Okay, I'm going to try and make this one short. It’s time to turn over the called strikes and balls responsibility to the computers! I'll let that sit for a minute. Most people will disagree. I've said that's the way it should be for years, but after watching the Angels vs. Twins game last night, I have to reiterate my opinion.

Accuracy, Accuracy, Accuracy. ESPN's K-zone is accurate within 4/10ths of an inch. Umps can vary the strike zone a couple inches between consecutive pitches. Also the break of a ball and the catcher framing a pitch has no bearing on K-zone.

I'm not talking about getting rid of the home plate ump, or any of the umps. If you look at the playoffs they even bring in two additional umpires to help with the foul ball pole. Of course we need the home plat ump for plays at the plate, foul tips, catcher interference and a number of other duties. The home ump would have overall control of the game and final say in the call, but let's face it, even checked swings are appealed with either the 1st or 3rd base umps.

Traditionalists will say it’s not a part of the game. Look at the NFL, NHL, and NBA, all leagues now use instant replay. I’ll save that for another discussion about baseball, but it is a tool to better regulate to consistency of the game. K-zone is a tool used by every network, and it shows over and over again, inaccuracies of called strikes.

Some people will say that it will slow down the game. Absolutely not true. K-zone is instantaneous, and the home ump can still be verbally call balls and strikes, but the actual call will come from the computer.

I’ll try and add more to this later when I have some time, but to quote the great Eddie Murphy from Coming to America “It is also tradition that times must, and always do change my friend”

(that’s right, I used a Coming to America reference, so?)  

Because FOXSports doesn't cover wrestling, I feel it's my duty to post this. The Big Ten dominates the sport of wrestling every year. Sure there's some powerhouses outside the Big Ten, like Oklahoma State and Iowa State, but look at this year for proof: 9 teams from the Big Ten are currently ranked in the top 20!

The Big Ten wrestling tournament was this weekend and the top-ranked University of Iowa wrestling team came back with a strong performance Sunday to win its 32nd Big Ten team title in Minneapolis, MN. Iowa Sophomore Brent Metcalf became Iowa's 101st Big Ten Champion when he won the 149-pound title was named Outstanding Wrestler of the Championships and Big Ten Wrestler of the Year. The Hawkeyes qualified nine wrestlers to the upcoming NCAA Championships which will be held March 20-22 in St Louis, MO at the Scotttrade center.  Iowa Head Coach Tom Brands was named Big Ten Coach of the Year.

Final results from the Big Ten Conference Tounament:

 Place Team Points
1. Iowa 127.0
2. Minnesota 112.5
3. Michigan 97.5
4. Illinois 94.0
5. Ohio State 92.5
6. Wisconsin 85.5
7. Penn State 84.5
8. Indiana, Northwestern 80
10. Purdue 51.5
11. Michigan State 34.0

Stay tuned for results from the NCAA Tournament in 2 weeks!

(Photo courtesy of hawkeyesports.com)

It's really almost an embarrassment. Seven home games, only five on the road. The toughest road game is at Illinois, an overrated team from last year that Iowa beat. There's no Michigan, and no Ohio State. Penn State, Purdue, and Wisconsin all have to come to Iowa City.

Surely the non-conference games must be tougher right? There's Maine and Florida International (both in Iowa City) those are both very winnable to say the least, and Iowa State is always a tough rivalry game, but this year it's (you guessed it) in Iowa City. Following the Iowa State game they do have to go to Pittsburg, but it seems like every year Pittsburg is supposed to be greatly improved, but they never are. They're like the Arizona Cardinals of the College ranks.  

Now granted I've already admitted this is my team, so it's a biased opinion, but it is very conceivable for Iowa to finish 10-2 or better, possibly with a share of the Big Ten title, and an invite to a BCS game. So go ahead, send me your hate. SEC fans tell me how much tougher your conference is. Criticize the Hawks for such a cupcake schedule. This year I'll be fine with it, because I'll be in Pasadena while you complain about how your team got screwed by the BCS!

I'm sure nobody out there knows this yet, but Dennis Miller has a sports show on the VS channel called "Sports Unfiltered". I've never heard of it before last night, when I caught a round table discussion with Bill Romanowski (NFL), Forrest Griffin (UFC), Jeremy Roenick (NHL), and the great Larry Holmes (Boxing). Each professional athlete started off by explaining why their respected sport is the toughest.

Romanowski said basically "The NFL is toughest because each collision is like a car crash." Then he talked about getting injected with black sheep cells. (seriously)

 Forrest Griffin (who had some great lines throughout the show) said "MMA is toughest because look at the clothes these guys are wearing, they get paid a lot more than me." Followed by "In Football and Hockey, they get into it on the field take off their pads and throw down, in MMA, we just skip all the foreplay!"

Jeremy Roenick (who was wearing a Christmas hat) said "NHL is toughest because we have collisions like football, but are opponents are also carrying weapons."

