Airing of Grievances

Ty and Dan extend an olive branch to the Verballerhood, asking which college football takes they get right and which they get wrong on a regular basis.

See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Support the show!: https://www.patreon.com/solidverbal

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:02):
Welcome to the solid verbal Hell that for me. I'm
a man, I'm for I've heard so many players say, well,
I want to be happy. You want to be happy
for a day? Ato steak? Is that woo woom?

Speaker 2 (00:14):
And Dan and Tie, welcome back to the solid verbal
Boys and girls.

Speaker 1 (00:21):
My name is Ty hilden Brandt.

Speaker 2 (00:23):
That guy over there, for those of you watching the
video on Patreon, his name, of course, is Dan Rubinstein.
We are the solid verbal Dan. How are you pretty good?

Speaker 1 (00:33):
Pretty good? I got some grocery shopping done today. I
went for a run yesterday, I showered yesterday. These are
not daily things for me anymore with a newborn and
a two plus year old, but I'm feeling productive. I
had some twigs, some mini twigs earlier because Jody with
and I went shopping because there's an Easter egg hunt

(00:53):
at a local park sometime in the next few days.
So things are just clicking. Tie and I get to
talk to you. Now, you get to talk to me.
You get to talk to the verballerhood. We've been advertising
this show. I'm talking in hushed revered tones. Oh no,
did Kate find out about the How's Your Marriage? Show? No?
A no, did you ask her what you brought to

(01:18):
the relationship? But I need to close the door. Hold on,
close the door, close the door, close the door. Okay, yeah,
I mean people on Patreon know what we're talking about
because we had a super secret podcast within a podcast.
But if you know, you know is what we like
to say on the program here. Yeah, so you didn't
ask Kate. No, this is my cue for your a.
You did not ask Kate what you tie bring to

(01:39):
the marriage, not yet, although I feel like we've had
that discussion before in the past. Okay, good, good, good good. Okay,
So this is we're doing a Q and A show,
but a little bit flipped in that we you are
cueuing us and we have to a for our t's.
That's correct, that's correct, to answer for our takes. Yeah. Yeah,

(02:02):
So oftentimes what we do on this show is we
say dumb stuff. Let's be clear. We say we say
dumb stuff. That's we inevitably end up doing that.

Speaker 2 (02:10):
So you had the bright idea, and I just had
an opportunity to look at the document.

Speaker 1 (02:15):
It's not as bad as I thought. It's a lot
of it. Continue to pose the question to the wonderful
for baller hood and say, folks, what do we get
wrong consistently?

Speaker 2 (02:28):
What do I tie? What do you Dan? What do
we consistently get wrong in our analysis, in the way
that we broadcast, in the way that.

Speaker 1 (02:35):
We put our show together.

Speaker 2 (02:37):
So before us we have our trust to Google document,
of course, as we always do, with a page and
a half page and a half of stuff that people
wrote in and said, you consistently.

Speaker 1 (02:49):
Just line after line after line after line. There's like
thirty five of these things here, Yeah, of the best ones. Anyway,
before you go any further, follow along through your podcasting
app of choice. Don't forget to go to forballers dot
com and check out the Patreon. We had this video
out there for our Patreon subscribers as part of one

(03:09):
of the benefit tiers. I honestly forget which one, but
you guys, if you're watching, you get to see me
wearing the Dodger hat that I wear pretty much every day,
the newer pair of glasses that I wear pretty much
every day, and a T shirt I bought on sale
for probably seven dollars in twenty thirteen. Shall we get
started with what we think each other gets wrong? Dan? Oh?

(03:30):
Sure we can do that too. So we, as you
mentioned and alluded to that, we ask people to tell us, well,
we consistently get wrong about their team or another team,
or college football in general, or life in general. And
people responded enthusiastically. I would say, yes too, enthusiastically, perhaps
on social media and emails. And we are going to
address them and either say you know what, You're probably right. Listener,

(03:52):
you're probably right, or we're going to double down and
say I refuse to admit defeat. I am right, and
you will see it will be and over and over
again as we move forward, and this is the reason
or reasons why I was right and continue to be right.
So we have this list. So do you want So?

Speaker 2 (04:10):
Am I supposed to tell you what I think you
get continually wrong?

Speaker 1 (04:13):
And you I mean, let's make let's shoot samarrows here, Dan,
we're all fray. I don't know if I was prepared
for that, So I'll think about it. Why don't you
tell me what you think I get generally wrong?

Speaker 2 (04:22):
I'm not that prepared for it either, So I don't
think there's there's all that much to be clear.

Speaker 1 (04:26):
Yeah, but there is enough that you get wrong. Okay.

Speaker 2 (04:30):
The one issue that I wanted to broach with you
is your your stance on weather, And this is more
of a life thing than.

Speaker 1 (04:37):
Why don't we say why don't we save life? Why
don't we get into college football? I'm happy to address weather,
but why don't Was there a college football thing that
you feel like I consistently air within like? I know
we disagree on the postseason. I know we disagree on
certain ways I pick games. I know we disagree on
a couple of different things within the sport. How I

(05:00):
viewed you know, teams like Notre Dame, I guess tell me, yeah,
I mean I think I think you covered a lot
of them. Well, were we received one that said I
think it's near the top of the BCS and polls.
We're superior to the playoff that he says ESPN's hyper
focus on the playoff is garbage. So you are a

(05:22):
proponent of an expanded playoff. I am a proponent of
a retracted postseason. Yeah.

Speaker 2 (05:30):
So okay, if I'm picking some things out that I
think you get wrong from a college football standpoint, I
will steal somebody's thunder and say that not all Notre
Dame fans are one hundred years old.

Speaker 1 (05:45):
Yeah, we have that in there as well. Yeah, I
understand it's a bit.

Speaker 2 (05:48):
It's a fun bit because look, either like Notre Dame
or you hate them, right, So I get why you
do it, and it works well on the show. Let's
be clear, it works. It works very well in this.

Speaker 1 (05:57):
Just Notre Dame is such a specific there is no
no Notre Dame in a professional There's the Yankees and
things like that, but there's like a very similar playing field.
The Yankees play in the Al East. The Yankees play
a similar schedule to every other major League baseball team.
There's no sort of religious component in the same way
there is obviously for Notre Dame. There are no other

(06:21):
professional sports because college football is a professional sport to me,
that finds a notable team, program whatever, on that sort
of prestigious island. Right, that's correct, that's correct, but it's it.

Speaker 2 (06:39):
It definitely has an older following, but they're not all
old fans. There are some young fans who I know,
as one respondent wrote in said that they were introduced
to it by an elder statesman of the family. Turn
off the music, thank you still a jerk, Proving my
point anyway, So the Notre Dame thing I think is

(07:01):
important to call attention to the postseason honestly stole my
thunder again.

Speaker 1 (07:07):
The postseason.

Speaker 2 (07:07):
To me, I just I don't understand how you could
possibly do this podcast for as long as we have
root for the sport in the fervent manner that I
know you do, because I've watch games with you and
still be okay with the season ending with exhibition games. Granted,
the college football playoff the national championship game does not

(07:30):
mean as much to most people as like say the
Rose Bowl, just in our experience, but I don't understand that, Like,
I cannot get it through my head. I cannot understand
the point of wanting to root for and talk about
a sport the way we do and still be just
cool with exhibition games to close out the year. A

(07:52):
TV show that closed out the year, That's just not
my thing. It is a TV show, now, I mean,
that's all it is, right. The playoff is the TV
show as well. It's just a different TV show. It's
not an exhibition in that there are assigned stakes. There's
the four team, the arbitrarily picked four team because we
had a two team playoff essentially, which is just a game.

