RockyMountainWingGal

Well there is no rule about being classy in the NHL - they should have made the announcement the same as if a player hit goal # 500 etc - then the fans can cheer or boo if they want - they're just ignorant. The above point is why I don't like them, however. The Predators should receive not one penny more in revenue than the team generates itself. Why must we have communism in the NHL for crying out loud???? They *might* have a great team, but if they cannot support themselves through ticket sales and merchandise - they should fold just like any other business - it makes me sick. I no longer want to buy Red Wings merchandise if part of the $$ goes to support un-franchise-worthy teams....

I know - he cracks me up. I give him full credit for being honest - and for trying his damned hardest knowing he will get slammed anyways. The tide may turn eventually, look at Peyton Manning..... I miscalculated when the match would be on anyways so I missed it - good thing. Sorry I missed Serena whooping up on Sharapova too (although I like both players). Looked like that match was a dud of a final also. I love watching Serena play and I wish her and Venus would actually hire a trainer/coach and get back to winning multiple slams. But when you can waltz in at the last minute, out of shape, and still kick everyone's a$$, what'sthe incentive? I shall boycott the men's final. I too am tired of Roger Federer whooping *blank* every tournament. Hats off to the guy, but like you all have said, the men's tour is very very boring right now without a good rivalry. See you all later in the spring.

Anyone know what the deal is with ESPN2 tennis coverage? I was just going to relax and watch the Sharapova/Clijsters match - which started, and is slated to go off the air here in a few minutes. All for some sports rerun BS. God it sucks to be a tennis fan......... edit: tennis match came back on....football still listed on the schedule and Aussie open site says no tv after 12:30amEST? go figure....

I totally agree. Although I don't hold it against the Colts for playing in a dome - just football is meant to be outdoors. I say rotate the Superbowl also - play one in Greenbay. Why don't those fans get a Superbowl in their backyard? Add my town Denver to the mix - so what if you have to play in a blizzard? I love watching those games.

Wow I guess Clijsters pulled herself out of a big hole. Hingis was up a set and winning the 2nd set when I went to bed. I really like Kim though so I'm glad - hope she decides not to retire this year! btw, anyone know if Lindsay Davenport retired? I haven't heard anything about her in awhile.

I was kind of like Mannysbetter on Sunday, but I would say 50% Pats, 50% Colts. Brady and Manning are my two favorite QBs. Two pretty classy guys if you ask me, in an era when there aren't too many in pro athletics. Although I would love to see Brady get 4 rings to tie Montana (next year!), I really want Manning to just go ahead and win the damn Superbowl. I have enjoyed watching the Colts the last several years and their time is due. Dungy's a good character too. Go Colts, beat the Bears! Keep the rings coming to the AFC.

I've been really enjoying this late every evening - no other sports interest me right now (remember I don't get the wings on tv). I've seen most of Roddick's matches, unfortunately for the one vs. Safin (whom I really like as well), since that was a 1:30amer here. Serena really pulled off a beauty vs. Peer yesterday. Sorry Aussie Wing. Even though she's fat and out of shape, I think Serena has enough talent and mental toughness to possibly pull this out. (btw what's with those earrings?) OK I admire the man Federer, but can Roddick please beat him for once in his life in a slam? I would like to see someone not only challenge Roger for Grand Slams this year - but actually win one...it won't kill the guy to lose a Slam for once.....

Thanks for reminding me - I would have forgotten since it doesn't get that much coverage here! I'll be sure to tune in (late at night here).

Great post. Remember a few years ago when the Pac-10 was dreadful, but USC was ranked #1? They couldn't help that their conference sucked - but they were still a great team and proved themselves when they had too (Oklahoma blow-out). I do think, however, that since the BCS teams are going out of their way to get the cupcakes. Michigan used to play a Pac-10 team AND the Irish almost every year in the pre-conference season (Washington, Oregon, UCLA, etc). Now teams will not do that anymore and I think it sucks for the fans. I don't really want to see UM or MSU play Eastern or Central every year, sorry. I'd rather my team schedule 2 quality opponents and risk getting beat. bts, Florida's non-conference was pretty weak too. Here's my thoughts on the Big Ten. 1. All conferences have down years, and everyone rags on them when it's their turn. Was the Pac-10 for a few years, now it's the Big 10. It's all cyclical. 2. The Big 10 needs to seriously address their scheduling in the BCS era. Every other conference plays later than us, and it's time to get with the times, folks. And yes, God forbid there be games after the UM-OSU showdown. Playing even one week later on T-giving weekend would help. 3. Consider adding a team and having a championship. While I personally don't like this, this is the way all the conferences are going and it might have to be done to get the best team out of the Big ten (ie maybe Wisc plays OSU this year afterall). 4. Schedule home and home games with teams from the Pac-10 and SEC - get their warm weather butts up to the Midwest for a game - and agree to go to their house for one (this is how it was done in the old days anyhow). Alot of these teams have a home field advantage in the bowl series. While I make no excuses for UM or OSU for what I perceived was a lack of preparation-astounding inability to adjust, the Big Ten layoff is just too damn long, and if the conference wants its teams at their best when they face outside competition, they need to change this. If there is a bright side anywhere, we still have 3 teams in the top 10 (sorry Wisc should NOT be ahead of Michigan), and really any team in the top 10 can beat any other on any given day. I still think if OSU had played Fla the week after the Mich game, they would have won handily. But that's not how the present system works and the conference needs to wake up and adjust to it.

