Tuesday, September 2, 2014

Football Vs. Football

I have two main inspirations for this post. The first is George Bernard Shaw’s observation that “The United States and Great Britain are two countries separated by a common language.” 

 
Two Irishmen

The second is George Carlin’s classic skit in which he compares football and baseball. You know, the one where he observes:

In football you wear a helmet. In baseball you wear a cap…

Football is played in any kind of weather: rain, snow, sleet, hail, fog... In baseball, if it rains, we don't go out to play…

In football the object is for the quarterback, also known as the field general, to be on target with his aerial assault, riddling the defense by hitting his receivers with deadly accuracy in spite of the blitz, even if he has to use the shotgun. With short bullet passes and long bombs, he marches his troops into enemy territory, balancing this aerial assault with a sustained ground attack that punches holes in the forward wall of the enemy's defensive line. In baseball the object is to go home! And to be safe! I hope I'll be safe at home!

I’m sure you’ll agree that there are some major differences between football and soccer as well, and with plenty of opportunities to mess things up language-wise to boot. Here, let me show you …

Football: football 
Soccer: American football
The confusion starts with the very most basic concepts. The two sides can’t even agree on what to call the games themselves.

Football: soccer
Soccer: football
Interestingly, even the Brits called soccer “soccer” into the 60s. The name comes from “association football,” a name given to football played under rules developed in the mid-19th Century (and to distinguish it from other, more primitive forms of foot-and-ball games).

Football: field 
Soccer: pitch
“Pitch” is typically something you do. You might, for example, pitch a tent, or pitch a baseball. Noun-wise, you’ve got a tarry substance and a musical quality. Only across the pond is a pitch something you would ever think of playing a game on.

 
Two movies, no relation

Football: sidelines
Soccer: touchlines
Both of these make sense, especially when you consider that in soccer a ball that goes past these lines has to be thrown in – the only time a non-goalie can, in fact, touch the ball.

Football: team 
Soccer: club
I don’t know. “Club” sounds awfully friendly and amateurish and even non-athletic to my ears. I mean, no one ever refers to the chess team or the photography team, now do they? 

Football: coach 
Soccer: manager
Here’s another one I can live with. Heck, baseball’s got a manager as well.

Football: uniform 
Soccer: kit
A kit? Now, I can believe a mess kit, or a model airplane kit, but a kit as something you wear? Makes no sense whatsoever.

This is a kit

Football: shoes 
Soccer: boots
On this side of the Atlantic, a boot usually refers to something long and/or clunky – i.e., not something you’d expect to run 11 kilometers in (that’s about seven miles in ‘Murcan), let alone be able to control a soccer ball with with any accuracy.

Football: cleats 
Soccer: studs
This one’s not too objectionable, but what I really think of when I think of “studs” is wall board, male horses, and all those women who get all interested in soccer every four years just because the guys are so “cute.”

Football: game 
Soccer: match
Sporting events are typically called one of three things: a game, a match, or a race. God forbid you should mix them up. There’s nothing like referring to a “NASCAR match,” a “tennis race,” or a “wrestling game” to let folks know you’re “not from around these parts.”

Football: tie 
Soccer: draw
Once again, I can live with this. I’m not so sure, though, when this turns into a verb. I don’t think any red-blooded American would ever say that the Stillers and da Bears “drew.”

Football: zero 
Soccer: nil
Would you believe “nil” is Latin? Yup, it’s a shortened form of nihil, which means “nothing.” Now, ask yourself … Should sports lingo really involve Latin abbreviations?

Football: preseason 
Soccer: friendly
Once again, soccer is way too chummy in this regard. There shouldn’t be anything friendly about sports, now should there?

Football: rivalry
Soccer: derby
No, this has nothing to do with hats. Also, it’s pronounced “dahr-bee,” not “duhr-bee.”

The term may actually come from an ancient game of soccer that was played between parishes in the English town of Derby, in the Midlands (read more right here). By the way, that also so happens to be where I was born!

This is a derby

Football: shutout 
Soccer: clean sheet
It sounds like this term may have come from scorekeeping, when the only real stats that were recorded were scores. A scoreless match would then result in a blank piece of paper – a “clean sheet.” All I can think of, though, is the laundry.

