May 20, 2025 • 39 mins
The “Tush-Push” ban is more likely to pass than seeding playoffs based off record. USC continues to make demands for how the rivalry with Notre Dame can proceed. Plus, sports curses and much more!
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Hey, thanks for listening to the Two Pros and a
Cup of Joe podcast with Brady Quinn, Jonas Knox, and myself,
LeVar Arrington. Make sure you catch us live weekdays six
to nine am Eastern or three am to six am
Pacific on Fox Sports Radio. You can find your local
station for the Two Pros and a Cup of Joe
(00:20):
show over at Fox Sports Radio dot com, or stream
us live every day on the iHeartRadio app by searching
fs R.
Speaker 2 (00:32):
Get this, You're listening to Fox Sports.
Speaker 3 (00:35):
Radio, Two Pros and a Cup of Joe, Fox Sports Radio,
LaVar Arrington, Brady Quinn.
Speaker 4 (00:44):
Jonas Knox with you here.
Speaker 3 (00:47):
So on this three hour extravaganza, we have got all
sorts of NFL conversation to be had. We started off
talking about Nick Sirianni getting his contract extension, and wouldn't
you know it, here to start hour two, Philadelphia Eagles
are back in the news yet again, because you got
a bunch of haters out there. You've got Inner Division haters,
(01:09):
you got people around the league that are haters. They
want some change. They're not happy with this toush push discussion.
And so this week at the owners meetings in Minneapolis.
They are going to vote on this to see what
sort of changes will be implemented moving forward when it
comes to the Toush push. But it did not stop
(01:32):
Commander's linebacker Frankie Luvu, who was on with Good Morning Football.
He talked about the play. As you remember, he was
in the playoff game leaping over the line of scrimmage
trying to make plays and kept getting called for penalties
and offside, so on and so forth. But Luvu spoke
yesterday with Good Morning Football about his thoughts on the toushbush.
Speaker 5 (01:52):
Yeah, I think they should bet it, you know what
I mean. But I know the argument is gonna be about.
Speaker 6 (01:57):
Like, hey, you guys have to stop it, get us
his shortyard and whatnot.
Speaker 5 (02:01):
But I mean, it's it's a it's kind of like
a cheek no play man.
Speaker 6 (02:05):
You got Jordan might a lota on the right, you
got you know, it's pretty much the scrum in rugby.
Speaker 5 (02:10):
That's how I kind of look at it. And we
gotta have a scrum too on that side.
Speaker 6 (02:14):
And and the scrum is, you know, we have a
cadence where we all go at once. It's not like
you hard can and this and that where you know,
now you're getting us with myself jumping over the pile
thinking that they're about to snap the ball, and uh,
that's just my own personal opinion and I'm gonna leave
that that So.
Speaker 1 (02:32):
LeVar, I mean, there's relevance to what he's saying. There
is an honor code and scrums, you line up, there's
a cadence, y'all go, y'all push. The ball is a
free ball. Either side can get the ball game possession
of the ball, if you understand rugby. But again, I mean,
(02:53):
I you do have if you look at it, you
do have an un advantage of if you're scrumming and
the other side doesn't have a fair opportunity to the ball, right,
So what happens is is you're going, you're pushing so
(03:15):
that one of your teammates has the ability to access
the ball. Whereas in the touch push, if you're a defender,
not only do you have to wait for the ball
to move because the offense already has possession of the ball,
but then now you gotta you gotta try to fit
(03:36):
into a gap to even get into the proper position
to get your shoulder on their shoulder to try to
touch your power and strength against their power and their strength,
and it's just not realistic. Now, where you fall on
the side of a coin of is it fair or
(03:58):
is it unfair? Is it an unfair advantage? I mean
you would have to say if you are literally able
to do it, yes, it's an unfair advantage. But again,
I don't think it's a sustainable play. You're not going
to run a touch push from the ten yard line
of the other side of the field all the way
(04:21):
to the other side to get a touchdown. You're not
so oh sure. I mean I haven't seen it.
Speaker 5 (04:27):
We haven't seen it yet, but I mean it's been
pretty darn successful.
Speaker 1 (04:30):
I mean, if I see that would be that would
be where I would say I take a hard stance
on saying the play has to be take removed if
a team is actually successfully able to run that play
all the way down the field for drives and score
(04:52):
touchdowns consistently during the course of a season. But on
a fourth down or a short yard play, I mean,
I don't know. I do fall on the side and
don't let them get close enough where they can run it,
that would be my That would be my call on it.
Speaker 7 (05:09):
So if you look at why the NFL took away
the pat or I shouldn't they take or took it away?
Speaker 5 (05:14):
They backed it up is they wanted to make it
a more competitive play.
Speaker 7 (05:19):
There's didn't been different changes to the rules around the
years to make the play safer right in particular for
the snapper, but that play was changed because they felt
like the pat as it currently stands in college football
is a non competitive play. Given it was it's so
close and so easy for a field goal carrier to
(05:40):
blast it through, and it was a play that if
you were watching the game at home, you probably got
up and went when the bathroom or got a beer.
If you're watching the stands, you probably went to the
bathroom or want to get a good a beer. And
that's not what you want. You want everything to be competitive,
there to be something in line.
Speaker 5 (05:57):
And even though.
Speaker 7 (05:57):
Kickers have for the most part they've been able to
overcome that and still be able to kick it at
a pretty.
Speaker 5 (06:05):
High rate, it adds some elements of suspense to it. Now.
Speaker 7 (06:10):
The problem that I think where I'm getting with the
toushbush is it's created such an advantage for the offense
that it even though I still find it to be
an exciting situation because there's the potential of a turnover
end downs on any fourth and one or fourth and two,
whatever it is. But on most short yardage plays like
a third and one, it does feel like it's slightly
(06:33):
in favor.
Speaker 5 (06:34):
Of the offense, and because of that, you almost think, well,
here we go again.
Speaker 7 (06:38):
So I understand the frustration from the defense, and I
think the only thing Frankie Luvu can do is what
he did last year, because it will take an injury
to me, It will take an injury, probably a serious one,
in order for them to outright Bannett. I think there's
going to be a way that defense is half to
(06:59):
try to explain to the NFL. You know, you could
say stop it on to first, second, third down or
first and second down and not let it.
Speaker 5 (07:07):
Be short yardage, but that's not realistic.
Speaker 7 (07:12):
Like it's also not fair that every single time we
have a rule change, for the most part, it impacts
the defense in a negative way.
Speaker 5 (07:20):
Like the defense has to adjust.
Speaker 7 (07:22):
They have to adjust the way they play coverage, they
have to adjust the way they tackle. They have to
now adjust the way they you know, can't jump over
the line for example, to try to make a play
on the quarterback on this play to stop them before
you gets started. So the only thing Frankie lou who
can do is keep honestly doing what he did back
(07:43):
in the playoff game and hope that they look at
it and say, this is now becoming an unsafe play
because so many people are doing this, someone's.
Speaker 5 (07:51):
Going to get hurt. We don't want to have. You know,
that is a.
Speaker 7 (07:54):
Stain on the NFL or a stain on the shield,
and that's most likely how this play it gets changed.
Speaker 5 (08:01):
I don't really see it.
Speaker 7 (08:02):
Are there being enough of a push now for it
to be completely outlawed?
Speaker 5 (08:06):
I think it would be significant.
Speaker 7 (08:08):
It could be significantly changed only because there's maybe enough
team so I don't feel.
Speaker 5 (08:12):
Like it's a true football play, but I don't think
that's enough.
Speaker 4 (08:15):
So Ian Rappaport reported that the Packers.
Speaker 3 (08:18):
Did resubmit, and the resubmitting includes, you know, basically the
revisal is both pulling and pushing of the ball carrier.
So it's sort of that why And I think that
I think that's probably why this because my next question
will be, all right, do you guys think this will
get passed?
Speaker 4 (08:37):
When they voted on it last month. It was sixteen sixteen.
Speaker 3 (08:40):
They were split down the middle. You need twenty four
votes for it to pass. And I wonder if part
of the discussion was, hey, include everything, and our no
becomes a yes.
Speaker 1 (08:50):
I mean you're talking.
Speaker 3 (08:51):
I think it's going to get passed. I think they're
going to ban it and they're going to go back
to the way it was back in two.
Speaker 1 (08:56):
Thousand and five. Just even like kind of piggyback off
of what Q saying in terms of it's going to
take seeing an injury take place. I think it's gonna
take seeing an injury take place with the quarterback, Like
it's the quarterback that's going to get injured. And it
plays to the point of what you're saying. It's the
pushing in the pool. You imagine that.
Speaker 4 (09:17):
It's like Mario Brothers when he loses his power.
Speaker 1 (09:19):
Yes, I mean, but imagine they push the quarterback in
the back. They run into him and hit him to
push him forward. Imagine if somebody just a little bit
too energetic and passionate about getting their quarterback across that
line to gain and they hurt his back, Like the
(09:41):
dude can't get up now, everybody gonna be gasping for air.
Oh my gosh, he's not getting up. Now it matters
because it's the quarterback to me again, before you get
to the point of where something like that happens. Where
it matters now Now, Patrick Mahomes got the touch pushing
(10:04):
to get up. It's got a cow right before you
get to a point of where Josh Allen or somebody
or Jalen Hurts gets hurt by the touch, push, ban
pushing and pulling you if you run to play and
your offensive line because all intensive purposes the football game
(10:25):
I grew up in and came from, it's it's one
and the battle is one in the trenches. If I
can push your defensive front back and create space we're
gonna establish to run. We're gonna be able to win
this game. If my defensive front can do the same
thing opposite side to your offensive front, chances are our
(10:49):
defense is gonna have a ton of success today and
we're gonna win the game. That's the battle of attrition.
