By the time you read this, I'll be on a Southwest flight to Jacksonville for the Cocktail Party. Already your costume suggestions are arriving, and I have to say, I think we have a winner. The suggestion is actually genius. It involves a Baby Bjorn, aviator sunglesses, and ... the pictures will be ready soon. But leaving that aside, let me give you a tip this weekend, the time changes. The f'ing time, it always screws you somehow. Even if, to be fair, the night after Halloween is a pretty epic time for an extra hour of sleep. I've always hated the time change because I live in Nashville, right at the beginning of the central time zone. This means that during the winter it gets light at 3AM and dark here at 3PM. This is only a subtle exaggeration. The worst thing about this city is that it encourages people to get up way too early in the morning. I've lived on the East Coast, in the Caribbean, and in Europe. In all of those places, it isn't considered an asset to get up at dawn. (Right: Nashville, approaching evening cocktails at 6AM)
Here? It's an asset.
Anyway, as you can tell, I'm anti-time change. Even when it helps me by giving me an extra hour to make my flight back to Nashville on Sunday. Our beaver pelt trader of the week is Wes from The Ruins. Previously Wes has been on Real World Austin and many of the challenges. I first wrote about him back in September of 2006, and for a while there we were e-mail buddies. But he came out of retirement after three years this fall. And it's shameful for me to admit how pumped I was when I saw that he'd returned.
Spoiler alert.
He was eliminated from the challenge on Wednesday night. But he's the most entertaining reality star on the face of the planet, and the least we can do is hand him our beaver pelt trader of the week award.
Okay, on to our picks.
Last week Audrey and I both went 3-3 so my lead remains. I'm now 18-17-1 while she is 14-20-2.
My picks this week:
Indiana @ Iowa -17.5
Georgia v. Florida -15
South Carolina @ Tennessee -6
Texas -9 @ Oklahoma State
Southern Cal -3 @ Oregon
San Jose State @ Boise State -35
And here are Audrey's picks with her rationales:
Indiana since I learned how to pronounce it!
Georgia
UT
Oklahoma State
Oregon
Boise State that is so lost!
Yep, amazingly, we picked all six of the same results.
I'm dead.
Victoria D. writes:
So I'm watching the "Locker Room" sports talk show I recorded from Sunday morning ... and this guy just called in ... and said : "I'm not exactly talkin' murder, but isn't it time for Kiffin to pull a John Wilkes Booth and just get rid of this whole Lincoln problem."
Thought you'd get a kick out of that, I sure did, haha. Gotta love Southern football fans.
Okay, to deconstruct for those who might not be aware, Daniel Lincoln is Tennessee's kicker. He missed three field goals last week against Alabama.
As for the statement, how could Kiffin "pull a John Wilkes Booth" and not kill Lincoln? Did I miss the history class where Booth showed up at the White House and tried to gently persuade Lincoln to end the Civil War? The regular tea and crumpets dinner between the two? So I think this caller, given his analogy, is "talkin' murder."
I will say this, Kiffin should go after Terrence Cody instead. After the deed, he needs to grab the mic and scream, "Sic Semper Terrencis."
I believe this translates quite nicely as, "Thus always to Terrences."
Tim F. writes:
Conventional wisdom would tell you that Iowa couldn't hang with an SEC team in the title game.
I wouldn't doubt this version of the Hawkeyes. They have risen to EVERY occasion this season.
The computers LOVE them due to road wins at Penn State, Wisconsin, and Michigan State. If a win in Columbus is added to that resume, the voters won't rank them below Cincinnati, Boise, or TCU. The glass ceiling doesn't apply to Big Ten teams.
If they could reach No. 3 in the coaches' and Harris Polls after Championship Saturday, then the computers may put them OVER an undefeated Texas squad and into a title game.
It could happen.
If Iowa ends up ranked ahead of an undefeated Texas, then the Longhorns are going to secede. Not from the BCS, mind you, but the entire state of Texas is going to return to the days when they were an independent country and leave the United States.
I don't think Iowa passing Texas would happen, but I do think the debate between an undefeated Iowa and an undefeated Cincinnati would be epic. Personally, I'd be inclined to favor Cincinnati, but Iowa's win over Arizona and Cincinnati's win over Oregon State should render a one-loss USC out of the picture. Only it wouldn't.
I'll write about this next week, but what if LSU goes into Tuscaloosa and beats Alabama? Then LSU runs the table from there. In the event of a Texas loss, does Florida have to play LSU in the SEC Title game and then the winner of that game play Alabama after in the BCS title game? Even above a no-loss Iowa or Cincinnati?
Maybe.
For the first time in a while this year, I have a sense that the end of this season is going to be incredibly messy.
John writes:
Clay,
So I got on the plane heading to Texas, and the guy sitting next to me has a copy of ON ROCKY TOP. Now, just because of this fact I broke my own rule of 'not speaking to people on planes'. Doing so is a huge gamble and it's just something I try to avoid at all costs. So anyway, I have to ask the guy if it's as good as the last book ( I really mean it, not small-talk). He says, "Yeah, it's a good book. I love Clay's stuff."
The guys' wearing an orange tie (which to me either means he's a UT fan or a moonlighting clown) so of course I'm going to continue breaking my own rule and ask him if he's a Tennessee fan (like me). To which he replies, "hell no, I hate f---ing Tennessee!"