These are clean sheets

Football: final 
Soccer: full time
Actually, I’m going to have to reward the Brits with the points on this one. I mean, both games have a half time, right? Only soccer, though, is consistent in using the same idea for the end of the game as well.

Football: standings 
Soccer: table
I sort of see where they’re going with this one, but I really associate tables with how data might be shown in a textbook, not with where Manchester United happens to be situated on that particular Sunday.

Football: trophy 
Soccer: cup
So, this is a Venn diagram sort of thing. In particular, I see the word “trophy” including “cups,” but also many other things as well. In soccer, though, everything’s a “cup,” whether it’s actually a cup or not. Just think of the World Cup award itself – it’s a bulky little statue!

This looks like a turkey leg

Football: trade 
Soccer: transfer
There might be some real accuracy in these two terms. In football, the movement of players tends to go two ways. You give me Jim John and I’ll give you Bob Mike. In soccer, though, there really aren’t trades so much as signings. And those signings involve the transfer of money to the original club. Let’s leave these two alone. 

Football: fan 
Soccer: supporter
So, if I root, root, root for the home team in the UK, I guess that would make me an “athletic supporter,” right? Hmm, I wonder what those crazy Brits call what we ‘Murcans use to protect our yarbles? Why, a “jock,” of course.

This is an athletic supporter

Football: program
Soccer: programme
No biggee here. Those guys just don’t know how to spell.

Football: offsides
Soccer: no equivalent

Football: no equivalent
Soccer: offsides

Football: tackle
Soccer: foul
Actually, this wouldn’t just be a foul, but a red card, and a possible suspension. 

Football: penalty 
Soccer: tackle
The particular penalty here would be kicking the ball. And the penalty for that would be to have the clock reset. Wait a minute – wrong sport …

Thursday, August 7, 2014

What's in a (Presidential) Name?

Names have meanings. A friend of my son, for example, is named Amy Vachon. And, yes, that does indeed mean “beloved cow” in French.

The tall hater

Names also have origins. Take Smith, for example. Every little village in the Middle Ages (when surnames first became common) had a smith, and that person’s job was pretty important to that little village. It’s why Smith is one of the most common names in English-speaking countries. There are equivalents, however, in pretty much every European tongue:
  • German – Schmidt
  • Dutch – Smit, Smits
  • French – Lefebvre
  • Spanish – Herrera
  • Italian – Ferraro
  • Ireland/Scotland – McGowan, MacGowan
  • Polish – Kowalski
  • Russian – Kuznetsov
  • Slovak – Kovacs

Theoretically, you can take any name and come up with a meaning for it. “Thomas Edison,” for example, means “one of the twin sons of Edward.” And “Edward” means “protector of wealth.” So “Thomas Edison” ultimately means “one of the twin sons of the protector of wealth.” 

So, let’s take a look at the meanings of the names of our chief executives. Maybe we can even come up with hidden, fortuitous insights into their actual character (but, then again, probably not). Anyway, here goes …

God favors the red one

Meanings
  • George Washington – The farmer from the town of the victor of the hunt
  • John Adams – God favors the red one
  • Thomas Jefferson – The twin, son of Peace of God
  • James Madison – He who seizes by the heel, the son of the one from the tower
  • James Monroe – He who seizes by the heel, from the hill
  • John Quincy Adams – God favors the fifth-born red one
  • Andrew Jackson – The manly one, son of the one God favors
  • Martin Van Buren – The martial one, from the house
  • William H. Harrison – Helmet of the will, the home ruler, son of the home ruler
  • John Tyler – God favors the tile maker

God favors the fifth-born red one

  • James K. Polk – He who seizes by the heel, of great glory
  • Zachary Taylor – God remembers the tailor
  • Millard Fillmore – The very famous, good, and brave one
  • Franklin Pierce – The free man, son of The Rock
  • James Buchanan – He who seizes by the heel, from the house of the monk
  • Abraham Lincoln – Father of nations, from the colony by the lake
  • Andrew Johnson – The manly one, son of the one God favors
  • Ulysses S. Grant – The tall hater
  • Rutherford B. Hayes – Son of fire, from the cattle ford
  • James A. Garfield – He who seizes by the heel, from the corner of the field