Larry Holmes (who had the ugliest sport jacket I've ever seen) said "In boxing, when you're at the top, everyone is gunning for you."

I thought is was a pretty good show, and a good discussion, but it got me thinking, what about the sports not represented? Bull riding, for example was breifly mentioned by Dennis Miller, has to be in the discussion.

I'm going to have to go with Bull Riding, just because I've watched a few of the PRS's Worst Wrecks shows on VS. channel. What's your vote? What sports am I missing?

So who's your pick for worst sportscaster or comentator ever?

Tony Kornhieser - I like him on PTI, HATE him on MNF

#### Vitale - Tolerated him in the 80's, now he should go away.

Lee Corso and his stupid mascot heads

Lou Holtz - Great coach, but the guy slurrs his speach and shouldn't be a TV commentator

John Madden - Frank Caliendo would be out of material without him

Bill Walton - NBA's version of John Madden. Dumb as a Brick.

Brant Gumble - aka Kermit the frog. Made the Dallas vs. Green Bay game almost unwatchable.

Tiki Barber - Should've quit whining and kept playing because as a commentator he's horrible.

Jim Rome - Enough all ready. You're mad at people in sports. We get it!

Stephen A. Smith - (See Jim Rome comments) Also doesn't think people should be able to post blogs.

Stewart Scott - aka Carlton Banks from Fresh Prince of Bel Air. "Hater in the house!" 

And finally gone from MNF, but not forgotten. Dennis Miller. I guess SI was wrong with this cover story.

So who am I missing? Who's your vote? In this field of tough compitition, I have to vote for Tony Kornhieser. But then with a contest like this, I think they're all losers. 

I vote for Kevin Smith!!!

Nope, not that Kevin Smith. The guy who ran for 2,448 yards for Central Florida.

Yep. That's the guy. I'll admit I didn't know a whole lot about him during the season other than he was the league leader in rushing. But, if you look at his numbers, and what Central Florida did this year. You gotta give to him, right?

The Heisman trophy is awarded each year to "The Most Outstanding Collegiate Football Player in the U.S." Where does it state that the player has to come from the best team? Or even from a winning team? Or from a BCS conference team? Or for that matter, from a Div I team?

It seemed like every week this year the media selected a new Heisman front-runner, and every week he's from a top 2 team, and the next week they lose. With no real answer of what team deserves to play in the Championship game, I think it also proves that there was no real clear-cut Heisman winner. Why doesn't a guy like Kevin Smith get even a lousy 5th place vote? The guy almost beat Barry Sanders record!!! Then again, Colt Brennan DID beat Ty Detmer's record and he's expected to finish 3rd.

The Heisman and the BCS Championship game have become a popularity contest, and unfortunately, I don't see it changing anytime soon. 

  vs.

Everyone who is a fan of the Big Ten, the Pac 10, and the Rose Bowl, please cheer for West Virginia and Missouri this weekend! Everyone who thinks the BCS is a joke, please cheer for West Virginia and Missouri this weekend! Screw it, everyone please cheer for West Virginia and Missouri this weekend!!!!!!!!!!!

Okay, don't get me wrong. Both teams have had a great year, and I personally would like to watch those two teams in the BCS Championship game. But the Rose Bowl needs this game. College football needs this game! This is without a doubt the craziest college football year I've ever seen, and because Hawaii will not play in the Championship game, I don't think any team can fairly justify saying they undeniably deserve a berth in the championship game. So let's bring back the one thing the BCS is trying to get rid of, Tradition.

Of course Ohio State fans are hoping to slide into that #2 spot and play for redemption from last year's loss to Florida. And if they make it good for them. But USC is clicking right now, and I'd be willing to bet that the USC game will be a tougher game than either West Virginia or Missouri. 

And while I'm at it, since the Associated Press is no longer a part of the BCS, let's just say that West Virgina and Missouri play a horrible championship game, lots of penaties and turnovers, and Ohio Sate just crushes USC in the Rose Bowl. They could still win a share of the national title, just like USC did in '04.   

Then again, the way this year has gone, both teams will lose, Ohio State will get snubbed, and we'll have Georgia vs. Kansas in the Championship game. How great would that be? Two teams that didn't even make their conference championship game playing for the national championship!

I love college football!! 

vs.

So let me just start with I don't hate the Dodgers. I'm just trying to start a little conversation with some baseball fans, especially those in LA. I do hate the Yankees though, but then again, who doesn't?

Okay, so I was reading a blog about the possiblity of Miguel Cabrera going to the Angels by sportthink, and he basically put together a pretty funny top 10 list bashing the Angels. (well more like a top 6 list).

