October 8, 2011

The Milwaukee Brewers Won A Playoff Series!!!!



Three years ago they didn't even win a playoff game!

This year, they won a whole series!!! 

And St. Louis won against Philly?  I know we can beat St. Louis!  Thanks, Cardinals!!! 

Words cannot convey my excitement!  But hitting random keys on my keyboard will!
  Odkoek9wsioajnoancasnoanwqfeoifninsdavcnklxasmklXIWEFINJIWOIFQENIaodaneoi!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

October 5, 2011

My Thoughts On Tony Romo

    
     I've been watching a lot of SportsNation lately, and the most interesting discussions on the show have been about Tony Romo.  The Cowboys QB has blown 2 pretty sizable 4th quarter leads already this year, and again people are questioning Tony's clutchness and level of ability.  Because those people are starting to aggravate me, I'm offering you a sloppily written, fake question-and-answer piece about Romo.  Enjoy.

Tony Romo is not a great QB.

He has a career QB rating of 95.3!  Even this year, as bad as he's been made out to be, his QB rating is 92.9.

Who cares about stats?  All that matters is wins and losses.

He's won 63% of his games...

He's also only won one playoff game.

I love this argument so much.  It's like everybody is so desperate to find a reason to discredit Romo, that once the "stats" argument and the "wins" argument are proven false, all they have left is this and the subsequent "rings" argument.  What a horribly simplistic way of looking at things!  It gives off a vibe that says, "I don't want to think that hard about the skill level of a quarterback.  There must be some simple way of judging them that can't be argued against."

There are 21 other starters on your team that determine whether or not you win.  Nobody is saying that LaDainian Tomlinson wasn't great because he has no rings.

He isn't the team leader.

How about Brian Urlacher, who is way more respected than any QB the Bears have had?  He's the captain of his side of the ball, just like a quarterback.  I've never heard anyone question his greatness due to lack of championships.

Okay, I get it.  You like Romo.  Do you think he's "clutch"?


Absolutely not.  In the past, I was willing to write off his awful losses as a series of freak occurrences.  But I feel now that he's had enough poor performances under pressure for me to know that he really can't handle it.

Therefore, he's not a good QB, right?

Wrong.  There's more to a game than the 4th quarter.  You have to play 3 good quarters to get to a point where the 4th matters.  If you play really well, you can basically skip the 4th quarter altogether.  And Tony Romo is awesome in the first 3 quarters, which is why he wins 63% of his games even with those blown leads.

Do you trust Tony Romo?

It depends on the situation.  If he has a 3-point lead with 5 minutes left, then no.  But if I'm coaching one game, and you tell me my QB is Romo, I would definitely trust him to get me a win.

Will he ever win a championship?

Probably not.  The only way it would happen is if he ended up in two blowout wins and lucked into a close win.  I just can't see Romo winning three close games in a row, and against such good teams, that's going to be the case more often than not.  And as disappointed as he'll be if he never gets a ring, he should still be happy with his NFL career.  It's been really, really good.

October 1, 2011

A Completely Different Use For The BCS

    
     For the last 13 years, the BCS has been determining the top 2 teams in NCAA football.  And by most accounts, it's been doing a terrible job.  Undefeated teams get left out of the championship game while one-loss teams get in.  Sometimes it has to choose between four or five teams with the same record, which is always going to anger somebody.  It's been so bad that the formula has been changed at least twice.  The BCS has basically become the transition from total chaos to playoffs.  At some point, it will be removed from college football.

     So what is it going to do once that moment comes?  I love the BCS.  I don't want to see it wandering around without a purpose for the rest of its life while everyone tells it what a failure it was.  Luckily, I think I've found a place where it would work perfectly.  Instead of sorting out college athletics, I suggest using the BCS to sort out college academics.

     That's right.  I'd like to see GPA's get the BCS treatment.

     I remember reading an article once that said something like 90% of Harvard graduates finished with high honors.  Professors are giving out A's and B's at higher rates than ever before.  I know of a high school that has about 10 valedictorians every year.  It's getting harder and harder to tell which students are really the best.  We need something like the BCS to fix that mess.

     The formula would be based on two categories:

Grade Compared to Class:

     This would be calculated by assigning a number value to each letter or using straight percentage, and then finding the average and standard deviation of the grades.  The GCtC would be the number of standard deviations away the student is from the average.
     What does this all mean?  Well, some teachers don't give out as many A's as others.  Sometimes, a class is just harder.  So instead of using the actual grade, I would compare it to the rest of the grades given out in the class.  A B in a class full of B's, C's, and D's would be about the same as an A in a class full of A's, B's, and C's.  A C+ in the first class would be roughly equivalent to a B or B- in a class with a wide variety of grades.

Strength of Classmates:

     Sort of like Strength of Schedule in the BCS, this number would keep an A in Algebra from counting as much as an A in Calculus.  Obviously the students in Calculus are smarter, so it's harder to do well in comparison to them.  The SoC calculation would somehow adjust the GCtC to fix that.
     How would we figure out how good a certain student is?  Use their grades in core classes, which almost all the students have taken and can be compared in.  If a student has tested out of one or more of the classes, they receive a "grade" that is slightly above the top performers in that class.

     I think this would be a really cool addition to the education system.  That is, until somebody starts sabotaging other students to make themselves look better.  If that happens, I had nothing to do with this.