Son of the one God favors, 
from the hill with the lime tree on it

  • Chester A. Arthur – Camp bear
  • Grover Cleveland – The grove dweller, from the land of the cliffs
  • Benjamin Harrison – Son of the home ruler’s sorrow
  • William McKinley – Helmet of the will, son of the fair warrior
  • Theodore Roosevelt – Gift of God, from the field of roses
  • William H. Taft – Helmet of the will, from the homestead
  • Woodrow Wilson – Son of the Helmet of the Will, from the row of cottages by the woods
  • Warren G. Harding – The park warden, son of the hard one
  • Calvin Coolidge – The bald one, from the college
  • Herbert Hoover – Bright as the army, a landowner

The powerful ruler, son of the ruler of the people

  • Franklin D. Roosevelt – The free man, from the field of roses
  • Harry S. Truman – The trustworthy home ruler
  • Dwight D. Eisenhower – The iron maker, from the clearing
  • John F. Kennedy – God favors ol’ ugly head
  • Lyndon B. Johnson – Son of the one God favors, from the hill with the lime tree on it
  • Richard M. Nixon – The powerful ruler, son of the ruler of the people
  • Gerald R. Ford – Brave spear, from the river crossing
  • Jimmy Carter – He who seizes by the heel, the wagon driver
  • Ronald Reagan – Furious but wise counsel
  • George H. W. Bush – The farmer who lives by the shrub
  • Bill Clinton – Helmet of the will, from the town on the bright stream
  • George W. Bush – The farmer who lives by the shrub
  • Barack Obama – The blessed, bent one

God favors ol’ ugly head

Origins

The most common origin for first name is Hebrew. The most common for last names is English. Combining the two, we get:
  • Hebrew – 18
  • English – 18
  • German – 15
  • Greek – 8
  • Dutch, Irish, Latin – 4
  • African – 2
  • Aramaic, Celtic, Norse, Scottish, Welsh, Slav (Polk, believe it or not) – 1

Camp bear

The most popular first name is James, with six instances. The most popular name where the two presidents are not related is Johnson. So, I’m thinking if your name is James Johnson, you really ought to consider running.



More name stuff:


Wednesday, July 16, 2014

We Need Some New Money

As a non-numismatic American, you may not realize it, but our country has one of the most boring currencies out there. Here are some of the problems:

  • Age – All of our basic coin designs are at least 50 years old: penny (1909), nickel (1939), dime (1946), quarter (1931), half dollar (1964). Same goes for the dollar bill (1923). Our other bills look much better with their recent updates, but their basic designs are just as old.
  • Busyness – By law, each coin must include “liberty,” “in God we trust,” “e pluribus unum,” and “United States of America.” In addition, the value is typically spelled out – “one cent,” “five cents,” “one dime,” “quarter dollar,” “half dollar.” All added up, each coin has at least 14 words on it. C’mon folks! It’s a coin, not a novel. Bills add some more verbiage – “Federal reserve note,” “this note is legal tender for all debts public and private,” and much, much more.
  • Abstractness – Though I do salute the recent commemorative nickels and quarters, most of our coins have some very basic adornment on them – essentially, presidents and symbols. Of the latter, we’ve got two buildings, two eagles, and the motley collection of crap on the  back of the dime (oak branch, olive branch, torch). Bills aren’t much better – an eagle, four buildings, and that weirdo Masonic thingee with the big eyeball on the back of the one-dollar bill.
  • Repetition – I’ve already mentioned how we’ve repeated the eagle no less than three times. We’ve also done something similar with Washington and Lincoln, who are both shown twice.
  • Color – Though it’s hard to get very colorful with coins, our bills are unrelievedly green. Green, green, green.

Face it, our currency is just damn ugly. 

Don’t believe me? Next time you’re outside the US, take a look at the stuff that’s in your pockets. It’s attractive! It’s modern looking! It’s colorful.  It’s simple! It’s elegant! 

Dutch 50 Guilder Note

A Modest Proposal

So, how can we improve this dire situation? Well, if I was dictator of the United States, I would propose something along the lines of the following …

First, we need to simplify, to clean things up. All that’s really needed on a coin is the name of the country, a date, and a value. Note that none of this needs to be spelled out. So, a quarter, for example, could simply include “USA,” “2014,” and “25¢.” I’m sure bills could be boiled down to include just a few more essentials as well.