(08:14):
And now we have a four team invitational wherein there
are very specific rules, whether official or unofficial, on how
to get invited. You go undefeated as an FBS team,
you probably won't be invited unless you are in a
specific conference. So there's an element to the playoff that
it aims to be official. It aims to put an

(08:36):
official crown on the best team of the season, with
unclear specifications as to how to play and arrive as
one of those four teams. Because it's just a group
of people selecting it. It's not an actual play And
is this your case then to expand the playoff and
make it more transparent who gets in. Well, it's not

(08:57):
my case to expand the playoff because I still think
all in all, for the health of the sport, it's
not good. It's not good to have all of your
attention on January. It's you know, I think it's much
more of a process oriented sport than a results are
a finish line oriented sport. Which is why I think
we all liked it, because we all liked watching these
games in October November. And sure there.

Speaker 1 (09:18):
Have been great Bowl games and you know, the Alliance
of Football whatever they called it in the nineties. Then
we had the BCS, We had all sorts of different
attempts at finding a national champion. But I think ultimately
it's not the point of the sport when the top
grouping has pulled away in ways, really in consistent ways,

(09:39):
because we've always had powers. So what essentially, Okay, I'm
throwing a lot of words salad at this lens in
this microphone. Yeah, what I'm saying is I am less
and less excited for the college football postseason year over
year with the playoff, and I'm trying to understand why
because my team has, aside from like four five six

(10:02):
other teams, my team has been to the playoff. My
team has won a playoff game, and yet I don't know.
My team keeps winning conference like they're right in the
mix right there, they're a top ten team. But I
find myself caring less and less about what has become
an invitational, what has become the focus of the sport.
And I don't necessarily have a good answer. I think

(10:24):
I would like the playoff more if it were like
a hey, every Power five team and a wildcard team
and it was a sixteen playoff, and there was a
clear reason. But then you're saying, we're not looking for
the best teams, We're looking for the best teams within
certain contexts of conferences. So I don't have a good answer.
I just find myself caring lessons. Well, you're allowed to
figure it out.

Speaker 2 (10:44):
You're allowed to feel the way you feel. I'm just
saying I fundamentally disagree. So what do I get wrong?
Tell me what I get wrong?

Speaker 1 (10:50):
Well, do you think on this? I mean, this is
something we've beaten to death, But with the reflection of
a few months, do you think an eight team playoff sixteen,
a twelve whatever at six? Do you think expanding something
that has trended downhill in terms of public interest? Do
you think that's a solution. Do you think college football

(11:13):
is built for a traditional professional sports or college basketball
or FCS level. Do you think Power five and to
a lesser extent, FBS football is built for that sort
of postseason organization.

Speaker 2 (11:26):
Well, we talked, we talked about the AUTHORI yeah, we
had Ari Wassmanak. We talked about this very point and
his point. I think the same point holds true for
all three of us. You can add fifteen teams if
you want, it's still going to be the same four
or five six teams that are right in the thick
of it in the end, in truth, the same three teams.
It's still going to be Clemson, Alabama, Ohio State. Those

(11:49):
are going to be your three, and George is trying
to get in there, Florida's trying to get in there.
Oklahoma obviously is has a thing or two to say,
but by and large, it's going to be the same
team as a matter how many you put in there,
because that talent gap, because of just all the built
in advantages that some of these schools have now created
for themselves. So no, I don't think it dramatically changes it.
But to your point, I mean, you're not entirely wrong

(12:12):
with I think some of you ir rationale there. What
I don't like about the playoff and the postseason is
that it does give the impression that it's that invitational,
that it really is only going to be inviting the
same handful of teams year in and year out. I feel
like the process needs to be a little at least
a little bit more accessible. If you're going to have

(12:33):
Boise State just to throw a team out there on
the same level, in the same division as in Alabama.
If you're going to create this impression that these teams
can be ranked by the playoff committee, that they can
have a chance to be there as one of the
final however many teams, then you have to give them
some degree of access to that playoff. And right now

(12:55):
it's a wink and a nod, but it's assumed that
there's no chance at UCS ever going to play for
any thing a Cincinnati.

Speaker 1 (13:01):
They're never going to play for it.

Speaker 2 (13:02):
Right We thought, I thought maybe this past season, because
of circumstances, maybe they would just go off the deep
end and say, yeah, we're gonna we're gonna put one
of these Group of.

Speaker 1 (13:12):
Five teams in. That didn't happen. Maybe we knew better.

Speaker 2 (13:15):
I hope that maybe they would go that direction. They didn't,
and so now here we are again. It's the same
teams that get in every year. And if you are
a team like a Group of five school or even
a you know, a smaller tier school on the Power
five front, I think your chances are slim. So at
least expanding would give more access, even if in the

(13:36):
end we still got the same for the same Final
four standard.

Speaker 1 (13:41):
You watch a lot of college basketball regular season me, nope, yeah,
you watch some of the tournament. I do. Yeah, you
think it's a good thing for the sport of college
of basketball, for somebody who likes basketball, who has rooting
interests in at least one school. I think you probably
enjoy Mike Bray and Notre Dame as well. That's a
good thing that you're like, I'll just I will sit through.

(14:04):
I will sim the season because I do the same thing.
I have absolutely watched Oregon regular season games in the past.
I didn't watch a single one this year. I watched
one and a half. I watched the Iowa game in
the tournament. I didn't even stay up to watch because
I didn't feel a need during the season to watch
because I figured they'd be a tournament team, and then
by the time they got to the tournament, I was like, oh,

(14:25):
I hadn't watched this team at all. I'm not invested
at all. And you know, people watch the tournament because
they fell out brackets, but there aren't going to be
Sweet sixteen college football brackets. I don't think.

Speaker 2 (14:34):
No. Well, look, there was an ambivalence this year. Sure
that needs to be mentioned. But to your point, I mean, look,
I rarely watch regular season college basketball. I love the
NCAA Tournament, my favorite thing every year. Yeah, but I
don't know why that is. I mean, I'm probably an
exception or a fringe case because of after football season.

Speaker 1 (14:58):
It's sort of like detox for me. And it's a
different sport. It's a totally different sport, and it's different layout,
and it's a different everything. I understand that, but that's
something that's concerning to me, where just like, okay, well,
college football is all about the playoff. We'll watch these
sixteen teams play, and then what happens in that first round.
If you watch Alabama beat Boise forty two to seven,
and you watch Georgia beat a super flawed, you know,

(15:22):
Oregon team, you know, thirty five to fourteen, Like, do
you think football? That is kind of a clear waste
of everybody's time in January because and you're also going
to risk injury because Alabama's gonna be favored. But you
want a thirty point spread in the first round of
a supposedly important postseason game like that, that's what we

(15:45):
think is going to be. You know, we're expanding something
that we all kind of agree is pretty flawed. Ok
it is isolating. So I don't know. That's just where
my gut strikes me. Okay, people, A number of people
took exception with how you pronounced.

