Tigers X - Number one Source to Talk Auburn Tigers Sports
Pat Dye Field => War Damn Eagle => Topic started by: Townhallsavoy on October 07, 2013, 02:30:20 PM
-
I usually think he's a douche. Well, I think he's a douche even in this clip, but I agree with what he had to say.
I might have added in - "If there is a woman out there who has coached or played at the collegiate level, then I would be okay with her being on the committee."
The playoff committee isn't a budget team. It's not an ethics convention. It's a group of people who are going to decide which four teams are the best football teams in the country. When picking those teams, I'd hope that the decisions are based primarily on on-the-field reasons and nothing else.
Of course he's in hot water over this.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNvXKuXYrt0# (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNvXKuXYrt0#)
-
Twitter is piling on drunk ol' Pat Dye as well. Except he's spot on.
http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2013/10/pat_dye_on_condoleeza_rice_all.html (http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2013/10/pat_dye_on_condoleeza_rice_all.html)
Pat Dye on Condoleezza Rice: 'All she knows about football is what somebody told her'
Matt Scalici | mscalici@al.com
on October 07, 2013 at 1:51 PM
After reports that former Secretary of State and Alabama native Condoleezza Rice would be a member of the upcoming College Football Playoff selection committee, several columnists and analysts criticized the choice, questioning Rice's football credentials.
Former Auburn head coach Pat Dye joined those ranks on Monday when he criticized the addition of Rice to the committee on WJOX morning show The Opening Drive.
"All she knows about football is what somebody told her," Dye said. "Or what she read in a book, or what she saw on television. To understand football, you've got to play with your hand in the dirt."
"I love Condoleezza Rice and she's probably a good statesman and all of that but how in the hell does she know what it's like out there when you can't get your breath and it's 110 degrees and the coach asks you to go some more?"
Dye also said that the he feels addition of Rice to the committee could make the selection process less about Xs and Os and more about personal relationships.
"That goes back to politics. Which one she likes the best. Which one's the smoothest talker. The game is played on the field."
Listen to Dye's full interview from WJOX's.
-
"No puss for you!"
-
Here's the thing. The same people losing their shit over this on Twitter are the same people that never in a million years be saying this about Donald Rumsfeld, or Dick Cheney, or any other male member of the Bush White House that never played a down of football in their lives, and never had any professional association with analyzing the game.
-
Dennis Dodd trolling like hell now.
https://twitter.com/dennisdoddcbs
-
The emotional rhetoric coming out of this proves his point.
-
If you have to have played an actual down of football to be on the committee, then 99% of the sports writers and talking heads that we listen to all season are not qualified.
I think she would do a helluva job. She is a student of the game, and a brilliant person. For Pat Dye or anyone else to say you have to have personally owned a sweaty jock strap to understand what it takes to be a champion, then they are full of shit.
-
If you have to have played an actual down of football to be on the committee, then 99% of the sports writers and talking heads that we listen to all season are not qualified.
I think she would do a helluva job. She is a student of the game, and a brilliant person. For Pat Dye or anyone else to say you have to have personally owned a sweaty jock strap to understand what it takes to be a champion, then they are full of shoot.
I think she's a dumbass and will suck. Agree with Dye that her decisions will be based on emotion and which uniforms she likes best.
What makes you think she's a "student of the game?"
There's a HELLUVA difference between being smart and being football smart. And yeah, you have to have played or coached to understand that.
-
What makes you think she's a "student of the game?"
Because she's a huge bama fan. Nothing says football smarts more than that.
-
If you have to have played an actual down of football to be on the committee, then 99% of the sports writers and talking heads that we listen to all season are not qualified.
I think she would do a helluva job. She is a student of the game, and a brilliant person. For Pat Dye or anyone else to say you have to have personally owned a sweaty jock strap to understand what it takes to be a champion, then they are full of shit.
I 100% agree, which means I would not advocate any sports writers or talking heads from being on the committee.
She can have a valid opinion to espouse on ESPN's College Gameday all she wants. Any man, woman, or child can go on a radio show and discuss what they think about college football.
But this is like picking Bill Gates to be a gymnastics judge in the Olympics. He's a high profile guy. Very successful. Very smart. Surely he can offer a valid and innovative opinion on which athlete performed the best tumbling routine.