While the SEC is better, it's not that much better. Michigan (better Big Ten team) did beat Vanderbilt (worst SEC team).

Not really looking like a very exciting playoffs on paper- but you never know. I picked San Diego - it seems to be their year. I won't be able to stomach watching Baltimore in the Super Bowl - I would rather go skiing that day then. I always root for Brady/Pats but I don't think they have that much talent this year - amazing they did this well considering. I like to watch the hometown team play - Broncos - but they blew it in OT last Sunday.

You gotta admire the kid for his unfaultering loyalty - even as a die-hard Michigan fan myself, I cannot even come close to that kind of homerism.

The whole "gangsta" mentality makes me sick. One of the Denver Broncos got killed last night in a shooting spree prompted by some night club spat at 2am. I guess a bunch of Denver Nuggets and Broncos were there. I hope they catch the loser cowards that shot off their guns - in my world they'd get shot themselves by a firing squad, but I'm sure some lawyer will embelish some sypathy for their pathetic behaviors. Sucks, it was at an intersection I drive through with my kids alot.

Wow, what a disappointment after such a great season. I believe this is the first time in years I haven't really watched Michigan play in a bowl game. It was so boring, I started doing other things and just kind of checked out. I even watched their awful performance last year in the Alamo Bowl. Worst Rose Bowl ever - I am sorry for the fans that went to cheer their team - I'm sorry for USC that Michigan didn't challenge them at all. I'm sorry for the Big Ten that Michigan sucked in their bowl game - yet again. Actually, they get credit for showing up vs USC in '04 and Texas in '05 but got beat by better teams. What can one say - back to where we started with very poor, questionable, conservative play calling and inability to adjust in a big game. Need a new O coordinator. And the defense has fallen apart that last two games. Oh well, not much to look forward to at this point. I hardly watched any of the bowl games this year - good thing I guess. I hope OSU wins some respect for the Big ten next week. Other than that, disappointing end to what could have been a turn around season for UM.

Well I was really hoping to ruin Matt Leinart's career last year. Not that the Cardinals can't take care of that. I guess I would vote for Quinn. I don't think the I dislike the guy enough to wish such a tragedy upon him though. How about Troy Smith? Double tragedy for him - having to move to Michigan, AND play for the Lions. Geeze, I don't think I dislike him that much either. Is there anybody worthy of such hatred out there?

But that's the point - we came very close to playing for a national title - if Michigan had beat Ohio State. A TD instead of a FG, one less botched tackle, etc. I believed as did many people, that whomever won on Nov 18th would win the title. It might sound weird, but I didn't really feel right about Michigan winning an outright title unless they had won in Columbus. Even a rematch would lead to more controversey about who was the NC if UM played and beat OSU. Remember where we were last year at this time? I'm pretty proud of my team for the turn-around. I think it shows how spoiled some of us Wolverine fans are, saying we are disappointed in the Rose Bowl - although I have to say, it would be nice to play somewhere else for once - ie the Sugar, Orange, etc. (see spoiled ha-ha). Ask Spartan fans how they'd feel about a trip to Pasadena? I'm disappointed surely in the whole way the BCS is such a mess each year, and I'm sad my team got stuck in the middle of it, but I'm not disappointed in the match-up. I think if Michigan can win convincingly vs USC, they'll probably wind up #2 anyways. I'm looking forward to the game, a little revenge for 3 years ago. A big win on Jan 1rst, could propel the Wolverines into a great 2007 season.

