Sport Not a Sport

Sports bar discussions regularly include debates comparing one activity to another and which event is better. Somewhere in the conversation, someone tries to through in a curve ball and include an activity that changes the debate to whether or not the event is a “true” sport vs an entertainment event.

I’ve began what will be considered the

Bill of Sports Rights

. Your comments can be used to submit amendments to the Bill of Sports Right pending review of the committee. If your amendment is approved, I’ll include reference to your blog site.

Keep in mind as you read the rules below, ones percieved athleticism is not valid criteria as we’re not talking about the person or team, we’re talking about the activity/event. While athleticism, training and fitness are admirable; those traits define the person not the event.

There are a couple traits that a sport must posses in order to qualify as a sport.

1. The event must include a physical element that challenges the person to be at a certain level of fitness in order to realistically compete.

- sub.1 Bicycling requires extreme endurance abilities to complete all the stages of The Tour de France
- sub.2 Football includes mixes of strength and speed in order to be competitive.

2. A certain amount of technique/skill level must be apparent in order to separate a novice from an expert.

– sub.1 A valid pitch is required to pass through a predefined area of space
– sub.2 Ping pong includes spin on the ball to exaggerate the path of the ball

3. There should be a component to the event which enables an opponent to challenge the other from completing a desired goal.

– sub.1 A field goal can be blocked
– sub.2 The path of a pitch can be altered to give misdirection

4. The winner/scoring mechanism must be objective.

– sub.1 True the requirements of a double flip in gymnastics are defined, but the range of variation in voting results lend that scoring is not absolute. With a scoring range between 7 & 9 among 5 judges, who’s right, who’s wrong?
– sub.2 A place kicker scores a point when the ball moves between and above the polls of a goal post

5. The winner must be decided as a result of human powered activities.
6. Things that detract/disqualify from the possibilites of being a sport:

- sub.1 Enibriation “adds” to the experience or even enables higher scoring
- sub.2 Any performance which scores points for appearance or style
- sub.3 If anyone has ever successfully competed at the highest level while wearing a custome
- sub.4 Adendum 1/23/2007 – Anytime the activity/event can also be described as “art”… automatically disqualified as a sport.

Races (some) are considered sports. Swimmers can draft or prevent some from drafting. Distance runners struggle with break away tactics. Skiing is all challenged by the clock as if the contestants are on the course at the same time.

PAC10 BBall is For Real — vote accordingly!

The numbers say plenty.

4- UCLA
10 – ARIZONA
15 – OREGON
23 – WASHINGTON ST
24 – WASHINGTON
With USC knocking on the door… that puts 6 in the top 30 of NCAA Basketball in January.

Somehow Kansas with an RPI sub 50, gets a higher seed than UofA with the 2nd (previously #1) toughest schedule in the nation!

Florida (albeit defending champs) have two losses and an RPI that doesn’t crack the top 30. I don’t mind giving def champs some credit for last years dues, but their two toughest challenges were losses Kansas and Florida St. They’ve played 7 teams ranked below 200 while still ranked in the top 10. For some reason the words “what have you done for me lately” seem applicable.

But some are coming to the conclusion that proving ones mettle against the PAC10 is the right thing to do. The PAC10 and Big12 will showcase their talents vs each other in 10 highlighted games each year for the next 4 years.

With 5 Top 25 teams and a 6th (USC) coming on strong, the Pac 10 is already being given the snub. If it’s time for a BCS playoff in football… it’s time to rid the NCAA of all human (east coast) bias in the AP voting polls.

Should the coach stay or go

The end of any football is ripe with rumors and controversy (this is a non-BCS post).
Already begun is the speculation regarding which coach will move to or be fired from.

Today the rumors have started swirling that Mike Stoops is being considered for the Head Coach assignment at ‘Bama and Miami.

I’m all for getting your dues when you feel you’ve earned them. Not saying that Stoops hasn’t, but he still hasn’t gotten to a bowl game yet as a head coach. Sorry, that’s the bitterness talking.

I also appreciate someone who takes a position with the intent to take a job, and move the program to the highest level of success. Not use it as a stepping stone to other venues.

Lute Olsen in my opinion is the epitomy of this example. Having taken the team from subpar to a perrenial title contender. A legacy like that speaks volumes. Otherwise you’re just a Phil Jackson who takes the job with the best possibilities to win without actually having to coach.