These blasphemous words reminded me why I don't talk to people on airplanes! So I ask, if you're not a VOL fan, what's with the tie? He said, "I'm an Auburn graduate." He then proceeds to insult me by commenting on my orange garb donned for travel to Big 12 country. He says "I should have known you would be a UT fan. You can always count on a UT fan to wear orange so everybody on the plane knows their a Vol fan."
I kind of feel like that was a compliment. What do you think?
You know, as a writer, you always want to see someone you don't know reading your book. People e-mail me sightings all the time, even pictures of sightings now that everyone is a paparazzi and I never see it myself.
Sigh.
Anyway, I'd take that as a compliment. There's actually several pages in the new book talking about UT fans wearing orange whenever they leave the state for a football game. The airplane, airport and everyone else must be aware who we're rooting for.
Ken writes:
"Clay:
I used to defend journalists in defamation cases when I practiced fresh out of law school and wasn't so concerned about trying to make a living, so maybe I have just a little more familiarity than the average bear with defamation, but when I read AJ's following statement Wednesday night, I cringed. If I were teaching a class and were trying to demonstrate what reckless disregard for the truth is, I might start with this statement and have the class examine it pro and con because it is so illustrative of his state of mind (which defamation plaintiffs usually have to develop from outside the libelous statement):
"Chances are, at this point, there's some truth to them. We'll just throw 'em out there and see how many "no comments" or, you know, actual comments or "you would be completely wrongs" there are about these situations. Consider this one giant all-day version of "Deleted Scenes" or something."
Bold statement indicates that he is unsure of the veracity of at least part of the information; if chances are there is some truth, doesn't that indicate he's not sure, and in fact, chances are there are lies in the information he is about to publish? Ouch.
The italicized and underlined statement seems reckless and disregards the truth, doesn't it? Ouch again.
Now he has lots of defenses that journalists (and he for sure qualifies there) rely on, and the whole context of it may or may not be true maybe gives him some cover, and I think your public figure discussion is pretty spot on. I have no idea if Gawker Media makes enough money to even finance an insurance policy, but if they do, their premiums either went through the roof or they have become uninsurable. But if someone wants to see where the line for actual malice is in this country in a digital world, we could have the test case right here if the posts are wrong.
Anyway, good column. It is an interesting area of the law, and someone is going to screw up libel law bad in the Digital Age for writers. Lacie v. Gawker Media may be just the case (Kuselias is a lawyer as well, but I suspect his facts are going to be tough to sue on).
Ken (please don't to use my last name if this ends up in a mailbag, gracias).
I didn't write it in the column, because I was more interested in the legal issues, but I had pretty good faith that what AJ wrote was true. Why? Because, despite the reputation, Deadspin actually vets things pretty well for accuracy. Now, there are mistakes, granted, but that happens in a competitive, immediate world of publishing on the Internet.
Now, having said that, your analysis is solid. It's an argument I could buy. Could a 70-year-old Supreme Court justice who has never been on a blog in his life buy it as well? Sure. It's one of many reasons why I think this issue is so fascinating.
One of these days a case like this is going to become a major Supreme Court precedent. And future law students will toss around the name of the website like we toss around Roe v. Wade now.
I'm serious, the decision is going to be that important to the legal canon.
When will it happen and who it will it be?
I don't know.
But it's coming.
Eric W. writes
Hi Clay –
If Tennessee wins out, does Lane Kiffin deserve SEC Coach of the Year? And, if so, do you think the other coaches would actually vote for him?
No, the other coaches wouldn't vote for him. Now the media might, but the coaches wouldn't. Kiffin is even less popular than Bruce Pearl, and do you remember when the coaches' voted for Billy Gillispie as coach of the year in his first year at Kentucky over Pearl?
Thought so.
As for whether he would deserve it, that's an interesting question. Meyer and Saban both started out in the top ten so you can argue they've met expectations. Houston Nutt has vanished, Gene Chizik is in the process of collapsing, Les Miles also began in the top ten, Mark Richt is out along with Bobby Johnson, Dan Mullen, and, probably, Bobby Petrino--thanks to the flags against Florida and the missed field goal.
And if Kiffin finished 8-4, I think he'd have a strong argument. But you know who I think would deserve it more than anyone if he finished at 7-5 or better?
Rich Brooks
He'd have Kentucky in their fourth consecutive bowl game and he'd have overcome a ton. Think about it, he lost his starting quarterback, his best defensive lineman, Jeremy Jarmon, took a supplement at GNC and lost his eligibility for the season. His top defender, Trevard Lindley, has been gimpy all season. Yet he goes into Auburn and wins. Right now Kentucky is sitting at 5-3. With winnable games against Mississippi State followed by Eastern Kentucky, there's a good chance the Wildcats are 6-3 with three to go.
They should be able to beat Vandy. If they could pull off an upset of either Georgia or Tennessee, they'd get to 8 wins. And I think you'd have to argue Brooks would have done the most of anyone.
So if I had to vote right now, based on your projections of Tennessee winning out and no earth-shattering changes in conference, I'd go:
1. Rich Brooks
2. Nick Saban -- I still think Bama's performance has exceeded SEC expectations.
3. Lane Kiffin
4. Urban Meyer
Sorry for the abbreviated mailbag today. I'm about to catch a plane and left a ton of comments behind. Much more next week.
.