I played high school football. I worked in the Auburn athletic department and sat in on a few meetings between the coaches and players. I watched the break down game film. I attended practices. I read message boards and watch ESPN. I talk to my friends about football. I give my opinion all the time about Auburn games and games going on around the country. I critique play calls and question decisions made by the coaches. I analyze talent and state who will be a good NFL player and who won't be. I do all of the things a football fanatic does, and I would never consider myself qualified to choose who should be in the playoff and who should not be.
I watched a video not too long ago of Nick Saban breaking down the Rip/Liz defense, and I could barely keep up with the jargon. I sure as hell wouldn't be able to identify that defense on the field. I can tell if I'm watching closely enough if the secondary is in man or zone. I can tell if someone blitzes. I can tell if the d-line runs a stunt. But I can't pick up on proper technique as the plays are happening. If I watched game film in slow motion, I may be able to guess at what players are doing right and wrong.
But guys playing D-1 football see all of that instantly. When I was at Auburn practices, I loved watching Coach Dunn. They'd run a play, and he would instantly start roaring at players to fix this and that about their technique and fundamentals. He could just see it at live speed.
Former players and coaches can and have seen things on the football field that I don't have the experience to understand. And because of that, those are the type of people who should choosing who gets into the playoff. Not someone who would be a great spokesperson or one who can handle the politics.
-
If you have to have played an actual down of football to be on the committee, then 99% of the sports writers and talking heads that we listen to all season are not qualified.
I think she would do a helluva job. She is a student of the game, and a brilliant person. For Pat Dye or anyone else to say you have to have personally owned a sweaty jock strap to understand what it takes to be a champion, then they are full of shit.
If she's a "student of the game" then so am I, everyone on this board, and about 50 million other football fans out there.
Here's Pat Dye blasting Mike Leach for having never played the game:
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/462135-mike-leach-disses-tide-pat-dye-defends-whattt (http://bleacherreport.com/articles/462135-mike-leach-disses-tide-pat-dye-defends-whattt)
Has zero to do with gender.
I would be more inclined to agree that having actually played the game of football is not necessarily a requirement for understanding it. But it certainly helps.
More importantly, making your living off of analyzing or anything in the realm of college football would be a plus for anyone given this much power for deciding who gets into a 4 team playoff.
Donald Rumsfeld played football at Princeton. In spite of this, he too is not qualified for this position. Same goes for any member of the Bush white house. Or Obama's. Unless they were also ESPN analysts on the side.
For the record, I doubt Dye would have made a comment like this if, say, Erin Andrews had been selected. She still wouldn't be at the top of my list, but I'd put her up there a billion times before a former secretary of State. For the same reasons I don't think Pat Dye is qualified to hold that office.
-
Well that's cause Pat Dye can't spare the time to be on some panel.
He is too busy running the AU athletic department.
-
I read message boards
That should disqualify anybody.
-
That should disqualify anybody.
You know what else should disqualify anybody?
Being a Finebaum listener. According to Finebaum, when he met Condi Rice, she talked to him about specific callers on his show as if she was a listener.
-
You know what else should disqualify anybody?
Being a Finebaum listener. According to Finebaum, when he met Condi Rice, she talked to him about specific callers on his show as if she was a listener.
If she listened it was because she needed to be reminded of what rednecks really were.
-
I would be horrible on this committee.
There would only be one team eligible every year for all four spots.
WDE Baby!
-
I would be horrible on this committee.
There would only be one team eligible every year for all four spots.
WDE Baby!
And so will whoever they choose, The screams of homerism will be very loud. Why don't they let ESPN choose the judges, they could be:
Lou Holtzzzzzzssssss-That way ND is always in the top four.
Nick Saban- They him suck him off so much.
Jenna Jameson-If your going to have a female at least make it interesting.
Stuart Scott: That crazy fucking eye would drive everybody crazy.
Keith Olbermann: Since nobody is going to like the panel anyway have somebody on there that is easy to hate.
Joe Schad: Can't have a board without at least one male who doesn't know jack shit.
I am sure there are more.
-
What does it matter? They'll put whomever ESPN pimps from start to finish. They are CLEARLY...CLEARLY the 4 best teams out there.
