TAC Bowl Pick’em

Friday, December 17, AD 2010

There’s still time to get in your picks for the Bowl Pick’Em game here at TAC. To encourage you, Jay Anderson & I have provided you with our picks & our comments about each bowl. Dave Hartline as well as commenter Nicholas Jagneux have also sent in picks, which I’ll show at the end. Again, your picks are definitely appreciated and we’ll take them until 1 o’clock CST tomorrow (when the New Mexico Bowl starts).

But first, another reminder to repeat “Leaders” and “Legends” to the nearest Big 10 fan you know.  Whatever dignity the Big 10 had is gone…ouch.

So let’s talk about the bowls!

Continue reading...

9 Responses to TAC Bowl Pick’em

  • There are signs the Big-10 is coming to its senses on the idiotic division names.

    http://www.freep.com/article/20101217/SPORTS07/101217025/1319/Big-Ten-may-rethink–football-division-names

    90%+ disapproval will cause some soul-searching. Even when you’re as clueless as the solons of the Big-10 administration.

  • ” since I’m not being paid to shill for these companies, I have eliminated the sponsors “

    When I submitted my picks, that was one of the two thoughts in my head as I typed them out.

    The other was: The names are long; it’s late; and I’m lazy.

  • @ Ohio vs Troy, Fla. Int vs Toledo, and Miami (OH) vs Midd. Tenn: I’ll take the MAC over the Sunbelt, too. With the Ragin’ Cajuns just 45 miles from home, I’m used to seeing Sun Belt teams stink things up.

    @ Army v SMU: Considering I had Navy and Air Force losing earlier, I felt that Army would try to uphold the military’s honor — in the Armed Forces bowl, no less.

    @ Pitt vs Kentucky: Although I took the Volunteers because they’re SEC, there was no way I could pick the Wildcats.

    @ Stanford vs Va. Tech, Air Force vs. Ga. Tech, Miami vs Notre Dame: I took Va. Tech, Ga. Tech, and Miami against better judgment to “set my picks apart”, as Jay says.

    Thanks to TAC, I’ll actually pay attention to the bowl game scores this year.

    Good luck, everyone; especially to me. 🙂

  • Dale:

    That’s good. Even if the geography isn’t accurate, who cares? Geographical division names is the way to go. The Saints have been in the NFC West, the Colts are in the AFC South, and the Cowboys are in the NFC East. I know the geography doesn’t make it perfect for the Big 10, but just give it a geography name and people will be ok with it.

    However, as an SEC fan who thinks the Big 10 is a little trumped up on its own legacy, I will always use these names. 😉

  • Here’s a list of some bygone bowls for some kicks: http://blogs.forbes.com/monteburke/2010/12/06/college-bowl-game-names-the-weirdest-and-wackiest/

    Like one of the comments pointed out, the Astro-Bluebonnet Bowl shoulda been there.

  • BYU to beat UTEP
    Fresno State to beat Northern Illinois
    Ohio to beat Troy
    Southern Miss to beat Louisville
    Boise State to beat Utah
    Navy to beat San Diego State
    Hawaii to beat Tulsa
    Toledo to beat Florida Intl.
    Air Force to beat Georgia Tech
    West Virginia to beat North Carolina St.
    Iowa to beat Missouri
    East Carolina to beat Maryland
    Illinois to beat Baylor
    Oklahoma State to beat Arizona
    SMU to beat Army
    Kansas State to beat Syracuse
    North Carolina to beat Tennessee
    Nebraska to beat Washington
    Clemson to beat South Florida
    Notre Dame to beat Miami (FL)
    Georgia to beat UCF
    South Carolina to beat Florida State
    Northwestern to beat Texas Tech
    Alabama to beat Michigan State
    Florida to beat Penn State
    Mississippi State to beat Michigan
    Wisconsin to beat TCU
    Oklahoma to beat UConn
    Stanford to beat Virginia Tech
    Ohio State to beat Arkansas
    Middle Tenn St. to beat Miami-Ohio
    LSU to beat Texas A&M
    Kentucky to beat Pittsburgh
    Nevada to beat Boston College
    Auburn to beat Oregon

  • Wisconsin will cream TCU, but then what would you expect from a transplanted cheesehead? Auburn? Give the points. As for the rest, who cares?

  • We’re halfway done, and I’m failing badly: 8-10, so far.

    Hopefully, there’s some redemption today heading into the the New Year.

  • (Hit “Submit Comment” too soon above.)

    I meant to add that I owe the Sunbelt Conference an apology. Congratulations to Troy and Florida International. Can Middle Tennessee pull off the trifecta?

Catholicism and College Football

Monday, December 13, AD 2010

No doubt many of you spent the weekend ignoring family and holiday festivities and perhaps even food & drink in order to study up on the all the bowl games so you can make your picks for the TAC Bowl Pick’em contest. But it occurred to me that while we at TAC have talked a lot about who would win the most games, we never discussed who ought to win those games.

A few months ago, we discussed how the New Orleans Saints were the team that all good Catholics ought to cheer for. After that post, I had a lot of feedback thanking me for providing this guidance but also wondering if there could be some guidance on the college level. Take this email for example:

Dear Michael,

I am a twenty-something in West Virginia whose hobbies include making parody blogs and using political terms I don’t quite understand. I have hated football for some time, believing it to be anathema to my own beliefs. However, after reading your post I realized my hatred of football was a product of my own fascist tendencies.. However, there are no pro teams in West Virginia but there is a college one; I would prefer to cheer for a college team but require your guidance to know who to root for.

Or this one :

Dear Michael,

I am a Cowboys fan living in Ohio. However, after your post I find my heart step by step being moved by what can only be the Holy Spirit to cheer for the Saints. I could hardly help myself from letting out a hearty “Who Dat!” after Malcolm Jenkins stripped the ball against my former favorite team on Thanksgiving. I pray that God can grant me the faith to bleed black & gold. But this is not enough, as I have started to examine my college allegiances. Is there a college team out there that can inspire my soul the way the Saints do?

There were many many emails like this, almost as many emails as there are people who honestly think the executive order has the legal effect Bart Stupak claims it has. So for these few months, I have been discerning what the standings of many college football teams are in the eyes of God.

Continue reading...

18 Responses to Catholicism and College Football

  • Check our “Mary’s Aggies” @ Texas A&M …

  • At least it’s not yet another defense of Notre Dame as the only Catholic football team. . .

  • I say we should cheer for the team all the others use to devalue their apponent’s capabilities. A team immortalized for it’s willingness to take on anyone knowing they have no chance in h… of ever winning. The team that has for years absorbed more abuse than all the others combined and still comes out fighting for truth and goodness with every ounce of their energy. Demonized but also idolized in spirit on all “opponent” schedules yet more Catholic any of them…The Little Sisters of the Poor.

  • Scholarship athletes are purported to be amateurs, yet are given payment in the form of tuition. This is a lie, an affront against God, Who is Truth. Therefore it is only permissible for Catholics to root for college teams which give no scholarships.

  • Pingback: Tweets that mention Catholicism and College Football | The American Catholic -- Topsy.com
  • Yes, Gordon Gee of OSU told us so. What a jerk!

  • “Dear Michael,

    I am a twenty-something in West Virginia whose hobbies include making parody blogs and using political terms I don’t quite understand. I have hated football for some time, believing it to be anathema to my own beliefs. However, after reading your post I realized my hatred of football was a product of my own fascist tendencies.. However, there are no pro teams in West Virginia but there is a college one; I would prefer to cheer for a college team but require your guidance to know who to root for.”

    Brilliant, absolutely brilliant!

  • I think God is clearly showing His dislike of our team’s rubbing Howard’s Rock, as we came nowhere near an ACC Championship like we did last year.

    It’s also curious that the two football teams that Catholics should root for are from Louisiana.

  • Bill, Sr., I was talking about Michael’s post, not your comment.

    And I agree that Gee acted like a jerk (although he offered a fairly solid apology for his graceless comments):

    http://proecclesia.blogspot.com/2010/12/ohio-state-president-apologizes-and.html

  • For one, I’ve never understood the neo-pagan culture of Louisiana with its voo-doo tendencies. Someone asked “Who Dat?” Lemme tell you… it’s Dat Nguyen.
    http://vcsa.org/files/images/camp/Dat_Nguyen_football.jpg
    http://www.bestsportsphotos.com/images/nguyen-dat-dcb-1.jpg

    More over, your analysis of Texas A&M and the 12th Man is weak. VERY weak. Let me direct you to the Church’s teaching on the Mystical Body of Christ. The team on the field is analogous to the Church Militant. The Church Suffering would be analogous to those Aggie fans unable to get tickets to the game. The 12th Man is analogous to the Church Victorious.

    Aggies have a good model on and off the field.

    there is no basis for any Catholic to be an Aggie fan
    FAIL.

  • LSU has more than 10k-11k Catholics?

  • Big Tex:

    Voodoo is anything but neo. There are more people practicing voodoo on film than in New Orleans.

    And I’ll take up your Mystical Body analogy. Most fans cheer for the team on the field. However, by claiming to be the 12th man the Aggies want to be on the field. Now, if the Aggies are the Church Victorious and the team is the Church Militant, that means that Aggies fan want to leave the Church Victorious to rejoin the Church Militant. In other words, they want to reject the heaven & glory of God. Rejecting the beatific vision? How more un-Catholic can you get?

