bugatti

The sad part is, in evaluating against how UK has looked much of this season, they didn’t play bad by that standard. Ugh. UK had the Tigers on the ropes. Solid lead, in the bonus earlier in the second half, and Missouri had no timeouts at their disposal down the stretch. Didn’t matter. They weren’t rattled and much better prepared for the moment.

Again, back to my amazement with IU being in this position. This would be like Northwestern in college basketball all of a sudden being a dominating presence coming off a 40 point drubbing of UK in the Elite 8.

What’s the definition of insanity?

I heard that stat earlier this week. That is incredible.

I believe they will, as the relationship seems stale... And I fully expect Harbaugh to land another gig several days later. If I have this correct, there has never been a head coach - QB combo together as long as Harbaugh and Jackson have been (8 years) without winning a Super Bowl.

Correct. This is the law of averages catching up with UK. They probably collected three wins more than they should have last season. As I said last season, consistently getting down by double-digits is a long term bad indicator. —— And not to go full doom and gloom, but what has been bad this season is not the amount of games they’ve lost, it’s that in all but one loss UK has gotten worked. Including a 35 point drubbing at home. Not like these games are coming down to the final minutes.

I give it up for how The Tide shot the ball, but that has been reoccurring pattern for the last several years, and only one common denominator.

Kind of went how most of us thought it would… being handled. And we are not talking some kind of juggernaut opponent.

Completely understandable. And it is weird, because in college football, I don't have that same perspective. And again, I will watch UK and miss very little of their conference action, but beyond that, I am only tuning in for the top 2-3 picks in next year's draft, and some NCAA tournament action. You are not going to catch me watching Baylor/TCU on a random Wednesday night.

College basketball is reliant upon the big names of the sport (coaches + players) driving interest. The coaching mainstays are dropping like flies, and blueblood teams (see UK and UL) are having to hire coaches you would never dream of them hiring several years ago. Same for players. The rules now create more really good teams, but I can't get excited about my team rolling the dice on a small forward from Mercer or whatever mid-major school. And as I've said before. I'm an NBA guy. Once you get a team and commit to watching the pro sport, college basketball is BRUTAL to watch. My UK interest level has dwindled. I'm in the new year and can only name a few of the guys on the team... that will pick up in conference, but that is not a good place to be.

Quietly, Lane Kiffin has put together an uninspiring resume against the big boys of college football. Last season was the first time he kind of got over the hump, defeating UGA, and I suppose one could argue that beating OU this year was monumental. Beyond that, it is rough. I think because he is such a character and tweets funny stuff, people believe he is on par with the elites. He is not that (yet), but it does seem the new landscape of the sport may fit his style better than before the transfer/NIL world we now live in.

Obviously some work to be done, but I can’t wrap my head around IU being in this position. Are there any parallels in college athletic history where in a matter of two years, one of the cellar dwellers of a sport ascends to these heights? The NIL world in which we live, now allows for this, but still, it’s INDIANA!

For good reason.

Stupid play call. I can’t stand going with a gimmicky east-west play design when you need half a yard. Coaching at its finest.

Again, revving up and preparing for four weeks for a one game, David vs Goliath matchup (when Goliath has nothing to win) is one thing. But for those teams, and the mid-majors up for debate this year, it comes down to attrition and the ability to replicate the physicality and athletic prowess in consecutive weeks. These teams do (did) not have the horses for that. It’s how we know if Tulane was in the SEC, they ain’t going to a major bowl of the CFP. Many want to make the March Madness analogy, but it’s apples and anchovies.

For everyone saying that the 12 best teams should be in the playoffs, I agree! But, the reason we have teams like James Madison and Tulane in it is because for years everyone was clamoring for the little guy to get a chance. We had teams like Boise State, Hawaii, etc. that would have great seasons, and all we heard was how unfair it was they weren’t allowed to compete with the big boys. And sure, there were some instances when these teams would win a meaningless bowl game against a power foe, but those are one-off scenarios. In the playoffs, these teams are playing to win the chip. The reality is these teams have never had a shot.

Vastly superior to any other service. Granted, it might be because it’s the two I mostly use, but them and Netflix are the gold standard.

I can't speak for each city, but I know some of the teams put out a call for volunteers to help out in the snow removal department. It's not like you can hire a company or hand over $20 to a couple of neighborhood kids to remove it for something this complex and specialized.

Game flipped with Wilkerson coming out with his 4th foul and Lowe forcing the action.

UK is playing with intensity in the second half, which can cover a lot of warts, but they are a tough watch on offense at time. IU is a tough watch as well... not a good team.

You can’t get to 36 wins without a victory today. The march is on!

He’s been great settling into his microwave role off the bench. Keep letting it fly, Reed!

As always? So with your prediction, I'm assuming you believe neither Alabama or OU deserved to be in the playoffs?

Someone please explain it to me. Specifically, why the Browns organization (with Stefanski being the head of the snake and fall guy) is apparently colluding with the league office to torpedo Sanders' career? Talking head: "They want Shedeur to fail!" Why? A high-profile athlete whom the media is in LOVE with (specifically his dad) wants a cash cow to fail? What would be the point of this? To prove what point? Talking head today: "Naming Shedeur the starter the rest of the year is setting him up to fail." So now that Cleveland is not playing the two worst teams in football in consecutive weeks, and the competition is a little better, this is setting him up (a fifth-round pick) to fail? Should he decline to play? This was suggested, btw. What kind of bizarro world are we living in? And before people cite taking out Sanders on the goaline - which, yeah, I wouldn't have done it - but do you watch NFL coaches and their bone-headedness sometimes? The best was the first week he was inserted and the talking heads were going off on how Sanders poor play was because he was not getting first team reps. This, despite several ex-players coming out saying that it is not commonplace given the circumstances, and ultimately, it is the professional athlete's job to be ready to play.

Sometimes you watch Hurts and wonder how he is on an NFL roster.