Speaker 2 (16:01):
Mario Mario cristable. Yeah, yeah, people take exception Marion crystable.
That's how I say it.

Speaker 1 (16:10):
I think that's locked in. You're turning forty this year.
I think the way you pronounce for that reminder, by
the way, I appreciate that zero wow. Yeah. So how
it's supposed to be Mario, I believe. So that is
how when I come across people from different parts of
the country, most parts of the country, it's mar not Mayor.

Speaker 2 (16:30):
So maybe it's an Eastern pa short a thing. I
don't know, but I can tell you that there is
a pizzeria, probably the best pizzeria in my hometown that
everybody came to know and love as Mario's Pizza. So
I grew up getting Mario's pizza. Mammy h should probably

(16:51):
take exception to me saying once a week, but you
know you get pedia pizza night. It's got pizza night, Yeah,
the thing. And when you had Pizza Knight, you went
to Marios, and so Mario's has been ingrained in my
vocabulary for as long as I can remember. And as
you said, I'm sort of an old quadure. Now I'm
setting my way, so I'm gonna stick with it.

Speaker 1 (17:12):
Okay, what's the name of the civil rights leader King?
What's his first name? Martin? Luther Martin? Okay, not Merton, No,
not Merton. I know it's a vowel thing.

Speaker 2 (17:23):
Not Martins. From Sarah A. We have not acknowledging that
SMU exists. I'm sorry, Ty, You've called their quarterback sugar
Shane for years now, Shaggy Shane, Shaggy Shane, sugar Shane.

Speaker 1 (17:38):
I said in nineteen seventy Hayden Fry went three and
four with the text. Ron Meyer was there from nineteen
seventy six to nineteen eighty one. We've talked about this
all the time.

Speaker 2 (17:50):
We talked about the the thirty thirty doctus Wallins.

Speaker 1 (17:57):
SMU is interesting. It's we should talk about the American more.
We should talk about Conference USA more. We should talk
about sun Belt more, Mountain West more. The problem is,
if we're peeling back some onion layers, it would be
very difficult for us to prepare for five hours for

(18:17):
every show during the season, and it will be very
difficult for us to do two hour shows, two hour
plus shows, right if we're gonna go super in depth
with as many teams as humanly possible, It's hard to
put out a show that long. It's hard to maintain
energy that long. We're old and washed up. Should we
be formulating more opinions when SMU is playing UCF for

(18:40):
Cincinnati or one of those bigger games. I think so,
I think probably we should be spending more time on that.
It just so happens that when you have a choice
of fifty plus games, and we know who listens to
the show, and maybe that's a self fulfilling prophecy that
we find ourselves intentionally not gravitating towards Power five teams.

(19:02):
That's who we when we get emails. It's about Florida,
it's about Wisconsin, it's about Texas Tech, it's about cal
it's about Oregon, it's about Notre Dame, it's about Penn State,
it's about South Carolina. And so we can only go
with what we hear from our listeners in terms of
what they want to hear us talk about both in
terms of big picture and games, and we do get

(19:22):
some UCF, we do get some SMU, We do get
some Cincinnati and things like that, but not a lot.
And maybe it's because we're not talking about it to
begin with, and so people are turned off that we don't.
But we do know what people are curious about within
the college football universe that listen.

Speaker 2 (19:39):
I appreciate the fascination and the respect that many of
our listeners feel towards a group of five teams I
care and you know it touched each of us on
a different level this past season when we had Coastal
Carolina work in its way up the ranking running that

(20:01):
fun offense, having Grayson McCall that that was an experience
that that I think you and I are both pretty
grateful for. Yeah, and I liked watching them this year
for sure. But to your point, it is hard to
preview all of the teams all the time. And as
you said, we know where our fan base is. Not

(20:21):
to say SMU fans aren't out there. They've written in
obviously one has, but they're just aren't enough hours. So
if it's something that we did, it was certainly not
on purpose. By the way, Chad Morris, former SMU coach,
took a high school job at Allan.

Speaker 1 (20:37):
Tollens Alan I was almost said, Alan Hall or the
University of Allen Eagles for schools. Yeah, the huge, huge
stadium in the school, superpower in the DFW. Yeah, so that,
I mean, that's as close to it. And it's also
just like it's again, it's the very circular thing where
I'm reading all sorts of sources and yes, I know
Bill Connelly covers this and what Chris Vanini over at
the Athletic, but you see college football news up and

(21:00):
you're like, Okay, that's what people are interested in. This
is this is the news. This is the news that
people are talking about. So we're going to talk about it.
And it's I wouldn't say it's more difficult, but it's
more time consuming to find out about schools in the
middle of the American or in the Sunbelt Conference USA.
It just is. And we're busy. That's a lad manson,

(21:22):
But we're busy, and that's we need to do a
better job period.

Speaker 2 (21:25):
But that's that's your reasoning why this is my favorite one. Okay,
I am one hundred percent guilty of this. Someone writes
in that we are too quick to get high on
up and coming coaches. Yes, I am guilty as charged.
So here's the thing for me, here's where I struggle

(21:45):
to the previous point of only having so many hours
to prepare. I feel like coaches, in particular up and
coming coaches are a bit of a blind spot to me.
And that is head coaches at the group A five level,
that is offensive coordinators in general, defensive coordinators, assistants. You know,

(22:06):
you try to allot your time accordingly, and you know,
I've had the mysterious day job for a long time,
and you only have so many hours that you could
prep with. So that for me has been a blind
spot to the extent that when these guys get hired
to actually run something more significant, I don't know as
much about them as I should. This full disclosure. It's
a show about honesty, and so therefore I just right

(22:32):
I just sort of assume that well as somebody put
their trust in these guys, it's going to be a
good fit. And it's at that point when they get
hired that I go and I read all the happy
talk about why it was a good move, and that's
what I buy into without actually having the foundation for
why it might be a lowsy move. Data shows us
that about half of these are good and half of

(22:54):
these are bad. So I've always aired on the side of, Hey,
these guys know what they're talking about. Hey, there's a
lot of money on the line.

Speaker 1 (23:02):
It's got to work. They've got it's a perfect fit
all these things.

Speaker 2 (23:07):
Never was it more apparent to me that I do
this than when I started saying nice things about the
Jedfish higher at Arizona. Hmm, yeah, because that it's very clear.
It's not even in like the fine print. It's very
clear that some people like the president of the university
I think, really like the hire, and everybody else was like,

(23:30):
hmm yeah, not so sure about that, right. So, though
my default state is to say something nice and to
be optimistic, even the people involved in that hire weren't
all that optimistic about it. And so perhaps Jedfish is
going to be the ultimate barometer for this. But I
am guiltiest charge. I am one hundred percent guilty of charge.

(23:50):
You got me this.