  • Weak.

    Four words in response:

    Legends. Leaders. Epic fail.

    It’s also curious that the two football teams that Catholics should root for are from Louisiana.LSU has more than 10k-11k Catholics?

    Almost assuredly. LSU has a population of 30,000+ and more than a third of that is going to be Catholic considering the very high Catholic population in the Southern part of the state (the main drawing ground for LSU).

  • So . . .

    It seems a Catholic cannot (in good conscience) root for either ND or MU in their bowl game. Could one, legitimately, prefer a devastating storm to a gang of heretics? Here’s how: the storm is harmful to the physical body. The heretic is dangerous for the soul.

    I totally don’t understand how anyone (I have friends, lovely people, with season tix) could be a fan of the NJ Devils, or the Duke Blue Devils!

  • A&M is 49k students… @25% Catholic.

  • And I’ll take up your Mystical Body analogy. Most fans cheer for the team on the field. However, by claiming to be the 12th man the Aggies want to be on the field. Now, if the Aggies are the Church Victorious and the team is the Church Militant, that means that Aggies fan want to leave the Church Victorious to rejoin the Church Militant. In other words, they want to reject the heaven & glory of God. Rejecting the beatific vision? How more un-Catholic can you get?

    The voo-doo king speaks falsity, yet again. 😉 You completely misinterpret the role of the 12th Man (i.e. the Church Victorious) and falsely assume a desire to be on the field. The yells are the “prayers” for the team on the field (i.e. the Church Militant). Did you learn about A&M from some t-sip?

  • Pingback: WEDNESDAY MORNING EDITION | ThePulp.it

TAC Bowl Pick’Em Contest

Tuesday, December 7, AD 2010

The bowl selections are out, and it will be Auburn v. Oregon in the BCS Title game. This is irrelevant, because the two biggest fan bases on this site will be meeting in Jerryworld on January 7th (that long. Seriously?) in the Cotton Bowl. I would talk trash about the Aggies, but there’s no need. Any school willing to be bought off by their biggest rival really isn’t worth the effort.

Ok, so in order to continue the college discussion at TAC, we’re doing a bowl pick’em game. There would be a prize but we have no money (unless you’d like to chip in…). You will get honor and glory…and perhaps the right to write a guest post on any college football topic of the winner’s choosing (I’ll work out the details and let you know if that’s happening).

The method is simple. We’re picking every bowl. The bowl begin on December 18th and to be consider you must have turned in your entry by the beginning of the New Mexico bowl, which is at 1 pm on the 18th. The list of all the bowls can be found here. Next week (hopefully on Monday), all the rankers here at TAC will put out their picks with their reasons.

So how do you turn in your picks? You can post them here in the comment section or you can post it on the wall of our facebook group (look for The American Catholic if you haven’t liked us yet). I suppose you could theoretically tweet it to TheAmCatholic, but that would probably be annoying. And by probably I mean definitely.

I’ll allow changes up until the the New Mexico Bowl, but if you do it in a different forum make sure I can identify you.

So send in your picks, and we’ll start the discussions and debates right away!

Continue reading...

12 Responses to TAC Bowl Pick’Em Contest

Final TAC College Rankings of 2010

Tuesday, November 30, AD 2010

And for most of us, we’re done.

With Boise St. and LSU losing, we’re down to three title contenders. TCU will need either Oregon or Auburn to lose. In my mind, they need either one to lose big in order to justify TCU getting into the title game b/c of how pitiful TCU’s schedule is.

Some random thoughts from the weeked, as it’s exam week for me:

A few commenters on Twitter noted the irony of Notre Dame beating the Trojans in a week when the pope had to battle contraception. Everyone can enjoy the sweet, sweet tears of USC fans.

Do college coaches not know about this new fangled thing called the prevent defense? Nevada & LSU, I’m looking straight at you (or am until i burst out in tears b/c we lost to a clearly inferior Arkansas team b/c we didn’t play freakin prevent defense. Nope, not bitter at all). Speaking of Nevada, I watched that game (one of the perks of having a newborn is getting to watch late night TV!). A lot of fun to watch as a game, but the stands? This was the big road test for Boise, and the stands for the student section were smaller than my high school. Auburn has to go play in front of 90,000+ Bama fans. It’s just not comparable. I just don’t know if I can ever justify putting those kinds of schools over a BCS team for a national title.

Does Rich Rod stay at Michigan or do they give him another chance? I don’t know how much longer Michigan will be content to be so far behind not only Ohio St., but also Iowa and Wisconsin.

Boise went from the Rose Bowl to the Kraft Fight Hunger. They would play a PAC-10 team but since the PAC-10 can’t fill its spots it’ll get an ACC team: either BC or Miami, which just fired its coach.

I hate rankings being used as conference tiebreakers, especially when the teams met in the regular season. Use some metric from the season, like points differential instead.

I’m going to hate writing the next sentence, but LSU losing was great for college football. Cries against the BCS would have increased if LSU, whom the media have decided is only lucky, made it in over TCU. This would have increased if Oregon lost and we had an SEC rematch. The same is true for Boise. TCU has no business in the title game this year (they did last year), so I think the anger against the BCS will abate unless one of the big two lose this weekend.

By the way, I’m rooting for South Carolina next weekend. Pay for play is a bad deal, and while logically Auburn ought to go over TCU, emotionally I want those cheaters to watch TCU go over them. Furthermore, that would knock Arkansas out of the BCS bid, sending them to the Cap One bowl instead of us. Yes, I am rooting for LSU to get knocked out of the “better” bowl and go to the Cotton, perhaps to play the Aggies. Sorry, but after last year I never want to go to the Cap One bowl again (ps-dear SEC-when LSU fans are openly hoping to not go to your premiere non-BCS bowl, it’s time to change the premiere non-BCS bowl). And yes, I know that they put in a new field but I’d rather Jerryworld than Disney world (the fact that I could maybe convince my wife to take a texas trip but not a Orlando trip has nothing to do with it)

TCU just joined the Big East. While the Big East could use a football school, 17 teams in basketball? Sure, they get exposure but how many teams until you have to contract? If you don’t think Mike Slive will be traveling with LSU to Morgantown this fall, you’re dead wrong.

Now, for next week I figure there won’t be enough to do another set of rankings (not to mention I’ll have three exams that week), so the rankings are done for the year. However, our college football stuff will not. I’ll ask all the rankers to submit their picks for the bowls with their reasoning behind the picks. I’m not sure if we’ll do all the bowls of just the ones after Christmas. When the bowl lineups come out, I’ll make a call. However, I also want our readers to participate. So you can send in your picks via comment here or via our facebook page. We can bash each other picks, trash talk etc.

(Speaking of trash talk, is it acceptable to post your team’s victory cheer on the facebook page of the opposing team after a win? Ex: an Ole Miss fan posting “Hotty Totty!” on the wall of an LSU fan. I think so, b/c it’s not really trash talk, it’s just “yay! my team won!” and is fairly harmless, especially if there’s a history of playful trash-talk between the two. However, someone recently disagreed with me and told me I was a jerk. I was curious if in fact I am a jerk).

Allright, so to the final rankings!

Continue reading...

27 Responses to Final TAC College Rankings of 2010

  • Get over it, Denton. I was in no mood to be heckled after that game.

  • OVERRATED!!!

    LSU!!!

    OVERRATED!!!

  • East Coast bias prevails again, from an LSU grad no less.

  • LSU is not overrated; their two losses were by touchdowns on the road to teams ranked #1 and #8 respectively. 7 of the 10 wins were over bowl-eligible teams.

  • OVERRATED!!!

    LSU!!!

    OVERRATED!!!

    Rankings based on NON-of my votes due to your bitterness.

    Over bowl-eligible teams?

    You gotta be kidding!

    Everybody is bowl-eligible. All you need is a pulse.

  • And this wasn’t about East Coast bias. Fresno St. has no business in the top 25, but my complaints were the bizarre rankings of LSU, Ohio St. and Arkansas in relation to other East Coast teams. Hard to have an East Coast bias when you’re picking East Coast teams over other East Coast teams. (And I defining East Coast in this context to mean teams East of the PAC & WAC)

  • I suppose the Buckeyes are “overrated”, too, since their only loss came in Madison to the #4 team in the nation.

    I feel bad for Sparty because, under the old system, Michigan State would be headed to the Rose Bowl. Now, they’re going to be locked out of the BCS bowls altogether even though they have only 1 loss and are the only team to beat the #4 team in the nation.

    Had they not been so completely blown out by Iowa (who finished the season with a shocking 5 losses), and instead lost by a closer score, the Spartans would likely be ranked ahead of Ohio State (and maybe even Wisconsin since they beat the Badgers head-to-head) and be headed to the Sugar Bowl (or even the Rose Bowl).

  • Jay,

    Ohio State is notorious for losing mythical national championship games by 30 or more.

    When they stop choking then I’ll consider them higher.

  • Shoulda, coulda, woulda… re: Arky, Okie Lite, and Mizzou. I like the Aggies’ chances in a rematch with these teams, but that’s now how it works. These teams took advantage of the Aggies various woes and made them pay. Good for them… they did what they were supposed to do. At the end of the day, I’m loving the fact that they are 9-3, with huge wins over t.u. and the two teams vying for the Big 12 championship.

