Friday, October 12, 2007

The Works, Off With Her Head-style


Sorry for the profanity, I really am. But let's see you read this remarkable story at the War Eagle Reader from the Reid McMilion 1993 game and not come away fired up to lay down your own bit of sassmouth on the nearest sash-wearer. Money quotes:

"The turning point came when we had been berated the entire first half by the Arkansas homecoming queen — yep, we were so bad in ’92, we were picked as homecoming — and finally defensive back Otis Mounds had had enough," Atkins said ... "He turned around to the young lady – decked out in a fur coat and tiara – and yelled at her in the third quarter ‘Shut up, bitch.’ Now, that is what made the whole sideline pickup and we won the game."

Hells to the yeah. By the way, this is yet another example of why--not to sound too much like a 1980s' dishwashing detergent commercial, or something--if you're not reading TWER, you're not reading the Auburn blogosphere. Excellent wrap-up of the Vandy game there as well including some thoughts on the 1957 national champs reunion, which I idiotically forgot to mention.

One quibble: J. Henderson plays a little bit of "What if?" at post's end about the USF game and the Crooming, and in my very humble opinion we as Auburn fans can't get caught up in that temptation, crazy tempting as it is. For two reasons:

1. We were so frickin' overdue to lose a couple of close games. As pointed out ad nauseum on this site, going 6-0 in close games one year means you'd better win decisively the next. Auburn didn't, that's what happens. Would I be willing to trade those razor's edge victories in 2006 for ones earlier this season? The Nebraska one, maybe, but none of the others.

2. If anything is keeping Auburn's feet on the ground right now as we head off to Fayetteville, it's the endless reams of "These guys totally suck" newsprint and blogprint that hit after MSU game. If that anchor of anger wasn't there, I'd feel even more confident this was 2002 all over again. (There's also the rather surprising fact that the 0-2 SEC team is getting three points on the 2-1 SEC team with the incredible road track record and the win over Florida, a fact I have precisely zero doubt has been mentioned more than once this week in the Auburn locker room. Thanks, Vegas.)

The coin's flip side.
Wonderfully-named Arkansas columnist institution Wally Hall provides 10 reasons Arkansas could win this game, and while I don't buy all of them--Casey Dick's passing game isn't going to "click in a big game" until Monk gets back--but No.2 (D-Mac) and No. 1 (Felix Jones) are really all the reasons the Hogs need. Especially when 0-3 in the SEC and the surefire firing of their coach are on the line. As has been said elsewhere, the Hogs are all in this week.

Accuracy, please. Snatched off the useful Best of SEC newswire is this piece of fluff from MSNBC. On the balance I agree that the SEC is still the nation's best conference, blah blah blah. But honestly? I think the league might have been a bit overrated entering this season. LSU is all that and a bag of cajun-style potato chips, of course, Florida is a worthy No. 2 as anyone who saw their slugfest last Saturday would attest, and if this were a chessboard South Carolina would make a fine bishop alongside LSU's queen and Florida's, like, almost-queen ... but who else? Kentucky is not a contender until they start allowing less than 12 yards a carry. Auburn has potential, obviously, but could likely lose to a Sun Belt team if they put their mind (not) to it. Tennessee rolled over and died in Gainesville, but are apparently still light years better than the toothless Dawgs, themselves road winners over the reeling Tide. MSNBC guy touts the number of SEC teams in the top 25, but I'm not sure even in this insane season more than those top 3 belong in the top 20. I hope I'm wrong. We'll see.

Second, bigger gripe: MSNBC guy writes that "South Florida whipped Auburn at Auburn." Whipped? That game went into overtime, jerkface, and the yardage totals, while not in Auburn's favor, weren't exactly one-sided. But why just say "beat" or "defeated" when you can go for something wholly inaccurate but still, dude, way cooler-sounding? This is a problem all over the place in college football writing; witness the reliable, reasonable OTS at RollBamaRoll writing this week that Miss. St. "squeak(ed) by" UAB. I know the Blazers led by a slim margin entering the fourth quarter, but still, that game finished 30-13. 17 points, only the final 7 of them coming via turnover really equals a squeaker? The JCCW is probably not innocent of this sort of exaggeration, either, mind you, but this sneaky, creeping tendency to describe games in terms based on the context the result is being placed in (i.e. the SEC isn't perfect, so Auburn got "whipped", MSU isn't going to beat UT, so they "squeaked" past UAB) rather than the result itself needs to be weeded out.

Stereotype confirmed. SEC fans, want to feel superior about the intensity of our crowds and gameday experience while simultaneously having your suspicions as to the milquetoast climate at Big 10 games scientifically verified? Have a look see at this letter from a Michigan fan exposed with snappy malice at MGo. If I hadn't seen these types of fans at the Big House with my own two eyes, I'd be tempted to think this was a parody, so thoroughly crotchety, ornery, and generally "Stay out of my yard, you damn kids!" that letter is.

Also worth checking: Braves and Birds lays into the ESPN brand of intangible analysis (look also for an insightful comment from LD of Gunslingers fame); Jay G. Tate reports that you may want to hold off on wishing Patrick Trahan well on his road to academic recovery; USC fan Jonathan Tu on Stanford's heroic backup QB: "earnest young lesbian ceramics associate professor"; and finally, please read occasional JCCW commenter PhillipVU94's Vandy blog Save the Shield, which I meant to point you towards earlier this week and, honest to God, got my Vandy blogs with two S-words in the title mixed up. Apologies to Phillip.

Wish List possibly later today, more likely first thing tomorrow a.m.

No comments: