Yeah, but what does all this have to do with me
Posted by The Heffalump on September 14, 2008
tOSU loses. They drop. Auburn beats a safety by one point. They should drop. Georgia valiantly does what Vandy did better. Do they drop? Or if you misunderstood the antecedant, do they rise?
Frenso State really screwed up a few (I use “few” rather than “couple” for a reason… more on that in the next parenthetical) things for the serenity seeking fan. First of all they could have taken Wisconsin out of the top ten thus insuring that two top ten teams lose. That would mean we get to be a top ten team even if the voters latch on to an undeserving but plucky midteen/lowtwenty ranking team like USF and jumps them past our undeserving but plucky sweet spot, we are still in the top ten (Penn State is getting too cute for comfort… I promised an explaination of the “few” thing in this parenthetical but I’m not ready… wait for it.) Second, a loss to Wisconsin would drop Wisconsin in the polls and rob tOSU a chance to beat a highly ranked opponent other than the pluckily looming Penn State and thus giving them no possibility of a quality win; ergo no poll jump and no boring #1 vs. #2 game where a ridicoulously talented tOSU team that has fallen asleep over the course of a milquetoast season meets a gauntlet forged monster from the SEC. For the sake of rigidly logical sports fandom, I can not simultainiously ridicule tOSU for winning against nobodies to ”earn” a perfect record and praise the SEC for “winning” national championships against the same undeserving foil. The SEC can beat Oklahoma. They can beat us too. The SEC might get really, really lucky against USC. We might risk embarassment. At least it would be a game.
(I almost forgot the promised parenthetical. At work we had an arguement over the definition of the word “few.” One said that few meant more than a couple, nough said. Another said that the word “few” meant three once in the incunabular days of language and only three. The most authoritative reference we had at hand, and still have, is an annotated OED. It gives the definition as being “not many, hardly any” and other definitions subjective to a preannounced assumption. I like the idea of “few” having once meant a specified amount. It seems tidy. If you – the one reader I have – or anyone you know can shed light on the subject I would be grateful.)
I Look for Alabama to be #9 tomorrow with tOSU dropping to the midteens, Auburn falling to #12 or so, and Wisconsin moving to number #8. I feel like we deserve to be about number #15 but until the preseason ranking mistakes shake out we get to be last years South Carolina. I hope we finish better than they did.
DukeWife said
Because I am a dork: The online etymology dictionary seems to say that few derives from the latin “pau-”, and originally meant “little” or “smallness.” So the three theory, while cool, seems to be bogus. Sometimes you just need an indefinite qualifier.