If the BCS would come out and say you had to win your conference to be in the NC game, that would be fine - everyone would know at the beginning of the season where they stand. UM and OSU would know on the morning of Nov 18th only one of them would be eligible to go by the afternoon. But like you said, it's NOT a rule, and I don't like people using that as an excuse to not vote for a team as stated. Here's one thing to consider about the conf championship thing: Not all conferences have equal championship systems. The Big Ten and Pac 10 don't have a championship game. They would need 1 and 2 more teams in their conference respectively to even consider having one. And remember, Notre Dame has turned down the Big Ten at least once on that note. There's another point: Notre Dame is it's own conference. Therefore they win it every year, and would always be eligible. Lets say they beat USC this year, and Fla lost to Arkansas, and UM wasn't eligible because they didn't win the Big Ten: ND could play in the NC game, but Michigan couldn't - f*&ed up. Also consider this year if Ark had beat Fla, leaving Michigan the only 1 loss team near the top 5 (OK I'm ignoring Boise State); then you would have 2 loss USC or 2 loss Ark playing OSU for the title. If one of those teams beats OSU, the Buckeyes still only have one loss. Does the 2 loss team get the title? That's why just stating you have to win your conference doesn't always work. Everything said, I'd still be OK with it IF they made it a rule from the beginning............

You know i might agree that winning your conference should be a prerequisite, but it is not currently in the BCS. Actually, if it was, then both OSU and UM would know going into the Nov 18th game that the loser could absolutely not go the NC bowl. But that wasn't the case. There are a number of scenarios where two teams from the same conference could be #1-2 like this year. Maybe two Big 12 or 2 SEC teams. What if Texas or Oklahoma run the table, exept for one has a single loss to the other. Let's say every other team has 2 losses. Only one would be the conference winner, should the other be denied the rematch even if all the other teams have 2 losses??? etc etc. For the Big Ten, we often have shared conference winners - which would actually be an advantage over most of the other conferences. The other conferences certainly wouldn't like that. If the NCAA ever goes to a playoff system. the championship game will probably disappear. I'm split on the Big Ten. On one hand, seeing our teams play later like the other conferences would help us out. There could be a way to put UM and OSU in different divisions, but would you want to? If OSU/UM were in the same big ten division This year, OSU would have to play an extra game vs Wisconsin - that would not benefit them at all. Nothing to gain, everything to lose. Also, if UM and OSU were in different brackets, they would rematch in the championship game. In fact, they would rematch most years. That would make the regular season meeting fairly meaningless imo. For me, I thought Mich was going to the Rose Bowl anyways - hey it's like our second home; I'm not upset about it at all. The whole BCS thing is just such a mess every year it just makes me sick - and it's done that plenty when my team wasn't in the mix. I'd almost rather have the old bowl system back - teams were locked into the Bowls and the NC team was subjective. The BCS is just as subjective - and there's always more fighting/disagreement about it.

I agree - Urban Meyer is the #1 a-hole coach in Amercia now in my book. First he ******* because he is on the outside looking in, crying for a playoff. Then he whines and campaigns in my mind inappropriately for his team. Now that he's in, he now won't say definitively whether he would support a playoff. When asked about OSU, he says he doesn't really watch the Big Ten - OSU or Michigan - and has only seen them play the last game in Columbus (who didn't?). Of course this guy should support his team and his school, but what a jerk imo. At least Lloyd has some class and didn't stoop to dissing Florida to try to get his team in. I hope OSU smokes their behinds - I see no reason why they won't - hopefully the ridiculously long layoff won't be a factor.

First of all, everyone in here is biased one way or another. The majority in here are die-hard UM fans and are going to give Michigan the *edge* on all the above comparisons, and rightfully so, since we are fans. Funny how the *edge* givers to Florida are Spartan fans. That makes you biased as well. And our adopted Buckeye fan, well he can't reasonably considered neutral either. Therefore we have no neutral opinions on any of this. Just to clarify. After a night to sleep on this, I think Florida will most definitely get the nod. Funny the Denver paper's poll yesterday had if USC should lose, 51% voting for UM, and 34% voting for the Fla-Ark winner (rest other). Funny how today they are saying Fla should definitely go. Just goes to show you how fickle this f*&ed up system is. Two thoughts: 1. UM should gracefully accept playing in the Rose Bowl and knock the pants off of USC. IF OSU should lose (which I doubt), UM would have a share of the title (remember this has happened recently to both USC and LSU). I always root for the Big Ten (unlike our friendly Spartans) so I have to cheer for OSU anyways; a dilemna. 2. The Big Ten needs to address its season ending earlier than the rest of the country. The SEC, PAC-10, Big East, Big 12 were all still playing yesterday. It's easier to vote for the teams you see last - human nature. I don't really like the idea of a conf championship, it would have been a rematch right there UM-OSU, and I know it's cold and snowy up North, but I think it's detrimental to the Big Ten not to have a later season/conf title game.

Someone is going to get screwed by the BCS - either Florida or Michigan. Someone always gets screwed by the BCS. The SEC has been screwed before, so it's also a case of the voters not wanting to do it to them again - the Big Ten can't really complain since they have a team in regardless.