Second, we need to add some slightly more interesting images. On the people side, surely there are other famous Americans who did something other than be president? Surely, there must have been some American who has accomplished something in the arts, or science, business, the military …? Heck, some of them might even reflect some of the diversity that our country is so famous for – women, immigrants, Native Americans, African Americans …

On the non-people side, I’m thinking there might also be some other sites out there than those situated in one square mile in Washington, DC. Yellowstone? The Grand Canyon? The Golden Gate Bridge? Maybe we could even add some events to these as well. The lunar landing, anyone? Raising the flag at Iwo Jima? The signing of the Declaration?


Looking at people first, let me propose the following:

Field Person Diversity
Architecture Wright
Art O'Keefe Woman
Business Carnegie Immigrant
Civil rights MLK African-American
Exploration Lewis & Clark
Invention Edison
Literature Twain
Music Ellington African-American
Science Einstein Jewish, immigrant


And these could be in addition to our two greatest presidents, Lincoln and Washington.

As to what we could put on the back, let me propose the following sites, symbols, and events (listed in order of importance – and possible visual impact):

  • Flag
  • Eagle
  • Statue of Liberty
  • Liberty Bell
  • Iwo Jima
  • Lunar landing
  • First flight (Wright brothers)
  • Mt. Rushmore
  • Capitol
  • White House
  • Signing of the Declaration
  • Golden Gate Bridge
  • Grand Canyon
  • Yellowstone
  • Empire State Building / Manhattan skyline
  • St. Louis Arch


Put them all together, and you might get something like the following:

Value Obverse Reverse Color
1 cent Lincoln Flag
5 cents Jefferson Statue of Liberty
10 cents MLK Liberty Bell
25 cents Washington Eagle
50 cents Frank Lloyd Wright Capitol
$1 (coin) Lewis & Clark Golden Gate Bridge
$1 (bill) Edison First Flight Green
$5 Carnegie Manhattan skyline Blue
$10 Twain Signing of the Declaration Grey
$20 Einstein Lunar Landing Purple
$50 O'Keefe Grand Canyon Scarlet

By the way, I also like how these selections cover the different regions of the country as well:

  • North East – Edison, Einstein, Statue of Liberty, Manhattan skyline
  • Mid-Atlantic – Jefferson, Washington, Carnegie, Liberty Bell, Signing of the Declaration
  • South – MLK, Twain, first flight
  • Midwest – Lincoln, Wright
  • West – Lewis & Clark, O’Keefe, Grand Canyon
  • West Coast – Golden Gate Bridge
  • Outer space (?!?!) – lunar landing


So, c’mon Jacob Lew (current, and 76th, Secretary of the Treasury)! Let’s get on the ball!

Monday, June 2, 2014

The Best World Series Ever!

What makes a great World Series? Well, it’s pretty subjective, isn’t it? 

I do know it’s got to be more than individual plays (Bill Mazeroski’s homer to win the ’60 Series against the Yankees, say), or individual performances (Don Larsen’s perfect game in ‘76), or individual games (the 12-inning Game 6 of the ‘75 Series between the Red Sox and Reds). It’s also probably more than a contest between arch rivals (Yankees and Brooklyn Dodgers anyone?) or between David and Goliath (Mets over Orioles in ‘69). 

Maz and friends

So, what is it? Is there a more objective way to measure something like this? 

Well, the first thing we probably want to do is to limit it to just seven-game series. I mean, that’s as close and drawn-out as you’re gonna  get pretty much by definition, right? No use including shutouts, 4-1’s, or even 4-2’s. I mean, how competitive were those really if the challenger couldn’t even bring it down to the last game?

Beyond that, though, what else could we use? Well, I happened to have thought about that quite a bit, and here are my suggested criteria:
  • Run differential – The lower the run differential, the closer the games. (Make sure, though, that’s a total of the run differential for every game, not the total for the whole series.)
  • Lead changes – The more of these, the more drama and the more it seems like either team could win.
  • Extra innings – Every extra inning only ups the tension.
  • Walk-off victories – What could be more dramatic than those? 

