Whacky article

[cibai]

ESPN - Schlabach: WAC vs. SEC - College Football

Neil Postman once said that politics is nothing like sports, because in sports the measure of success or failure is always clear, but in politics what matters is the appearance of success or failure. Why do we insist on taking away any demonstrable evidence in sport and replacing it entirely with speculation?

What redeeming quality does this article have? It is fully of statistics, but void of any facts that support its argument.

 

[IPorange]

You are right. That is an incredibly useless article.

 

[obxvol]

It was interesting until he started smoking crack in the last two paragraphs.

 

[Teddyhead]

Despite the WAC's recent history against the SEC, some WAC teams would probably beat a few SEC teams this coming season. Boise State, Fresno State, Hawaii, Nevada, New Mexico State and San Jose State are each capable of beating Ole Miss or Mississippi State. Hawaii would probably beat Alabama in 2007, and Boise State would keep it much closer against Georgia -- maybe even beat the Bulldogs.

In fact, Boise State and Hawaii are probably capable of beating any team in the SEC this season. But much of the rest of the WAC teams remain paycheck opponents -- and easy victories -- for the SEC.

Mark Schlabach

Wow, you really gotta love that statement. Saying Boise St. and Hawaii are probably capable of beating ANY SEC TEAM!?! I honestly think a lot of these writers try and create controversy with their articles to increase readership.

 

[TennesseeFan07]

Yeah really, how you doing Teddy? Haven't heard from you in awhile