Friday Gumbo

Photo Credit: Chris Kramer
catches his pal Rob seconds
after getting picked

Neither J nor I are fans of the NBA...but that won't and doesn't stop us from rooting for ex-Boilers as they take the next step in their basketball career.  But the reasons we don't like the league reared their collective ugly head on Thursday night...before #4 swooped in and shed some light into the dark chasm of the world's most-watched professional basketball league.

Before you attempt to sell the league to us, let me urge you to save your breath.  Your energy might be better used performing a rain dance for the Indiana's BS headquarters in Fishers.

Unlikeable players, a ton of them, were picked time and again on Thursday night...then, a bunch of 6'10" Euros that will never make a dent for their team became the en vogue pick type.  Sure, there were a few players in the first 50-or-so picks that won't be hard to cheer for...but not many, at least for me.  Finally, much like Smooge's long draft night a year ago was mercifully ended late in the night, Hummel was picked just before the two-round draft ended.

Hummel landed in Minnesota after the 58th pick was announced.  The same state that hosted Hummel's first knee injury...and then a year later, Goldy was in town on a football roadie when Hummel hurt it, yet again...many, myself included, weren't so sure Hummel would play basketball at a high level again. But after a second half of a season of very good basketball, and NBA workouts and doctors' opinions that kept reaffirming that one of Valpo's favorite sons was indeed back, he'll play basketball professionally.

The biased Matt Painter told everyone that Rob's best ball was in front of him last week in meetings with the media...and it looks like he's got at least one team that believes it's true.  And really, that'll be all it takes. Hummel's work ethic, overall attitude and ability to make his teammates better should make him a guy that has a solid run in a league that needs players that I actually want to watch play a game that almost-resembles basketball.

As the night wore on, even Purdue fans questioned if Hummel truly deserved a spot on an NBA roster via Twitter. Sure, the guy was injured, but players that were drafted higher like Thomas Robinson and Draymond Green both know how much of a warrior Hummel is on the court...and how difficult he is to stop or when he's feelin' it.

I don't think the NBA deserves Hummel...but Rob thinks it does...so I'm glad he's playing in the league.  Congrats, #4. Regardless of what happens in your pro career, you'll be a legend in West La La.

Hope Focusing on Needs
A few seasons ago, Danny Hope had a hard time getting anyone to verbal during the summer months.  This year, Purdue's coach already has four verbal commitments.  He's got another DE, which is needed, with a last name that you might know from that God-forsaken school in the Southern-half of Indiana.  This Repogle chose Purdue over Air Force, Navy, Marshall and others.

Randy Gregory, another DE, comes to Purdue following some time in JuCo.  His commitment out of High School was merely delayed.

The final DE in this class (thus far), John Strauser, seems to be well-suited to play in the 3-4.  He chose Purdue over Pitt and others...but the really interesting part of that commitment is that he's the nephew of Pitt's new coach (and former Wisconsin OC), Paul Chryst.

David Yancey, an RB out of Saint John, Indiana, surely won't be the last RB in the incoming class of '13...and Danny Etling, the second Elite11 QB finalist in as many years to verbal to Coach Hope, completes the group...So far.

I know, I know, most of these verbals have been known to Purdue fans for a while.  But many Purdue fans, unlike me, don't read up on recruiting...and they do visit this site, so I thought, why not?

But even though I read about recruiting, I still don't trust it a whole bunch.  All it takes for me to be sobered up (when I'm stoked about a verbal commit) is a few minutes cruising around Twitter and reading just how fickle some recruits can be...then I'm reminded why I don't talk about these guys too much until their name is signed in the late winter.  But that doesn't change that it's better to have verbals than to have no one interested or talking about the program...even in June.

But June is almost over...and we're getting closer and closer to the first day of September.

My Gut Says...
J talked about how he wasn't a fan of the new 4-team playoff system earlier this week...and he and I seem to be in the minority when we talk about our hesitation to celebrate the new system.  But, am I the only one who remembers how EsPN college football TV analysts were diametrically-opposed to anything but the two-team BCS game as recently as months ago...but now, they're all smiles as they talk about this mini-playoff?

The whole thing stinks. Sure, it's good that two teams won't be just named to the championship, but a committee to decide such a small group is not comprable to a committee that decides a large field like we see in college basketball. They're still puppet masters.  AND, the presidents and conference heads all enabled UND to continue being a member of the NCAA in football, on their terms.  Any entity that does that is pretty tough to get behind, for me.  Jim Delany and other conference bosses held all the cards...and they gave the once-mighty (20 years ago, or so) Irish an ace or two...and I can't figure out why.

My brother assures me that this 4-team playoff is a step toward an 8-team playoff that will have ripple effects that will affect everybody...Call me skeptical, but until I actually see it, I won't believe it.  Playing a tournament to decide the championship seems to be a no-brainer...but this discussion has been going on for about 20 years, and has moved as slowly as J Money after he's enjoyed a delicious 32 oz. carbonated beverage (illegally) in NYC.

Let's hope it's not longer than just a few years before college football gets closer to truly deciding a champion on the field.

Don't Get Too Excited About This CFB "Playoff" Just Yet

Sort of

The topic many college football writers and bloggers will be talking about this week is the now-approved, so-called four team college football playoff to replace the 1-vs-2 BCS situation currently in place.