So, here’s what I did:
  1. Take the 36 seven-game series
  2. Rank each one by the criteria above
  3. Give the number one team 1 point, the number two 2, and so on
  4. Add up those values for all of the rankings
  5. Lowest total wins

So, let me give you an example …  Let’s take the last seven-game series, the 2011 one between Texas and St. Louis.
  1. The run differential was 22. That comes in at number 14, so there’s 14 points.
  2. There were 6 lead changes, which also happens to rank 6th overall. So that’s 6 points.
  3. There was only one extra game, which went into the 10th. So that’s 2 extra innings, which just so happens to rank 9th (17 of the series didn’t have any extra innings). So that’s 9 more points.
  4. Finally, there was one walk-off victory, in that extra-inning game. Once again, there were 17 series without any walk-offs, so this number is pretty high – 6 in our case.
  5. Add ‘em all together, and you’ve got 35 points.

After doing the same for all the other seven-game series, the 2011 Series actually comes in sixth.  Who would have thunk it?

David Freese walk-off homer in Game 6

Here are the overall top 10:
Year Winner Loser Points
1975 Cinn Bos AL 13
1924 Wash NYG 22
1912 Bos AL NYG 33
1997 Fla Clev 34
2011 StL Tex 35
1991 Minn StL 37
2001 Ariz NYY 39
1964 StL NYY 39
1947 NYY Brkln 41
1952 NYY Brkln 41

You may not be surprised that the ’75 Series is the best. In fact, it ranked no lower than fourth in every category. Carlton Fisk’s homer in the bottom of the twelth in Game 6 is just gravy.

That ’24 Series might be something of a surprise however. Yes, it was a very long time ago (and who knew the Senators were ever even in a World Series). But this series was tops for run differential (13) and extra innings (6). What’s holding it back was lead changes – a mere three. 
Walter Johnson’s dramatic four-inning save in the 12-inning 
Game 7 may have made this one of the best WS games ever

I guess some other surprises would be the number of series from recent years and, consequently, the limited number of those from the “golden age” of baseball. It is good to see some Yankee versus Dodger classics made it though.

Some other highlights:
  • The 1991 Series had the most walk-offs, with 4
  • That series also tied for the most extra innings with the ’24 Series
  • Lead changes – a mere 2 – kept the ‘91 Series from finishing much higher
  • The 1958 Series, with Milwaukee beating the Yankees, had the most lead changes, with 8 (it came in 11th overall, just missing the top 10)

By the way, the least competitive 7-game series was in 1965, when the Dodgers beat the Twins. Somehow, they managed to do that without an extra-inning game or walk-off, and with a differential of 33 runs and only 1 lead change!

The Worst World Series Ever!

So, what was the most non-competitive series? Well, reverse-engineering this a little (and only looking at 4-0 series), it looks like it would be the 1989 Series, where the A’s pounded the Giants. No walk-offs, no extra innings, no lead changes (!?!?), and a differential of 18 runs.

Probably more memorable for the earthquake

A close second was 2007, where the Red Sox trounced the Cards. Once again, no walk-offs, no extra innings, just 1 lead change, and a differential of 19 runs.

Interestingly, the most competitive four-game series was in 2005, when the Chisox whomped the Astros. That one had 1 walk-off, 5 extra innings, 4 lead changes, and a run differential of only 6.

Monday, May 5, 2014

How Preppy Were the Presidents?

There’s a lot of talk these days about “elites.” It’s a favorite trope of the Republicans, who typically cite academics, and actors, and policy wonks, and anyone else they can come up with who seem to be “out of touch” with the average Joe. Now, I’ve always assumed that’s just pure projection, as I can’t imagine who could possibly be more elite than the super rich and the politicians who serve them. 

I was wondering, though … Is there a way we can measure “eliteness”? Hmm …  Ever read The Official Preppy Handbook? I can’t imagine a better place to start than that. But how to quantify all the things that that book covers? Square footage of madras in closet? Use of dorky nicknames, like Trip or Tipper or Poppy? 

Well, heck, why not just cut to the chase and measure whether a politician went to prep school or not? Or an Ivy (the college equivalent)? Yup, I think we’ve got a winner. So, here’s how it’ll work:
  • 1 point for attending prep school
  • 1 point for an Ivy bachelors
  • 1 point for an Ivy postgraduate degree

And what I’ll be looking at is presidential elections from 1868 to 2012. I think that defines the modern political scene pretty well, in addition to giving plenty of opportunity for our candidates to turn up the collars of their polo shirts as well.