Speaker 1 (23:52):
This item was submitted with the names Lane Kiffen and
Sam Pittman. I watched a good amount of Arkansas and
all missed this year and that's generally why. And I
watched a good amount of ole miss in Arkansas these
last few years. Not full games with commercials and everything,
but extend everyone. You watch drives and you watch you know,
sped up games, and you scrub through it quickly. And

(24:13):
there is always to me something really exciting about a
coach who takes a clearly flawed team and gets their
act together. And there's just there is that special something
to me about somebody seeming like the right guy in
year one, because the team goes from looking uninterested or

(24:35):
disinterested and unorganized, disorganized and not looking like they want
to be there, not looking like they belong to fighting
hard to winning games, to looking competitive. That I just
I hate bad football, like seeing a seventy seven to
three interconference game, be it you know, Arkansas Rutgers, Oregon State,

(24:58):
Kansas like that, It's not fun for me. So when
there is a situation like Arkansas and Sam Pittman, who
finally after being this really well known position coach, and
it seems like an out of the box higher right,
it's always going to be like the hot offensive coordinator
who's hired for these big jobs or a guy who's
like an also ran or a stud smaller school head
coach gets a job in the SEC or the Big ten.

(25:21):
What have you? So when you have a different way
of hiring, which is Sam Pittman, somebody who seemed to
be well liked position coach and has developed guys along
a position group really successfully over many years, he gets
a shot. You're like, I like that somebody went in
a different direction, and I like that people up here

(25:41):
from many hundreds, if not thousands of miles away, seem
to be buying in. See that the transfers are coming in.
The offensive progress is clear. He resonates with hiring Kendall
bryle Bury ot, I'm like, there is something about that,
just like, okay, there's something that resonates with that with me,
and it's for like Lane Kiffen specifically. They had a crazy, fun,

(26:01):
explosive office. I don't know what a miss ceiling is. Yeah,
but is Lane?

Speaker 2 (26:06):
See like, I feel like Lane's a bad example. I'm
guilty as charged on this, I'll admit it. Well, that's
also narrative driven too, right it is. But Lane Kiffin
is not a a so an up and coming coach
that we are too quick to get high on Lane.
Kiff has been a coach for a long time, right,
I don't think we can classify him as an up
and coming coach. But he's a new coach at ole Miss.

(26:28):
He's a new coach at ole Miss. He's a known
quantity in a way that Sam Pittman surely was not
in year one at Arkansas. So again, guilty is charge.
I think Lane's a bad example where we want to
go next.

Speaker 1 (26:40):
Well, I was just going to say, with those two,
you're also talking about an sec where Ole Miss has
dropped to really low levels. Arkansas has dropped to really
low levels. So we hope for good games, and so
we talk ourselves into it, and it's all rooted in
the hope for more good games. We hope for Ole
Miss challenging Alabama like they did in years past, and
like they did last year. We hope for Arkansas doing

(27:02):
the very same thing. So I think it's rooted in
hope and seeing a movement forward in year one and
hoping that progression continues. Actually, where are we going? Let
me jump in. Yeah, I think we can have a
good debate about this one. Okay.

Speaker 2 (27:17):
Somebody writes in one thing that we get wrong. USC
was never actually that great. It was the same state
out I've said that, Yeah, more of a circumstance of
a down conference, with the implication being that the right
coach couldn't make them a consistent playoff contender. This is
something that you've argued. Yes, I don't think I've ever

(27:38):
argued that USC wasn't great. I think I'm more argued,
and maybe I can clarify this if we're going to
go back to takes on a USC stretch from like
two thousand and three to two thousand and nine. Although
I know that like it's always going to hang over
the modern program when you reach that level.

Speaker 1 (27:58):
I think they were great. I think it's a tougher
place to be great, and I think it's much more
just dumb luck lightning in a bottle that I mean.
USC tried to hire Mike Riley, they tried to hire
Mike Blatti. Pete Carroll ended up I think being their
fourth choice. So that their fourth choice happened to grow
into an amazing college football coach and and then a

(28:20):
really strong NFL coach. Was nothing that anybody in Heritage
Hall knew was going to happen orlo he would have
been their first choice. So every school, aside from probably
modern Alabama or the Alabama saban Era, is a beneficiary
of great context within their conference, be it Clemson, be

(28:41):
at Ohio State. If Michigan were extremely strong right now,
wile State probably wouldn't beat him by forty every year.
And so there's nothing Ohio State can do about it
except strive for excellence. But what USC did was destroy
the Pac twelve for a number of years, and then
Oregon got good with Chip Kelly and Pete Carroll ran
away scared, and USC couldn't find another Pete Carroll. And

(29:03):
so here's what I would posit to you. I think
this is and I think USC could be excellent. I
don't know how well USC can attract that next incredible
Hall of Fame level coach. Which schools are the most
average coach proof, which schools can can win ten games

(29:24):
with average coaches most years?

Speaker 2 (29:28):
Because it's not USC, No, well, it's clearly not USC.
My point here is that greatness is very relative and
in the sports world, very temporary.

Speaker 1 (29:39):
Hmm.

Speaker 2 (29:40):
What we see going on right now with Alabama, with Clemson,
to some extent with Ohio State, Like I think it's
I think it's it feels pretty rare that you have
a triumvirate like that that's just so dominant atop the
sport for as long a period of time as we have.
We've always had blue bloods, sure, but it feels like

(30:01):
the dominance on all three fronts has been remarkable to watch.
USC was great for a moment in time. The program
has obviously taken some turns. There were sanctions that I
think crippled that program and knocked them down a couple pegs.
You know, certainly they've had a hard time finding that
coach to get back to that to that same level.

(30:23):
They may never find that coach. It may have been
a lightning in a bottle situation. So is the program
itself now great? Probably not. We've seen it be pretty
damn average. We've played the Hudson News game with Clay Hilton.
It's very unspectacular at the moment, despite the fact that
they're in a recruiting hotbed. Were they great back in

(30:44):
the day and age with Matt Lioner and Reggie Bush and.

Speaker 1 (30:46):
Those teams were awesome? Definitely, those teams were awesome. So
I take issue with They were never actually that great.

Speaker 2 (30:53):
Those teams were freaking awesome. They were awesome, They were
fun to watch. They may not have had this sustainable
success for myriad reasons that an Alabama or a Clemson
does now. But yeah, those teams were great. They were
absolutely great.

Speaker 1 (31:08):
Yeah, they had a tough time with Oregon State.

Speaker 2 (31:10):
Tough time with Oregon State. But who does how Vallas
is a weird place. Uh No, I think it's you know,
I think that a lot goes into us C. I
think had USC hired Urban Meyer, I think they would
win eleven games every year. Again, but I think there
are reasons coaches like Urban Meyer don't want to go
to USC as well. I think there's there are specific
challenges to USC that are hard to overcome.

Speaker 1 (31:33):
That's all. Yeah, what else we want to talk about?
Michael Dyer was not down. I thought we had gotten
past this.

Speaker 2 (31:39):
Dan. I was on the field, sir or madam, I
had a pretty you were on the field in a
cold sweat.

Speaker 1 (31:47):
Yeah, I was on the field. Though we were right
than fielding that great vantage. Okay, here we go.

Speaker 2 (31:52):
Yeah, somebody says we're wrong that Northwestern is boring. Northwestern
pretty much plays more nail bighter games than any team
in college football. I would pause it. The reason that
they're in the nail bighter games is because the offense
is boring and they have to win exclusively through defense.