Let me start by saying the BCS system, while much-maligned, basically did what it was outlined to do back when it was brought to college football in the late 1990s. The goal was to make sure that 1 played 2 in a big-time bowl game. That was it. It wasn't intended to solve all problems with the college football championship boondoggle. Sometimes it didn't quite please everyone, and there were several years where it could have been a complete mess had a couple of teams not obligingly rolled over late in the season. But for the most part, it pitted 1 versus 2, which is neat on that given night.... but which doesn't really feel like any other playoff in any sport.

You might insert the obivous joke here -- "Why is a Purdue site owner writing about college football playoffs? Pssshaw! Purdue won't be in there!" But maybe that makes me that much more qualified, since I'm unbiased and, usually, unaffected.

ESPN is happy in their coverage of this new "playoff" because they're supposed to be. Remember, ESPN isn't independent any more than the GM of the NY Yankees is independent. ESPN has a vested interest in people being excited by this playoff, so they've got writers talking about it being "celebrated" and giving "kudos." I'd say not so fast, because this isn't really what anyone has been pining for. Is it better? Sure, I suppose it's a step forward, but it's really only a playoff in the most basic sense and it's not even going to be based on obvious, on-the-field stuff. The four participants are going to be chosen....by a committee.

The thinking here isn't hard to see -- let's call it a committee and everyone will accept it since the NCAA basketball tournament is so popular. But that's got 68 teams, and every year people criticize the committee for something. Now their margin for error is far slimmer. Make a mistake here, and people are just as pissed off as when an undefeated Boise plays an undefeated TCU so that at least one of them will have to go away. Or when an undefeated Auburn team in 2004 doesn't get a shot at the title.

I also don't think people are thinking about the in-the-moment differences. As the season winds down right now, we know who is in contention for the top 2 spots and who isn't. Then there are usually a few long shots who could sneak in if the chips fall right. With the new system, even if a team is unbeaten and is #4 in whatever ranking system we're using at that point, they won't know for sure that they're in.... they'll have to then sit around like fringe teams do on selection Sunday in March. While that's fine for fringe teams that barely deserve consideration, it's not fine for an undefeated college football team in November.

And what rankings will we be referring to? I'm all for not having rankings until mid-October. Let the teams play and do the first voting/calculating on October 15. No more preseason nonsense that gives some teams a downhill grade to start with and others an insurmountable uphill climb. Play 'em out, and then when you have a real idea of who's who, then rank them.

I'm also fine with using some iteration of the BCS rankings...combine computer polls, human polls, etc., an algorithm to include a factor for just dag-nab, awersome the SEC is, ya'll, and then spit 'em out. But to have everyone play to the finish line and then have a committee decide? A committee that will most certainly have sketchy ties to those who run the BCS bowls? It all but guarantees corruption and more lying to college football fans. Just like the previous asinine lies about how a playoff would "ruin" the "tradition" of the Mineke Car Care Bowl or the majesty of the Pinstripe Bowl when two 6-6 teams duke it out. Or that a playoff brings unnecessary expense to fans or interferes with all those exams that these very serious students are taking....between Christmas and New Year's Day, one presumes.

Anyway, the point is, we've been fed blatant lie after blatant lie and I just want to put it out there that I only think it's going to get worse. When an 11-1 LSU team is 5th in the nation and Utah is 12-0 and 4th and the committee decides that LSU should go, we're going to be right back where we were.

And no, I'm not one of those people who says "Well, just like the tournament, wherever you cut it off, the next team will whine." Yes, I know that, but I don't care about that issue. If you don't make it, tough. If the rules/qualifications are clear from the beginning, then you can't bitch when you fall just short. However, the rules on how to qualify for this new, wonderful, unicorn-filled, utopian playoff system are very much not clear. It's the same crap -- everyone play hard and maybe you'll get rewarded.

Only now, instead of knowing that you absolutely must finish #1 or #2, you don't know what you have to do. Win a conference title but finish #5? Go undefeated but be in a certain conference? Pay off the committee? Who knows?

The ESPN article lists the following as things the committee will consider:

The committee will consider win-loss record, strength of schedule, head-to-head results and whether a team is a conference champion.

Wow. So W-L record is easy. Strength of schedule is hard. Are we talking a computerized, defined, hard-to-argue strength of schedule? Or those Doug Gottleib-type graphics where someone like him (think Mark May) decides what's a good win and a bad loss?

Head-to-head results? Uh, what? Like if the #5 team has beaten the #4 team, the #5 team gets selected? That's weird and if that's indeed what that means, it doesn't sound like it's too likely to happen often. Or do they mean the committee will look at opponents that teams being considered have in common? Who knows?

And, of course, there is the perceived importance of winning your conference title. I suspect this is here just to keep conference commissioners happy as well as those who think it's stupid for Alabama to be in the position to win a national title when they didn't even win their division within the SEC, much less the conference. (Yes, I know they were great -- but they lost on the field to a team that shouldn't have had to play them again.)

So there you have it! It's all so simple! A committee will make a decision.... and so all those sycophants currently chirping -- "Finally, it will be decided on the field!" -- are actually wrong. It'll be decided on the field after who gets to go onto the field are hand-picked.

Yeah, sounds like heaven.