    This is a huge step towards regaining and maintaining relevance in NCAAF. Looking forward to the bowl game and next season.

    Nebraska – They can beat just about any team that’s not from the State of Texas
    ROFL… I like their chances against Baylor and tceh. And Cougar High and SMU and Rice.

    Bama surprised me. Up by 24 and lose? Either that was an EPIC meltdown, or that demonstrates the legitimacy of Auburn. Auburn and Oregon for the MNC, with Auburn taking the title.

  • List out all these games the Buckeyes have lost by 30 or more points. There must be quite a few of them, since Ohio State is allegedly “notorious” for it.

  • East Coast Bias!

    Banning the only west coast writer!

    East Coast Bias!

  • Everybody is bowl-eligible. All you need is a pulse.

    What does that say about the PAC-10? Considering that they’re looking at getting 3 teams at worst and 5 teams at best into bowls?

    Had they not been so completely blown out by Iowa (who finished the season with a shocking 5 losses), and instead lost by a closer score, the Spartans would likely be ranked ahead of Ohio State (and maybe even Wisconsin since they beat the Badgers head-to-head) and be headed to the Sugar Bowl (or even the Rose Bowl)

    Yeah, I really hate the idea of conferences using rankings as tiebreakers. These teams played on the field; we use the rankings to compare teams that haven’t played. OSU, OU, and A&M played each other. Use on the field stuff. Same with the Big 10, though the problem there is allowing teams to not play each other and not having a conference title game.

  • I was being sarcastic, but when you get as many shots at the MNC and still lose (and you only get in because of your reputation), then they get the ranking they deserve.

  • Banning the only west coast writer!

    Don’t you live in Houston?

  • All you need is a 6-6 season to get in.

    That doesn’t make it all that remarkable.

    I live in Houston, but I was raised on WAC and PAC-10 football.

    We’re used to getting the shaft from the east coast establishment.

  • Ohio St. the last two shots at the title game were the only undefeated AQ team and the only AQ 1 loss team. The last two times they got in on merit. I think the Big 10 gets a lot of media hype, but if we’re looking at a team getting in on reputation alone, the criminal is OU. OU had no business being in the title game in 2003 or 2004 and have played poorly in bowls since (losing to Boise, then losing again in the BCS title game v. Florida).

  • There was an aberration in ’84 when BYU won the MNC, but besides that, Oregon and USC have been denied the MNC because of east coast bias.

    Am I complaining?

    No, but I bring it up because of the FACT that I have been banned from this poll from you easterners.

  • Yeah, getting to a bowl isn’t impressive. However, it’s a good measuring stick for strength of schedule. To see the SoS, you look at number of ranked teams (either at the end or at the time played) and then the number of bowl eligibility. That way you can see top wins as well as the depth of the schedule.

  • USC getting East Coast Bias? Wtf. They got the national in 2003 despite not getting in the game. They got the nod of Auburn in 04 despite having a much weaker schedule. USC was declared the greatest team ever in 2005 before Young Stomped them. I’m sure Oregon has complaints, but USC is so far up ESPN’s rear that it’s ridiculous to claim they’re hurt by bias.

  • I’ll admit I tanked LSU, but does it really matter?

    I re-did my rankings after second thoughts on TCU (had them #24) after jumping to the Big LEast.

    Considering the WAC has three teams ranked nationally and the Big Least only one (and behind the other WAC ranked teams).

    Yet Boise State gets the Toilet Bowl game and a Big Least Champion gets a ticket to a BCS bowl game.

    Anyhoo, I can’t wait for bowl season and watch all the Big Least teams choke in the bowls (along with Ohio State).

  • Tito:

    I didn’t yours in b/c I had already finished writing this up & your rankings weren’t based on what you really think. I’m just not going to spend time re-doing rankings b/c you’re mad at LSU fans (which by the way, the Miles haters annoy me too, but they’re overblown in the media. Go to And the Valley Shook blog; you’ll see that they are by no means the only LSU fans). If you really think LSU & Ohio St. are 22nd and 25th, then fine, but I don’t think you do. If you say that they are, fine, I’ll go back and edit them. If you want to re-do your rankings, I’ll put them in.

    Now, we really need to talk about this TCU jump. In this, the WAC is dead, Boise is screwed, and the Big East somehow ended up securing an auto bid (unless the SEC takes WVU). What does Boise do now? Do they go to beg the PAC for an invite? They gained nothing except a game against Air Force.

  • Aggies to the Cotton Bowl.

    Awesome! It won’t matter which SEC team they face–the Aggies are getting 10 wins this year!

  • Tito,

    You do realize that Ohio State actually won one of the three “mythical national championship” games they played in, right?

    You do realize that Ohio State’s BCS bowl record was 4-0 prior to losing those last two “mythical national championship” games, right?

    You do realize that their overall BCS bowl record at this point is 5-3, in stark contrast to Oklahoma’s paltry 2-5 BCS bowl record, right?

    Yet Oklahoma always gets a pass and everyone always gives Ohio State hell. Yeah, SOME “East Coast bias”. Give me a frickin’ break.

  • By the way, Tito, who was the last team your precious west coast Oregon Ducks lost to (say, sometime around New Year’s Day in Pasadena)?

    Overrated and getting in based on reputation alone, my ass.

  • It won’t matter which SEC team they face–the Aggies are getting 10 wins this year!

    Them be fighting words. If the Aggies face the Tigers, this blog is going to explode.

  • Them be fighting words. If the Aggies face the Tigers, this blog is going to explode.

    From what I’ve been hearing, it’ll be LSU. I’ll bring the beer. You bring the boudin. Jay will bring some BBQ and his REK collection. Darwin will provide Scotch. MJ will bring the rotel dip and fritos. Tito can bring the organic, fair-trade tofu he heard about from the hippies in Eugene, OR. 🙂

TAC College Rankings

Tuesday, November 23, AD 2010

After a lackluster week in college football (unless you’re Bo Pelini), the Friday after Thanksgiving gives us an excellent slate of college football. Arizona v. Oregon, Auburn v. Alabama, and Boise v. Nevada. The day after, TCU, Stanford, Wisconsin, LSU, and Ohio St. will all be looking to get wins & style points to position themselves for a BCS bid, possibly a title game if a scenario that involves the Second Coming occurs.

We know that Oregon is dreadful in the computers. We know the SEC schools do really well. Can everyone stay undefeated? Can one of the non-AQs impress enough to get in? And throw in the fact that this is rivalry week, which always adds for an extra bit of chaos and unpredictability. The worst teams can and will challenge teams that normally would be far superior to them (like for example when Ole Miss debuts a quasi triple option offense in a failed attempt to beat LSU. Enjoy Hell, you racist rednecks). Weeks like this make college football a lot of fun.

To the rankings!

Continue reading...

11 Responses to TAC College Rankings

  • Michael,

    The LSU-Ark match-up looks very good for the Tigers. Arkansas is dangerous, of course, but LSU’s defense is built to stop it. Individual play – not schemes – will be the determining factor here. Plus, Arkansas’ defense can give up lots of points – just when the Tigers’ offense is finding confidence.

    Boy, I really hope that ‘Bama plays its best ball of the season. I agree that if they lose, they’ll drop further than what would normally happen.

  • What happened to my rankings? I sent them to you on Monday.

  • I don’t have them. I’ve been getting a bunch of emails right before exams, so I may have lost it by accident. Send them to me, and I’ll try to update the post.

  • Don’t forget that the Aggies’ three losses have come at the hands of Missouri, Arkansas, and Oklahoma State, three top-15 BCS teams. Two of those losses were by a touchdown or less.

    I would love to replay those three games. Okie Lite is good, and I think we could beat them (almost did with a turnover-prone QB). Same with Mizzou… the Aggies are playing much better lately. Arkie is the only one I have doubts on…. the hogs are good.

    Bring on the ‘sips! It’s gonna be a hot time in Austin tomorrow night.

  • Big Tex,

    The Aggies are playing very well. It’s too bad y’all hit that three game skid in the middle. I’ve got to admit that I haven’t followed Aggie football too closely lately, but I know y’all have a couple of pretty good running backs. Good luck today.

    Although I think LSU will get a berth in the Sugar Bowl, with a loss to the Hogs, the Tigers could also end up in the Cotton Bowl. If the Aggies win, they might also end up in the Cotton Bowl. We might see each other in a few weeks.

  • Big Tex,

    Congratulations on the win over the Longhorns.

  • The Cotton Bowl would be awesome. And I’d love to play LSU.

  • Not sure who called it, but props to the commenter who’s been calling the Boise St. loss to Nevada since October. Got it right.

  • Wow! Well, I guess it’ll be LSU and TCU in the Sugar Bowl. That’s okay with me.

    Of course, LSU has to beat Arkansas today. Geaux Tigers!

    As for the national title (I know: Oregon and Auburn still have a game to play; but, does anyone doubt who it will be at this point?), we won’t lack for scoring.

  • Probably won’t be TCU; the Rose Bowl gets stuck with TCU. The Sugar is likely to pick up Ohio St., and we’ll have a rematch of the 2007 game.