-
Okay, I don't see why some are making a big deal about Condi possibly being on the committee. She sure the heck has experience in being in a room full of people who can't agree on shit and would probably be the least likely, of the names mentioned, to show bias. Isn't that what we want out this committee? If you put former players, coaches, and ADs on this committee, then you are looking at a board full of biased members. We all know that media members tend to be bias, despite many saying they are not. So, I ask how do we put non-biased members on the selection committee? Should it be made up of people that have no ties to football and can just look at numbers to come up with a final four? Should it be made up of only people who are students of the game and what qualifies them as such? Only those that at least played or coached at the collegiate level? Hell, including myself, I bet 90% of this board believes they have the qualifications to be able to pick the top 4 teams at the end of the year.
We finally get some semblance of a playoff system and now we can't agree who is qualified to be on the selection committee.
-
Okay, I don't see why some are making a big deal about Condi possibly being on the committee. She sure the heck has experience in being in a room full of people who can't agree on shoot and would probably be the least likely, of the names mentioned, to show bias. Isn't that what we want out this committee? If you put former players, coaches, and ADs on this committee, then you are looking at a board full of biased members. We all know that media members tend to be bias, despite many saying they are not. So, I ask how do we put non-biased members on the selection committee? Should it be made up of people that have no ties to football and can just look at numbers to come up with a final four? Should it be made up of only people who are students of the game and what qualifies them as such? Only those that at least played or coached at the collegiate level? Hell, including myself, I bet 90% of this board believes they have the qualifications to be able to pick the top 4 teams at the end of the year.
We finally get some semblance of a playoff system and now we can't agree who is qualified to be on the selection committee.
She has no qualifications.
It would be like putting a gymnast on the panel to select the Oscar nominees. Or turning Sasquatch loose to pick best rock album at the Grammys.
It's stupid to put her gap-tooth mug on there.
On top of that, her only God-bless't reference to college football at ALL is sitting around with Deddy listening to Bear Freaking Bryant. Jesus.
I know more about EVERYTHING than 95% of all ya'll. And I wouldn't put myself on that committee.
-
This has become national news. Dye just got eviscerated on PTI.
Fox News piled on him as well.
Once again, Auburn has been singled out as the sole monstrous voice of hate and bigotry.
:taunt:
-
And again as usual, no one will attempt to see the reasoning behind Dye's comments. They just hear a southern accent saying that women, especially black women, should be in the kitchen.
We're just wondering why a non-football person is going to help determine the championship.
Question - are any politicians on the committee that picks the NCAA basketball tournament?
-
Question - are any politicians on the committee that picks the NCAA basketball tournament?
No...they're all former/current athletic directors, with the exception of one guy who was an assistant AD.
Some of them may have dabbled in politics at some point on some level, but they all have athletic ties at least in regard to being an AD/assistant AD. Some of them have also held other positions at schools' athletic departments, but they've all at least been an AD/assistant AD.
-
From an SI Article:
The playoff committee is supposed to determine which four teams are most qualified to play for the national title. That is it. Rice is smart enough and diligent enough to do that. The task has nothing to do with putting your hand in the dirt.
Pete Rozelle, the greatest commissioner in NFL history, never played football. Mike Leach, one of the great coaching minds in college football, never played college football. Charlie Weis never ... well, OK, bad example.
As with most sexism, the backlash against Rice is not about a hatred of women. It's about protecting turf. It's about insiders trying to keep outsiders out.
I'm sure that Pollack and Dye believe they are not speaking from a sexist place. They think they are protecting the game. But why did they feel the urge to do it? Because Rice is a woman, that's why.
Quick: Name the members of the NCAA men's basketball tournament selection committee. You can't, can you? As my colleague Seth Davis pointed out on Twitter, Texas-San Antonio athletic director Lynn Hickey served a five-year term on that committee. She was the second woman to do so.
I bet Pollack and Dye don't even know who is supposed to join Rice on the football committee. One of the people is longtime sportswriter Steve Wieberg, who is built like a kicker's little brother. Where is the outrage about Wieberg? (And I'm not trying to start any -- he will be great.)
But then, most people have no idea who has been determining the Bowl Championship Series title-game matchup for the last decade and a half. Who did you think was behind all those computer rankings, folks? Mean Joe Greene?