It's in the trenches. I have no problem with if
a grown as man can push another grown ass man back,
because that is the essence of what football is. In
some instances. But when you get into pushing, everybody's pushing,
(11:11):
you're pushing the ball carrier and you're aiding the ball carrier,
and what's taking place. Take that totally out of the game.
It did not belong before. It doesn't belong now.
Speaker 3 (11:21):
On the Patrick Mahomes front, he's still not allowed to
do quarterback sneaks because of that one time on a
Thursday night game years ago when he did a quarterback sneak,
he got hit in the side of the leg and
he dislocated his kneecap. Andy Reid refuses, so he like,
just is, yeah, listen, dislocated kneecap, you need to get
hit though he was just walking. Yeah, when yeah, when
(11:48):
win Gus win Gus in twenty miles an hour, the
kneecap snapped off.
Speaker 1 (11:52):
Is that one hundred and fifty year old knee that
vampire Your kneed to get away from you everyone.
Speaker 3 (11:57):
You know what I was thinking about too, though, on
the point of everything is favoring the offense. DeMar Hamblin
died on the field on Monday Night football pretty much,
and Joe Flacco got Comeback Player.
Speaker 1 (12:09):
Of the Year the next year. Enough's enough, all right?
Speaker 4 (12:14):
The defense deserves a little bit of love in the
NFL from time to time, and.
Speaker 1 (12:22):
I agree.
Speaker 3 (12:24):
I mean, it's a shame, but you know what, I
believe that it is going to get voted on.
Speaker 7 (12:30):
And blame all the nerds and fantasy football because they
want to see points, they want to see scoring. They
would and that's what's helped to drive the league to
make the most popular sport.
Speaker 5 (12:40):
That's the truth of it.
Speaker 7 (12:42):
And it's one of the reasons why people love seeing
offensive football.
Speaker 5 (12:45):
They do not appreciate good defensive football.
Speaker 3 (12:48):
What do you guys think has a better chance of passing?
Because there's two things of note. There's two things of
note that are going to be discussed here, one of
which is obviously the Tush push. The other is the
Lions playoff seeding proposal to where it's going to be
record only, not you know, win a division, you host
a playoff game regardless, even if you have a worse
(13:10):
record than the wild card team. Do you think that
is more like should pass? I agree it should, I won't.
Speaker 1 (13:16):
But let me ask the question once again, does a
conference champion miss the playoffs? Say it's a six wing
conference champion, but you have a team and another conference
that has more than six wins.
Speaker 4 (13:33):
You mean a division winner. Division winner, you're automatically in.
Speaker 1 (13:37):
You win the division automatically.
Speaker 4 (13:38):
In the playoffs, you just don't get to host a game.
Speaker 7 (13:41):
It's an automatic qualifier. It's it's literally no different than
why the College Football Playoff is going to change the
way they seed this year is for this exact reason.
Speaker 5 (13:53):
It's because they felt like.
Speaker 7 (13:54):
There was teams who got buys into the next round
who weren't necessarily worthy of that. Now, granted a little
different because of the strength of schedule comparison, et cetera.
But that is the exact point at which you're making
and it's why they're changing the College Football Playoffs and
not have that anymore. Well, they'll essentially have the College
Football Playoff Committee have the top four seeds go one, two, three, four,
(14:17):
and they will get the buys.
Speaker 5 (14:19):
And that's what's at stake.
Speaker 1 (14:21):
And I'm with Brady.
Speaker 3 (14:22):
I think this will be discussed. I think it should
be changed. It should absolutely be based on record and
not on winning a division. Superseds having a worse record
than the wildcard team and that and you get to host.
I think it should get passed. I don't think it will.
I think for some reason they're not going to pass.
Speaker 1 (14:39):
I feel like they should do away with conference champs too,
automatic qualifiers, do away with it. If you take college
or NFL, I don't care. I think it was different,
it would make it would make more sense. And in
the pros then, because there's a lot of teams in college,
I think it would make more sense in the pros
(15:00):
to just say this is the amount of playoffs teams
there are, and with that amount of playoffs team playoff teams,
whichever teams the amount have the best record. The only
way maybe you settle it is if some of these
teams have the same record. I mean, now that's different.
But if again, if you have a team that's in
(15:21):
a weak ass division and they won the division, but
you got a team that's really good and they're in
a really, really tough division and they had a really
good season, but they didn't win their division. Mighta not
even came in second because the division is so good,
but they had a better season than the team over
here that won the division over here? Wat should that
(15:43):
team have to go home when they were a better
team than the team that won the conference? In a
weaker division or a week wee could do.
Speaker 5 (15:50):
I'll give you.
Speaker 7 (15:50):
I'll give you an example, the Cincinnati Bengals last year
versus what the Texans won THEFC South, right, and so
who would you have.
Speaker 1 (16:00):
Much rather at the end of the year, I would
have I would have said Cincinnati, even though you.
Speaker 5 (16:05):
Wouldn't you wouldn't want to face You.
Speaker 1 (16:07):
Wouldn't want to play against Cincinnati, right absolutely.
Speaker 5 (16:11):
And I meanwhile, they're fighting for their life to play
for just a chance.
Speaker 7 (16:15):
And because essentially it was a Kansas city, you ends
up playing their backups and kind of allows Denver to
get in.
Speaker 5 (16:22):
And that's part of that, you know that conversation too.
Speaker 7 (16:25):
But like that's to me when you look at those
two teams, you're like, all right, if they had similar records,
and granted you know that there's you have to look
at headhead, you know, play and you have to measure
more factors. But I do think there's a world that
would exist in the NFL to make it more compelling,
especially if you could get your top quarterbacks in, if
(16:46):
it if it wasn't just about winning your division, if
it overall record mattered more in that instance, So you
do get some teams that are wildcard teams that in
this instance would host a home playoff game because they
earned that.
Speaker 3 (16:59):
And also to that point, if they this was implemented
a year ago, that same Houston Texans team is going
on the road to face the Chargers, they're not hosting them,
and maybe that game turns out differently. I just it
also speaks to me that we've had, you know, one
year of the expanded college football Playoff, and they already recognize, Yeah,
(17:20):
this doesn't make sense.
Speaker 1 (17:21):
We've got to make changes.
Speaker 3 (17:22):
The NFL has been doing this for years, and they're like,
I don't know, we'll see if it.
Speaker 1 (17:27):
Gets passed or not. I don't. I don't.
Speaker 3 (17:29):
I don't get it. I just I don't think it's
going to get pat for some reason. Somebody's going to
find an issue with it, or you're gonna have an
owner bitch and moan and say we want our division,
we want the home game playoff revenue.
Speaker 1 (17:41):
They will be right and doing that. They would if
they won their division.
Speaker 7 (17:50):
Would you have an equal argument to being a wild
card team and hosting one, though, Like, if you're an owner,
as much as you want to make the argument that, oh,
we want our revision which get the host one. Well,
could you turn right back around and have the other
owners that represent wild card teams and make the same comments, Well,
we won more games this year, like we were more
successful than you, Why shouldn't we get to host one.
Speaker 4 (18:12):
There's literally no logical argument against this.
Speaker 1 (18:15):
Noon you won your divisionsion.
Speaker 7 (18:20):
It should be a it should be an automatic qualifier
to get into the playoffs.
Speaker 5 (18:25):
That's all it should be. It shouldn't be that you
get to host a home field advantage for it.
Speaker 7 (18:30):
I think that's a reasonable that's a reasonable response to it.
Speaker 1 (18:34):
I feel like if you won a heat and track
and field and it was a weaker heat than the
other heats, it doesn't matter. You're going to get a
high seat.
Speaker 5 (18:45):
True.
Speaker 1 (18:45):
Yeah, no, they know they will see.
Speaker 5 (18:49):
Go look at the Olympics.
Speaker 1 (18:51):
They will see they look at times, they do look
at times. But when you get lane preference, it's based
off of winning your heats. When you when you go
out and like state championships and stuff like that. Four five, three,
four and five I believe are the top lanes, and
those generally go to the people that have won the.
Speaker 5 (19:14):
Limits.
Speaker 1 (19:15):
The preliminaries, they put fast times they do take times
into consideration. That's consideration.
Speaker 5 (19:22):
That's how they do it. Like if there's been slow
heats where no one qualifies, that's how the Olympics are done.
Speaker 1 (19:27):
No, that's not true. If you win your heat, if
you win your heat, you still compete.
Speaker 5 (19:32):
You have to run fast enough.
Speaker 1 (19:34):
It's still about when you can't.
Speaker 5 (19:36):
You can't run a time that's slower than others, and
they're like, oh, they're just going to get in.
Speaker 1 (19:40):
I mean, it's a qualifying fast enough.
Speaker 5 (19:43):
There has to be a qualifier.
Speaker 1 (19:44):
But they won't run a qualifier where you win your
qualifying race and you don't go because your your time
with slower than the fast or one of the guys
that lost in in a prior heat or or next heat.
You still qualify. You still qualify, and you get LAYE preference.
Speaker 3 (20:01):
Can we have our our track and field expert Carl Leis,
look this up.
Speaker 4 (20:06):
Carl, what do you have?
Speaker 8 (20:08):
I'm seeing winning your heat in track does not typically
give you the option to pick your lane in the
next round.
Speaker 1 (20:14):
You don't ever pick your lane in a round, right,
that's not a part of it. So that's not that's
not what's what is for debate is does the time
is the time what matters the most? Or winning your heat?
Does that matter? Like? Which one matters? I guess is
the question. It's one of the same, though it isn't
(20:35):
if you're saying that if you run.
Speaker 7 (20:36):
The fastest time, you're probably gonna win the You're gonna
win that heat if you run the fastest.
Speaker 1 (20:40):
Yeah, but what if somebody runs another heat. What if
somebody advances the run.