  • Congratulations to Arkansas. The Hogs simply outplayed LSU in the 4th quarter. LSU missed some terrific opporutunities.

    Now, it looks like the Sugar Bowl will get South Carolina, as the #2 SEC team.

Fighting Global Warming

Thursday, November 18, AD 2010

The NCR notes a Rutgers professor went on the Joy Behar show and compared having kids to littering. I found this shocking. People watch the Joy Behar show?

Sadly, the idea that kids are an evil and that the virtuous green movement should rid them (presumably through contraception and abortion, though they rarely state the latter explicitly) seems to be growing in momentum on the left. In a humorous coincidence, this comic appeared in today’s newspaper (from Yahoo!).

People really will believe anything these days…

Continue reading...

One Response to Fighting Global Warming

Brave New World for TAC

Wednesday, November 17, AD 2010

TAC is undergoing an upgrade, and I’m proud to announce this upgrade also includes an expansion. TAC has launched a facebook page and a twitter page! Look up “The American Catholic” on facebook and @TheAmCatholic (full name “TheAmericanCatholic” on twitter to follow us!

Now, why are we doing this? It occurred to us that people desperately want to know what our contributors have for breakfast. This allows me to tell you that I had Pop-Tarts, and that Tito made hash browns out of Idaho potatoes.

Of course I’m joking. The goal is two-fold. First, we’ll do what everyone else does with these platforms, which is link back to the posts, allowing people a different way to get our posts than just an RSS feed. More importantly however, we’d like to see this really supplement the TAC community and discussions.

There are many topics or news items that interest us, but aren’t blogged about because there’s not enough material to write a blog post or enough time to write the post. Micro-blogging allows us an opportunity to share these stories with you and discuss them. We’re hoping these discussions are as fruitful as our comment boxes and will really add to what we’re doing. This isn’t just a one-way street. We’ve noticed that a lot of big name bloggers in the Catholic blogosphere get a lot of help from their readers in that readers will email them with news or post ideas. We think our readership can do the same thing, and as a group blog these platforms are great for allowing you, the reader, to post on our wall or tweet us with things you’d like to see discussed at TAC. This way, TAC can become a more interactive blog and become an even better forum for the discussion of issues in light of Catholic teaching.

So please, if you’re on facebook or twitter, follow us! We’re still figuring things out with, so forgive us if we have some snafus, but we think this will really help improve TAC so thanks in advance for putting up with us.

Continue reading...

6 Responses to Brave New World for TAC

TAC College Rankings: Week 12

Monday, November 15, AD 2010

Let’s a take moment of silence to remember Tito’s Idaho Vandals. *Pause*

A week of so much potential for wonderful chaos left us with a more set picture. Although TCU is largely assuredly to be undefeated, the suddenly don’t have any great wins. Oregon St. & Baylor both lost, and Utah got embarrassed by a Notre Dame team that got whalloped by Navy. It appears that Boise, strengthened by Virginia Tech’s dominance in the ACC, will likely jump TCU if the Broncos beat #18 Nevada in two weeks. Oregon appears in good shape, as Arizona and Oregon St. don’t look as troublesome as they did a week ago, though they did have to survive a scare at Cal. Auburn gets a week off to pray that Cam Newton isn’t declared ineligible while trying to prepare themselves for a trip to Bama.

It is hard to imagine a one-loss team like LSU getting into the title unless Boise, Auburn, and Oregon all lose. Possible, but for LSU it would require Auburn to probably lose twice (or get declared ineligible) so it appears LSU’s chances are equivalent to the chances of Christ coming back in the next few weeks. LSU appears to be the only one with a chance, as the computers don’t give anyone else much love, though I suspect Ohio St. could muscle their way into the picture with a big win over Iowa.

So yes, put me on record as publicly declaring that LSU’s chances of making it to the title game are equivalent to those of the Second Coming in the next few weeks. I doubt I will have to eat crow for that statement. Now to the rankings!

Continue reading...

21 Responses to TAC College Rankings: Week 12

  • LSU continues to romp through their most difficult schedule since they take “all-comers”.

    They destroyed the University of the Little Sisters of the Poor this past weekend to increase their chances of playing for the mythical championship.

    //sarcasm off

  • I am no fan of LSU (or anyone else in the SEC for that matter), but let’s not pretend that TCU or Boise State would still be undefeated if they had played LSU’s schedule.

    Boise State’s “signature” win was a last-second comeback against a team that lost to James Madison.

  • Tito:

    LSU has 7 bowl eligible teams, with an additional 3 BCS teams on the schedule. They play two in-state teams in accordance with LSU’s determination to help other in-state schools financially. Name me a team with a better schedule than LSU. Certainly not Boise, who plays 3, maybe 4 bowl eligible teams this year.

    LSU’s cupcake games are Boise’s conference showdowns. Name me a team with a tougher schedule.

  • Easy to say when the BCS schools avoid Boise State.

    That’s fair?

  • Easy to say when the BCS schools avoid Boise State.
    That’s fair?

    Yeah, which is why Boise played Oregon St. and Virginia Tech this year. No ones playing them.

    LSU is not under an obligation to play every non-AQ team that wants a shot at the big time.

    But you dodged the question: name me a team with a tougher schedule.

  • I defer on Boise State until next year… when they are a member of the Pac 10. At that point, we’ll see how they fare with a tougher schedule.

    Bring on the Huskers! I believe they are entitled to another “don’t let the door hit you on the way out” loss. 🙂

    A flashback to 1998:

  • VATech’s loss to James Madison was a fluke. Aside from that game, VATech has played pretty well. It’s loss to Boise State was as close as could be, and it was the opening game of a very young and inexperienced defense against a team full of returning starters. That said, while Boise State is a good team I agree that they would likely not be able to withstand the weekly challenges of a top conference.

  • I defer on Boise State until next year… when they are a member of the Pac 10. At that point, we’ll see how they fare with a tougher schedule.

    You mean Utah. Utah and Colorado are joining the PAC 12. Boise is joining the MWC next year, so TCU and Boise will be playing each other.

  • Mike,

    The Hokies are running the table in the ACC – weakest BCS conference not called the Big East.

    😉

    And I say that as an ACC alum.

  • This is why college is such bs. So Boise St is given the shaft not just because they play a weak schedule that is the result of higher profile programs ducking them, but even the good teams that they beat are downgraded because they don’t really play a tough enough schedule, or the teams that they beat aren’t really that good. Let’s go nuts and just look at the teams beaten by the teams beaten by the teams beaten by the teams beaten by Boise St and TCU and see what their strength of schedule is like.

    Let’s cut this farce out already and just declare that only teams in the Big 10, Pac 10, Big 12, and SEC are truly eligible for the title game, and in the former two conferences only in certain select years when the conference is strong.

    Eh, screw it, whoever wins the SEC should just be declared the national champion.

  • Eh, screw it, whoever wins the SEC should just be declared the national champion.

    Works for me. 😉

    So Boise St is given the shaft not just because they play a weak schedule that is the result of higher profile programs ducking them,

    I think TCU could make this claim, but not Boise. They played 2 BCS teams, and not puny ones either. Both OSU and VT were close to winning their conference the year before.

  • Plus VoTech is back from the brink this year.

  • Oh, please. Spare me the cries about how college football is a sham. I don’t think Boise State has played as tough a schedule as LSU, but I still have the Broncos ranked 2nd because (1) they’ve done what’s been asked of them and (2) I think Alabama will beat Auburn while Boise State will likely run the table. If that happens, then Boise State belongs in the championship game.

    But if there are 4 or 5 undefeated teams at the end of the season, and one of those teams has beaten several other top 25 teams, forgive me for being more impressed with that team than I am the gimmicky team playing on a gimmicky blue field. I have them at #2 right now, so all you playoff crybabies should just be satisfied with that.

    😉

  • I think TCU could make this claim, but not Boise. They played 2 BCS teams, and not puny ones either. Both OSU and VT were close to winning their conference the year before.

    Yes, but then we hear about how these programs really aren’t that strong, and they play in weaker BCS conferences, etc. It’s like Boise St can’t win. First they’re knocked for playing in a weak conference, and then the wins against teams from elite conferences are pooh-poohed. I’m sure BSU would welcome the opportunity to play upper echelon schools, but that’s just not going to happen – and I don’t even blame the elites for ducking BSU when their conference schedules are so tough. Why on Earth would LSU or Alabama or Oklahoma schedule BSU or TCU when they’ve got to play five or six top 25 teams within their own conference?

    The system itself is what the problem is.

  • Eh, who cares. Real football is played on Sundays anyway. 🙂

  • And I predict the Hokies will lose whatever BCS bowl game they play in, assuming they beat whatever 7-4 team they play in the ACC championship.

  • Well, at least “real football” was finally played in the Meadowlands on Sunday. Finally.

  • You may be right, Jay, but I’m not so sure. If Hokies run the table, the most likely Orange Bowl opponent will be TCU, which should be a very interesting game. I’m a Duke guy myself, but admit to being a fan of Beamer ball. His end of season team rankings consistently out-perform his recruiting class rankings, which is the mark of good coaching. And Beamer is not afraid to play a risky non-conf opponent ala Boise State, something he does pretty much every year. If the Orange Bowl match-up turns out to be TCU then one would expect a high-scoring game, which is why it will probably be a defensive struggle.
    I think this year’s Tech team might be a bit under-rated. Beamer has admitted he should not have scheduled a game for the Saturday after the Monday night Boise State game (I doubt Boise State did), and it was that loss to James Madison that really haunts them. IMO the loss to Boise State was predictable given that Tech was starting 7 or 8 newbees on defense and Boise State’s offense brought back everyone. That experience mismatch probably does not amount to much now, but it certainly would in game 1.