Anyway here's my list. Top 10 reasons Angel Stadium is better than Dodger stadium:

1. Angels stadium has way hotter women in the stands. Orange county surfer chicks vs. biker chicks from the valley.

2. Less criminals in the stands. And by criminals I mean Raider fans. After the Raiders packed up their fans had to go somewhere, they went to Dodger stadium. And they still wear their Raider gear. To a baseball game!

3.  Better hotdogs at Angel Stadium. The Angels use Wienerschnitzel, Dodgers use Farmer Johns. You can talk about the tradition of the Dodgerdog all you want, I'm talking taste. BIG advantage for the Halos.

4. Better parking. The parking lot at Dodger stadium is on a hill, Angels parking lots are flat. Tailgating is much better on a flat surface.

5. Better access to the freeways after games.  Anyone in LA knows how important this is, and Dodger traffic is notoriously bad. 

6. There's a Hooter's in the ballpark at Angels stadium!

7. And another Hooter's just outside the parking lot, walking distance after the game because...

8. If the Angels score 10 runs or more, you get 10 free wings at Hooter's for each ticket. Tip your waitress well, that place is rediculously packed!

9. Lighting up the Halo after an Angel victory. The closest thing you'll get after a Dodger victory is gunfire from the Raiders fans!

10. Finally the Rally ####! You gotta love the ####! The videos on the JumboTron are great.

Okay Dodger fans, fire away. I mean with comments, not actual bullets!

Like most of you, I was watching the Oregon vs. Arizona game last night and saw Dennis Dixon go down with an injury, which basically ended any type of offense the Ducks had the rest of the night. They showed a stat in the 3rd quarter that said before his injury Oregon's offense averaged 9.3 yards per down, after the injury it was 3.0. That brought up a couple questions for me. First, is Dixon really that good? And is Oregon's offense really that bad without him? Maybe he does deserve the Heisman.

While I was thinking about this, ESPN went to commercial, and what are they advertising? It's a ad campaign for Dixon for Heisman. Really?!?! Is that what this award has become? Are the leading candidates going to start mudslinging? Do they have to go out and kiss babies and shake hands with voters? I remember thinking the Times Square ad was in poor taste, but a national television ad? I'm officially off the Dennis Dixon for Heisman campaign, and it has nothing to do with him, his performance, or his injury. It's the University of Oregon's Athletic department for buying the ad and trying to buy the school a Heisman trophy, again.  

Glenn Dorsey for Heisman!! Or whoever else isn't playing for Oregon.

Okay, I've finally heard enough talk about the "need" for a college football playoff system. I couldn't disagree more! Sure the system isn't perfect, that's the beauty of it though! Every single game counts! And the later in the year the game is weighs even heavier. Stick with me. If Oregon lost last week to Cal, and Ohio State had lost to Illinios in Week 6, don't you think the Ohio State would be higher ranked?

Sure there are some teams that get left out of the title game that obviously belong (Auburn of '04), and then there are teams that get let into the game that don't belong (Nebraska of '01).  But overall the system works! Oklahoma went 13-0 in 2000, the only team to do so that year, they beat #2 ranked Florida State. Should they have been forced to play an extra game?

I can see a small-playoff system that would make everyone happy. You take the top 6 teams and place them in a 8 team bracket with the #1 and #2 teams receiving byes, just like the NFL does for each conference. You then have #6 play #3 in the Sugar Bowl, #5 vs. #4 in the Fiesta Bowl, #1 vs. the Sugar Bowl winner in the Rose Bowl, #2 vs the Fiesta Bowl winner in the Orange Bowl, and then the Orange Bowl vs Rose Bowl winner play in the BCS Championship game. The Orange, Rose, Fiesta, and Sugar Bowls would all rotate positions to maintain their "prestige". And only conference champions are allowed, if by some miracle Notre Dame or a Boise State is ranked higher than a BCS Conference Champ, so be it, the lower ranked conference champ is left out. (I still think Notre Dame needs to join the Big Ten, now more than ever!)  

Sure it would make everyone happy. Not me though. Let's start with the obvious. The teams not in the top 6 would complain that they were left out (sound familiar?) The 4 major bowls would all complain about no longer housing the tradition of thier storied past. (again, sound familiar) Also, with this plan, it's a 3 week playoff series, so unless we push the first two games up to Christmas, the BCS game goes even further into January. Maybe it's just me, but I miss the days of January 1st being the last day of college football.

So really by switching to the playoff system solved nothing! Just like addind the BCS Championship game solved nothing! College footbal is what it is, the most highly debated subject in sports, it's always going to stay that way. I don't even mind the pre-BCS years of a split title. If there was no BCS I'd be fine with the split title in '03, but the BCS was in place, LSU won. Get over it USC, you got passed over like Fredo. You won it the following year, but your back-to-back claim is null and void.

Bottom line. College Football is flawed AND perfect the way it is, every year they try and change it, they accomplish nothing. Everyone needs to embrace the imperfections of the game and cheer for your team, regardless of which Bowl game they qualify for!