Speaker 1 (32:12):
Right yeah, okay, so that's my point. Northwestern is boring
because we know Northwestern could be exciting and Northwestern, which
is seems like they're doing the right thing by I'm
trying to look up Northwestern's team history of offenses. It's
not pretty, as we can imagine. It's a lot of
offenses in the nineties, hundreds, whatever. Northwestern games are fun

(32:35):
in a certain way because it's thirteen seventeen, they're down
and they're driving. There is an element of that, okay,
what's going to happen at the end of this game,
Like it's coming down to the final drive, and that's fun.
The problem is, when you've watched a full game of
Northwestern football and they've scored thirteen points, it's hard to
get really excited that they're going to drive eighty three

(32:57):
yards for a game winning touchdown.

Speaker 2 (33:00):
From the thirty eight yard line. Now, I'm sorry, that's
boring football. It's boring football, and they are to phrase
that they're able to teach effort and tenacity and develop
NFL level talent on defense.

Speaker 1 (33:15):
More often than they are on offense. I think maybe
the number two offensive tackle Rashaan Slater is from Northwestern
in this upcoming draft. But the fact is they run
an offense that has long been there to serve the defense,
to control the ball, to give the defense some rest,
and maybe to grind out, you know, a few touchdowns.
But it's a personal preference in that excitement to me

(33:37):
comes from creative, interesting speed on offense, right, and that
it just hasn't been the case in probably over a
decade with Northwestern. I mean, you go back to when
Randy Walker was like a true modern pioneer of the
spread offense with that like crazy shootout I think as
Michigan around the turn of the century, and you thought

(33:57):
to yourself, man, this is one of those schools that's
punching of its talent weight class because they're creative and fast,
and they're you know, confusing defenses across the country, more
talented defenses NFL, you know, filled defenses. And then Pat
Fitzgerald for a long time just remained very stubborn and
keeping around his offensive coordinator being satisfied with an offense

(34:18):
that underwhelmed but was good enough to get the team
to nine and three and to win a down West.
It's just it doesn't make for it. If you're trying
to convince me to watch your TV show, it's hard
to sell it on The shots are always in focus
and well lit. I need more, I need more.

Speaker 2 (34:36):
And look, people have written in to me specifically it
have said that, not as part of this exercise, but
throughout the years and have said, well, one thing that
I get wrong is that I always, I always AerR
on the side of offensive football being exciting.

Speaker 1 (34:53):
Mm hmm.

Speaker 2 (34:54):
You know, the whole defense wins championship's crowd and that
for a lot of people, that old slugfest that style
of football can be equally as exciting.

Speaker 1 (35:03):
And that's true.

Speaker 2 (35:04):
That that's one vantage point. It doesn't do it for me.
It doesn't do it for me. I think two things
can be true at the same time. I think Northwestern's
offense could be boring as hell and underwhelming, and they
could go into some games against much better competition and
get drilled and sort of prove the point. At the
same time, Pat Fitzgerald being an innovative coach who has

(35:26):
done amazing things in Evanston. Is he innovative or is
he just good? He's good, I don't know, he's something.
He's got to be innovative to win with the talent
that he's had at his disposal. I think both those
things can be true. Northwestern can be boring. Pat Fitzgerald
can be a genius. Northwestern can be a team that
we root for and do root for. Hell, you live there, now,

(35:49):
you're the hometown earlier.

Speaker 1 (35:51):
Yep, you know.

Speaker 2 (35:53):
So these are all things that can be true about Northwestern.
There is something to be said for capitalizing on the circumstances.
As we mentioned with USC, the Big ten West has
been down, it's been down. Who you got Wisconsin who
has been kind of the notable second fiddle? I'll wait, Minnesota, Okay,

(36:17):
they had a good year. Nebraska.

Speaker 1 (36:19):
Now it's just Iowa, Wisconsin.

Speaker 2 (36:21):
I know it's Iowa, it's Wisconsin. So you know, Northwestern
has done a really good job with that.

Speaker 1 (36:27):
I mean, Northwestern has won the division like yeah, yeah, yeah, no, no, no,
relative to what they probably should. Yeah. Absolutely, there's a
defending champ. I think it's about balance and it's not
just a Northwestern thing. It's across the sport where if
you were to bite into a wing, it's great that
it's spicy, maybe a little sweetness, maybe a little tang,

(36:48):
maybe some saltiness. Like you want balance. You want balance
in all things. And if Northwestern is giving you strong
defense and an unwatchable offense, it's hard to pry my
attention away from other games.

Speaker 2 (37:00):
It is here you go, Dan, Okay, Someone says they've
been listening since twenty twelve. Yes, you always pick Minnesota
against Wisconsin in the acts game. I swear he'll always
say something like, sky you Bob, give me the Gophers.
Did he have a bad experience with Badger fans or something?
And then somebody rides into the contrary that I always

(37:20):
trust the Gophers, and then I should never trust the Gophers.
I will never trust the Gophers again. The Gophers did
me dirty the way TCU has been over the years,
and no longer will I put any time, any energy,
any hard earned American currency behind the Gophers.

Speaker 1 (37:37):
Full stop, take it. No bad experience with Wisconsin. I
tell people when they ask me what college towns they
should go to to watch games. Madison is extremely high
on the list. And my number one in the Big Ten.
I've always had a great time in Madison and Wisconsin,
and I have loved watching Wisconsin football. I think it's again,
it's more of the desire to see the power struck

(38:00):
sure up ended in every part of college football that
you know, Wisconsin has done such a fantastic job, along
with Iowa, to a lesser extent, Northwestern. But I want
a good Minnesota. I like going to Minneapolis. I like
that there is a Gopher mascot for a college football team,
and not just any gopherhers Golden Gopher, a Golden Gopher.

(38:24):
It's wonderful. So yeah, maybe it's just my desire to
see because we've also Minnesota is also one of those
schools that tends to when I think back to recent seasons,
you know, looking at you, Jerry Kill and Tracy Clay's whatever,
we're like you look up and they're seven and one.
Huh what really, And you're like, all right, let's let's
beat Wisconsin. Then let's win something big near the end

(38:47):
of the season. And then they come up short. And
so I think it's just a desire to see an
upset and a fun game, And I get I get
talked into specific players, you know, whether it's Eric Decker
or Rashad Bateman, whatever it is, Lawrence Maroney, We're like,
that guy's pretty good. I like watching him and that
does it for me. I don't know, but no, nothing
against Wisconsin. Yeah, I'm I mean, if you look at

(39:09):
my dating career, my my short lived dating career, even
New York wherever, I'm very big ten focused. So no,
I don't discriminate. Somebody says that I call Baylor Baylor.

Speaker 2 (39:22):
Okay, explain this to me that I call b a
y l O R b A I l O R.
How am I saying it versus how should I be
saying it?

Speaker 1 (39:34):
I believe the Bears and the people who are in
Waco or went to school in Waco, they pronounced it
baylorre Baylor. I think it's the difference between bay Watch
and bail of Hay.

Speaker 2 (39:51):
Baylor, not bailor Baylor. Baylor, Baylor bailor Baylor.

Speaker 1 (39:58):
Yeah, not bail. Like you know, how the woman's name
Haylor Haley can there's some that are h A y
and some that are h a I.

Speaker 2 (40:05):
And it's Haley versus Haley Haley versus Haley Baylor Baylor, Baylor, Baylor,
just Baylor.

Speaker 1 (40:15):
Baylor, Babe, baby, bye bye bye bye bye bye bye.
I'm gonna rexss down phonetically next. I mean, isn't this
our I didn't even think about this. And it's not
Christmas time, it's not the holidays. Isn't this the airing
of the grievances? We've got a couple of dan is
too pessimistic about the Ducks. We got a couple of those.