  • The only thing sadly that will get LSU in is if this Cam Newton thing explodes. That is SEC followers and voters learn that AUBURN got to where it at by having a player that should not be playing and their is revolt with votes going to LSU

    It already appears to me as Clay Travis reported that Newton very likely is already no eligible

  • Nebraska offered a 2 for 1 vs Boise State and they declined…

  • SEC West teams play the toughest schedule. And, LSU has the most Top 25 wins this season.

    Of course, a playoff would solve all of this.

    (But, then, we’d have arguments about how many teams get in the playoff. With an 8 team playoff, teams 9 -12 would complain; and so forth.)

    As for Cam Newton, maybe he should be ineligible. Either way, his team spanked LSU. No doubt. I’d love for LSU to make the SEC Championship game (assuming that they beat Arkansas; not an easy task). But, I’d always have the memory that on the field – where it matters – they got beat. For me, it would always have an asterisk.

TAC College Rankings: Week 10

Tuesday, November 9, AD 2010

This post is dedicated to my beautiful wife Shannon. On Tuesday, she gave birth to our son, Benedict Michael. Do you know where she wanted me on Saturday? In Death Valley, watching LSU end Alabama’s dreams of a national title. It need not be said that I love my wife, very, very, very, very much.

With LSU’s glorious victory and TCU’s pasting of Utah in Salt Lake, the national title race has narrowed down considerably. The Big 12, with Oklahoma’s loss to the Aggies and the near loss by the Cornhuskers to freaking Iowa St., will almost certainly not send a team to the BCS title game. I imagine the same will also be true for the Big 10, though I suspect Ohio St. has the best chance of proving me wrong there. Still, the Big 10 will likely get 2 BCS bids, which is not too shabby.

To me, there are 5 teams in contention: Oregon, Auburn, TCU and Boise being the obvious, with LSU still an outside shots. For LSU, they’d need 2 out of the 3 of the Ducks, WarPlainsTigersEagleMen, or Horned Frogs to lose. I don’t think LSU needs Boise to lose. Before you call me a homer, look at the computer rankings. LSU is already above Boise in the computers and we have an opportunity to improve that ranking when we play Arkansas. The human polls may revolt against LSU if it gets close (b/c they really don’t like the idea of LSU playing for the title) but there are plausible scenarios where LSU makes it in-even if LSU doesn’t win the SEC. Of course, if LSU jumps Boise without winning the SEC, there will be a riot. While I expect Oregon to remain undefeated, the other three undefeated have at least one more test left. Auburn, a team weak against the pass, has to face AJ Green and Julio Jones (as well as possible Florida). Boise still has Nevada, and TCU has to avoid the let-down game against a San Diego St. that’s 7-2 and getting some votes in the polls. It ain’t over yet, and it’s so much fun!

This would all be simpler if the NCAA did its job and declared Cam Newton ineligible. Seriously, do you think he decided to not play for Dan Mullen b/c he was impressed with Gene Chizik’s record at Iowa St.? The whole thing stinks, and someone is going to get busted for it. It would be a tragedy if the NCAA waited to finish this investigation until it’s too late (i.e. after the SEC title game).

When on earth did the Big 10 decide to play like the PAC-10? I’m looking at you, Michigan & Illinois. At least the Big 10 has a bunch of bowl eligible teams. Speaking of teams that may not get into bowls, what happened to Texas? We knew it’d be a down year, but losses to Baylor, Iowa St. & Kansas St? At least Texas fans can watch their beloved Cow… oh. Same goes to Notre Dame. They have to win 2 out of 3 against the Utes, USC, and Army. While I’ll be rooting for them against the Utes and USC (yeah, this is the time of year where I root solely to hurt other teams in front of LSU. You do it too), if they don’t get in one perhaps may start considering an Obama curse. Since Notre Dame invited Obama, they haven’t been to a bowl.

Important games of the week:

San Diego St. v. TCU, Georgia v. Auburn, VT v. UNC, South Carolina v. Florida,

I may want to explain the VT v. UNC game. Boise’s big win is against VT; LSU has a win over UNC. If UNC beats VT, VT might fall from the rankings and UNC get in. While the humans may not care, the computers will, and LSU will get even stronger in the computers. Furthermore, a VT team with 3 losses, including the one to James Madison, isn’t going to motivate voters to support Boise. On the other hand, a VT team that goes through the ACC undefeated with only another loss that’s almost excusable (you’re an idiot scheduling a Sat. game after a Mon night game, even if it is James Madison) is a very strong win. Combined with wins against Nevada, Boise would have a very strong case to make it in if people start losing ahead of them.

Alright, let’s get to the rankings!

Continue reading...

19 Responses to TAC College Rankings: Week 10

  • I’m wondering if we’re about to see a shift in the balance of power in Texas. Aggies ranked. t.u. not. It was 15 years ago they ended our home field winning streak. And thus began our slide into mediocrity (at best). Is the balance shifting? I guess we’ll see.

    I was particularly impressed by the three goal line stands the Aggies had against the Sooners. That was great stuff. Ryan Tannehill… thank you very much.

  • Oh, and I want the games against Okie Lite and Mizzou back.

  • Important games of the week:

    Joe Pa going for win # 400 in the Horseshoe against the Buckeyes.

  • Oh, and my prediction is that Bama is going to shake things up in a couple of weeks by beating Auburn.

    While that will help LSU’s chances, it won’t be enough unless there’s a combination of losses from two of the other three teams ahead of them: Oregon, TCU, and Boise State.

  • Never mind. I guess Joe Pa won 400 this past weekend. For some reason I thought that was win # 399.

  • First off: Congratulations to you and your wife on the birth of your son. May God continue to bless you.

    About football: excellent commentary. I just want to gloat (a little). I picked the LSU win last week in the combox of the Week 9 rankings. Most people (certainly most outside Louisiana) thought ‘Bama was going to trounce the Tigers.

    Here’s another prediction: Cam Newton’s Heisman chances are done, even if an investigation clears him. No way voters are going to take a chance for a a Bush repeat.

    I really hope the NCAA finishes up the investigation in time for LSU to play in the SEC Championship. If the Tigers can get in the title game, they’ll beat any SEC East team, and get into the BCS National Championship game.

    Otherwise, it’ll be Sugar Bowl for LSU. If that’s the case, I think it’ll be Oregon vs TCU in the national championship because Auburn will lose to ‘Bama.

  • I’m wondering if we’re about to see a shift in the balance of power in Texas. Aggies ranked.

    A win over the Sooners is nice, but I think you have to beat UT first before discussing a shift. I do think the Aggies with the new Big 12(?) contract is in a good place to take advantage and make a run at their big brother.

    Joe Pa going for win # 400 in the Horseshoe against the Buckeyes.

    That’s a good game too. In the Big 10, every game is so important b/c everyone is so tight. I don’t quite buy Penn St. as being in a spot to challenge the Buckeyes though.

    While that will help LSU’s chances, it won’t be enough unless there’s a combination of losses from two of the other three teams ahead of them: Oregon, TCU, and Boise State.

    That may be true, though I think LSU could squeak by Boise as long as TCU also loses. Still, LSU certainly needs helps and it would certainly help if 3 out of the 4 (preferably those not Oregon) would lose.

    Here’s another prediction: Cam Newton’s Heisman chances are done, even if an investigation clears him. No way voters are going to take a chance for a a Bush repeat.

    I don’t know. They’re still giving him the nod with little mention of the scandal. If he loses and James in Oregon continues to shine (or Moore in Boise) then he’ll be in danger.

  • Otherwise, it’ll be Sugar Bowl for LSU. If that’s the case, I think it’ll be Oregon vs TCU in the national championship because Auburn will lose to ‘Bama.

    I have no problem with the Sugar Bowl. I’d like to play Boise St if we go. Show those Idaho people a good time and then show them a real football team 😉

  • “If the Tigers can get in the title game, they’ll beat any SEC East team, and get into the BCS National Championship game.”

    I disagree. By no means is LSU assured of a BCS berth should Oregon, Boise State, and TCU remain unbeaten. This is the year when I believe the pollsters will want to prove that the BCS system “works” by including one of the non-BCS schools in the championship.

    In my opinion, by virtue of their being the defending champs, Alabama was the only SEC team who could have run the table with 1 loss and still made it into the BCS Championship. That 2nd loss kills Alabama’s chances.

    Besides, LSU needs to watch out for the Hogs in that last game. Over the last 5 years, that game has been decided by a grand total of 13 points (that’s less than 3 points per game).

  • “I’d like to play Boise St if we go.”

    That’s the one team I would NOT want to play in a bowl game. There’s simply no upside to it. It’s like the poor guy who had to wrestle a girl in the state playoffs a couple of years ago. If you win, then people will say “Well of course you won. It’s Boise State.” But if you lose, it’s the same sort of shame Oklahoma faced when they lost to Boise State and Alabama faced with they lost to Utah.

