Power play
The college football playoff rankings came out last night. They stayed the same, for the most part.
Couple of thoughts:
First, after the first set of rankings, these feel like a spring scrimmage until the last set of rankings, right? OK, maybe the penultimate rankings have merit. And hey, anytime we can use penultimate in a sentence is a good thing too.
But these November walk-throughs feel like shoddy dress rehearsals.
Second, the only question that interests me at this juncture is if a two-loss Alabama gets into the bracket.
Because if the top five – Georgia is 1, followed in order by Alabama, Oregon, THE Ohio State and unbeaten Cincinnati – win out with Alabama losing to Georgia in the SEC title game, the scenario presents the ultimate answer to the defining question of what the committee values.
Are they looking for the four best teams or the four teams who had the best year?
Because we can all agree that Alabama – even with two losses – is better than unbeaten Cincy, but would the committee pick the Tide or the Fickels?
Thoughts?
Far short of gold medal achievement
What a crock.
Is Mark Emmert running the International Olympic Committee, too?
The IOC walked back its previous ruling and stance on transgender athletes competing in the Olympics.
The IOC is now offering ‘recommendations’ and asking each sport to craft its own rules, theoretically passing the buck on what should be a top-down decision that addresses one of the fundamental divisions among athletes.
To make matters even more confusing and more downright wrong, one IOC official even suggested that male-born athletes choosing to compete as females should be “evaluated based on performance” to determine whether there is an unfair advantage.
What?