(40:38):
Let me, let me come to your defense here.

Speaker 2 (40:40):
Okay, they lost organs, eight lost organs. We we do
a national show, and whenever one of us is optimistic
about our teams, we get it on Twitter, we get
it through email. Another Homer pick that you talk too

(41:01):
much about Oregon, talk too much about Notre Dame. I
feel like there is kind of like, deep down inside
of us, we have that tick where we want to
try not to oversell our team too much.

Speaker 1 (41:16):
Well, it's just not that fun to listen to.

Speaker 2 (41:18):
Yeah, we did, but we don't want to do it
because we don't want that feedback. I don't want feedback,
and I think that inherently makes us a little bit
more pessimistic.

Speaker 1 (41:29):
Well, I just think it's we have a more realistic
view of everything, and it's hard to just be too
optimistic because you have the complete picture. Like I could say, ty,
I think Mama H is just the best. I think
she's awesome because in every single one of my experiences
she's been amazing. But you know Mama H more than

(41:50):
I do, so you could say yeah, but like we
all have weird days and we're like, Okay, I've never
caught Mama H on a weird day, so I don't know.
So when I am mystic about Oregon, I know about
this linebacker who struggles to tackle in the open field.
I know about this safety who gets caught looking in
play action, and so I overthink things because I'm looking

(42:15):
at a more complete picture than I am for most teams,
and so I also know what could go wrong in
ways that I don't necessarily know for Florida State or Tennessee,
that kind of thing. And so it's not hedging. But
I think it maybe is kind of my personality too,
to not get too high or too low. The Don

(42:37):
pellam Era, the end of the Don Pellamra had me actually,
by the end of our respective Foreign eight seasons, Notre
Dame's Foreign Eight season, Organ's four and eight season. You
can't be angry, you just like you could. Yeah, they're bad,
they're bad at football, and it's okay most teams have
these years. But when you thought they would be okay

(42:59):
and they were terrible, that's when it's not fun, right,
It's it's exactly.

Speaker 2 (43:03):
Yeah, the four and eight season was a don't cry
because it's over, smile because it happened.

Speaker 1 (43:08):
Kind of thing. Yeah, Yeah, I don't know.

Speaker 2 (43:12):
I think that there are times I've gotten the feedback
that I'm too pessimistic about Notre Dame. Yeah, and uh, well,
we've all watched Notre Dame. We've watched the guiltiest charged,
guiltiest charge. I've been especially pessimistic about him. Book, and
he might go down as the greatest quarterback in Notre
Dame history. Didn't do it for me, couldn't throw a

(43:34):
thirty yard pass, but be Clemson did be Clemson did
be Clemson. What else we got here? You tell me
we have a couple about Yeah, continue, Dan is too pious,
Oh too pious about teams who've had scandals for years after.

Speaker 1 (43:56):
Hold on, let me look this up. Devoutly religious. I
think that I think this is meaning holier than now,
perhaps too holier than now, so making a hypocritical display
of virtue. Okay, okay, let's dive in. Do you agree
with this? Like do you think? I? Okay, So we

(44:19):
have a bunch of recent scand trying to think of
the program. So you have Baylor, you have Penn State,
are like the two biggie biggie ones of the past
decade or so, right, that had lasting effects in terms
of program reputation. But it's all over the sport as well, so.

Speaker 2 (44:37):
You know a little bit maybe I I don't know
if I go to this extreme with it.

Speaker 1 (44:45):
It's just it's difficult because I think there's an element,
and I understand the element of a scandal happens and
the administration cleans house, you know, maybe like the president
fires the athletic director and all the coaches and every
you know, everybody that was even remotely close to said
scandal wherever it happened. I think there's an element of, well,

(45:06):
they fired everybody, they hired an interim guy, they had
a disastrous season, and now the rebuild begins. When I
still think there's a stink on certain programs where it's
hard to like when the calendar flips from December thirty
first to jan one, say, can't wait to see what
Phil Steele says about this Falls team. And I try

(45:28):
to balance the stink that a program has because certainly
it's generally a larger rot than just like a head
coach or an athletic director or whatever, that there's some
sort of program wide or institution wide issue that needed
to be rectified. But also fans had nothing to do
with it. Players had nothing to do with it. Family

(45:50):
of the players had nothing to do with it. So
I try to sympathize and say, man, that sucks. That sucks,
and I just want to judge. You know, this Penn
State team, this group of nineteen year olds who stayed
at state college, or this group of you know, nineteen
to twenty year olds whatever in Waco that are just
trying to play football. But it's tough. It's just it's

(46:10):
tough because they're representing a place that handled things in
some way, and it's not limited to pend State in Baylor,
not Baylor. Baylor, Baylor that Baylor to handle things terribly
as an institution and to view that institution as new
a year after or two years after it's hard to
just be like binary and just like Okay, new year,

(46:32):
new thought. It's tough. Yeah.

Speaker 2 (46:35):
See, I you know, I can think of instances, so
like Brian Kelly's not without scandal, right, He's not without scandal.

Speaker 1 (46:43):
Brian Kelly had the Forkliff situation. He's not without scandal.

Speaker 2 (46:47):
Yeah, And so I'm not going to sit here and
say that you're you're too pious about that, holier than
thou about that, because that was a horrible thing. It's
a horrible thing, and you know, Kelly does bear some responsibility.
So I understand that perspective. I struggle to place the

(47:08):
appropriate label on how you've analyzed those situations over the years. Right, Well,
there's definitely there have definitely been moments where I'm thinking,
like Dan's getting a little carried away here. But but
I do understand the perspective. I feel that same way
too about me. But continue, Yeah.

Speaker 1 (47:27):
Yeah, I mean I'm not even trying to be critical.

Speaker 2 (47:29):
No, no, it's fine, I'm I'm I I understand the spirit
of the comment. I do take issue with the word
pious or the holier than that aspect of it. So yeah,
but I I okay.

Speaker 1 (47:45):
Yeah, because there are because there are certain things that
coaches do. Our coaches say that the schools say, well,
it's not a big deal, we're going to keep him around,
or like we reprimanded him. Like there are certain things
where like you're trying to see what is okay and
not okay in terms of the people who hold responsibility
at certain schools. And it's like, okay, did this coach

(48:07):
know about this thing? Is he's still employed? Well, who's
still employing him? And who employs that person? Like, oh,
this university is okay with this situation continuing, And so
if the situation is going to continue, I'm going to say, okay, well,
let's let's not say because it's a new year that
this person's reputation isn't what it is. That that to
me is difficult all times. And like college football is

(48:29):
just like a screwed up sport that we love dearly.
It's just kind of a reality.

Speaker 2 (48:33):
Yeah, it's it's sort of like the black Sheep sibling
where if you look too close, you're going to find
something under every rock. Yeah, you're going to find something
every under every rock. And also it's hard to respond.

Speaker 1 (48:47):
It's hard to respond to this when we weren't given
specific examples like Dan was too pious about Baylor, or
Tan was too pious about Penn State, or Dan was
piss about Brian Kelly Notre Dame, Dan was too pious
about whatever USC's sanctions or what ever. I wish I
knew an example to talk about. No fair, all fair,
all fair to say, And you know, I just I

(49:09):
to your point.