Speaker 5 (20:44):
Faster, they'll be in a better spot than you.
Speaker 1 (20:47):
They will. But what I'm trying to explain or they
get it instead of you. Yeah, there may be like
three heats trying to qualify for semi finals and finals
of a race. You are going to get a lane
in preference if you win your qualifying round, your qualifying heat,
going into the semifinals or going into the finals. It's
(21:09):
not you're going to get skipped because somebody ran a
faster time than you in a different heat, even though
you won the heat that you were in. It doesn't
work that way. They were going to take who won
the heat.
Speaker 5 (21:19):
That makes no logical sense. You look it up, like,
look it up. Okay, I'm just saying if you have
four heats and the first heat eight of the runners
ran a faster one hundred meters, and the fourth heat
they had knowne that came close. I understand what you're saying,
but I'm saying that makes no logical sense.
Speaker 7 (21:36):
You would literally say, well, then we're going to sacrifice
runners who literally could run faster it could compete to
win it.
Speaker 1 (21:43):
Yeah, I mean guys throttle down.
Speaker 5 (21:45):
Run slower.
Speaker 1 (21:45):
Guys throttle down all the time. They throttle down one
hundred times, one hundred percent of the time a guy
will throttle down and not run a fast time. If
that were the case, Q, then they're going to run
their fastest times every single time they go out there
and run. It's just about winning.
Speaker 5 (22:02):
You have to still run a fast enough time to qualify.
Speaker 1 (22:04):
No, it's about winning your race. If you go out
there and you win your race, then you qualified to
go to the semi finals. And and based upon now,
I will say to your point, if if the person
out of the people who are going to the next round,
say it's the qualifying semi final round, whoever, they will
place you in your lanes based off of the times
(22:27):
that you ran.
Speaker 8 (22:28):
Advancing runners are seated ranked based on their heat placement.
Heat winner second place finisher and then by their times
if necessary.
Speaker 1 (22:35):
Thank you, Carl. I mean I ran track. Whether I
sound ridiculous or not, I mean I got an idea.
But but I'm basically saying you're going.
Speaker 4 (22:44):
To doubt the credibility of Carl LEAs.
Speaker 1 (22:47):
Go tricked out man. Yeah he did not. He ran
from bums after that was his track.
Speaker 5 (23:00):
Did you ever run track in your life?
Speaker 1 (23:02):
Yeah? I did the two hundred.
Speaker 4 (23:03):
In the mind, he did the bum hundred meters, the.
Speaker 1 (23:07):
Bum hundred.
Speaker 5 (23:08):
That's that's what That's what said.
Speaker 8 (23:11):
Pretty pretty decent track athlete.
Speaker 1 (23:13):
Oh god, Lee, what do you run over time the
steeple chase?
Speaker 5 (23:19):
You run two hundred?
Speaker 8 (23:20):
I don't remember the times. I wasn't I was you
know what a good mile? He did like six minutes?
Speaker 3 (23:26):
Lee did the shot put minus the put at least
six minutes for a mile. Blow.
Speaker 5 (23:31):
Well whatever, I was just gonna say, Like, these high
school kids now run like it's just a bit over
four on the rag. Yeah, they're all sub five now.
Speaker 1 (23:39):
Yeah, I didn't. I didn't play varsity trackers. Six minutes
his power walking junior high.
Speaker 5 (23:44):
You're now counting it like you ran track.
Speaker 8 (23:47):
You asked, man, you asked at any points, So I
said no, but hold on.
Speaker 5 (23:50):
Can we be can we real about this?
Speaker 7 (23:52):
You're claiming a junior high track participation as you run track.
Speaker 8 (23:56):
Yeah, well we were pretty we were pretty into it
on our junior at our and you're high.
Speaker 5 (24:00):
We were.
Speaker 1 (24:01):
I don't know that was there. They were really into it.
I don't know they wanted me to do it.
Speaker 7 (24:05):
I think I think I've got a new idea for
a segment where we oh god, no, for real, like
hear me out, like what does this say about you?
Like that's the name of the segment. Like, for example, yesterday,
as I'm walking on the plane, there's a dude who's
got a tennis racket in his carry on bag. And
it's not like a tennis racket bag that he's carrying on.
(24:28):
It's sticking out of what would be like a laptop
like like bag.
Speaker 5 (24:32):
And I'm thinking to myself, what does this say about
this guy? Because I'm looking.
Speaker 7 (24:37):
At it as he's standing there, thinking like all these
different thoughts about like is he an avid tennis player?
Did he lose his tennis bag racket for it? Does
he really just want people to know he plays tennis?
Or he's got like a match as soon as he lands, like, like,
what exactly is he just a d bag?
Speaker 3 (24:53):
So many things that I'm going he's a geek. We
don't have to worry about offending him because geeks don't
listen to our show. He's geek and he's walking around
the tennis racket in a jan sport instead of just
being an adult and getting a real bag.
Speaker 1 (25:07):
And you could get away with it with jan sport.
That's like a high school type of dip. But if
you got it in like your work bag, weave, you
got it in your work bag, your carry on bag
of a of a plane. He's he's planning on hurting somebody.
That's his problem. He's going to use that. He's not
using that tennis racket for tennis.
Speaker 5 (25:29):
He's probably trying to hurt someone. Give a little bit
of backpen. Yeah you know about pass, I.
Speaker 7 (25:33):
Know about back Yeah, you do what The right mattress
makes a difference. Matches from Sleep Experts, Well, help you
find the perfect bed for your unique needs. Get maxed
and matches from Memorial Day, Sail and Sleep at Night.
Speaker 1 (25:45):
You talk about a segment that just ran a muck.
Where the hell did we start and where do we
end up? That was wild.
Speaker 3 (25:55):
Over some god dang track, dap damn tush push ended
up in a tennis racket.
Speaker 1 (26:04):
In a backpack? Oh? Why does lead the lab head Lucille? Alright?
Speaker 3 (26:12):
Alright, so it is Two Pros and a Cup of
Joe here on Fox Sports Radio.
Speaker 4 (26:16):
We're gonna figure out why.
Speaker 3 (26:17):
Lee's got Levar's stunt double in the other studio here.
Coming up next though, apparently something that's great could be
coming to the end in the world of football, it's terrible.
Speaker 4 (26:27):
We'll have the details for you here on FSR.
Speaker 2 (26:30):
Be sure to catch live editions of Two Pros and
a Cup of Joe with Brady Quinn, LeVar Arrington, and
Jonas Knox weekdays at six am Eastern three am Pacific
on Fox Sports Radio and the iHeartRadio app.
Speaker 3 (26:44):
Two Pros and a Cup of Joe Fox Sports Radio,
LeVar Arrington, Brady Quinn, Jonas Knox with the air. All right,
so on the fly, should we uh? Is there enough
time in this segment before we have to get to
break to discuss the pathetic possible decision from the USC
trojans there, Brady Quinn, is there enough time in this break?
(27:06):
Or should we save it till next break and maybe
kind of flip flop what we gotta ask.
Speaker 5 (27:11):
It doesn't need to be that long winded of a conversation.
Speaker 7 (27:15):
I would quickly say this, there's no doubt that this
whole conversation was spurred by Lincoln Riley basically saying that
or questioning if the rivalry should continue because of the
decision to move to the Big Ten and how that's
impacted Southern calig traveling across the country. And no one's
(27:37):
going to dispute the argument that it's probably taking a
toll on their athletes, has probably taken a toll on
their program. They flew I think seventeen thousand miles last year,
the first year in the Big Ten. If you compare
that to twenty twenty three or twenty twenty two, the
PAC twelve flew more than any conference in its existence,
because you can't bus as much to any of the places,
(28:01):
how hell spread out it is. But they flew someone
in the ballpark of teny eleven thousand miles, so you're
almost adding on to you know, a third of what
they were originally flying now onto their schedule.
Speaker 5 (28:14):
Now Notre Dame is not to blame for that.
Speaker 7 (28:17):
Southern Cow signed up to go to the Big Ten,
kind of like we talked about the College Football Playoff
after you know, one year, trying to figure some things out.
I think they're trying to figure some things out and
how to make it work for Southern Cow because it
is a non conference game for them, you know, for
Notre Dame their perspective, they view it differently because it's
(28:38):
been such a historical rivalry and Notre Dame's historically been
independent that that's been one of the games that they
look for to every year, and they kind of we
kind of looked at it like, well, this is part
of our schedule, part of our conference, if you will,
even though there's the soft affiliation with the ACC. So
the hard part is the difference in that perspective where
Southern Cal joined a conference and they are now playing
(29:00):
a schedule that you know, causes them have to go
back and forth the East Coast more than they ever
have before, and it's I think it's taking its toll
and maybe take it away from some of their competitiveness.
And if you look at you know, Notre Dame, they're like, well,
nothing's really changed for them.
Speaker 5 (29:16):
I mean, yes, there's some different opponents.
Speaker 7 (29:17):
They've got the deal with Clemson, the twelve year deal
that's coming up, and they'll schedule Ohio State and Texas and.
Speaker 5 (29:23):
Other big boys.
Speaker 7 (29:25):
But you know, for the most part, the schedules remain
somewhat the same, and you've got your traditional games against Stanford.
Speaker 5 (29:32):
And Navy, and you.
Speaker 7 (29:34):
Know, you always try to have Michigan State, some other
schools that are within the you know, the schedule that
have kind of already been there, and Purdue and Michigan
back when we played Michigan not so much anymore. But
that's got I think one of the bigger differences is
there's been so much change to Southern Cow that they're
now looking at how they can make it work within
their schedule.
Speaker 5 (29:53):
And I think for Notre Name there's going to be
a change.
