Oh the humanity...

Some Mondays it’s best to just not watch TV.

That was the cast the past Monday for me anyway. Oh sure, you can start up your cries of “sour grapes” or “but it’s good for the SEC” w/r/t the Tostitos BCS National Title (PS, American Idol will be on soon, so don’t start watching Heroes, or Grey’s or Survivor…oh, and 24 too…Only of FOX) Game, but it wasn’t just that (but don’t fret, I’ll get to it soon enough.)

The more immediately disturbing thing was the half-hour or so I was exposed to MTV’s latest dating show. First off—this was not my choice to watch the show. I had been keeping up with my (oh go ahead and say it) resolution to spend more time at the gym and less time in front of the computer not writing, but someone had already commandeered the remote. So for the duration of my warm-up stationary bike session (guess who has two thumbs and forgot to bring a book? This guy) I was stuck watching a show that made me think thoughts more appropriate for old fart (example “this is today’s youth?”) and made me hope like hell most girls were the exact opposite of the shallow-as-an-adjective-carries-too-strong-a-connotation-of-depth-to-adequetely-describe would-be celebutards.




























(They made the folks that go on this show look deep, witty, urbane and cultured--which says a lot since I'm convinced the casting process boils down to two key questions: "1. Are you easily offended?" and "2. Despite rational evidence from many sane people that it doesn't work out, would you have sex with a roomate if you happened to find him/her attractive--even if only when you're drunk and or high?")


The premise was the girl would use a waveform-analysis-based lie-detector (which apparently is read by her best friend) to pick a “winner” from two neuron-deficient would-be boy toys. In addition, the best friend would suggest questions for the girl to ask the two idiots (mostly inane stuff, both would-be celebutards were quite concerned with virginity and wallet size in their w.-b.b.t.s.) After the inane questions are done, the guys are then told about the lie-detector, and listening best friend, and told what answers were utter bull, the point apparently being that liars shouldn’t be rewarded with dates. But instead, the first w.b.c.t. picks the guy that lied constantly anyway, and the second picks the guy that “honestly” would rather her get $100,000 than his receiving $10,000 (or something.) I haven’t been that disgusted by females on tv since I caught part of Flavor of Love.

And then came Troy Smith's Gino Torretta impersonation on national tv later that night. Oh sure, it's nice for the conference and all...but really it sucked. And not just because as a Georgia fan it's my sacred and duty-bound calling to hate Florida. It's because I knew what would happen afterwards...

Professional (sic) sports journalists, at least w/r/t college football, seem to have gathered in a conclave a few years back and decided the best way to counter the percieved "threat" of bloggers was to pick a group of teams that were "the best", then come up with reasons to justify the prodigous ballwashing these select teams would recieve. Sub-rule 1A reads: if one of the ball-washed teams (note: NOT Notre Dame--provided they can keep beating the service acadamies and Stanford they're BCS material) is beaten, the team that beats them joins the circle.

And now, lo and behold, the Florida ball-washing has began. The same ESPN pundits that said Michigan was screwed are now jumping on the bandwagon and screaming that even though Florida will lose 15 or more starters (for Holtz, Corso and the others that can't do math, that's more than half the starting lineup) including the suddenly-we-knew-he-was-great-all-along-despite-all-those-times-we-pointed-out-his-higher-INT-rate-this-year-because-we-at-ESPN-don't-have-an-exclusive-SEC-contract-and-the-Big-10-can't-totally-suck QB Chris Leak and most of the D will repeat?

Really?

And in the AJC, Mark Bradley does his best would-be P.B. Shelley and tells us to look on Nancy Meyer's works and dispair, for he is king of kings.

The talk of how deadly the spread offense will be is what really kills me. Ok, granted they hung 41 on Ohio State. But they failed to break 30 on Vandy (and actually every SEC team they played other than Arkansas.) Don't let the points fool you folks...Florida won because of a sick, talented D. That's what got them to the game, it's what won them the game. But since Chris Leak played out of his head for a half, the team was able to surprise a slightly-slow-footed and tired (since their O was doing nothing) Buckeye D with short drives ending mostly in TDs the spread is OMG the best ever!!!!!1111!?

Cro-Magnon-QB Tim Tebow has yet to prove he can do more than short throws in the red zone because the D thinks he's going up the middle, but because of one game, he's going to morph into Alex Smith?

Could the spread work in the SEC? Jury's still out...and until Florida can at least hang 41 on Miss. St. or Vandy, let's hold off on saying he's Spurrier pt. 2. But it probably'd work fine in the Big 10.

So to answer Mark Bradley...no we're not scared. Saban's not scared. Fulmer's not scared (hell, UGA, with JTIII at QB put up more points on the Vols in a half than Meyer's spread did in the whole game). And Richt ain't scared.

2006 taught us that history can repeat itself (the last time UGA lost to Vandy and UK--before I was born so you know it's a ways back--they beat Tech, Auburn and won the Peach bowl too), and what happened when UGA played Florida after they won their other National Title?