ROYALE TREATMENT

If I were an enterprising theater owner, I'd be celebrating the first day of 2007 by offering a double-feauture of "Casino Royale" and any other movie you'd like to see for the price of one film. You could call it the "Two 007". Is anyone doing this? Anywhere?

Random Thoughts:

--Minnesota fired Glen Mason two days after the Golden Gophers blew a 31-point lead and lost to Texas Tech in the Insight Bowl. When did George Steinbrenner become Minnesota's AD?
--If Nick Saban is such a fantastic, must-have football coach, how come the Dolphins aren't going to the playoffs? Yes, I saw what Saban was able to do at Michigan State and LSU, but it seems the more he stays mum, the more valuable he becomes. And Alabama is looking very, very, desperate. Saban's agent should duct-tape his mouth until the offer reaches $60 mil.
--The Miami Hurricanes had the most impressive-looking offensive and defensive linemen I've seen this bowl season. Pretty much all around, Miami is the most physically superior team I've seen yet. It's hard, after seeing them in person, not to think that they underachieved tremendously this season. 7-6 with that group? Wait and see what some of these guys, especially the defensive linemen, do in the NFL.
--Georgia Tech scores 35 points in their bowl game without Reggie Ball at quarterback. The Yellow Jackets scored more points in just three of their 12 games this autumn. Tell me you're surprised, because I'm not.
--A lot of people are going to point to USC's 32-18 win against Michigan and blame the Wolverines for being preoccupied with their BCS Championship game snub. I don't know what that had to do with the loss, but I do think that Pete Carroll is by far the best all-around coach in college football. Coaching is not just game-planning and whistle-blowing. It's relating to players, attracting good assistants, and it's RECRUITING, RECRUITING, RECRUITING. No one trumps Carroll in those areas.
--Michigan's loss is just another reason I prefer the system stay as is. Win the games you play, no matter what month you play them, and everything will take care of itself. Michigan spent 50 days seething about how they were more deserving than Florida to play Ohio State. Michigan had their chance on November 18th.
The fallacy is in believing that one team is inherently "better' than another. You and I simply cannot know if Michigan is better than Florida, or if Florida is better than Michigan. But we both know that Michigan played and lost to Ohio State, so why should they get to play them again?
It's like this: USC beat Michigan, UCLA beat USC, Notre Dame beat UCLA, and both Michigan and USC destroyed the Irish. Inherently better? Who's to say? But head to head and body of work? Those are the two most important factors in determining who deserves to playing on 01/08/07.
And what I love, love, love about Pete Carroll is that he understands the rules and doesn't gripe about them. There's few of us who think Florida would beat USC, but Carroll understands that his team had its chance and lost two games. It's not about esoteric arguments. It's about your overall record and, when it's relevant, your head-to-head record against other top five or top ten teams.

Oh, and if we had a playoff, Wisconsin, which finished 12-1, still wouldn't have been invited. Don't for a second think that a playoff is a panacea.