Speaker 7 (29:56):
If it does continue to take place, probably as far
as when it takes place during the year, because you
also have to look at you know, for again Notre Dame,
there's not like conference play. They play, you know, five
ACC teams are kind of sprinkled in throughout. You know,
Southern Cow gets into their conference schedule after the first
few weeks of non conference games.
Speaker 5 (30:15):
Well, that's a non conference opponent.
Speaker 7 (30:18):
It always has been, and they kind of had their
special slot for it, but it's become that much more
difficult logistically and probably with the schedule they play now
in the Big Ten as compared to what they had
previously in the Pac twelve.
Speaker 5 (30:29):
So I like to be reasonable. I think you can
look at it from both sides. But this was all
spurred by Lincoln Riley.
Speaker 7 (30:36):
And the weird thing is is ads ultimately the decision
makers to make the schedules, the head coaches have influence
on it, and he's clearly speaking out to what he
believes has been difficult for Southern Cow.
Speaker 5 (30:49):
So you know, they've got a year left. They played
this year in South Bend.
Speaker 7 (30:53):
Maybe there'll be an extension for another year and to
twenty twenty six where Notre Dame goes out to Southern
Cow and they can figure it out.
Speaker 5 (30:59):
But it would be a shame to see it go away.
Speaker 7 (31:01):
I mean, it really would take away from what is
one of the greatest robberies in college football history.
Speaker 3 (31:06):
And not into the season opener idea either. That's also
the one that was kicked around is.
Speaker 5 (31:11):
Yeah, and that's that's one of the ideas for it.
Speaker 7 (31:13):
I think if again it fits what Southern cal wants
to do for Notre Dame, could have worked potentially. I
just it takes away from what has been traditionally there,
you know, West Coast trip at the end of the
season and Thanksgiving and and again, you know, we kind
of mentioned the automatic qualifiers, which that could maybe change
(31:35):
USC's perspective.
Speaker 5 (31:37):
If they implement automatic qualifiers.
Speaker 7 (31:39):
For the Big ten, the SEC you know, ACC and
Big twelve into the playoff, then maybe that changes. Maybe
they're okay with playing Notre Dame when they played them,
because it kind of was, you know, back in the
day when both programs are thriving or ones you know,
thriving and the other is competitive and.
Speaker 5 (31:56):
It's a robbery. That's what it was. It was almost
like a game to decide whether or not you're gonna.
Speaker 7 (32:01):
Get a shot at a BCS, a shot at a
national championship. I mean, that's really what that game kind
of was. So having it at the end of the season,
if it was out in California, or we're having it
at like a midpoint of the season where it's at
the teeth of the schedule, those were pivotal games, and
you look at it now and just say, if you
(32:22):
put at the beginning of the season, does it take away
from what the rivalry and the history of this robbery
has been.
Speaker 1 (32:27):
USC is in a transitional time and they have they
been hit with the transfer portal. Just doesn't seem like
they're confident in playing playing against a Notre Dame and
if they can get out of the way of getting
steamrolled by a team that seems to be a program
(32:50):
that seems to be going in the opposite direction. I
was talking to coach Jaywan the other day. We had
great conversation and I I rarely hear people speak so
highly of other people, and just the glowing remarks of
what he had to say about Marcus Freeman. I'm I'm
(33:10):
a fan of Notre Dame football because I'm a football pureist.
I went to a blue blood school and I feel
like Notre Dame is a relatable school to Penn State
in a lot of ways. So I'm a big Notre
Dame fan, But I'm also now a Marcus Freeman fan
after hearing the way he handles things, he treats things,
(33:33):
and you can see it. You can see these players
are wanting to go to Notre Dame. You can see
there are coaches going to Notre Dame. It's a team
and an organization, a program that's trending in the right direction.
And I don't see that for you for us. I mean,
you're talking about what they had an upwards I believe
of like twenty plus, like twenty seven players that entered
(33:56):
their portal. Now, I don't know how good those players are,
but I just got there's a lot. I've got a certainty.
Speaker 5 (34:02):
I've got a theory too on that. And what you're saying,
I think one of the reasons why there probably won't
be a decision made now is because, let's say USC
struggles this year.
Speaker 3 (34:12):
Oh boy.
Speaker 7 (34:14):
I'm just saying, if there's the potential they will, and
if they do, and if again, the contracts a tough
thing to buy out. But if they do, and maybe
the pressure continues to mount and maybe Lincoln's not the
guy at Southern Cal, then you don't have to worry
about signing up for this rivalry with a coach who's
(34:37):
begrudgingly walking into it or doesn't want it. You can,
you know, have a coach that signs up saying I
know exactly what I signed up for. I know that
when USC's best, they're a team that's going to be competitive,
or there'd be a team that can beat Notre Dame
because ultimately that's gonna be one of the teams that's
gonna be playing for a national championship too.
Speaker 5 (34:56):
And that's the perspective you have to have. You can't.
Speaker 7 (34:58):
You're eventually gonna have have to pay the piper. You're
eventually going to have to play the top teams, whether
it's in this playoff system or even throughout the course
of a season.
Speaker 5 (35:08):
And that's the reality for where college football is at,
Like you can't shy away from those big matchups.
Speaker 7 (35:14):
And it felt like when Lincoln Riley first brought up
a year ago, that's what exactly what he was doing.
Speaker 1 (35:20):
You gotta win the recruiting war, especially in your own
your own home, and it used to be they dominated
recruiting in southern California and that was good enough. You
fight against UCLA. It's like, hey, it's okay, little brother
you over there. You guys, just get your good grades,
be happy with what you got. We we'll we'll play sports,
(35:41):
we'll we'll win football over here. Y'all, y'all do basketball.
It's less people. Y'all gotta pay for you know, do,
go ahead and do you. But now you got to
compete against everyone everyone. If you are a four star,
if you are a five star guy, three star guy,
they're coming for you. I'm all over the country, and
(36:02):
Oregon has been recruiting like gangbusters in southern California like gangbusters.
Alabama coming, OSU has been coming to California, Penn State
has been coming to California, Notre Dame Stays coming to
California and getting some dope linebackers and defensive players. So
(36:25):
I'm just saying they have a lot working against them
because they just aren't as whoever they get. If it's
if they do move on from Lincoln Rally or if
Lincoln Rallley wants to stay, he's got to figure out
how to become more attractive to the recruiting classes and
the transfer portal guys that are out there if they
want to have a chance of surviving where they're at
(36:45):
currently in the NCAA.
Speaker 3 (36:47):
Two Pros and a Cup of Joe, Fox Sports Radio,
LeVar Arrington, Brady Quinn, Jonas Knox with you coming up,
next here, though, we're going to talk about curses. We've
got a brand new culprit in the world of sports, apparently,
and it's yours here on FSR.
Speaker 2 (37:00):
Sure to catch live editions of Two Pros and a
Cup of Joe with Brady Quinn, LeVar Errington, and Jonas
Knox weekdays at six am Eastern, three am Pacific.
Speaker 3 (37:10):
Two Pros and a Cup of Joe Fox Sports Radio,
LaVar Arrington, Brady Quinn, Jonas Knox with you here coming
up top of next hour. The rewards continue for one
team in the NFL, somebody else gets paid. That's yours again,
ten minutes from now here on FSR. By the way,
be sure to check out the Fox Sports Radio YouTube channel.
Just search Fox Sports Radio on YouTube. You'll see a
whole bunch of video highlights from our shows. Be sure
(37:32):
to subscribe so you never miss our very best Fox
Sports Radio videos on YouTube. So doesn't Drake have like
a real bad Drake have like a real bad like
percentage as far as games he bets on or teams.
Speaker 1 (37:49):
It's like a curse, only one like once.
Speaker 3 (37:51):
Right, He's terrible, but apparently he's blaming the Toronto maple leafs.
Blowout loss to Brady's Floor or the Panthers the other
night on Justin Bieber who was sitting eye side for
that game.
Speaker 4 (38:07):
And I don't know if there's any validity to it.
Speaker 3 (38:10):
I'll just say this, Justin Bieber seems like kind of
a weirdo based on some of the mannerisms and.
Speaker 4 (38:17):
What else is going on.
Speaker 3 (38:18):
And I know there's probably some legitimate reasons what is
going on. You know, he's been rumored to have what
maybe a little bit of an issue with photographers, extra
con you know, things like that, like what well, like
some people have wondered whether or not he's sober clean
(38:42):
behavior has been a little odd. I mean, Lee, you
can confirm this correct.
Speaker 8 (38:46):
There's there's a lot going on there. I mean, he's
definitely had money issues. He had to sell his catalog.
Now with everything going on with Diddy, obviously they have
a history, so that's a lot of people worry about
his mental health.
Speaker 5 (38:58):
Net what's the history a Diddy?
Speaker 8 (39:01):
He well, do you think he was a did he
was a predator?
Speaker 1 (39:03):
To to Bieber and he came out, he came out
and denied that. You don't know if it's true or false,
but they definitely in the No, Bieber denied it's he
wasn't a part of none of that type stuff.
Speaker 3 (39:20):
He was a part of an embarrassing performance by the
Leaves the other night, though.
Speaker 1 (39:23):
I know that, dang I put all that kiets. You
gotta say cats, I guess cats. There you go, the cats.
Now the show is now, you know now we got
the cats, keyets. There you go.
Speaker 4 (39:40):
Good luck justin Bieber, you are Oh did you see
the hat he was wearing? The hell was that?
Speaker 5 (39:46):
Yeah? You got one of those?
Speaker 1 (39:49):
What was it? I don't know, go cats at oh oh,
Hey, thanks for listening to the Two Pros and a
Cup of Joe podcast with Brady Quinn, Jonas Knox, and myself,
LeVar Arrington. Make sure you catch us live weekdays six
to nine am Eastern or three am to six am
Pacific on Fox Sports Radio. You can find your local
station for the Two Pros and a Cup of Joe
(00:20):
show over at Fox Sports Radio dot com, or stream
us live every day on the iHeartRadio app by searching
fs R.
