Football is back! And so is my little blog...

Let's take a quick look back at week 1 in college football and a quick look ahead to week 2.

-I'll start with Texas A&M since they represent all that is good and holy in this world. The Aggies first game was postponed due to the hurricane, which was a giant let down for everyone (the cancellation, not the hurricane... the hurricane was just ok... I've had better). So... that's about it for looking back to week 1 for the Ags. I'll revisit them in a bit as I look to week 2.

-How about a little more SEC talk? South Carolina and Vanderbilt went about exactly the way I picture all SEC games going. Poor offense, good defense, low scoring, with the better team eventually winning. People always rave about the SEC defenses and use that a reason why A&M will supposedly get crushed, but I think a large part of the equation is just bad offense. Last year Alabama only played one team all season (Arkansas) that had a top 50 offense. ONE! Meanwhile, A&M played against 5 of the top 13. Some might say it's a chicken and egg scenario (Does the Big 12 have good offenses or bad defenses?) and maybe some  chicken and some egg in it (huh?), but the fact is, the SEC does NOT have dynamic offenses, outside of Arkansas and now, hopefully, A&M. 

-Alabama! SEC! SEC! It's just not fair. I'll just leave it at that. And if you don't know what I'm talking about, just go look at the first half play by play from their game against Michigan. They are this year's national champions, in my opinion.

-Florida, who I did watch closely since they are playing A&M this week, looked... ok. They were just ok as a team last year, and there's not much to suggest they'll improve this year. Which isn't to say they're bad, they just aren't on the level they used to be, and they are beatable. They do have athletes though. They also have what the French call a certain... I don't know what, but whatever it is, it comes from being a program that has been really good for a long time. They don't have much at quarterback though and that will cost them a few games this year. And their defense didn't play nearly as well as I thought it would.

Now, on to some non-SEC stuff.

-The Longhorns, who naturally represent all that is evil and dirty in this world, had an easy win against Wyoming. I didn't see it so I can't comment on much, but my opinion all summer on the Horns' prospects has been this: a very good defense, and an offense that will be better than last year, both running and passing, though still not explosive, which will lead to 9 (most likely) or 10 wins. I felt like this game somewhat went with my predictions. The running game does look better, and t.u. has a few good backs that are each different in style. Two running backs rushed for 100+, which I'm assuming hasn't happened in a very long time for them. The passing game led by Davis Ash still doesn't produce big plays, but at least he protected the ball. That right there is a big reason I see t.u. winning more games this year. I could certainly talk more about them but I feel very dirty right now so let's move on.

-OU looked pretty bad for three quarters against a bad team. Very interesting development. They are still a highly regarded team but I get the sense that they're just teetering on the edge of falling back down to normalcy. I think Bob Stoops is one of the best, so I'll be interested to see how they handle this season. The good news for them is that the Big 12 only has one other school that recruits as well as they do, so they still have as much talent as anyone, although West Virginia's offense appears to be in a league of its own.

-West Virginia came within one missed extra point of scoring 70 points in back to back games, dating back to last year's bowl game. I spent all summer rolling my eyes at how people were overrating WVU. People seemed to only look at the bowl game and assume that WVU scored 70 every week, when in reality they did have a few struggles here and there. Seeing them come right out of the gate this year has changed my opinion on them somewhat, and I now have them winning the Big 12. The only two teams that I think have a chance to slow them down are OU and Texas, and both of those teams have issues of their own. So I have WVU winning the conference with an 11-1 record. Full prediction below.

-Baylor looked great. I know, I know, it was just SMU that they played, but the fact is, they racked up over 600 yards of offense despite losing the Heisman Trophy winner, a wide receiver that went in the first round of the NFL draft, and a running back that set the all-time single season rushing record for their school last year. You'd expect a drop-off, but there was none. I've been high on Baylor this off-season. I have still had them as an 8 or 9 win team even without RG3, because they are still with Art Briles. Briles is an evil genius, and I think we're really going to see that this year as their offense is almost as good as it was last year. Baylor has done a great job of re-inventing themselves, branding themselves as a "cool" football team, wearing flashy uniforms (their basketball team does as well), and having a superstar to help the image. Even with an atrocious defense last year, Baylor won 10 games. This year, they lose a little on offense but their defense should slightly improve, and I have them going 9-3. 