Speaker 2 (49:09):
I just it is a flawed sport. It's flawed sport.
I think if you look too close pretty much anywhere,
you're going to find stuff. And I know, just as fans,
you know, we try to we try to do our
best here to cover things in the right way, to
give attention to the things that we think matter. But
it's there are definitely times, more often than not, where

(49:32):
there's a moral dilemma like how do we cover this
here issue? Because we know that there's a lot of
a lot of stuff in the sport that's not so great.
So yeah, understand the spirit of it. I want to
get to this one here. There have been a lot
of Notre Dame ones that have come through.

Speaker 1 (49:48):
This one is mostly snail mail. That was good.

Speaker 2 (49:53):
That Tie says he's a Notre Dame fan, yet wants
them to join a conference. Plus, I think I heard
that he hasn't been to South Bend for a home
game in a decade.

Speaker 1 (50:03):
Exclamation, Bark. You're only allowed to think one way if
you're a Notre Dame fan.

Speaker 2 (50:07):
I remember the humanity, the humanity. I haven't been to
South Bend in a decade because we do our show
on a Sunday. Yeah, and that makes it hard, really
hard to do a podcast, national podcast. When I'm on
the road at a game and I can't watch all
the action, It's damn near impossible. So rather than go
an experienced game day at South Bend, really anywhere, I've

(50:29):
only been to a handful of games in the last
you know, however many years we've been doing this thing,
thirteen years. It's because of the show. It's for you
that I don't go to these games.

Speaker 1 (50:40):
Yes, I haven't been to Eugene since twenty eleven. The
last game I saw in Eugene. I've been to National
championship games, but the last game in Eugene I saw
was when Matt Barklay and USC beat Oregon. I forget
I think that organ miss a field goal something like that,
and it was an absolute joy to go back to Eugene.
But I haven't been there in a decade. I don't

(51:00):
think i've been to State College since twenty eleven? Really now,
is that? No? You've been? Because I remember getting a
text at some point it was it twenty eleven that
you were recognized in a bar in State College? Twenty eleven?
Did you go to a spring game or anything there? No? No,
twenty eleven it was the Nebraska game. But you haven't

(51:21):
been back to the town at all. No, I'm a
Notre Dame fan. Yes, I want them to join a conference.

Speaker 2 (51:29):
Yeah I do. Okay, that makes me wrong. I'm happy
to be wrong, but I do. I want them to
join a conference. I hope that what we saw the
ACC makes them join a conference.

Speaker 1 (51:40):
It was fun to have Notre Dame in conversations that
they're not usually in this past fall, in talking about
the ACC championship game, in talking about standings, and talking
about looking at their schedule and saying, man, there is
a cohesive theme to this schedule, and I can look
at this Notre Dame opponent and say, Okay, this is

(52:00):
how they did against this other Notre Dame opponent earlier
on in the year, and you can think about Notre
Dame in that in a more familiar context. And it's
not that, you know, Notre Dame football isn't fun to
watch if they're good and they're playing USC and Michigan
in North Carolina whatever. But to have those ties, no
pun intended throughout the schedule, those three points nice. It

(52:23):
was nice because Notre Dame on an Island is not
as fun because you're just like, oh wow, they're playing
Virginia Tech this week and the next week they play
Michigan State. What are the implications if they lose to
Virginia Tech when they play Michigan Cit or like they're none,
there are none, doesn't matter. But now that this, you know,
watching him in twenty twenty, there.

Speaker 2 (52:40):
Was okay, we've got one other one here.

Speaker 1 (52:46):
Recruiting rankings. Recruiting rankings. Yeah, well we have the one
about you hating ketchup. Oh yeah we can, and we
can end with you have what some sort of life
criticism about me in weather right? Well, I mean it's
not that I think Dan Klobakar also mentioned something about
that in the assuming recruiting rankings are accurate, when it's

(53:08):
just as likely that services will get it wrong. Okay, fair,
just so as likely. Here, here's the deal.

Speaker 2 (53:16):
Recruiting rankings have gotten demonstrably better over the last decade.
There's just more money in it. They're more eyes on
the talent. It's easier to get recognized than ever if
you are a prospect. There's just more information. So I
think because there's more info, it's it's easier to get

(53:36):
it right. There's no doubt that recruiting rankings are still
very wrong on a number of guys. It's not always
their fault, though, because only half of the battle is
what kind of athlete these kids are in high school.
Once they get into a system, once they get into

(53:57):
you know, coaches foundation at their new school coaches, that's
when things go sideways. Yeah, that's when things can go sideways.
And it may not have as much to do about
whether the recruiting services got it wrong. Some kids just
aren't a good fit. So I take a little bit
of issue with just as likely.

Speaker 1 (54:20):
Yeah, just as likely isn't true. So I mean it's
a loaded topic, but basically, the recruiting services don't get
it wrong. Recruiting services are projecting the data that they
have is so crazy and complete with football because of
talent level, because of available video, which has gotten way

(54:41):
way better, like the ability to evaluate these guys at
camps competing. Its like, but they're not in pads at
all of these camps. And so this is like a
crazy and perfect science that was never expected to be perfect.
And so we've gone over the reasons why schools miss
on what becomes an All American or a first round
pick or an NFL Hall of Fame or whatever. You know,

(55:03):
it's late growth spurts, it's injuries, it's grades, it's transfers,
it's all sorts of reasons that the coach who is
recruiting them leaves and then that school is no longer.
You know, a new guy comes in and he's got
his own recruits. There are crazy situations across the sport,
and so we it always happens around NFL Draft time
where they're like JJ Watt was a two star and

(55:24):
look what he did with his life. Well, he was
a two star tight end. He went to Central Michigan
and he became a walk on defensive end at Wisconsin. Like,
there's context to a lot of these stories, and also
we look at that it's it's become an industry based
on what essentially now three sometimes four ratings indicators a

(55:45):
two star, three star, four star, five star, which doesn't
leave a lot of room for nuance. Like maybe if
it were like an A plus AA minus B plus
I know, twenty four to seven that has like the
numbering system like at an eighty seven fifty one, I
don't know what that means. It's I guess it's a
B plus ish. So the star system doesn't leave a
lot for nuance. But what the star system does do

(56:09):
is say, okay, this person. I think Brandon Hoffman talked
about it on the show. What a five star is,
what a four star is, what a three star is?
For example, Yeah, a three star is a clear college
football player who has potential to be a contributor at
the very least. A four star is that same thing,
but with a physically really impressive starting point that they're
you know, tall and strong and they run quickly, and

(56:30):
a five star is both of those things, but special
in a way that separates them from somebody who looks
like a contributor and is physically ready. And so that's
a very vague way of looking at things, because a six'
four to three hundred pounds strong dude playing against terrible
competition on a low, level who is said to be

(56:51):
a four, star five. Star it's just a. Projection it's
not a finished product. Rating it's just a. Projection so
it was never meant to. Be these are the best
players that have arrived and are finished products and ready for,
college and this is what they will. Be this is
where they are. Trending and so THAT i think is

(57:12):
the miss the misinterpretation that a lot of people have
when they, say, oh this quarterback was a two. Star
he declared he decided to declare after one junior college
year before he was evaluated and only played half the.
Year they're, like there are so many weird circumstances with
evaluation and recruiting services that to blanket say they got it. Wrong,

(57:37):
no it doesn't tell anywhere near the whole, story because
by and, large the teams that amass the most of
those four and five star guys the ones winning the most.
Games and there's a reason to. True it's a bites
at the apple thing if you are if you are
building up a roster full of guys that all of
these services by and large conclude are the most talented

(58:00):
did guys in terms of projecting them. Forward those teams
tend to win ten games every. Year it's just sort
of how it works. Out, no all, right well that's
ALL i. Have people or a couple people Said Shan
clifford's not going to be the, starter Or Shan clifford
is going to be the, starter and you're wrong saying
that he's not going to. BE i don't know IF

(58:21):
i have it in me to talk More Shan. Clifford, no, no, no, no,
no, no no me.