Speaker 2 (00:32):
Get this, You're listening to Fox Sports.
Speaker 3 (00:35):
Radio, Two Pros and a Cup of Joe, Fox Sports Radio,
LaVar Arrington, Brady Quinn.
Speaker 4 (00:44):
Jonas Knox with you here.
Speaker 3 (00:47):
So on this three hour extravaganza, we have got all
sorts of NFL conversation to be had. We started off
talking about Nick Sirianni getting his contract extension, and wouldn't
you know it, here to start hour two, Philadelphia Eagles
are back in the news yet again, because you got
a bunch of haters out there. You've got Inner Division haters,
(01:09):
you got people around the league that are haters. They
want some change. They're not happy with this toush push discussion.
And so this week at the owners meetings in Minneapolis.
They are going to vote on this to see what
sort of changes will be implemented moving forward when it
comes to the Toush push. But it did not stop
(01:32):
Commander's linebacker Frankie Luvu, who was on with Good Morning Football.
He talked about the play. As you remember, he was
in the playoff game leaping over the line of scrimmage
trying to make plays and kept getting called for penalties
and offside, so on and so forth. But Luvu spoke
yesterday with Good Morning Football about his thoughts on the toushbush.
Speaker 5 (01:52):
Yeah, I think they should bet it, you know what
I mean. But I know the argument is gonna be about.
Speaker 6 (01:57):
Like, hey, you guys have to stop it, get us
his shortyard and whatnot.
Speaker 5 (02:01):
But I mean, it's it's a it's kind of like
a cheek no play man.
Speaker 6 (02:05):
You got Jordan might a lota on the right, you
got you know, it's pretty much the scrum in rugby.
Speaker 5 (02:10):
That's how I kind of look at it. And we
gotta have a scrum too on that side.
Speaker 6 (02:14):
And and the scrum is, you know, we have a
cadence where we all go at once. It's not like
you hard can and this and that where you know,
now you're getting us with myself jumping over the pile
thinking that they're about to snap the ball, and uh,
that's just my own personal opinion and I'm gonna leave
that that So.
Speaker 1 (02:32):
LeVar, I mean, there's relevance to what he's saying. There
is an honor code and scrums, you line up, there's
a cadence, y'all go, y'all push. The ball is a
free ball. Either side can get the ball game possession
of the ball, if you understand rugby. But again, I mean,
(02:53):
I you do have if you look at it, you
do have an un advantage of if you're scrumming and
the other side doesn't have a fair opportunity to the ball, right,
So what happens is is you're going, you're pushing so
(03:15):
that one of your teammates has the ability to access
the ball. Whereas in the touch push, if you're a defender,
not only do you have to wait for the ball
to move because the offense already has possession of the ball,
but then now you gotta you gotta try to fit
(03:36):
into a gap to even get into the proper position
to get your shoulder on their shoulder to try to
touch your power and strength against their power and their strength,
and it's just not realistic. Now, where you fall on
the side of a coin of is it fair or
(03:58):
is it unfair? Is it an unfair advantage? I mean
you would have to say if you are literally able
to do it, yes, it's an unfair advantage. But again,
I don't think it's a sustainable play. You're not going
to run a touch push from the ten yard line
of the other side of the field all the way
(04:21):
to the other side to get a touchdown. You're not
so oh sure. I mean I haven't seen it.
Speaker 5 (04:27):
We haven't seen it yet, but I mean it's been
pretty darn successful.
Speaker 1 (04:30):
I mean, if I see that would be that would
be where I would say I take a hard stance
on saying the play has to be take removed if
a team is actually successfully able to run that play
all the way down the field for drives and score
(04:52):
touchdowns consistently during the course of a season. But on
a fourth down or a short yard play, I mean,
I don't know. I do fall on the side and
don't let them get close enough where they can run it,
that would be my That would be my call on it.
Speaker 7 (05:09):
So if you look at why the NFL took away
the pat or I shouldn't they take or took it away?
Speaker 5 (05:14):
They backed it up is they wanted to make it
a more competitive play.
Speaker 7 (05:19):
There's didn't been different changes to the rules around the
years to make the play safer right in particular for
the snapper, but that play was changed because they felt
like the pat as it currently stands in college football
is a non competitive play. Given it was it's so
close and so easy for a field goal carrier to
(05:40):
blast it through, and it was a play that if
you were watching the game at home, you probably got
up and went when the bathroom or got a beer.
If you're watching the stands, you probably went to the
bathroom or want to get a good a beer. And
that's not what you want. You want everything to be competitive,
there to be something in line.
Speaker 5 (05:57):
And even though.
Speaker 7 (05:57):
Kickers have for the most part they've been able to
overcome that and still be able to kick it at
a pretty.
Speaker 5 (06:05):
High rate, it adds some elements of suspense to it. Now.
Speaker 7 (06:10):
The problem that I think where I'm getting with the
toushbush is it's created such an advantage for the offense
that it even though I still find it to be
an exciting situation because there's the potential of a turnover
end downs on any fourth and one or fourth and two,
whatever it is. But on most short yardage plays like
a third and one, it does feel like it's slightly
(06:33):
in favor.
Speaker 5 (06:34):
Of the offense, and because of that, you almost think, well,
here we go again.
Speaker 7 (06:38):
So I understand the frustration from the defense, and I
think the only thing Frankie Luvu can do is what
he did last year, because it will take an injury
to me, It will take an injury, probably a serious one,
in order for them to outright Bannett. I think there's
going to be a way that defense is half to
(06:59):
try to explain to the NFL. You know, you could
say stop it on to first, second, third down or
first and second down and not let it.
Speaker 5 (07:07):
Be short yardage, but that's not realistic.
Speaker 7 (07:12):
Like it's also not fair that every single time we
have a rule change, for the most part, it impacts
the defense in a negative way.
Speaker 5 (07:20):
Like the defense has to adjust.
Speaker 7 (07:22):
They have to adjust the way they play coverage, they
have to adjust the way they tackle. They have to
now adjust the way they you know, can't jump over
the line for example, to try to make a play
on the quarterback on this play to stop them before
you gets started. So the only thing Frankie lou who
can do is keep honestly doing what he did back
(07:43):
in the playoff game and hope that they look at
it and say, this is now becoming an unsafe play
because so many people are doing this, someone's.
Speaker 5 (07:51):
Going to get hurt. We don't want to have. You know,
that is a.
Speaker 7 (07:54):
Stain on the NFL or a stain on the shield,
and that's most likely how this play it gets changed.
Speaker 5 (08:01):
I don't really see it.
Speaker 7 (08:02):
Are there being enough of a push now for it
to be completely outlawed?
Speaker 5 (08:06):
I think it would be significant.
Speaker 7 (08:08):
It could be significantly changed only because there's maybe enough
team so I don't feel.
Speaker 5 (08:12):
Like it's a true football play, but I don't think
that's enough.
Speaker 4 (08:15):
So Ian Rappaport reported that the Packers.
Speaker 3 (08:18):
Did resubmit, and the resubmitting includes, you know, basically the
revisal is both pulling and pushing of the ball carrier.
So it's sort of that why And I think that
I think that's probably why this because my next question
will be, all right, do you guys think this will
get passed?
Speaker 4 (08:37):
When they voted on it last month. It was sixteen sixteen.
Speaker 3 (08:40):
They were split down the middle. You need twenty four
votes for it to pass. And I wonder if part
of the discussion was, hey, include everything, and our no
becomes a yes.
Speaker 1 (08:50):
I mean you're talking.
Speaker 3 (08:51):
I think it's going to get passed. I think they're
going to ban it and they're going to go back
to the way it was back in two.
Speaker 1 (08:56):
Thousand and five. Just even like kind of piggyback off
of what Q saying in terms of it's going to
take seeing an injury take place. I think it's gonna
take seeing an injury take place with the quarterback, Like
it's the quarterback that's going to get injured. And it
plays to the point of what you're saying. It's the
pushing in the pool. You imagine that.
Speaker 4 (09:17):
It's like Mario Brothers when he loses his power.
Speaker 1 (09:19):
Yes, I mean, but imagine they push the quarterback in
the back. They run into him and hit him to
push him forward. Imagine if somebody just a little bit
too energetic and passionate about getting their quarterback across that
line to gain and they hurt his back, Like the
(09:41):
dude can't get up now, everybody gonna be gasping for air.
Oh my gosh, he's not getting up. Now it matters
because it's the quarterback to me again, before you get
to the point of where something like that happens. Where
it matters now Now, Patrick Mahomes got the touch pushing
(10:04):
to get up. It's got a cow right before you
get to a point of where Josh Allen or somebody
or Jalen Hurts gets hurt by the touch, push, ban
pushing and pulling you if you run to play and
your offensive line because all intensive purposes the football game
(10:25):
I grew up in and came from, it's it's one
and the battle is one in the trenches. If I
can push your defensive front back and create space we're
gonna establish to run. We're gonna be able to win
this game. If my defensive front can do the same
thing opposite side to your offensive front, chances are our
(10:49):
defense is gonna have a ton of success today and
we're gonna win the game. That's the battle of attrition.
It's in the trenches. I have no problem with if
a grown as man can push another grown ass man back,
because that is the essence of what football is. In
some instances. But when you get into pushing, everybody's pushing,
(11:11):
you're pushing the ball carrier and you're aiding the ball carrier,
and what's taking place. Take that totally out of the game.
It did not belong before. It doesn't belong now.