Who’s the Preppiest of Them All?

Well, overall, would you believe it’s the Democrats? Yup, 39 to 32. My guess, though, is most of that can be attributed to a single person, one Franklin Delano Roosevelt. That fine Groton and Harvard grad (2 points) was on the ticket no less than four times (8 points). Take him out of the picture, and things are pretty even.

The preppiest ticket? Well, only one ticket garnered 4 points. And that one was Gore / Lieberman. That’s St. Albans and Harvard for the first guy, and Yale and Yale Law for the second one. More Dems. Hmm …

Gore / Lieberman
(+1 point for button-down collar,
-1 point for pit stain)

I’ve also got several with 3 points each:

Year Party Prez Points Veep Points
1912 Rep Taft 1 Butler 2
1956 Dem Stevenson 2 Kefauver 1
1972 Dem McGovern 0 Shriver 3
1992 Dem Clinton 1 Gore 2
1996 Dem Clinton 1 Gore 2
2000 Rep Bush 3 Cheney 0
2004 Rep Bush 3 Cheney 0

The preppiest candidate

Well, as you can probably tell from the graph above, we’ve got two. On the Democratic side, we’ve got Sargent Shriver. That’s Canterbury, Yale, and Yale Law. Extra points for the surname as first name and for marrying a Kennedy. 

R. Sargent Shriver Weds Eunice Kennedy
May 23, 1953, St. Patricks Cathedral, New York, NY

One the Republican side, we’ve got “Dubya,” the regular guy with the Texas drawl who everyone wanted to share a beer with. For him, it’s Phillips Andover, Yale, and Harvard Biz School. 

George W. Bush
Phillips Andover cheerleader

Are We Getting Preppier?

Well, if it wasn’t obvious from the table above, we are indeed getting preppier. Here’s graphical proof:


If you need a little help interpreting this:
  • The X axis is presidential elections (1 = 1868, 38 = 2012)
  • The Y axis is total points (all prez and veep candidates combined)

By the way, those elections with 0 points? They were:

Year Dem Prez Dem VP Rep Prez Rep VP
1880 Hancock English Garfield Arthur
1884 Cleveland Hendricks Blaine Logan
1888 Cleveland Thurman Harrison Morton
1892 Cleveland Stevenson Harrison Reid
1924 Davis Bryan Coolidge Dawes
1928 Smith Robinson Hoover Curtis

What Does It All Mean?

Well, I guess we shouldn’t be too surprised to learn that Republicans are preppy. Like I said before, the party is basically for the super rich, the politicians who serve them, and any chumps from the other 99% they can get to vote for them.

But why would Democrats be preppy? I mean, they’re the party of the people, right? Now, Republicans would like us to think that Democrats are all pointy-headed intellectuals who are totally out of touch and think they know best for all of us.

An alternative explanation, though, would relate to something called noblesse oblige. Perhaps you need to have gone to a prep school or Ivy to know what that means, but basically it’s the same as the biblical saying “to whom much is given, much is expected in return.”

In other words, if I was born with a silver spoon in my mouth, is it really necessary for me to take bread out of other the mouths of others? Shouldn’t I feel secure enough that I don’t need to do that sort of thing? Perhaps I should even occasionally help out at the soup kitchen. I don’t know ...

Thursday, April 3, 2014

B Movie Title Generator

I love B movies. Zombies, aliens, bad acting, lame special effects … These things cannot be cheesy enough for me. I love them all. Ed Wood is one of my all-time heroes.

Looking through my collection the other day, I noticed a definite pattern when it came to titles for these things. It seems to go something along the lines of “adjective + entity[+s] of/from place.” You know, like Terror Creatures from the Grave, or Wild Women of Wongo, or Devil Girl from Mars (all real, by the way)


And that led me to create this handy tool. Perhaps you can use it for your own venture into movie-making.

