Kelly Hunter hates me!

[Guest Tigrinum Major]

As I prerused the WJOX website yesterday, I came across this little nugget in Kelly Hunter's "Random Thoughts":

...I know we griped and whined about it for nearly two months--but the BCS

got it right.  And unfortunately for those of us that want a playoff, or

even just a plus one--it seems they get it right more often than not.

I immediately felt compelled to fire off a quick email:

Kelly:

As a long time WJOX listener, I was perusing the website today and came across this nugget:

"...I know we griped and whined about it for nearly two months--but the BCS

got it right.  And unfortunately for those of us that want a playoff, or

even just a plus one--it seems they get it right more often than not."

Surely you jest. 

The BCS did not "get it right".  They got lucky.  A blind monkey with arthritis could have gotten this one right.  Two (and only two) undefeated teams from major conferences with enough star power between them to blind the population of Pluto?  My grandmother had this one pegged without the polls that are so obscure that cnnsi.com doesn't post them (Harris) and the math geniuses that somehow ranked Harvard above Alabama in 2004.  Penn State was two seconds away from blowing the BCS wide open.  Can you sit there and tell me that, because of a last play win for Michigan against the Nittany Lions, the system "got it right"?  The stars aligned and my eight year old daughter could have "gotten it right". 

I used to think that you had some sports knowledge.  No longer.  That is the most asinine thing that I have read outside of ESPN.com this week. 

The BCS has done the exact opposite of what it was designed to do, which is save the bowls.  It has made the bowl system irrelevant outside of one.  It has brought more cries for a playoff system. It has done a better job of crowning a mythical national champion, but it has rarely "gotten it right".  After two years of getting it completely wrong, it finally had things align in its favor. 

Good luck with your show.  I'll be tuning in to Laugh Break on Sirius this afternoon.  At least Larry the Cable Guy realizes it when he makes comments that make him appear senseless. 

Feel free to response. 

She responded with this:

Dear Greatest Sports Mind of All Time (I edited this, she just used my name),

  Thanks so much for listening and taking the time to write.  But I digress--how's the view from the cheap seats?  It must be nice to know that your always right, everyone else is always wrong.  But that's beside the point.  Your argument is that the BCS somehow muffed the punt this year. 

Interesting.  The bowl system was already irrelevant.  Unless you're #1 or

#2 the bowl system is irrelevant!  But thanks for the email.  And by the way, anyone who would even consider listening to that Larry guy--well, nevermind.  Thanks again for listening and taking the time to write. 

Sincerely,

        Kelly Hunter

I was on my blackberry at the time and was only able to manage this quick response:

The bowl system was not irrelavent before the BCS.  Think 1983.  Number 1 Nebraska meets Number 4 Miami in the Orange.  Number 2 Texas has been beaten in the Cotton (I am going from memory, forgive me if this part is incorrect.). Number 3 Auburn beats Michigan in the Sugar. 

Three bowls have meaning, not just one.

Thanks for the condesending tone.  Hope your view from the box seats is good. 

I am not always right, as you assert.  But on this point, I am.

And followed it up this morning with a more well thought out email:

Kelly:

Just a follow-up to my hastily written email last night:

I was correct about Texas in 1983.  They were Number Two and lost to UGA in the Cotton Bowl. 

I was not saying that I am always right and everyone else is always wrong.  You put those words in an improper context. 

You assert that more often than not, the BCS "gets it right".

Did the BCS get it right in 2005?  Yes.

2004?  Is it right that two undefeated teams had no chance to play for a mythical national championship?  No. 

2003?  Split championship, with OU making the title game after losing their conference championship game?  No.

2002?  Again, two major undefeated teams.  Anyone, including three blind mice and the farmer's wife could schedule this match up.  Yes.

2001?  Nebraska in the title game after being destroyed in the Big XII title game?  No thanks.  How about Oregon making that game?  No.

2000?  Arguable, but who's to say that FSU deserved to be there over Miami, Washington, or Oregon State?  No.

1999?  Again, sketchy, even with two and only two undefeated teams.  Nebraska was better than either FSU or Va Tech.  An early loss to Texas spoiled their chances.  I'll give you a yes.   

1998?  Tennessee and FSU?  UT, yes.  FSU, no way.  Ohio State should have gotten a shot.  No. 

That is five times when the BCS failed to "get it right" versus three when it did.  That is not more often than not. 

The BCS works when there are two and only two undefeated teams.  Other than that, it relies on subjective opinions from coaches and sportswriters that turn the process into a beauty contest and the objective opinions of some computer programmers that somehow devise rankings that have teams such as Harvard ranked above teams such as Alabama during the 2004 season.  This should never happen. 

You are a member of the media that shapes the way that people think about systems such as the BCS.  Be a little more responsible in throwing out comments such as the BCS "gets it right more often than not" when writing your random thoughts. 