Speaker 3 (11:21):
On the Patrick Mahomes front, he's still not allowed to
do quarterback sneaks because of that one time on a
Thursday night game years ago when he did a quarterback sneak,
he got hit in the side of the leg and
he dislocated his kneecap. Andy Reid refuses, so he like,
just is, yeah, listen, dislocated kneecap, you need to get
hit though he was just walking. Yeah, when yeah, when
(11:48):
win Gus win Gus in twenty miles an hour, the
kneecap snapped off.
Speaker 1 (11:52):
Is that one hundred and fifty year old knee that
vampire Your kneed to get away from you everyone.
Speaker 3 (11:57):
You know what I was thinking about too, though, on
the point of everything is favoring the offense. DeMar Hamblin
died on the field on Monday Night football pretty much,
and Joe Flacco got Comeback Player.
Speaker 1 (12:09):
Of the Year the next year. Enough's enough, all right?
Speaker 4 (12:14):
The defense deserves a little bit of love in the
NFL from time to time, and.
Speaker 1 (12:22):
I agree.
Speaker 3 (12:24):
I mean, it's a shame, but you know what, I
believe that it is going to get voted on.
Speaker 7 (12:30):
And blame all the nerds and fantasy football because they
want to see points, they want to see scoring. They
would and that's what's helped to drive the league to
make the most popular sport.
Speaker 5 (12:40):
That's the truth of it.
Speaker 7 (12:42):
And it's one of the reasons why people love seeing
offensive football.
Speaker 5 (12:45):
They do not appreciate good defensive football.
Speaker 3 (12:48):
What do you guys think has a better chance of passing?
Because there's two things of note. There's two things of
note that are going to be discussed here, one of
which is obviously the Tush push. The other is the
Lions playoff seeding proposal to where it's going to be
record only, not you know, win a division, you host
a playoff game regardless, even if you have a worse
(13:10):
record than the wild card team. Do you think that
is more like should pass? I agree it should, I won't.
Speaker 1 (13:16):
But let me ask the question once again, does a
conference champion miss the playoffs? Say it's a six wing
conference champion, but you have a team and another conference
that has more than six wins.
Speaker 4 (13:33):
You mean a division winner. Division winner, you're automatically in.
Speaker 1 (13:37):
You win the division automatically.
Speaker 4 (13:38):
In the playoffs, you just don't get to host a game.
Speaker 7 (13:41):
It's an automatic qualifier. It's it's literally no different than
why the College Football Playoff is going to change the
way they seed this year is for this exact reason.
Speaker 5 (13:53):
It's because they felt like.
Speaker 7 (13:54):
There was teams who got buys into the next round
who weren't necessarily worthy of that. Now, granted a little
different because of the strength of schedule comparison, et cetera.
But that is the exact point at which you're making
and it's why they're changing the College Football Playoffs and
not have that anymore. Well, they'll essentially have the College
Football Playoff Committee have the top four seeds go one, two, three, four,
(14:17):
and they will get the buys.
Speaker 5 (14:19):
And that's what's at stake.
Speaker 1 (14:21):
And I'm with Brady.
Speaker 3 (14:22):
I think this will be discussed. I think it should
be changed. It should absolutely be based on record and
not on winning a division. Superseds having a worse record
than the wildcard team and that and you get to host.
I think it should get passed. I don't think it will.
I think for some reason they're not going to pass.
Speaker 1 (14:39):
I feel like they should do away with conference champs too,
automatic qualifiers, do away with it. If you take college
or NFL, I don't care. I think it was different,
it would make it would make more sense. And in
the pros then, because there's a lot of teams in college,
I think it would make more sense in the pros
(15:00):
to just say this is the amount of playoffs teams
there are, and with that amount of playoffs team playoff teams,
whichever teams the amount have the best record. The only
way maybe you settle it is if some of these
teams have the same record. I mean, now that's different.
But if again, if you have a team that's in
(15:21):
a weak ass division and they won the division, but
you got a team that's really good and they're in
a really, really tough division and they had a really
good season, but they didn't win their division. Mighta not
even came in second because the division is so good,
but they had a better season than the team over
here that won the division over here? Wat should that
(15:43):
team have to go home when they were a better
team than the team that won the conference? In a
weaker division or a week wee could do.
Speaker 5 (15:50):
I'll give you.
Speaker 7 (15:50):
I'll give you an example, the Cincinnati Bengals last year
versus what the Texans won THEFC South, right, and so
who would you have.
Speaker 1 (16:00):
Much rather at the end of the year, I would
have I would have said Cincinnati, even though you.
Speaker 5 (16:05):
Wouldn't you wouldn't want to face You.
Speaker 1 (16:07):
Wouldn't want to play against Cincinnati, right absolutely.
Speaker 5 (16:11):
And I meanwhile, they're fighting for their life to play
for just a chance.
Speaker 7 (16:15):
And because essentially it was a Kansas city, you ends
up playing their backups and kind of allows Denver to
get in.
Speaker 5 (16:22):
And that's part of that, you know that conversation too.
Speaker 7 (16:25):
But like that's to me when you look at those
two teams, you're like, all right, if they had similar records,
and granted you know that there's you have to look
at headhead, you know, play and you have to measure
more factors. But I do think there's a world that
would exist in the NFL to make it more compelling,
especially if you could get your top quarterbacks in, if
(16:46):
it if it wasn't just about winning your division, if
it overall record mattered more in that instance, So you
do get some teams that are wildcard teams that in
this instance would host a home playoff game because they
earned that.
Speaker 3 (16:59):
And also to that point, if they this was implemented
a year ago, that same Houston Texans team is going
on the road to face the Chargers, they're not hosting them,
and maybe that game turns out differently. I just it
also speaks to me that we've had, you know, one
year of the expanded college football Playoff, and they already recognize, Yeah,
(17:20):
this doesn't make sense.
Speaker 1 (17:21):
We've got to make changes.
Speaker 3 (17:22):
The NFL has been doing this for years, and they're like,
I don't know, we'll see if it.
Speaker 1 (17:27):
Gets passed or not. I don't. I don't.
Speaker 3 (17:29):
I don't get it. I just I don't think it's
going to get pat for some reason. Somebody's going to
find an issue with it, or you're gonna have an
owner bitch and moan and say we want our division,
we want the home game playoff revenue.
Speaker 1 (17:41):
They will be right and doing that. They would if
they won their division.
Speaker 7 (17:50):
Would you have an equal argument to being a wild
card team and hosting one, though, Like, if you're an owner,
as much as you want to make the argument that, oh,
we want our revision which get the host one. Well,
could you turn right back around and have the other
owners that represent wild card teams and make the same comments, Well,
we won more games this year, like we were more
successful than you, Why shouldn't we get to host one.
Speaker 4 (18:12):
There's literally no logical argument against this.
Speaker 1 (18:15):
Noon you won your divisionsion.
Speaker 7 (18:20):
It should be a it should be an automatic qualifier
to get into the playoffs.
Speaker 5 (18:25):
That's all it should be. It shouldn't be that you
get to host a home field advantage for it.
Speaker 7 (18:30):
I think that's a reasonable that's a reasonable response to it.
Speaker 1 (18:34):
I feel like if you won a heat and track
and field and it was a weaker heat than the
other heats, it doesn't matter. You're going to get a
high seat.
Speaker 5 (18:45):
True.
Speaker 1 (18:45):
Yeah, no, they know they will see.
Speaker 5 (18:49):
Go look at the Olympics.
Speaker 1 (18:51):
They will see they look at times, they do look
at times. But when you get lane preference, it's based
off of winning your heats. When you when you go
out and like state championships and stuff like that. Four five, three,
four and five I believe are the top lanes, and
those generally go to the people that have won the.
Speaker 5 (19:14):
Limits.
Speaker 1 (19:15):
The preliminaries, they put fast times they do take times
into consideration. That's consideration.
Speaker 5 (19:22):
That's how they do it. Like if there's been slow
heats where no one qualifies, that's how the Olympics are done.
Speaker 1 (19:27):
No, that's not true. If you win your heat, if
you win your heat, you still compete.
Speaker 5 (19:32):
You have to run fast enough.
Speaker 1 (19:34):
It's still about when you can't.
Speaker 5 (19:36):
You can't run a time that's slower than others, and
they're like, oh, they're just going to get in.
Speaker 1 (19:40):
I mean, it's a qualifying fast enough.
Speaker 5 (19:43):
There has to be a qualifier.
Speaker 1 (19:44):
But they won't run a qualifier where you win your
qualifying race and you don't go because your your time
with slower than the fast or one of the guys
that lost in in a prior heat or or next heat.
You still qualify. You still qualify, and you get LAYE preference.
Speaker 3 (20:01):
Can we have our our track and field expert Carl Leis,
look this up.
Speaker 4 (20:06):
Carl, what do you have?
Speaker 8 (20:08):
I'm seeing winning your heat in track does not typically
give you the option to pick your lane in the
next round.
Speaker 1 (20:14):
You don't ever pick your lane in a round, right,
that's not a part of it. So that's not that's
not what's what is for debate is does the time
is the time what matters the most? Or winning your heat?
Does that matter? Like? Which one matters? I guess is
the question. It's one of the same, though it isn't
(20:35):
if you're saying that if you run.
Speaker 7 (20:36):
The fastest time, you're probably gonna win the You're gonna
win that heat if you run the fastest.
Speaker 1 (20:40):
Yeah, but what if somebody runs another heat. What if
somebody advances the run.
Speaker 5 (20:44):
Faster, they'll be in a better spot than you.
Speaker 1 (20:47):
They will. But what I'm trying to explain or they
get it instead of you. Yeah, there may be like
three heats trying to qualify for semi finals and finals
of a race. You are going to get a lane
in preference if you win your qualifying round, your qualifying heat,
going into the semifinals or going into the finals. It's
(21:09):
not you're going to get skipped because somebody ran a
faster time than you in a different heat, even though
you won the heat that you were in. It doesn't
work that way. They were going to take who won
the heat.