Here’s how it works:
  1. Take your first initial and match it up to the word in column A
  2. Take your middle initial and match it up to the word in column B 
  3. Add the word “from”
  4. Take your last initial and match it up to the phrase in column C*
* For [A], you can pick whatever you like from column A

Voila! You now have a movie.

Let me show you a couple of examples. My full name is Clifford P. Anderson. That gives me “blood” for Clifford, “predators” for P., and “[A] island” for Anderson (let’s go with “zombie” for “[A]”). Put ‘em all together and you get “Blood Predators from Zombie Island.” Duh-duh-duh Duh!

JFK? Demon Creatures from Beyond the Sun! T.S.Eliot? Robot Slaves from Another Universe! Michael J. Fox? Evil Killers from Another World! Lee Harvey Oswald? Doomsday Ghosts from Planet Evil! HR Puffenstuff? Creeping Prisoners from the Savage Planet!

Initial A B C
A alien assassins [A] island
B atomic beasts a different world
C blood bigfoots another dimension
D bloody brain another planet
E cannibal creatures another universe
F chilling demons another world
G crazed devils beneath the sea
H creeping ghosts beyond space
I death invaders beyond the grave
J demon killers beyond the moon
K devil machines beyond the sun
L doomsday madmen beyond the universe
M evil monsters galaxy X
N hell nazis outer space
O horror outlaws planet [A]
P killer predators the [A] planet
Q nazi prey the 6th dimension
R outlaw prisoners the center of the earth
S robo robots the future
T robot slave grave
U savage species the haunted cave
V teenage spiders the lost planet
W terror UFOs the lost universe
X undead vampires the lost world
Y vampire werewolves the underworld
Z zombie zombies the wasteland

Oh, Terror Creatures from the Grave? It’s initials would be WET. Hmm …  It wouldn’t be William Howard Taft (that would give us Terror Ghosts from the Grave though). I know, I know. How about William E. Timmons, Sr.? You know, the famous Washington lobbyist? President of the Timmons Company? Ah, never mind.


Tuesday, March 11, 2014

Conference Realignment: A Modest Proposal

It’s hard to believe that the arch-rival of my alma mater, Duke, is now Syracuse. Or is it Notre Dame? Or was that Texas A&M? Weber State? I’m so confused.

The ACC used to be so predictable, year in and year out. Maryland, Virginia, Wake, NC State, UNC, Duke, Clemson, Georgia Tech ... Heck, I remember when Florida State came into the conference (and I wasn’t too happy about it either). But where the heck is Boston College coming from? Or Pitt? Why is Maryland leaving? And what in the heck does Notre Dame have to do with the coast of the Atlantic Ocean?

It’s a problem that fans are having to deal with all over the country. You’re aware, aren’t you, that the Big 10 now has twelve schools (and will have even more when football season starts again this fall)? Or that the Big 12 now has ten schools (and that one of those schools, West Virginia, is about 900 miles away from its nearest conference rival)?

I know it all has to do with money somehow. It’s not something that makes any sense to me, though, and I have to admit I just simply don’t like it all.

So, here’s my modest proposal for some conferences that really make sense, and that – more importantly – do a great deal to soothe my tortured soul. It’s kind of a unique combination of tradition and geography. Whatever it is, I’m sure you’ll agree that it’s a lot better than what we’ve got now.

The Big Boys

The top level of Div I athletics has a fair amount of stability. These schools have been around awhile, and their conferences are a little more set. So, most of these conferences will look very familiar to you – the ACC, the Big 10, the PAC 10. The Big East and the SEC should look pretty familiar, with a few little changes.

There’s another conference that should look pretty familiar, but which I’m giving a new name. The Plains Conference is basically the Big 12, with a few additions and subtractions. I mean, hey, why name your conference after a number, when that number changes every year?

Now, there is one conference that really is a bit “out there.” I just so happened to notice that Texas has a ton of great schools, but they seem to spread them over a dozen different conferences. So, why don’t we put them all together right? Ladies and gentlemen, meet the Lone Star Conference.