OK this is bad for my health. I was very much settled into playing in the Rose Bowl. My mixed up thought right now: USC had a right to jump Mich after beating ND and play OSU. I personally think OSU would have slammed them - this I thought long before tonight's loss to UCLA. I must say I have come to really like Pete Carroll - even though I've never liked USC. He's done an amazing job coaching that team this yer - he lost two Heisman winners, and still almost got a not-as-talented team into the NC game. Very gracious when he loses too. Florida: I think they would get beat by either OSU or UM. In fact, I was thinking we would play them in the Rose Bowl until tonight (in a perfect world, UM should play Fla for a birth in the NC game). Their QB will get rattled by either D, he's not as good as Henne, and not even close to Smith. That said, Fla can make a good case, being in a tougher conference, and winning their championship game. But why should Mich be punished for being in the big ten? I've heard in recent weeks, USC shouldn't be punished for being in the Pac-10, (even though that conference improved alot this year). The media will screw UM. I'm pretty sure of it. It's all about what matchups THEY want, not who really is #1-2. Which might be OK with me if they would just come out and admit it. I can't say I'm really excited about a potential rematch with OSU myself. Who's to say Mich will beat them this time, even away from Columbus? And even if we do, I think OSU would deserve a share of the title - that's just my opinion. I personally enjoy playing teams from other conferences that we don't get chance to that often. It just doesn't feel like a championship year to me - having lost in Columbus. BUT, the BCS is set up for 1 and 2, and I truly believe OSU-UM are just that. The BCS needs to address this re-match business. I am actually surprised it hasn't happened before that two teams from the same conference, or who have played, are 1-2. Fla-Fla St, Texas-Okla, etc. What if Texas was #2, would they want them playing OSU again? This whole thing will give me headaches for weeks!

Not that it isn't already hard for college students to go to bowl games, but it would be much easier on New Years weekend before the University starts again. Not to mention anyone with kids who are back in school by then. It just tells you how far the BCS is removed from what bowl games are supposed to be about. I went to a bowl game every year I was in college - twice for UM, twice for MSU (yes they actually went to bowl games - tells you how old I am - lol). Mostly is was just to get the f*&^ out of Michigan in the winter.

That's how I feel - I still believe Michigan deserves to be/and is the #2 team, but USC should play OSU. The contradiction is with the BCS - they can't have UM be #2, but not play OSU - another reason the BCS sucks. I'm wondering what they would do if Texas was #2 - would they allow a rematch? They need to address the "rematch" thing. Incidently, I see no way UM plays ND in a rematch in the Rose Bowl. Esp since it wasn't a close game the first time, and we play them early next year anyhow. ND can try to make a case for itself since its losses were to the #2 and #3 teams, albeit in blowouts. Michigan is better off playing Florida or LSU. I forsee OSU beating USC pretty handily - Pete Carroll is a great coach, but I just don't think they match the talent of OSU this year. Here's my dilemna: if OSU beats USC, and UM wins their bowl game, who winds up #2 in the polls? I fear they would keep USC at #2 regardless. Here's something that makes me really hate the BCS even more: the NC Bowl game is on Monday January 8th! wtf? They should have to play ALL bowl games by the end of New Years week/weekend. I think it's BS for the fans too - is OSU back in school by then?

It is what it is, final score says 3 points. I've heard Buckeye fans say, well if you don't count the pts on turnovers, it wasn't close. Well if you aren't going to count the turnover pts, then we can choose not to count the 2 missed tackled run touchdowns, etc etc. Arkansas got thrashed by USC. UM didn't get thrashed by anyone. The "no brainer" is just your opinion. If Fla and Ark schedules were so tough, they WOULD be in the #2 spot. And I have alot of respect for the SEC - I personally think Florida is a huge fraud - they're lucky the Gamecocks choked on their FG. I'll somewhat agree with you on the Big ten being weak - it is (so is the Pac-10 btw). The Wisconsin win is legit - they are a top 10 team like it or not - they are no more frauds than all those teams from the Big East that would get thrashed by any of the above teams (Fla, Ark, UM, OSU, USC). Who said they have a weak schedule? I said above, I wouldn't have a problem with USC-OSU. It's a game I'd like to see. I would have problem with ND for obvious reasons (it could happen - the BCS would love it). If the BCS doesn't want teams from the same conference playing each other in the NC game - no problem - but they need to make a rule and stick to it. It happens all the time in the conference championships - which is why the Big 10 should never have one - it would mean (often) a rematch of UM-OSU a week after they just played, or 2 other Big ten teams that already played - worthless! I personally would like to see Michigan go to the Rose Bowl and win big for once. We seem to be cursed there. I think that win is more important for Carr than last weekend's game was, imo. If that happens, I think they could be assured of winding up #2. I 'd be satisfied with OSU and UM taking the final #1-2 for the Big Ten. Did you hear the Tom Izzo for MSU football coach rumor today? It was discussed quite heavily on the radio - yes seems ridiculous, but it got legit airtime!