Speaker 5 (21:19):
That makes no logical sense. You look it up, like,
look it up. Okay, I'm just saying if you have
four heats and the first heat eight of the runners
ran a faster one hundred meters, and the fourth heat
they had knowne that came close. I understand what you're saying,
but I'm saying that makes no logical sense.
Speaker 7 (21:36):
You would literally say, well, then we're going to sacrifice
runners who literally could run faster it could compete to
win it.
Speaker 1 (21:43):
Yeah, I mean guys throttle down.
Speaker 5 (21:45):
Run slower.
Speaker 1 (21:45):
Guys throttle down all the time. They throttle down one
hundred times, one hundred percent of the time a guy
will throttle down and not run a fast time. If
that were the case, Q, then they're going to run
their fastest times every single time they go out there
and run. It's just about winning.
Speaker 5 (22:02):
You have to still run a fast enough time to qualify.
Speaker 1 (22:04):
No, it's about winning your race. If you go out
there and you win your race, then you qualified to
go to the semi finals. And and based upon now,
I will say to your point, if if the person
out of the people who are going to the next round,
say it's the qualifying semi final round, whoever, they will
place you in your lanes based off of the times
(22:27):
that you ran.
Speaker 8 (22:28):
Advancing runners are seated ranked based on their heat placement.
Heat winner second place finisher and then by their times
if necessary.
Speaker 1 (22:35):
Thank you, Carl. I mean I ran track. Whether I
sound ridiculous or not, I mean I got an idea.
But but I'm basically saying you're going.
Speaker 4 (22:44):
To doubt the credibility of Carl LEAs.
Speaker 1 (22:47):
Go tricked out man. Yeah he did not. He ran
from bums after that was his track.
Speaker 5 (23:00):
Did you ever run track in your life?
Speaker 1 (23:02):
Yeah? I did the two hundred.
Speaker 4 (23:03):
In the mind, he did the bum hundred meters, the.
Speaker 1 (23:07):
Bum hundred.
Speaker 5 (23:08):
That's that's what That's what said.
Speaker 8 (23:11):
Pretty pretty decent track athlete.
Speaker 1 (23:13):
Oh god, Lee, what do you run over time the
steeple chase?
Speaker 5 (23:19):
You run two hundred?
Speaker 8 (23:20):
I don't remember the times. I wasn't I was you
know what a good mile? He did like six minutes?
Speaker 3 (23:26):
Lee did the shot put minus the put at least
six minutes for a mile. Blow.
Speaker 5 (23:31):
Well whatever, I was just gonna say, Like, these high
school kids now run like it's just a bit over
four on the rag. Yeah, they're all sub five now.
Speaker 1 (23:39):
Yeah, I didn't. I didn't play varsity trackers. Six minutes
his power walking junior high.
Speaker 5 (23:44):
You're now counting it like you ran track.
Speaker 8 (23:47):
You asked, man, you asked at any points, So I
said no, but hold on.
Speaker 5 (23:50):
Can we be can we real about this?
Speaker 7 (23:52):
You're claiming a junior high track participation as you run track.
Speaker 8 (23:56):
Yeah, well we were pretty we were pretty into it
on our junior at our and you're high.
Speaker 5 (24:00):
We were.
Speaker 1 (24:01):
I don't know that was there. They were really into it.
I don't know they wanted me to do it.
Speaker 7 (24:05):
I think I think I've got a new idea for
a segment where we oh god, no, for real, like
hear me out, like what does this say about you?
Like that's the name of the segment. Like, for example, yesterday,
as I'm walking on the plane, there's a dude who's
got a tennis racket in his carry on bag. And
it's not like a tennis racket bag that he's carrying on.
(24:28):
It's sticking out of what would be like a laptop
like like bag.
Speaker 5 (24:32):
And I'm thinking to myself, what does this say about
this guy? Because I'm looking.
Speaker 7 (24:37):
At it as he's standing there, thinking like all these
different thoughts about like is he an avid tennis player?
Did he lose his tennis bag racket for it? Does
he really just want people to know he plays tennis?
Or he's got like a match as soon as he lands, like, like,
what exactly is he just a d bag?
Speaker 3 (24:53):
So many things that I'm going he's a geek. We
don't have to worry about offending him because geeks don't
listen to our show. He's geek and he's walking around
the tennis racket in a jan sport instead of just
being an adult and getting a real bag.
Speaker 1 (25:07):
And you could get away with it with jan sport.
That's like a high school type of dip. But if
you got it in like your work bag, weave, you
got it in your work bag, your carry on bag
of a of a plane. He's he's planning on hurting somebody.
That's his problem. He's going to use that. He's not
using that tennis racket for tennis.
Speaker 5 (25:29):
He's probably trying to hurt someone. Give a little bit
of backpen. Yeah you know about pass, I.
Speaker 7 (25:33):
Know about back Yeah, you do what The right mattress
makes a difference. Matches from Sleep Experts, Well, help you
find the perfect bed for your unique needs. Get maxed
and matches from Memorial Day, Sail and Sleep at Night.
Speaker 1 (25:45):
You talk about a segment that just ran a muck.
Where the hell did we start and where do we
end up? That was wild.
Speaker 3 (25:55):
Over some god dang track, dap damn tush push ended
up in a tennis racket.
Speaker 1 (26:04):
In a backpack? Oh? Why does lead the lab head Lucille? Alright?
Speaker 3 (26:12):
Alright, so it is Two Pros and a Cup of
Joe here on Fox Sports Radio.
Speaker 4 (26:16):
We're gonna figure out why.
Speaker 3 (26:17):
Lee's got Levar's stunt double in the other studio here.
Coming up next though, apparently something that's great could be
coming to the end in the world of football, it's terrible.
Speaker 4 (26:27):
We'll have the details for you here on FSR.
Speaker 2 (26:30):
Be sure to catch live editions of Two Pros and
a Cup of Joe with Brady Quinn, LeVar Arrington, and
Jonas Knox weekdays at six am Eastern three am Pacific
on Fox Sports Radio and the iHeartRadio app.
Speaker 3 (26:44):
Two Pros and a Cup of Joe Fox Sports Radio,
LeVar Arrington, Brady Quinn, Jonas Knox with the air. All right,
so on the fly, should we uh? Is there enough
time in this segment before we have to get to
break to discuss the pathetic possible decision from the USC
trojans there, Brady Quinn, is there enough time in this break?
(27:06):
Or should we save it till next break and maybe
kind of flip flop what we gotta ask.
Speaker 5 (27:11):
It doesn't need to be that long winded of a conversation.
Speaker 7 (27:15):
I would quickly say this, there's no doubt that this
whole conversation was spurred by Lincoln Riley basically saying that
or questioning if the rivalry should continue because of the
decision to move to the Big Ten and how that's
impacted Southern calig traveling across the country. And no one's
(27:37):
going to dispute the argument that it's probably taking a
toll on their athletes, has probably taken a toll on
their program. They flew I think seventeen thousand miles last year,
the first year in the Big Ten. If you compare
that to twenty twenty three or twenty twenty two, the
PAC twelve flew more than any conference in its existence,
because you can't bus as much to any of the places,
(28:01):
how hell spread out it is. But they flew someone
in the ballpark of teny eleven thousand miles, so you're
almost adding on to you know, a third of what
they were originally flying now onto their schedule.
Speaker 5 (28:14):
Now Notre Dame is not to blame for that.
Speaker 7 (28:17):
Southern Cow signed up to go to the Big Ten,
kind of like we talked about the College Football Playoff
after you know, one year, trying to figure some things out.
I think they're trying to figure some things out and
how to make it work for Southern Cow because it
is a non conference game for them, you know, for
Notre Dame their perspective, they view it differently because it's
(28:38):
been such a historical rivalry and Notre Dame's historically been
independent that that's been one of the games that they
look for to every year, and they kind of we
kind of looked at it like, well, this is part
of our schedule, part of our conference, if you will,
even though there's the soft affiliation with the ACC. So
the hard part is the difference in that perspective where
Southern Cal joined a conference and they are now playing
(29:00):
a schedule that you know, causes them have to go
back and forth the East Coast more than they ever
have before, and it's I think it's taking its toll
and maybe take it away from some of their competitiveness.
And if you look at you know, Notre Dame, they're like, well,
nothing's really changed for them.
Speaker 5 (29:16):
I mean, yes, there's some different opponents.
Speaker 7 (29:17):
They've got the deal with Clemson, the twelve year deal
that's coming up, and they'll schedule Ohio State and Texas and.
Speaker 5 (29:23):
Other big boys.
Speaker 7 (29:25):
But you know, for the most part, the schedules remain
somewhat the same, and you've got your traditional games against Stanford.
Speaker 5 (29:32):
And Navy, and you.
Speaker 7 (29:34):
Know, you always try to have Michigan State, some other
schools that are within the you know, the schedule that
have kind of already been there, and Purdue and Michigan
back when we played Michigan not so much anymore. But
that's got I think one of the bigger differences is
there's been so much change to Southern Cow that they're
now looking at how they can make it work within
their schedule.
Speaker 5 (29:53):
And I think for Notre Name there's going to be
a change.
Speaker 7 (29:56):
If it does continue to take place, probably as far
as when it takes place during the year, because you
also have to look at you know, for again Notre Dame,
there's not like conference play. They play, you know, five
ACC teams are kind of sprinkled in throughout. You know,
Southern Cow gets into their conference schedule after the first
few weeks of non conference games.
Speaker 5 (30:15):
Well, that's a non conference opponent.
Speaker 7 (30:18):
It always has been, and they kind of had their
special slot for it, but it's become that much more
difficult logistically and probably with the schedule they play now
in the Big Ten as compared to what they had
previously in the Pac twelve.