Rice served as the provost of Stanford, she is a huge college football fan, and she has dealt with much more complicated problems than this. She is one of many people on the committee. Unlike college coaches, athletic directors or conference commissioners, she has no financial stake in the selections.
And if she brings the perspective of somebody who didn't have a hand in the dirt, that is actually wonderful. She can bring a more detached and reasoned perspective than the "eye test" or conventional wisdom. That's what analytics experts have brought to every sport, and they have made teams and leagues smarter.
The college football committee needs outsiders. It should not be made up entirely of outsiders, and it won't be, but adding somebody like Rice is helpful.
-
From an SI Article:
longtime sportswriter Steve Wieberg
He's made a living covering the game.
She's watched games.
I've been in every place. I played (baseball).
I coached and will be the FIRST to tell you that having only played football for a year, I was behind way way way behind in terms of just seeing the game the way I needed to. I'll never forget my first year when I was on the roof and spotting tendencies and after four straight running plays coach called me on the headset and asked if the corners were creeping up. How did I know? I'd started watching the ball. I had no idea if they'd crept or crawled. There's a VAST difference in watching a game from the stands or on TV and understanding what is really going on from play to play, game to game.
I also covered the game briefly. Again, there's a significant difference in what you're looking at and looking for than there is for the casual observer.
Having never played, coached or made a living writing about the game, Condi Rice is less qualified than any high school coach I know to be on that panel. Period. Not because she's a woman but because she has no knowledge or understanding of the game.
If they'd suggested Erin Andrews, Jill Arrington or one of those airheads I'd choose them over Rice because they've at least been in the middle of it.
-
If they'd suggested Erin Andrews, Jill Arrington or one of those airheads I'd choose them over Rice because they've at least been in the middle of it.
Middle of what? An Eiffel Tower?
-
Middle of what? An Eiffel Tower?
London Bridge.
-
From an SI Article:
No one's criticizing her ability to be a commissioner.
I don't like the sports writer being on there either.
The BCS was an imperfect system. The playoff was supposed to move closer to being a perfect system, but this is a bad first step.
Look at this scenario:
1. LSU is 12-1
2. Baylor is undefeated.
3. Notre Dame is 12-1
4. Ohio State is 13-0
5. Florida State is 13-0
6. Oregon is 12-1 with a loss to Stanford
7. Stanford is 12-1 with a loss to Washington
Who goes? And when the final playoff is set up, there will be anger. Do you want to be able to say that 12 former players and coaches analyzed film like they did in their college/NFL careers to decide which four teams are the best? Or would you rather Condi Rice help choose the four teams because she can pacify the angry fans when they speak out against the committee's lack of knowledge and experience to make such decisions?
-
No one's criticizing her ability to be a commissioner.
I don't like the sports writer being on there either.
The BCS was an imperfect system. The playoff was supposed to move closer to being a perfect system, but this is a bad first step.
Look at this scenario:
1. LSU is 12-1
2. Baylor is undefeated.
3. Notre Dame is 12-1
4. Ohio State is 13-0
5. Florida State is 13-0
6. Oregon is 12-1 with a loss to Stanford
7. Stanford is 12-1 with a loss to Washington
Who goes? And when the final playoff is set up, there will be anger. Do you want to be able to say that 12 former players and coaches analyzed film like they did in their college/NFL careers to decide which four teams are the best? Or would you rather Condi Rice help choose the four teams because she can pacify the angry fans when they speak out against the committee's lack of knowledge and experience to make such decisions?
This. All of it!
-
I know more about EVERYTHING than 95% of all ya'll. And I wouldn't put myself on that committee.
Its' tough being over here in the 5%, but I also heard Gene Stallings and Fran Tarkenton agree with Dye. And Fran at least has the ability to say it in non-drunken English that people can understand.
People are starting to come around and see Dye isn't just a sexist old man. He is a football-savvy sexist old man.
-
The only problem I have with this is that they are really trying to play up the fact that she is a Stanford fan...all the while showing pictures of her hugging bammer players on the sidelines of the MNC game in Pasadena. I suppose they assume the general masses won't realize that it's not a Stanford player she's hugging in the pics.