    And Boise State seems to bring it in bowl games, so beating them is definitely not assured.

  • By no means is LSU assured of a BCS berth should Oregon, Boise State, and TCU remain unbeaten. This is the year when I believe the pollsters will want to prove that the BCS system “works” by including one of the non-BCS schools in the championship.

    I agree. The pollsters hate LSU and will need to have the same record as TCU, Oregon and Boise to jump them in the computer polls. The computers don’t care too much about Boise, and LSU may be able to stay close enough to Boise to jump them b/c of the computers. Still, LSU is an underdog here and needs plenty of help/chaos to make it in. However, don’t be surprised if LSU gets in and is the impetus for changes to the BCS system.

    If you win, then people will say “Well of course you won. It’s Boise State.”

    Not anymore, I don’t think. While beating them is not assured, I think it’s about time Boise got a real test in a BCS game.

  • A “real test” would include an offense that doesn’t rely on gimmicky game-time calls by the head coach.

    😉

    Seriously, LSU plays some awesome defense, but I’m still not sold on their offense. I could see Boise’s offense getting just enough production and making just enough big plays, with their defense getting just enough stops to pull off the upset. Actually WANTING to play Boise State is like playing with fire.

  • <i<The pollsters hate LSU and will need to have the same record as TCU, Oregon and Boise to jump them in the computer polls.

    I disagree. I think that the human voters recognize that LSU is playing in the hardest division in college football.

    Jay, I agree that LSU needs to watch out for Arkansas. I don’t at all think that LSU will have an easy time of it. Let’s not forget that the game will be in Arkansas. That’s why a win over Arkansas will be very convincing to voters.

    If LSU wins out – with a convincing win over Arkansas, then they’ll have more wins over ranked opponents than any other Div. 1 team (6). That counts for something.

    If their offense continues to come around, this is the right time to do it. Voters will recognize that the Tigers are peaking at the right moment.

    I don’t think that an 11-1 LSU can vault into the top 3 without winning the SEC Championship, but I think that voters will like them over Boise.

    It could also be wishful thinking.

    About Cameron Newton and the Heisman: If the NCAA comes out with a strongly-worded report that clears him of any wrong-doing, then he’ll be the winner.

    Other than that, and I think the prospect of taking it back a couple of years from now will have some voters looking at James, who would be a legitimate winner.

    (By the way: I love this blog. I think that it covers the widest ground, in the most depth, with the most authority. Keep up the good work.)

  • A “real test” would include an offense that doesn’t rely on gimmicky game-time calls by the head coach.

    Are you talking about Boise or LSU here? Think of a game between the two: there would be no punts!

    Seriously, LSU plays some awesome defense, but I’m still not sold on their offense.

    Then welcome to Baton Rouge! We’ll see if the Bama games marks a turn of the corner for LSU, but they need to turn the corner still.

    I think that the human voters recognize that LSU is playing in the hardest division in college football.

    But they think LSU has won by luck and gimmicks rather than by playing good football. Pat Forde still thinks Les has sold his soul to the devil-even after admitting Miles outcoached Saban.

  • Pat Forde still thinks Les has sold his soul to the devil.

    Well, Pat Forde is guilty of plaguarism, because that’s exactly what I told my dad – half-jokingly – after the Tenn. game.

  • A win over the Sooners is nice, but I think you have to beat UT first before discussing a shift. I do think the Aggies with the new Big 12(?) contract is in a good place to take advantage and make a run at their big brother.

    Seeing how they are playing, a win over t.u. is more than just a possibility. I see the Aggies getting two more wins (Baylor and t.u.). Beating Nebraska would be nice as well, but I’m not holding my breath.

  • Big Tex: That “Okie Light” team has now owned TAM for three years in a row! Are you sure you want more of that? And it will be four in a row next year with both Blackmon and Weedon returning. I know it wont stop the TAM faithful from getting big heads as usual.

  • I love the trash talking! However, David, you do assume Blackmon isn’t in jail next year.

    Any one have any thoughts on the latest news about Newton?

  • Yeah, I want them. Did you see the game we had against them when we were struggling with turnovers? It was handed to them on a silver platter and was within our reach.

Rep. Cao's Defeat

Thursday, November 4, AD 2010

If I said anything about the election in general, I’d probably be wrong. At about 9:17 pm, while everyone else was watching election returns, I was at the hospital, meeting 7 lb. 14.9 oz. little Benedict Denton (Luckily for you, I’m not one of those dads who posts absurd quantities of pictures of his irresistibly adorably cute son). So  I didn’t really give a damn about the election (though I did vote in it), nor did I glean much other than the GOP performed in the mid-range of everyone’s expectations, and that the coming of the Tea Party was overrated. The latter is all that really matters to me, as I expect it will have consequences for the GOP candidate in 2012 (sorry Palin). I’ll leave it to others to craft the results to fit nicely in their gradiose theories about the inevitable victory of their political persuasion.

The only race I did care about was Louisiana’s 2nd district in which La. Rep. Joseph Cao lost to Democrat Cedric Richmond. It was one of the bright spots of the Democrat’s night, but it was entirely expected as Cao only won two years ago b/c most of the Bill Jefferson’s voters didn’t know he hadn’t already won the election. Cao always was an odd-ball, with his significant votes coming in the healthcare debate. A Catholic who cared deeply about the opinion of the bishops, he voted for the healthcare bill with the Stupak language and then, recognizing that without abortion would be funded, changed his vote.

His votes made everyone uncomfortable. The Republicans didn’t like their unanimous front being broken. The Democrats didn’t like the stinging rebuke on their lies about abortion funding in the bill. In heavily Democratic 2nd district, Cao was almost certainly giving up any chance of re-election in order to vote for life.

It was no surprise that Cao received almost no national support, even from some “Catholic” organizations. What may be surprising is who came down hard opposing Cao: Pres. Barack Obama. Two years after promising to change the tone in Washington, Obama campaigned hard for a indisputably corrupt Democrat against the only bi-partisan Republican in Congress. Hope & Change? hardly.

This makes me question whether Americans are telling the truth when they claim they want a less partisan Congress. We say we’re tired of the stupid games, but we don’t support the candidates who fight to change that. I’m not talking here about RINOs or other candidates who lie through their teeth about their true positions. I have no problem giving them the boot. I’m talking about candidates who don’t like up perfectly with their parties but are honest about the differences. Candidates who are willing to work with those outside the party for the good of their constituencies, not those working to get a plug for the New York Times.

So if don’t want Cao, and we claim to not like the status quo, then what do we want?

Continue reading...

22 Responses to Rep. Cao's Defeat

  • Looking at the pictures, he is cute. Good thing he looks like his mom. 😉

    Congratulations!

  • Who says he doesn’t want Cao? I’d have no problem voting for him if he ran in my jurisdiction.

  • Of all the congressmen/women to lose their seats on Tuesday evening, no one deserved to retain their own more than Joe Cao 🙁

    He will be missed.

  • There should be room for Rep Cao in the GOP. If not perhaps it is time for a distinctly Catholic political movement; one faithful above all to our Magisterium. I don’t even agree with him on the Healthcare bill, questions of abortion notwithstanding, but I have no problem working with any conscientious Catholic whose faithfulness to the principles of Evangelium Vitae and all Catholic teaching is beyond question. Such I believe to be the case of Rep Cao, at least from what I know about his career.

  • I don’t think Cao’s loss reflects an attitude that he isn’t wanted. I think most conservatives and Republicans would love to have Cao still in that Congressional seat. That Cao received so little support is probably more than anything else a reflection of what donors thought of his chances to retain his seat vis-a-vis other more winnable races. Donors weren’t going to contribute to what they saw as a lost cause when other candidates needing money were running in races that seemed within reach.

    But because Cao was so unlikely to retain the seat anyway, that makes Obama’s insertion of himself into the race on behalf of Cao’s opponent all the more despicable. That’s how bipartisanship gets rewarded, I guess.

  • Cao voted for Obamacare. Maybe, the Republicans that voted against him thought that he was not willing to stand up against expanding government and reducing spending. These appear to be the current concerns in the Republican party as I see it.

  • So if don’t want Cao, and we claim to not like the status quo, then what do we want?

    Which [missing] ‘we’ did you have in mind? Most of ‘we’ do not reside in the 2d district of Louisiana. One account has it that the demographics of the district are as follows:

    30.2% White, 64.1% Black, 2.7% Asian, 3.8% Hispanic, 0.3% Native American, 0.2% other.

    Tough territory for a Republican.

  • Aww, congratulations!

  • But because Cao was so unlikely to retain the seat anyway, that makes Obama’s insertion of himself into the race on behalf of Cao’s opponent all the more despicable. That’s how bipartisanship gets rewarded, I guess.

    Maybe it’s just me, but I’m starting to suspect that the President’s claim that he wants to be a post-partisan leader who heals national divisions is somewhat less than whole-hearted.

  • Dale: I share your suspicisions. According to the President, it’s Obama’s way or the highway.

  • Congrats on the son Michael! I assure you that your world will never be the same again based upon my on-going adventure with my kids!

