Two Things

1) I watched "Band of Pirates" last night at 3 AM.  The first words of the documentary were spoken by none other than Musburger.  He wouldn't make an appearance for the rest of it.  Im assuming that the video clip was taken from the Final Four, which we all know Musburger used to do.  I know that he did the 89 final four from Seattle, as I have seen the other final four game, Illinois vs Michigan on ESPN Classic before. I really cant think of a modern day equivalent of what Seton Hall did.  They were picked to finish 7/9 in the Big East, but they played well the entire year.  They only lost 5 games, and 3 were to Syracuse.  They got a 3 seed, and beat Indiana, UNLV, and Duke in the Sweet 16, Elite 8, and Final Four respectively.  They lost in the title game in OT.  

I would want to say that George Mason is the equivalent, but they were an 11 seed, and that was more of a, no one has ever heard of them, theyre from a mid-major, etc.  Sticking with the Big East theme...it would be like if South Florida went 25-5 this year, and then made the title game.  Seton Hall had no one you ever heard of on their team.  S. Florida doesnt either.  They will be predicted to finish bottom 3 in the Big East this year.  No one has heard of them from a basketball standpoint.  It was a pretty big run/string of upsets that Seton Hall pulled off.

2) Whats going on on ESPN.com college football is the reason that I started this blog.  Sure, Mark May and Brock Huard have some part in it  ---  when you watch College Football Live and see them talking about 50 states in 50 days tour and talk about the best player to have ever played for BYU, then ask the fans, and all that, it can irritate you.  But nothing is more irritating than what is going on at ESPN's  "previews" of the season.   The season starts in one month.  So what are they doing?   They are thinking up overly complicated formulas to figure out what the best program of all time is.  Really?  At the end of it they came up with Oklahoma, USC, Texas, ND, Florida, etc.  You really need a formula for that?  Then these four boners get together and draft 40 teams.  Based on what you ask?  Well, even after reading it, im not that sure.

It could be based on last year, last 10 years, last 80 years, this year, the future, the fans, the size of the stadium, anything!!!!  They would knock other peoples picks for each of these reasons.  For example, Okie State figures to be good this year, but they say, they havent been good in the last 10 years.  Penn State is historically a powerhouse, but they say that they play an easy schedule this year (one year is a drop in a bucket compared to the 80 years + theyve been around).  They pick Georgia Tech, and say that colleges in major cities have fan bases that are too fickle (not just Atlanta, but every major city......really?    Thats a pretty broad, idiotic statement.  Apparently Miami, Boston College, USC, UCLA, Georgia Tech are fickle).   Well what about Ohio State?  Is Columbus a major city?  Its a capital, that says something.  Same with Iowa in Iowa City.  Whatever, its an idiotic statement.

Now, theyre placing these 40 teams into 4 hypothetical, made up conferences.  Can you believe that people get paid for this?  And I guess they are going to have votes or mythical matchups to determine conference champions and then have a final four and all that.  So with 1 month to go until the 2009 season starts, theyre putting teams in conferences that have nothing to do with this year, but instead are based on something else --- im guess the last 80 years.  And they are going to talk about that for the next month instead of, like, who is going to be good this year.  Its so idiotic because you know this is going to go on for weeks, and at the end, you know Texas, OK, USC, and probably ND will be in this stupid final four.  Again, I need to do 4 weeks of analysis and hypothetical matchups to determine those are the best programs of all time?

Does this frustrate anyone else as much as I do?