not movie-worthy, per se, but something I haven’t yet gotten an apology for. I’m waiting, Seth Morales. That said, the story is still cool. It’s like Rudy, but without the lies upon lies.
The Michigan blogs offered some interesting stories, though I don’t think you could pay me to watch any of them. MBN mentions the story of Walter Smith, a senior co-captain who injured himself preseason and looked to end his career ignominously before getting on the field for the last game and having the Michigan Stadium faithful chant his name. TOGTM and VB both think Tom Harmon’s life merits a movie. VB also adds additional plots for a movie built around the Michigan program. Bo Schembechler’s first year in Ann Arbor would be an interesting movie.
LTP thinks Northwestern’s 1995 season is going to be a screenplay someday, even if he’s going to be the one that has to write it.
ES went the same route I had intended to: by drawing attention to the fact that Duffy Daugherty, like Woody Hayes and presumably several others in the Big Ten at the time, were at the forefront of integrating African-Americans into college football. Daugherty took in Bubba Smith (from Beaumont, Texas), Charles Webster (from Houston, Texas), Charlie “Mad Dog” Thornhill (Roanoake, Virginia), and Gene Washington (LaPorte, Texas) when none of the regional powers would have dared accept them at their respective universities. Naturally, Michigan State was no worse off for having them.
And, because this is a Buckeye blog, I finish with some Buckeye movie possibilities. tBBC puts forward the story of John Borton, who was the incumbent QB to the eventual national title team that fell victim to injury early in the season. Hayes offered to play him in the Rose Bowl with the game well in hand, but Borton declined in favor of the third string QB, whose father had traveled so far to watch his son play. Very cool.
I’m surprised no serious movie has ever been done on the life of Woody Hayes. Everything you can read on Woody Hayes would have you convinced he was one of the most bizarre figures of the 20th century. He was something of a tragic hero, and probably emotionally crippled to some capacity. He obsessed about winning because he obsessed even more about losing. Winning and working were the only rubrics he knew to judge people by. He never knew how to outwardly show affection, and had to rely on showing up to hospitals to visit sick people in the Columbus area as some kind of confirmation that he was capable of feeling. He often times slept in the film room during the season, not making it back home to his family. He was a man who terrified his freshmen, angered his sophomores, drew respect from his juniors and earned the love of his seniors. He purposely turned down raises for fear that increasing his salary would lead to inflation. He never wanted to accept payments for his guest lectures, but people insisted on cutting him checks. By time he died, his family found countless uncashed checks, which eventually set up several posthumous endowments to the university. He was such a complex figure that even a critical look into his life — one that chooses to focus on the aggression, the tantrums, the bitter feuds with Evanshenski and Schembechler and anything else — could only be fascinating.
Remember, Ohio State’s last foray into probation was because of Woody Hayes. In 1956, Woody landed the entire department on probation for loaning money to players in emergency situations. What was the cause of this?
In 1956 Ohio State was placed on a one-year probation because of Woody’s having given money to some of his players. I took my two boys to a pre-season warm-up with Woody at the Faculty Club that fall. In the course of the evening we asked him for his explanation of the episode. I have never seen that explanation in the press, and I give it here for what it is worth. This, mind you, was in the mid-fifties, long before the anti-discrimination laws of the following decade. Woody said that he got summer jobs for many of his players, but that it was often the case that the black athletes received less for the same work than the white athletes. When that happened, he said, he made up the difference out of his own pocket. He was proud of having done so, he said, and if need be he would do it again. Many I know who read this will regard it with cynicism. I can only say that I believed Woody then and still do. However brutally he may have treated them sometimes on the practice field, Woody’s devotion to his players – whatever their race, creed, or color – was legendary.
The next year, Ohio State went 9-1 and won a national championship. I think there’s some kind of Season on the Brink movie to be made of it.
There’s also a lot to be said about Woody Hayes’ color-blindedness. That’s not to say Woody Hayes was a perfect man, just that in his weird psyche, he never thought race was a salient means of categorization. Instead, he only judged people by work ethic and will to win. There were occasions when black players and white players would separate into their own cliques, Woody would force them together by assigned seating, earnestly baffled that the players would let race divide the team. Again: this was not an instrumental view to integration held by the likes of Bear Bryant (wanting to break the color barrier because the segregation policy was holding him back from top recruits). This was just a complex figure taking a stand against racism. Ohio State’s program under Woody, like ES’s account of the Daugherty days, is filled with young African-Americans getting a chance at a university education. In fact, with Ernie Davis on everyone’s mind as the first African-American Heisman winner, take a looksie at who the runner-up was that year. I don’t mean to trivialize Davis’ story, only to show that the Woody Hayes era has such uplifting stories as well.
Go to Source
Add The Sports Daily to your Google News Feed!