    In regard to Cao I think he has a bright political future if he wants it. He might be a tad liberal on some fiscal policies for many Repbublicans, but he more than makes up for that by his strong devotion to the pro-life cause and the various pokes in the eye that he gave to the North Vietnamese government while in office. He is bright and principled and both qualities show in his life. He should try running for statewide office in Louisiana.

  • Dale, I like the dry way in which you wrote your observations about Obama. It reminded me of Burke Breathed’s classic cartoon where Opus is watching professional wrestling and one of the groping gladiators hits his oppponent with a monkey wrench. Opus turns to the reader and says, “You know, I think this might be fixed!”

  • I was very, very disappointed that Cao did not win re-election. He is a sincere, conscientious Catholic. I’ve never heard of a Congressman going to Mass and praying before votes. I would have voted for him without blinking.

  • Cao continued his oddball antics by siding with the Log Cabin Republicans. I wish he hadn’t.

  • A Republican who seems to be Catholic first, Republican second. One of the only American statesman who doesn’t reinforce my gratitude that I don’t have to vote in your elections. Let us ask God for more such “oddballs.”

  • I get frustrated when people see Rep. Cao as truly pro-life. Being truly pro-life means being able to see beyond abortion. It means being able to understand how easy it is for socialism and communism to be slipped into the fabric of American Culture.

    I certainly did not like our Bishops misleading the Catholics in the US about the Health Care Vote. Simply saying, ” Call your representative to make sure abortion is not in the bill” was not enough. As a matter of fact, I think that position gave the Democrats a sort of blessing to force this health care bill into our livelihood.

    Rep. Cao should not have voted for the bill whether there was funding for abortion in it or not. These are principles we have to have ingrained in our hearts and minds. We should not promote the breakdown of our culture by encouraging the government to provide us with goods and services that majority do not want. That is why we have the Church to provide us with goods and services out of charity. This charity is what gives the world the sanity that it needs to keep going on. Let charity be from the bottom up, not from the top down.

    Unfortunate for Cao because he listened to the US Bishops.

  • Phillippus, Cao voted against final passage of Obamacare precisely because of his fear that it opened the door to public funding of abortion. Voting against the center piece of Obama’s legislative agenda was to sign one’s own political death warrant in Cao’s liberal district, but Cao, always a man of principal, cast that vote anyway.

  • Mr. McClarey,

    Perhaps I can say what I mean in other words. Anybody who voted for or supported the bill was doing so even after they knew it was a bill forcing Americans to buy a good and service. Furthermore, there were “death panels” provisions made in the bill that was clear to the supporters of the bill (even though they chose to ignore it because it sounds ridiculous to the common ear). What part of “Catholic” is voting for the bill? In my opinion, it is none.

    If the government wants to provide for people who are needy, ought they not try to work with independent groups such as charitable organizations and Churches to see what they can do from their own sides?

    There is a better approach than forcing the people to take on additional burdens and also ensuring that they don’t have a way out of it.

    I’ve got an idea, how about those people who want to support free health care for all ask the government to take the money out of their paychecks and let those people who truly have a moral problem with perpetuating the idea that the government should provide all, be left alone.

    If the state gives us such goods and services, then we have become the slaves of the state and will no longer seek to call on God for we will have forgotten Him.

    Cao is an honest man, but he was also honestly naive. He calls Obama his friend and was surprised that Obama campaigned for his opponent just before Tuesday’s elections.

  • Oh! I should also add that Health Care for All is as absurd an idea as Education for All.

    We wanted free public education. We have got it. And then now we are fighting a war with the state not to treat us as secular people. We want them to respect our Christian beliefs and not teach us about same-sex attraction as a normal way of life. We rip what we sow.

    In that same vein, when we call for free health care, are we not giving too much power to the state to determine how we want to be cared for when we fall into their hands?

    We burden a civil state with the responsibility of being our teachers, our doctors, our housing provider and our food provider.

  • I agree with much of what you say, but your attempt to make our prudential calculations Catholic orthodoxy is mistaken. There is no reason a good Catholic could not have favored ObamaCare if it had contained appropriate protections against abortion funding. Such support would be very mistaken in my view, but not incompatable with Church teaching as such.

  • I should have made clear that my previous message was directed toward Philippus.
    I am in complete agreement with Don.

  • Cao’s initial vote for ObamaCare put him on the skids, but he was bouncing back a bit until he opined that he wasn’t sure he’d vote for the GOP leader for Speaker – stating that he’d like to see what they’re platforms were before making such a choice. At that moment, he was finished because he opened up the prospect of actually voting for Nancy Pelosi for Speaker. It wasn’t lack of money – candidates with even less chance of winning than Cao took in bags of money (most notably Starr Parker in California who actually outspent her Democrat incumbent and was still blown out of the water) Yes, we want more genuine Catholics in office – but there has to be some political sense in there, some where. Cao simply didn’t have any.

    Unless we Catholics want to form a specifically Catholic political party – which would be suicidal – we’re going to have to adjust ourselves to the fact that the majority of those we work with won’t be Catholic. We still should and can become the largest political force in America and we must work diligently to implement as much of Catholic teaching as possible – but we also have to recognize that we won’t get it all, and that some times non-crucial things will have to take a back seat to the crucial. While some sort of national health care plan has been a desire of the Bishops for ages, the larger issue in ObamaCare wasn’t health care, but government control – including such things as eventually government control over Catholic hospitals, with the implications that they’d be force to provide birth control and abortions.

    We must help the poor; we must give a fair shake to all those illegals we de-facto invited in to the country; we want all sorts of things all sorts of Democrats will claim they are shooting for – but we must recognize the reality of what the Democrats are doing: using high minded principles as a cover for a naked power grab. And not just any, old power grab, but a power grab designed to implement the most anti-family, anti-Christian and anti-American policies imaginable. Given these circumstances, the default position of any Catholic to any Democrat proposal must be opposition and only if it is 100% clear that both intent and actuality are in accordance with Catholic teaching should we back a Democrat proposal.

TAC College Football Rankings

Tuesday, November 2, AD 2010

This week is Bama week for the rest of LSU, but it’s also Baby Denton week for me. TCU & Boise have their toughest conference tests so far this week.

In an interesting stat note, the SEC West has as many bowl-eligible teams as any other conference. If any SEC West team gets through with just one loss, they have to get in (though I expect LSU will have a harder time b/c of reputation than Bama or Auburn). All in all, the tests for the top teams are dwindling; most have only one or two tough games between them. 

Continue reading...

8 Responses to TAC College Football Rankings

22 Responses to Prayer Request

TAC NFL Rankings: Week 7

Tuesday, October 26, AD 2010

With Romo and Favre injured, we’re a Big Ben injury in the Superdome away from knocking out the axis of ESPN evil of NFL quarterbacks.

The NFC continues to be a mystery. The Saints dropped an ugly one to the Browns, yet still can make an argument to be the best team in the conference. I think the NFC will be decided by who gets hot at the end-and that’s anybody’s guess.

The AFC looks pretty stout, though the injuries to Clark and Collie that killed my previously beautiful fantasy team give the Colts something extra to worry about.

Again, Tito is honeymooning so no rankings from him. However, if you want crazy, I’m still ranking the Saints, so enjoy.

Continue reading...

6 Responses to TAC NFL Rankings: Week 7

  • I don’t get the love for the Giants as the best team in the NFC. They were a bounce on an onsides kick away from losing to the Cowboys. They had 4 turnovers in that game? The bizarre decision to be throwing the ball with an 18 point lead? I just don’t get why people are putting them in the Super Bowl. I can see the Falcons, but for the rest of the NFC there’s no reason to put anyone anywhere yet (except the Panthers as out of the playoffs-that’s pretty safe).

  • Michael,

    I’m 40-years-old, and I’ve loved and watched the Saints all that time. However, I just cant’ get behind the idea that the Saints “still can make an argument to be the best team in the conference.”

    Granted, the NFC is tremendously weak this year, but there are too many problems with the Saints. Brees is off; Thomas is out; Bush may or may not be ready to come back; the defense is like Swiss Cheese and can’t get the turnovers that saved their behinds last year.

    There is no “Best” team in the NFC.

    I wholeheartedly agree that the NFC will be won by the team that gets hot in the last 3-4 games going into the playoffs.

    As for the AFC: their teams are much better, but still no clear cut “Best” team. But, I like Pittsburgh’s chances the most.

  • the defense is like Swiss Cheese and can’t get the turnovers that saved their behinds last year.

    I don’t think that’s the case. Given the fact that our offense hasn’t been holding on to the ball as much, our defense has managed to keep the points to about 20. That’s not swiss cheese.

    As far the argument, I think the teams in the NFC that are good are: Saints, Falcons, Bucs, Giants, Eagles, and Redskins. I don’t buy anyone from the West, and the Packers are too weak in the North. Out of those 6, considering the Saints should have beaten two of them (Bucs & falcons, darn it Hartley), I think a case can be made. It’s not a great case, but there’s one. If the Saints can shock Pittsburgh, it’ll be a great case.

  • They were a bounce on an onsides kick away from losing to the Cowboys.

    I think they would have still required the Cowboys to actually score before just awarding them the win with a recovered onsides kick.

    Kidding aside, though the Giants did seem to do everything in their power to give the Boys the game at the end, the fact of the matter is that they rolled 500 yards and 41 points on the road against a good defensive team that was in a must-win situation. Right now the Giants offense is clicking on all cylinders with the best 3-receive tandem in the NFL, Bradshaw going crazy, and even a revitalized Jacobs. Oh, and they’re defense ain’t so bad either – just ask the 4 qbs they’ve knocked out.