ACC Big 10 Pac 10 Big East SEC Plains Lone Star **
MD Ohio St Wash Boston Coll Miami * Iowa Texas
VA Indiana Wash St Syracuse Florida Iowa St Texas Tech
VA Tech Purdue Oregon Rutgers Florida St * Missou TCU
Wake Notre Dame Oregon St Army * Georgia Nebraska Texas A&M
UNC Michigan Stanford Penn St * Vanderbilt Kansas St SMU
NC State Mich St Cal Pitt Tennessee Kansas Baylor
SC Illinois USC WV Kentucky Oklahoma Houston
Clemson Northwestern UCLA Navy Auburn Okla St Rice
Ga Tech Wisconsin Arizona Alabama Colorado
Minnesota Arizona St Ole Miss
Miss St
LSU
Arkansas

* Never in the conference (all the rest were, at one time or other)
** Brand new conference

By the way, the SEC is big enough that it needs two divisions. I’m seeing a good division between the eastern schools (the top seven) and the western ones (the bottom six).

  • Lt. blue – Pac 10
  • Black – Plains
  • Red – Lone Star
  • Royal blue – Big 10
  • Yellow, left of the line – SEC West
  • Yellow, right of the line – SEC East
  • Orange – ACC
  • Green – Big East

The Second Tier

The next group of schools shows a lot more fluidity. A lot of them are newer, so they lack the tradition that that first group has. They’re also smaller, so they might have to move around a little bit to find their place in the sun.

Now, there are definitely some conferences that will look familiar to you – the Ivy League, the Mid-American, the Western Athletic ... There are also some that shouldn’t be too far of a stretch – Conference USA, the Sun Belt, and the Mountain West. I am, though, adding a brand new one, the South Atlantic, which is basically just a grab-bag for all the leftovers.

This is also where we start to get into some of the non-football schools. I’ve shown those in italics in the table and as triangles on the map. Rest assured, though, there’s plenty of football schools at this level that nobody should have any problems with their fall sports schedules.

Ivy Mid-American Western Athletic Conference USA
Dartmouth N Illinois Hawaii Memphis
Harvard Ball St San Jose W Kentucky *
Brown West Mich Fresno DePaul
Yale Central Mich San Diego St Marquette
Columbia East Mich Nevada Butler *
Cornell Toledo UNLV Cincinnati
Princeton Bowling Green Utah Xavier *
Penn Miami OH Utah St Louisville
Ohio BYU Marshall
Kent
Akron
Mountain West Sunbelt South Atlantic **
Idaho * UTEP * Middle Tenn
Boise St N Texas So Alabama
Wyoming Texas St Troy
Colo St Tulsa * UAB
Air Force Arkansas-LR E Carolina
New Mexico Ark St Fla Intl
NM St LA Tech Fla Atl
Texas-Arl LA-Lafayette UCF
UTSA LA-Monroe USF
Tulane
Southern Miss

* Never in the conference (all the rest were, at one time or other)
** Brand new conference

The second tier’s got two conferences that need to be divided up, the Mid-American and the Sun Belt. For both, I’m making a break between the top five and the bottom six.

  • Lt. blue – Western Athletic
  • Black – Mountain West
  • Red – Sun Belt 
  • Royal blue – Conference USA
  • Orange – Mid-American
  • Yellow – South Atlantic
  • Green – Ivy

The Basketball Schools

Now we are getting into a little different territory. These schools tend to have great basketball teams and no football teams. 

There are a few who do have football though. They’re all in one conference – what I’m calling the Little East – so I guess they can play each other then find some other teams outside their conference. Once again, italics and triangles means no football.

Atlantic West Coast Little East Miss Valley
VCU Gonzaga Providence N Iowa
Geo Wash Seattle UMass Drake
Richmond Portland UConn Creighton
St Joseph San Fran St John Missou St
LaSalle Santa Clara Seton Hall St Louis *
Duquesne Pepperdine Villanova Wichita St
St Bonny Loyola Marymount Temple * S Illinois
Fordham San Diego Georgetown Illinois St
Rhode Isl Buffalo * Bradley
Indiana St
Evansville
Dayton *

* Never in the conference (all the rest were, at one time or other)

There's one conference that needs to be divided up, the Mississippi Valley. It, though, involves an even split between the top six (west of the squiggly line) and the bottom six (east of the squiggly line - roughly, the Mississippi River). 

  • Lt. blue – West Coast
  • Royal blue – Mississippi Valley
  • Yellow – Atlantic
  • Green – Little East

So, there you go, NCAA! Have at it!