BCS/BS Merry-Go-Round

How can anyone say the system is “flawed” when the intent isn’t clear?

What is the intent of any exiting playoff system? It certainly isn’t to match up the two best teams and determine THE best team overall… case in point: St Louis winning the 2006 MLB… George Mason in the 2006 Final Four…

Just because a team wins a tournament, doesn’t necessarily “crown them” the best (a la Dennis Green).

In this year’s debate, pretend a playoff pits Michigan against Ohio State in a rematch. If Michigan wins, the headlines the next day would read… “Who’s #1?” since Ohio State won the first match and both teams only have one loss.

Conversely, without a playoff system, if Ohio State wins a rematch with Michigan, the “could have been” contenders cry foul that they weren’t given a chance to win once when Michigan would have been given two chances at a title.

What was the purpose of bowl games prior to 1998? I don’t know the answer… I’m asking.

In the end… any newly implemented playoff system would still be dependant upon a ranking system as it exists today (“flawed”?). Which means instead of the #3 & #4 teams complaining about their end state, the #5 and #6 teams would whine. I use a little creative license in limiting a playoff to only four teams because someone would be hard pressed to make a case that a #8 team should have a chance to play… and nobody else should try to make that case since no one is making a case for Boise State to be in the championship game today. To through more heat on the fire, if you limit to four, then in this years debacle, USC cries fowl as they are the team with the hardest schedule BY FAR.

Additional cons to a playoff system:

- Who would get the higher seed?

- Do you limit BCS playoff to only Conference Champions? If you let Michigan in this year, then a conference tournament/championship means nothing unless you miss out on a playoff otherwise. The regular season would probably lose much of its importance.

- For those that cry foul about the current system benefiting the colleges monetarily, who do you think benefits more with a playoff system? And who SHOULD benefit most? Your answer should be, the colleges, and not the media/networks which would be the result of a playoff system.

- Who would travel to the remaining (leftover) bowl games?

- Team travel/hotel logistics (see State Fans Nation blog here)

“Can 50K people afford to travel 3 different times in a month to exotic locales?”

- It would be more advantageous for BCS schools to schedule cupcakes than they are now

- If you’re not a fan of a football powerhouse, be ready to be excluded – you won’t be invited.

Again, Just say NO to pre rankings.

———————————————–

The above statements are designed to insite discussion and not violence. I only take pleasure in playing the role of the Devil’s Advocate

Just Say No to Pre-Rankings

This isn’t intended to make a case for or against the current system, rather to highlight the flaws of both.

The conference and non-conference schedules are not level playing fields. Many argue the East coast bias against West coast teams. While it’s relevant, it’s also overplayed. The SEC will continue to whine that its conference is and always will be the ‘bride’s maid, never a bride.” OK, I admit the reference to the SEC as a dress wearing conference may have gone a bit too far, but it was fun.
The point is that under the current regular season system, non-conference schedules should be made by the NCAA so that teams are not falsely inflating their records by electing to play D-2AA schools if they want to be considered championship contenders. If you want to play on New Year’s Day, your non-conference schedule should include wins against teams that show you would put on a good show on New Year’s Day against another contender.

Additionally, even if a playoff system were put in place today, the teams put into the playoff would still be based on the current BCS ranking system which already gets enough heat for being imperfect as it is. Right now, the #3 & #4 team are the squeaky wheels, if you implement a playoff, the #9 & #10 teams become the squeaky wheel (in an 8 team playoff). And before someone jumps the gun to say; well, those are just the bottom of the barrel team… you might even say ‘wildcard’ teams… the Cardinals would not have been in the playoffs had they been in any other division (rename that conference when referring back to NCAA football).

The Cardinals being crowned the best team but not actually BEING the best team should carry more weight than it has. Just the marathon of being in a place to contend for a title should remove even the possibility of any discussions/comments that the winner “doesn’t deserve the trophy.” Rarely is the subject more apparent than now that most playoff systems are NOT setup to crown someone as The Champion: (NCAA Basketball single elimination, NBA first round seven game series, NFL regular season only serves to identify those teams that should be college teams)

The real tragedy is the 2006 MLB Championship puts to rest the sports catch phrase, “In a seven game series, the best team always wins.”