Feel free to opine.  We might never agree, but I feel like I have presented a strong argument, while you have presented nothing but a sentence written without abstract thought and a few insults about cheap seats and my choice of comedy listening.  Just for the record, I prefer Mitch Hedburg to Larry, but sometimes we listen to what we are dealt.

Thank you for taking the time to write back.  I anxiously await your future response.

Greatest Sports Mind of All Time (another edit)

If you had time and energy to read all that, you have more free time on your hands than I do.

Feel free to opine.

[jumbo 0]

opine........why would you waste time even trying to match wits with kelly hunter,she is the reason that i listen to finebaum.......she is horrible and has no clue about sports

[abrnfanatc 6]

You mean there's someone out there worse than Ray Melick?

[Tigermike 3,027]

Herb Winches!

[auee90 0]

OK, TM, I'm opining. I pretty much agree with your points and am against her's. She sounds like a yes (wo)man.

But here's one side argument... before the BCS, the bowls had more meaning because there were too many teams that deserved a shot that weren't playing each other. Those bowls affected the subjective polls (except many years ago when the final polls were out before the bowls, adding to Bama's MNC count). How else does a BYU win a MNC? So all too often, the bowls prevented a 1 vs. 2 matchup, which the BCS does solve. Kinda. It does guarantee a 1v2, but how those teams got to be 1 & 2 is still mostly subjective. And the fact that other teams are for sure out of the running for MNC makes those bowls matter less (except for 2003-4 USC, which somehow won the AP, thus the split, while Auburn 2004-5 did not).

[tgr4lfe 220]

opine........why would you waste time even trying to match wits with kelly hunter,she is the reason that i listen to finebaum.......she is horrible and has no clue about sports

210914[/snapback]

She is only on the show b/c of her female anatomy....oh wait it's radio

[Guest Tigrinum Major]

opine........why would you waste time even trying to match wits with kelly hunter,she is the reason that i listen to finebaum.......she is horrible and has no clue about sports

210914[/snapback]

You mean there's someone out there worse than Ray Melick?

210917[/snapback]

Herb Winches!

210919[/snapback]

The unholy trifecta of The Big Time.

[Guest Tigrinum Major]

But here's one side argument... before the BCS, the bowls had more meaning because there were too many teams that deserved a shot that weren't playing each other. 

<snip>

So all too often, the bowls prevented a 1 vs. 2 matchup, which the BCS does solve.  Kinda.  It does guarantee a 1v2, but how those teams got to be 1 & 2 is still mostly subjective. 

210925[/snapback]

I will agree that the BCS does a better job of matching up two teams than the old days. But in the process, they have made every other bowl matter less.

Playoff, baby, playoff!

[tgr4lfe 220]

At minimum at least start off with the Plus One. Then, we at least could have a situation like 1983, 2003, 2004 be resolved on the field within those top few teams. TM is right, there I said it, the BCS only glorifies the MNC game and all others are meaningless. If under the old bowl schedule, for instance last year, could have matched...USC v. Utah in the Rose/Fiesta AND Auburn v. OU in the Sugar, with the two winners playing in another bowl the next week to decide who is #1.

I will be completely and utterly amazed if we ever see a playoff system in place in D-1 college football.

[Tigerdog 0]

ewww weee! aint she a purty thang!

[ROLL TIDE FOREVER AMEN 0]

Sounds like you two need to get a room.

[280TIGER 12]

Kelly Hunter wrote:

the BCS somehow muffed the punt this year.

She said "muff".

[AuNuma1 1]

Kelly Hunter is only on that show because her other buddies bailed 107.7 for greener pastures. She was ok on 107.7, mainly because they rambled on about everything OTHER than sports.

And now she talks "sports"? Please...

[DKW 86 7,423]

Kelly Hunter wrote:

the BCS somehow muffed the punt this year.

She said "muff". 

211012[/snapback]

[Tigermike 3,027]

Kelly Hunter wrote:

the BCS somehow muffed the punt this year.

She said "muff". 

211012[/snapback]

That post is so juvenile, I thought I had made the post!

[WENkj 0]

To the argument at hand:

I would say the BCS has created a bigger mess. Where before there were MNC's and they all pretty much claimed to be opinion polls, we now have opinion polls that claim to be Truth, and thus discounting any other championship. However, because of USC's ability to win last year's BCSCG, they were given a pass on missing out on that game the previous year. They thus went on to claim to be going for a third National Championship this season. How can that be? I thought the BCS put #1 vs #2 and the winner was #1. The truth is, it's more subjective than ever, yet it claims to not be subjective unless it helps ratings or increases revenue. This system has always been and will always be flawed. If it weren't, other sports and levels of the sport we love, football, would be gravitating towards a BCS version of their championship. Instead, they continue to point and laugh at the only level of any major sport that doesn't decide it's championship in a playoff system. Until D1 CFB wises up, we will be left to being the joke of the sports world where writers and analysts have more to say about who wins titles and championships than the coaches and players do on the field.

kj