Speaker 5 (30:29):
So I like to be reasonable. I think you can
look at it from both sides. But this was all
spurred by Lincoln Riley.
Speaker 7 (30:36):
And the weird thing is is ads ultimately the decision
makers to make the schedules, the head coaches have influence
on it, and he's clearly speaking out to what he
believes has been difficult for Southern Cow.
Speaker 5 (30:49):
So you know, they've got a year left. They played
this year in South Bend.
Speaker 7 (30:53):
Maybe there'll be an extension for another year and to
twenty twenty six where Notre Dame goes out to Southern
Cow and they can figure it out.
Speaker 5 (30:59):
But it would be a shame to see it go away.
Speaker 7 (31:01):
I mean, it really would take away from what is
one of the greatest robberies in college football history.
Speaker 3 (31:06):
And not into the season opener idea either. That's also
the one that was kicked around is.
Speaker 5 (31:11):
Yeah, and that's that's one of the ideas for it.
Speaker 7 (31:13):
I think if again it fits what Southern cal wants
to do for Notre Dame, could have worked potentially. I
just it takes away from what has been traditionally there,
you know, West Coast trip at the end of the
season and Thanksgiving and and again, you know, we kind
of mentioned the automatic qualifiers, which that could maybe change
(31:35):
USC's perspective.
Speaker 5 (31:37):
If they implement automatic qualifiers.
Speaker 7 (31:39):
For the Big ten, the SEC you know, ACC and
Big twelve into the playoff, then maybe that changes. Maybe
they're okay with playing Notre Dame when they played them,
because it kind of was, you know, back in the
day when both programs are thriving or ones you know,
thriving and the other is competitive and.
Speaker 5 (31:56):
It's a robbery. That's what it was. It was almost
like a game to decide whether or not you're gonna.
Speaker 7 (32:01):
Get a shot at a BCS, a shot at a
national championship. I mean, that's really what that game kind
of was. So having it at the end of the season,
if it was out in California, or we're having it
at like a midpoint of the season where it's at
the teeth of the schedule, those were pivotal games, and
you look at it now and just say, if you
(32:22):
put at the beginning of the season, does it take away
from what the rivalry and the history of this robbery
has been.
Speaker 1 (32:27):
USC is in a transitional time and they have they
been hit with the transfer portal. Just doesn't seem like
they're confident in playing playing against a Notre Dame and
if they can get out of the way of getting
steamrolled by a team that seems to be a program
(32:50):
that seems to be going in the opposite direction. I
was talking to coach Jaywan the other day. We had
great conversation and I I rarely hear people speak so
highly of other people, and just the glowing remarks of
what he had to say about Marcus Freeman. I'm I'm
(33:10):
a fan of Notre Dame football because I'm a football pureist.
I went to a blue blood school and I feel
like Notre Dame is a relatable school to Penn State
in a lot of ways. So I'm a big Notre
Dame fan, But I'm also now a Marcus Freeman fan
after hearing the way he handles things, he treats things,
(33:33):
and you can see it. You can see these players
are wanting to go to Notre Dame. You can see
there are coaches going to Notre Dame. It's a team
and an organization, a program that's trending in the right direction.
And I don't see that for you for us. I mean,
you're talking about what they had an upwards I believe
of like twenty plus, like twenty seven players that entered
(33:56):
their portal. Now, I don't know how good those players are,
but I just got there's a lot. I've got a certainty.
Speaker 5 (34:02):
I've got a theory too on that. And what you're saying,
I think one of the reasons why there probably won't
be a decision made now is because, let's say USC
struggles this year.
Speaker 3 (34:12):
Oh boy.
Speaker 7 (34:14):
I'm just saying, if there's the potential they will, and
if they do, and if again, the contracts a tough
thing to buy out. But if they do, and maybe
the pressure continues to mount and maybe Lincoln's not the
guy at Southern Cal, then you don't have to worry
about signing up for this rivalry with a coach who's
(34:37):
begrudgingly walking into it or doesn't want it. You can,
you know, have a coach that signs up saying I
know exactly what I signed up for. I know that
when USC's best, they're a team that's going to be competitive,
or there'd be a team that can beat Notre Dame
because ultimately that's gonna be one of the teams that's
gonna be playing for a national championship too.
Speaker 5 (34:56):
And that's the perspective you have to have. You can't.
Speaker 7 (34:58):
You're eventually gonna have have to pay the piper. You're
eventually going to have to play the top teams, whether
it's in this playoff system or even throughout the course
of a season.
Speaker 5 (35:08):
And that's the reality for where college football is at,
Like you can't shy away from those big matchups.
Speaker 7 (35:14):
And it felt like when Lincoln Riley first brought up
a year ago, that's what exactly what he was doing.
Speaker 1 (35:20):
You gotta win the recruiting war, especially in your own
your own home, and it used to be they dominated
recruiting in southern California and that was good enough. You
fight against UCLA. It's like, hey, it's okay, little brother
you over there. You guys, just get your good grades,
be happy with what you got. We we'll we'll play sports,
(35:41):
we'll we'll win football over here. Y'all, y'all do basketball.
It's less people. Y'all gotta pay for you know, do,
go ahead and do you. But now you got to
compete against everyone everyone. If you are a four star,
if you are a five star guy, three star guy,
they're coming for you. I'm all over the country, and
(36:02):
Oregon has been recruiting like gangbusters in southern California like gangbusters.
Alabama coming, OSU has been coming to California, Penn State
has been coming to California, Notre Dame Stays coming to
California and getting some dope linebackers and defensive players. So
(36:25):
I'm just saying they have a lot working against them
because they just aren't as whoever they get. If it's
if they do move on from Lincoln Rally or if
Lincoln Rallley wants to stay, he's got to figure out
how to become more attractive to the recruiting classes and
the transfer portal guys that are out there if they
want to have a chance of surviving where they're at
(36:45):
currently in the NCAA.
Speaker 3 (36:47):
Two Pros and a Cup of Joe, Fox Sports Radio,
LeVar Arrington, Brady Quinn, Jonas Knox with you coming up,
next here, though, we're going to talk about curses. We've
got a brand new culprit in the world of sports, apparently,
and it's yours here on FSR.
Speaker 2 (37:00):
Sure to catch live editions of Two Pros and a
Cup of Joe with Brady Quinn, LeVar Errington, and Jonas
Knox weekdays at six am Eastern, three am Pacific.
Speaker 3 (37:10):
Two Pros and a Cup of Joe Fox Sports Radio,
LaVar Arrington, Brady Quinn, Jonas Knox with you here coming
up top of next hour. The rewards continue for one
team in the NFL, somebody else gets paid. That's yours again,
ten minutes from now here on FSR. By the way,
be sure to check out the Fox Sports Radio YouTube channel.
Just search Fox Sports Radio on YouTube. You'll see a
whole bunch of video highlights from our shows. Be sure
(37:32):
to subscribe so you never miss our very best Fox
Sports Radio videos on YouTube. So doesn't Drake have like
a real bad Drake have like a real bad like
percentage as far as games he bets on or teams.
Speaker 1 (37:49):
It's like a curse, only one like once.
Speaker 3 (37:51):
Right, He's terrible, but apparently he's blaming the Toronto maple leafs.
Blowout loss to Brady's Floor or the Panthers the other
night on Justin Bieber who was sitting eye side for
that game.
Speaker 4 (38:07):
And I don't know if there's any validity to it.
Speaker 3 (38:10):
I'll just say this, Justin Bieber seems like kind of
a weirdo based on some of the mannerisms and.
Speaker 4 (38:17):
What else is going on.
Speaker 3 (38:18):
And I know there's probably some legitimate reasons what is
going on. You know, he's been rumored to have what
maybe a little bit of an issue with photographers, extra
con you know, things like that, like what well, like
some people have wondered whether or not he's sober clean
(38:42):
behavior has been a little odd. I mean, Lee, you
can confirm this correct.
Speaker 8 (38:46):
There's there's a lot going on there. I mean, he's
definitely had money issues. He had to sell his catalog.
Now with everything going on with Diddy, obviously they have
a history, so that's a lot of people worry about
his mental health.
Speaker 5 (38:58):
Net what's the history a Diddy?
Speaker 8 (39:01):
He well, do you think he was a did he
was a predator?
Speaker 1 (39:03):
To to Bieber and he came out, he came out
and denied that. You don't know if it's true or false,
but they definitely in the No, Bieber denied it's he
wasn't a part of none of that type stuff.
Speaker 3 (39:20):
He was a part of an embarrassing performance by the
Leaves the other night, though.
Speaker 1 (39:23):
I know that, dang I put all that kiets. You
gotta say cats, I guess cats. There you go, the cats.
Now the show is now, you know now we got
the cats, keyets. There you go.
Speaker 4 (39:40):
Good luck justin Bieber, you are Oh did you see
the hat he was wearing? The hell was that?
Speaker 5 (39:46):
Yeah? You got one of those?
Speaker 1 (39:49):
What was it? I don't know, go cats at oh oh,
Hosts And Creators
Brady Quinn
LaVar Arrington
Jonas Knox
Popular Podcasts
Are You A Charlotte?
In 1997, actress Kristin Davis’ life was forever changed when she took on the role of Charlotte York in Sex and the City. As we watched Carrie, Samantha, Miranda and Charlotte navigate relationships in NYC, the show helped push once unacceptable conversation topics out of the shadows and altered the narrative around women and sex. We all saw ourselves in them as they searched for fulfillment in life, sex and friendships. Now, Kristin Davis wants to connect with you, the fans, and share untold stories and all the behind the scenes. Together, with Kristin and special guests, what will begin with Sex and the City will evolve into talks about themes that are still so relevant today. "Are you a Charlotte?" is much more than just rewatching this beloved show, it brings the past and the present together as we talk with heart, humor and of course some optimism.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.