-
I coached and will be the FIRST to tell you that having only played football for a year, I was behind way way way behind in terms of just seeing the game the way I needed to. I'll never forget my first year when I was on the roof and spotting tendencies and after four straight running plays coach called me on the headset and asked if the corners were creeping up. How did I know? I'd started watching the ball. I had no idea if they'd crept or crawled. There's a VAST difference in watching a game from the stands or on TV and understanding what is really going on from play to play, game to game.
Having coached a bit and sitting in the box calling plays, it was very difficult to train yourself to witch off-the -call during the play. The success of the play you just called does not carry over ot the next play all of the time. You have to watch key personnel on the other team every play to get tendencies. I would have guys on the sidelines watching different positions. I would call down and ask, "hey. What is the DE doing on the lead play?". And the response form little Johnny's dad would be silence. He was watching the game, not the position.
So to your point, there is a huge difference in how one views the game. Sometimes I think just to be a drunken fan would be more fun, but I cannot help myself. My DVR will be the death of me. I constantly back up the play to see if what I thought I saw on the edge of the play is what I did see. The trick is to do this without TiVo. And those are the people you want on the committee.
-
Why do you people have a problem with a strong, black woman?
Too many people over thinking this. They'll have enough people on the committee with enough football knowledge to make rational decisions on who gets in. It doesn't matter if you select the greatest college football minds out there, #5 or #6 will be pissed. It will eventually expand to 8 and #9 and #10 will have sand in their vaginas.
I think the BCS system sucks and there's no possible way to pick the top 2 with absolute certainty. But with regards to 4 teams, the troof is it usually all works itself out and by season's end and I feel much better about getting the match ups that will result in a true champion.
-
Why do you people have a problem with a strong, black woman?
Too many people over thinking this. They'll have enough people on the committee with enough football knowledge to make rational decisions on who gets in. It doesn't matter if you select the greatest college football minds out there, #5 or #6 will be pissed. It will eventually expand to 8 and #9 and #10 will have sand in their vaginas.
I think the BCS system sucks and there's no possible way to pick the top 2 with absolute certainty. But with regards to 4 teams, the troof is it usually all works itself out and by season's end and I feel much better about getting the match ups that will result in a true champion.
If they have enough people on the committee with enough football knowledge, then why do they need Condeleeza Rice?
-
I'm only recently learning that they're doing away with the computers. The only part of the formula that can be relied on to be 100% free from bias. To not consider who diddy rooted for. To actually use statistical analysis based on SOS, and how teams fared against said competition.
I'm more pissed about that than anything.
-
If they have enough people on the committee with enough football knowledge, then why do they need Condeleeza Rice?
Heard an interview with the head of the BCS Tuesday and the one mainly responsible for the people on this committee. He said the #1 criteria for someone to be on the panel was integrity. Know matter who they put on it, they'll always be able to point to her and say you can't question our motives.
-
Why do you people have a problem with a strong, black woman?
Too many people over thinking this. They'll have enough people on the committee with enough football knowledge to make rational decisions on who gets in. It doesn't matter if you select the greatest college football minds out there, #5 or #6 will be pissed. It will eventually expand to 8 and #9 and #10 will have sand in their vaginas.
I think the BCS system sucks and there's no possible way to pick the top 2 with absolute certainty. But with regards to 4 teams, the troof is it usually all works itself out and by season's end and I feel much better about getting the match ups that will result in a true champion.
At the end of the day the only way this becomes an issue in my mind is if there are 5 or more teams undefeated at the end of the year. How many times has that happened? And you know what if you are number 5 and have the same record as number 2-4 (let's say one loss) then fuck you! You had the ability to be there by doing your job and not losing the first place. You take the decision out of other people's hands.
-
Heard an interview with the head of the BCS Tuesday and the one mainly responsible for the people on this committee. He said the #1 criteria for someone to be on the panel was integrity. Know matter who they put on it, they'll always be able to point to her and say you can't question our motives.
If he really meant that, he wouldn't feel the need to state it so that everyone hears it.
Condi will be great at the politics, and that's what this is about. If this year needed the playoff committee, I guarantee Louisville would get in. She would be there with a nice smile to tell ESPN why Louisville was a good choice.
That's why she's there.