Tim Tebow will go back to New York as a Heisman finalist for the third time. He's not going to win, but it's wrong for people to jump on him as not deserving to be there. The Heisman people can invite as many or as few people as they wish - last year it was three, this year it's five. Tebow is a former winner and likely will finish fifth or sixth in the voting - why wouldn't they want him there? The notion that Tebow is "taking" a spot that C.J. Spiller or Kellen Moore deserved instead is nonsense. If they had enough votes to be there, they would be there. I have a Heisman vote this year for the first time. They've asked us not to reveal our votes in advance, to preserve some surprise factor now that sites like stiffarmtrophy.com compile any published/broadcast info and look to project the winner in advance. Without disclosing the order for now, I will say that Mark Ingram, Toby Gerhart and Ndamukong Suh were the three guys I voted for.
To me this year's BCS matchups are thoroughly uninspiring. Alabama-Texas for the championship is suspect, largely because the Longhorns did nothing to earn the spot all season long. Colt McCoy struggles every time he plays a pass D ranked higher than 70, they basically have one WR, and the Texas A&M game indicated their defense is highly overhyped as well. It's the other four games that really are lackluster though. The Rose Bowl matchup has nothing to do with the BCS, and it's alright. UF-Cincy could be interesting. Find a soul without a previous tie to either Iowa and Georgia Tech who's excited about that game and I'll be amazed. The TCU-Boise State game is a cynical ploy by the BCS to put the two non-BCS league teams in just as Congress is bringing more political heat (ridiculous though that is). By matching them against each other rather than BCS conference teams, the possibility of any Utah like upsets to bolster underdog programs credibility is eliminated. My guess is other than the two on New Year's Day and the title game, ratings will be dreadful. Why is this supposed to be better than a playoff again?
If you haven't taken the time to go over the final ballots from the coaches poll, you owe it to yourself to do so. Among the more interesting items, Brian Kelly ranked UF seventh, lower than any other coach (along with Tommy West). Troy Calhoun of Air Force kept UF second, ahead of Texas. Les Miles has Cincinnati ranked eighth, including inexplicably putting them behind two loss Ohio State at five. Steve Spurrier may have leftover Buckeye memories from the 2006 Championship game, because he not only ranked them eleventh but put them behind Penn State and Iowa - two teams the Buckeyes beat on their way to winning the Big Ten. This would all be interesting as a curiosity, but it actually matters in the BCS. That's not good.
It was documented two years ago during Houston Nutt's unpleasant final season at Arkansas that he attempted to get involved in job searches at NC State and Miami. Those both seemed like moves that would have made sense for him had the schools been interested. Both had access to areas with more talent than what Nutt had in Fayetteville, and there was extra incentive for him to look around. For him to be trying to get in on the Kansas job after just two years at Ole Miss makes no sense whatsoever. Nutt just had a disappointing season, lost to his instate rival, and won't have Dexter McCluster next year. This is not the time to test the patience of the fanbase currently paying your bills. If Nutt doesn't disassociate himself from the KU search in a hurry, he'd better get the job or his seat in Oxford will get warm mighty fast next year.
The Tiger Woods crap just will not go away, with every female he's ever met suddenly coming forward to claim they had a torrid affair. Curiously, all of them seem to have lawyers too. I have no idea how many women Woods was involved with outside his marriage, but the first example of legitimate hypocrisy on his part has now come to light. Tiger talks about family and how his priorities have changed in advertising for an Asheville area resort he's designed a course for. I still don't think that justifies the insane saturation coverage of this whole sordid situation, but it's worth noting.
David Stern says he believes a woman will play in the NBA within a decade. If we're talking "play" like Manon Rheaume played in the NHL, maybe. Playing as any kind of regular member of a team? Sorry, no sale. Look at the athletes playing in today's NBA and tell me what woman can guard them. Even if there's a male who's a great shooter, he won't play if he gives up points for sure on the other end. I don't know if this is some sort of WNBA wind down strategy - we don't need a women's league because they're good enough to play with the guys now! - but to me it's ridiculous.