Speaker 2 (58:25):
Neither he may he may. Be he may be the
starter week. One, okay he, probably he probably will.

Speaker 1 (58:32):
Be he shouldn't. Be he stinks when you drive to
The chicago suburbs if he is benched. Before if he,
is if he is the every week starter all year,
long WILL i? Drive, yeah come on over and watch
The Big Ten championship game with. ME i will drive To.
Chicago If Seawan clifford starts every game For Penn state

(58:57):
this coming, Year, okay you have to make. Pizza absolutely
make you. PIZZA i will drive there for The Big
Ten championship. Game.

Speaker 2 (59:06):
YEAH i just bought some really good new tomato.

Speaker 1 (59:08):
SAUCE i went to a bulk supply store. Today of
course you. Did i'm very. EXCITED i have to make
a longer drive for my cheese moving, forward But i'm
in a good. Place you wanted to take issue with
something with HOW i feel about cold. Weather you, An,
Well i'm not going to say you're a big old. Ninny,

(59:29):
NO i. DON'T i. Don't the weather there is colder
than it is, here So i'm not going to.

Speaker 2 (59:34):
Compare, yeah BUT i have noticed the tendency with you
to view cold weather almost in the same way that
people Viewed little Nas x's devil shoes like you are?
You cold weather to you is like the ultimate slap

(59:57):
in the. Face AND i worry you're. Laughing this is,
True it's a hundred.

Speaker 1 (01:00:02):
Percent it's. Funny it's a funny way to phrase.

Speaker 2 (01:00:05):
It and you seem to have a blind spot that
people who grow up in cold weather.

Speaker 1 (01:00:15):
Happen to have parents who don't like.

Speaker 2 (01:00:16):
Them, continue people who grow up in cold weather can
turn out to be, normal productive human.

Speaker 1 (01:00:21):
Beings, yeah that is. TRUE i married somebody WHO i
think just tried to walk into this, room who grew
up in cold, weather AND i will love her for
the rest of my. LIFE i think being cold is not.
FUN i THINK i agree with you on. THAT i

(01:00:42):
agree with you on that driving in the snow is not.
Fun and that's my personal. Take all sorts of people
grow up to be, really really great contributors to society
that grew up in cold. WEATHER a lot of them are.
Shorter i've found that the lack of sun. Exposed, sure,
sometimes is that is that based on real? Science, no

(01:01:04):
not at. All but my friends WHEN i was WHEN
i grew up in Southern, california we're all around my.
Height and THEN i worked with a bunch of people
In New york and they were not around my height
who grew up In New jersey And, connecticut In.

Speaker 2 (01:01:17):
Pennsylvania it's very very, Scientific, yeah extremely.

Speaker 1 (01:01:20):
Scientific, sure the cold weather thing is Just i'm affected by, gray,
cold icye like just an outdoors, person AND i don't
feel like snowshoeing to get. Groceries, okay that's not a me.
Thing SO i respect everybody's preferences and. Opinions if you
enjoy cold, weather bully on. You BUT i think IT'S

(01:01:45):
i think it makes me. SAD i don't necessarily enjoy.

Speaker 2 (01:01:48):
IT i want to GET i want to get that out.
THERE i just don't think it's quite the death. Sentence
not a death.

Speaker 1 (01:01:57):
Sentence but if you're going to spend a few months
of the year having to put in a lot of
work to live your life, regularly that's a. Choice it
is a. Choice, okay it's a. Choice if all of
the Hilden brandson colorusos and Uh solid Wife kate's, families
if they're all LIKE i think, we're we've all decided

(01:02:19):
to base Camp Palm springs and we just want to
play golf all the time and set up like a
breezy podcast. STUDIO i don't think you'd hate.

Speaker 2 (01:02:29):
IT i don't THINK i wouldn't like a breezy studio
because of the.

Speaker 1 (01:02:35):
Wind, okay let's Say. Dyson dyson is designing the studio
to be a, silent breezy. Studio it's the most division
studio if we've ever been able to divide in the.
Laboratory that's that's what everyone At dyson sounds. Like, YEAH
i THINK i think you would jump out the opportunity

(01:02:55):
to broadcast With dyson designed podcast studio between nine holes
of golf every, day all year.

Speaker 2 (01:03:05):
Long If dyson starts doing microphones and. Mixers i'm In,
Yeah i'm talking like.

Speaker 1 (01:03:10):
An air conditioning system or like an open air, breezy
but they dead in the air at the same. Time
you know, what you know WHAT i learned About dyson.
Recently you know.

Speaker 2 (01:03:19):
THOSE bigtl podcasts About. Dyson, yeah you know those big
like oval kind of air. Purifiers, yeah that look like they're.

Speaker 1 (01:03:28):
Magic mm. Hmm they have they're the fans, too, right
Are they're just like these big oval rings that are
somehow air.

Speaker 2 (01:03:34):
Conditioners, yeah there's a little slot all around the, oval
and that's where the air comes out. Of it's not
just like magically charging the air and forcing it through
a big. Hoop, right there's a little vent THAT i
did not know about until.

Speaker 1 (01:03:50):
Recently that's, okay that's. Okay we never claimed to be,
bright and people that chimed in increasing they know THAT
i agree with us that we're. NOT i learned that
the guy who Started dyson was a wheelbarrow a, designer
and he was, like it makes no sense that a

(01:04:10):
wheelbarrow has this single regular wheel when it should be
a ball so it can tilt and turn more. Efficiently
and he designed that and that got him started on
trying to reinvent everyday. Household they did the ball with the, vacuum,
right it turns more. EASILY i have one in the other. Room,
yeah and there was. THIS i think it was HOW

(01:04:31):
i built. This he also, mentioned like why you have
to keep buying bags for. VACUUMS i don't want bags and.
Vacuums and so he just decided to be more efficient
with all sorts of everyday. Items and that culminated with
you saying there's a. Event there is.

Speaker 2 (01:04:48):
Event, okay there's a. Event the airing of grievances show
in the. Books soliverbloodgmail dot. Com right, in let us
know what we got, right what we got? Wrong will
we continue to get? Wrong you can also hit us
up on social media and go on. Out if you
want to see the, video go To uvererballers dot.

Speaker 1 (01:05:06):
Com dan SO i got. SO i got to have
a good. Weekend, YEAH i have a good. Weekend all?

Speaker 2 (01:05:13):
Right you two for that guy over, there my good
Friend Dan, rubinstein for, Myself tie Hilden. Brand we'll catch
all y'all next. Week in the, meantime stay, solid, peace