-I can't go without a quick mention of the Houston game against Texas State. WOW. So Houston goes 12-1 last year, loses their coach to Texas A&M, and promptly loses their first game, in which they were favored by about 35 points to a team that just started playing FBS football. All I know is that after seeing that score pop up, I immediately felt even better about the fact that Kevin Sumlin is A&M's coach, because for them to crumble like that in the first game without Sumlin tells me that Sumlin was the key ingredient in Houston's success. Another interesting note from that game is that in the days following, Houston's offensive coordinator Mike Nesbitt resigned. After one game. It's somewhat reminiscent of how Kevin Sumlin, who coached at A&M in 2002, got his first opportunity to be an offensive coordinator. A&M's offense was struggling badly under Dino Babers, and in the middle of the season, R.C. Slocum demoted Babers and promoted Sumlin, and just like that, A&M's offense improved. Scoring went up by 50%, and A&M ended up beating #1 ranked Oklahoma in one of the most memorable games ever at Kyle Field. 10 years later, Sumlin has now ascended to one of the highest levels you can reach, and back at the school he just left, the same thing is essentially happening ... something something circle of life.

Looking ahead to Week 2, from the viewpoint of a degenerate gambler:

-A&M (-2) vs. Florida: I can't really say too much that hasn't already been said about this game. Being the featured game of the week on ESPN, having College Gameday there, it's been talked about plenty. A&M new quarterback, A&M no depth at defensive line, Florida two quarterbacks, A&M home field advantage, blah blah blah. So I'll just go for the old journalistic trick of attempting to make connections to similar situations in the past. Here goes.

In 1989, R.C. Slocum took over and in his very first game, he hosted a top 10 SEC opponent. A&M was coming off of a 7 win season. And in an "I'm here to be reckoned with" statement game, he led his Ags to a 28-16 victory and went on to have a hall of fame coaching career.

Now, Sumlin inherits a team coming off of a 7 win season, and opens the year with a traditional SEC powerhouse at Kyle Field.

The fact is, even with the fact that A&M hasn't played a game yet and Florida has, Sumlin can still come in and make a big, fat statement to the SEC and all of college football and win this first game.

I was a student when A&M's offense was sputtering so badly in 2002 that R.C. demoted Babers mid-season and promoted Sumlin, and Sumlin, with the exact same players and playbook, increased our scoring average by over 50% and led us to an upset of the #1 team in the nation. He's a badass and he has been for a LONG time. He's not going to let the fact that this is the first game affect anything. He's going to go out and lead the team and have them ready. We may win, we may not, but we'll be ready.

In that LSU game in 1989, A&M's Larry Horton returned the opening kickoff of the game for a touchdown. How sweet would it be if Trey Williams did the exact same thing this Saturday...

I believe Sumlin is THE man for our program, and he will announce as much by leading us to a win over Florida. My official pick: A&M- 27, Florida, 24. (It's not one I'd bet on though)

Other gambling picks for the week:

I really like Georgia (-2.5) over Mizzou. 

I like Michigan (-21) over Air Force (assuming Air Force still isn't allowed to use planes).

I like Ohio State (-18) over Central Florida.

I like Miami (+7) over Kansas State, and would probably also throw a bet down on the moneyline for Miami, because I think there's a great shot they'll win the game.

I like Iowa State (+5) over Iowa and again, would consider a moneyline bet on ISU.

I like New Mexico (+38) against t.u. I think t.u. will easily win, of course, but they don't have the type of offense to cover very many 38 point spreads.

I like Louisiana Tech (-3.5) over Houston. 

I like Nebraska (-6) over UCLA. 

That's it. I may add some over/unders but haven't really looked at them yet. Last week, I didn't post picks here but I went 5-2 on picks against the spread posted on another website. They were:

Baylor (-9)- win
Baylor (OVER)- win
Michigan (+14)- loss
Boise (UNDER)- win
Stanford (-24)- loss
Texas State (+36)- win
Wyoming (+31.5)- win

Oh, and I almost forgot. I was going to make a couple predictions. Official prediction for A&M is 8-4 and has been all along for me. Bama wins the SEC and the whole country and maybe even plays an all-star football team from the USSR and beats them too to win the world. In the Big 12, which I still feel most knowledgeable about, I'm going with WVU at 1 loss, OU, t.u., and Baylor with 3 losses, TCU, KSU, and OSU right behind them, and ISU, KU, and Tech all struggling with only 1 or 2 conference wins. I haven't added all that up to make sure the math works, but something in that general vicinity is my prediction.

Book review: "The Big Miss," by Hank Haney

I am a huge golf fan, a huge Tiger Woods fan, a big Hank Haney fan, and I know how to read (sort of), so when Haney wrote a book about Tiger Woods playing golf, that was right up my alley So here are my thoughts, for what they're worth:

-You have to give Haney some credibility, simply because of his time spent with Tiger. That said, you also still have to remember that his is just one view. I don't doubt for a second that Tiger's personality is just as Haney described- distant, aloof, selfish, etc.- but Haney seems like a very sensitive dude after reading the whole book, and it seems like maybe he wasn't the right personality type to "get" Tiger, or also to be really liked by Tiger.

-On that same note, one thing you definitely pick up on throughout the book is a surprising level of insecurity on Haney's part. There are myriad mentions, in different forms, of how bothered he was by criticisms and comparisons and such. You would think a guy as successful as Haney, and Haney was VERY successful, both before Tiger and with Tiger, would be a little more thick skinned. Haney tried several times to claim that he and Tiger have similar outlooks and both have the same mental makeup in certain ways, but in my opinion, that was more a case of Haney trying to convince himself it was true, trying to keep up with Tiger. Fact is, Tiger is a unique personality and casts a huge shadow, and despite the fact that Haney dealt with it for 6 years and in many ways handled it well, I get the sense that Haney was just desperate for Tiger's approval the whole time and since he never got the public validation from Tiger, he wrote the book to try get validation from everyone else. He even has a whole chapter devoted to convincing people that Tiger was just as good under Haney as he was under Harmon. He put waaaay too much effort into comparing himself to Harmon. Like I said, I was surprised at how insecure Haney seems to be. 

-The chapter about the US Open at Torrey Pines (the one Tiger won despite playing with a torn ACL and two stress fractures in his leg) is awesome. Very cool to hear the details about the injury, the weeks leading up to it, and everything that went into that amazing performance. My favorite part of the book, by far.

-Overall, it was also a very good look into such a unique guy like Tiger Woods. In my lifetime (I'm 32), I basically feel like there are two guys who are wired differently than the rest of humanity, but who are wired the same as each other. Tiger Woods and Michael Jordan. I've read a ton about MJ, and love seeing how that type of person goes about becoming the best of all time. Very interesting to hear about all of Tiger's flaws, which Haney fairly points out are also part of the reason he's such a great golfer. There are also plenty of cool "here's how good Tiger Woods is" stories, which I love. I love following greatness and I love hearing about just how great the greatest are. 

-Even if you take everything Hank says as gospel, and it may be, you can't honestly say you're surprised at what you hear. OF COURSE Tiger is a messed up dude. He's been famous since adolescence, and fame like that can be a curse. That said, I have no idea (and honestly kind of doubt) if Tiger is quite as jerky as Hank sometimes makes him out to be. I think it was more a case of Haney being a different personality type than Tiger, but obviously I am just guessing here. 

-Hank does a good job of still, even while criticizing Tiger, pointing out that he believes Tiger is the greatest of all time. It was also interesting to hear of Tiger's struggles. Struggles on the range, struggles on the course, struggles with trusting certain parts of his game, etc. While it's cool to admire greatness, it's also cool to hear that the great ones have struggles to overcome. 

-All told, I liked both Tiger and Haney before all this, and I still like them both fine now. I never had any illusions that Tiger was a normal, friendly guy. I always actually like the fact that he doesn't "play the game" and isn't afraid to admit that he only wants to win- period. So I still respect Tiger as a golfer like I always have, and still have the "fan" part of me that would love to hang out with him, but also still have the rational part of me that knows that he's probably pretty much a selfish jerk. I'm mature enough to separate those out and still be as big a Tiger fan as there is when he's playing. As for Hank, I like him more in some ways after reading the book, and in some ways I think he's whiny and insecure. But no matter. I like him. I still love watching the Haney Project. I'm a loyal guy, and once I like someone, I pretty much like them forever. And these days, I'm so obsessed with golf, that I like everyone associated with it. 

If you're a golf fan, you should read this book.