    I’m not necessarily arguing that they’re ticket is punched for Dallas, especially after what happened just 2 years ago, but as of right now there is no team in the NFC playing as well on both sides of the ball. Atlanta has a good offense and a good defense, but the G-men have a better offense and a better defense.

    Just cut down on the turnovers.

  • Michael,

    I agree that if the Saints beat Pittsburgh, that will speak volumes about their ability to stay in the hunt the rest of the season. I have faith in Payton’s decision-making, and that Brees will improve.

    Also, I’ll have to retract what I said about our defense. They aren’t swiss cheese: I checked out the NFL stats page (to bolster my argument) and found out exactly the opposite of what I said.

    In fact, New Orleans is third in the league in total defense (even better than Pittsburgh!)

  • That was a very good performance by the Saints last night. It gives me great hope for the rest of the season.

    The defense was NOT swiss-cheese. They were formidable.

    Brees looked like he’s getting back on track.

    They’ll healthy the second half of the season.

    Things are looking good.

    Now, if only the Tigers can beat ‘Bama.

TAC College Rankings: Week 8

Monday, October 25, AD 2010

There are few reasons a baseball team’s logo leads this week’s post, not the least of which being the Rangers victory that knocked out the Yankees was the last worthwhile sports thing that happened for me this weekend. I had 7 and a half hours of hideously ugly football.

I digress a bit to express my hatred for CBS’s announcers Gary & Verne. Although I am pleased that they have found a replacement after Tim Tebow broke their hearts by both leaving the SEC and by not marrying them, I didn’t near to hear that much about Cam Newton. I’d say more, but this is a family blog. LSU fans now are clamoring for Bama tickets just so they don’t have to hear this duo ever again, and many across the SEC share our pain.

However, my purple and gold brethren were not alone in our pain. The Sooners lost their bid for a perfect season (As did their in-state rivals, but they barely beat The RajunBullCajundogs of ULL so it was to be expected). Texas lost to Iowa St.; Notre Dame got destroyed by Navy. Not a good weekend for most of the powerhouses.

With Texas’s & Oklahoma’s loss, unless Missouri dazzles it’s harder to see the Big 12 getting into the title game. Oregon’s destruction of UCLA makes the Texas win by Oklahoma less shiny (as does Air Force’s loss to TCU) and weakens the conference overall. If Auburn and Bama don’t lose again until the Iron Bowl, they will both have impressive resumes. The Big 10/1/2 has an undefeated Michigan St. team that has only a test against Iowa left to seriously challenge them. TCU also had an impressive victory over Air Force.

The Heisman looks to be Newton’s to lose, but if Auburn sleeps against either Ole Miss or Georgia, a loss could devastate their national title & Heisman hopes. While wins are nice, in a season like this sometimes the losses are more important.

Now to the rankings. No Tito this week, as he is presumably honeymooning in the blue fields of Idaho. Yet, we still have the bizarrest rankings yet. Enjoy.

Continue reading...

4 Responses to TAC College Rankings: Week 8

  • I couldn’t see the LSU-Auburn game; cable went out. I had to listen to Jim Hawthorne, “The Voice of the Tigers”, instead of Gary and Vern. Apparently, I was lucky.

    I’m going to pick LSU against ‘Bama already. LSU’s defense matches up much better against ‘Bama. (No one matches up with Newton.) And Miles – bittersweet that it is – always manages to come up with something.

    LSU will go 10-1 and get in a BCS game as a wildcard.

    Oregon vs Boise St. in the title game.

  • You were very lucky.

    LSU does match up better-but we match up best against Arkansas. Bama can still run, and we may be a little undersized on D such that we’ll have some trouble. The question is whether Lee can rebound and put in a good performance-and if our WRs can freaking catch. We can beat Bama.

  • Our D might be a little undersized, but I think their speed and strenght make up for that. Plus, I believe that there’s enough pride to make up the rest of the size deficit. Sheppard, Peters, Nevis, and company are going to want to make a statement after what Newton did.

  • Geaux Tigers!!

    LSU beats ‘Bama, 24-21.

    I called it. (Hey, let me gloat a little. I was totally wrong about the Saints the other day.)

    Once again, I didn’t get to see the LSU. This time I was giving a talk to Confirmation students, so I guess God gave me a gift for my sacrifice.

    As I climbed in my truck after Mass, I heard Jim Hawthorne say, “All the Tigers need is to tackle, and … They did it. LSU beats Alabama!”

    Such sweet words.

    My prediction stands. LSU goes 10-1 and goes to the Sugar Bowl.

Reading Between the Hats

Wednesday, October 20, AD 2010

Pope Benedict XVI has announced the 24 men who will become cardinals next month. There are two Americans in the group: Archbishop Burke of St. Louis and Archbishop Wuerl of Washington D.C.

It seems pretty clear that this is, in part, a stinging loss for those Catholics on the left who have attempted to deride Burke and other hardline Catholics on the abortion issue as being “out of touch with the Vatican.” Obviously, Burke’s viewpoints are not so distasteful and Calvinist to the Pope. Considering how vocal Burke has been on the issue, it would stretch credulity to think that the Pope did not think that Burke’s interpretation of the meaning of the abortion issue in the voting decision is an acceptable Catholic position.

However, with the appointment of Wuerl the pope seems to be suggesting that Burke’s position is not the only one. In a papacy that has confounded left and right, the pope does so again by elevating one of the more vocal bishops on determining withholding of communion on an individual basis in regards to pro-abortion politicians. Wuerl was however also extremely vocal in opposing DC’s move to same-sex marriage.

While neither “side” can claim victory with these two appointments, what has been defeated is the idea that the Vatican has a right answer. That the Vatican secretly disdains all these Republican voters or that the Pope wishes he could excommunicate everyone cannot be held except by the severest of ideologues. Instead, the Pope is sending a message that, as he did in Caritas in Veritate, he wants the different sides of the aisle in American to be dialoguing with each other and this debate, far from being an example of silly American politics, may be one that the rest of the world needs to be engaged in. So while neither side can claim victory, both sides seem to be encouraged in coming to the table to present their arguments.

Continue reading...

17 Responses to Reading Between the Hats

  • I think you’re right to an extent, Michael.

    But I’m not sure it actually represents some sort of “compromise” on whether those who publicly dissent from Church teaching on issues such as abortion, same-sex “marriage”, torture, etc. should be permitted to receive Communion. On matters of Canon Law, Abp. Burke is the expert, not Abp. Wuerl. The fact that not only does Abp. Burke serve as the Church’s chief canon lawyer but has now been raised to the status of Cardinal, in my mind, argues that someone in high places thinks Abp. Burke knows his Canon Law stuff.

    In addition, I don’t think Abp. Wuerl’s being raised to a Cardinal can necessarily be seen as a defeat for those on the so-called “right”; whereas Abp. Burke’s being raised to a Cardinal is a clear and resounding defeat for his detractors on the “left”.

  • I for one am ecstatic for both announcements. I don’t see this as any sort of mixed message. While Wuerl does take a less hard-line approach than some would want, his preaching has been consistent and clear throughout his tenure here in DC. I am very happy to see him finally get his red hat.

  • I should say that I’m very happy to see Abp. Wuerl get a red hat, as well. Somewhat surprised Abp. Dolan didn’t get one, though.

  • Somewhat surprised Abp. Dolan didn’t get one, though.

    Me, too.

  • Yeah, it’s not a mixed message but it’s not a clear endorsement of “Burke is right about excommunication.” Both bishops have been good in arguing in defense of life however.

    I too was surprised Dolan didn’t get a nod. Perhaps he is too new to his post?

  • Dolan did not get one for the reason many did not. That is technically a few of these American Sees as well as elsewhere have a Former Cardinal under the age of 80 and can still vote. Dolan should be up next year.

    I actually like Wuerl a lot. I think his stance during the recent DC debate on the gay issues and Church services was a strong one.

    Further he seesm to be taking care of business. Vocations are up, little by little CUA is gaining their Catholic ID again. I get the sense of a very Orthodox Archdiocese on the whole.

    Further having him as Cardinal will help even more the new Anglo Catholic structure that is coming on line that he is head of.

  • How old is Cdl. McCarrick? Is he already 75?

  • Sorry, 80, not 75, is the cutoff age for voting.

  • And McCarrick just turned 80 in July.

  • I think you are reading this too much through the prism of American politics; in reality, it was a bureacratic decision. McCarrick turned 80, making space for Wuerl. And Burke’s job typically comes with the red hat, like him or not.

    I was happiest with Abp. Marx of Munich, one of the leading authorities on Catholic social teaching. Marx has criticized the tendency of “reducing Christianity to religious ideology propping up the market economy” and had praised the German model of “a welfare state that works: insurance for the unemployed, benefits for those laid off, support for those with odd jobs, public health care.”

  • praised the German model of “a welfare state that works: insurance for the unemployed, benefits for those laid off, support for those with odd jobs, public health care

    The first two on the list have been provided by state governments in this country since the 1930s. The last has been provided by the state and federal governments since 1965. As for the 3d, perhaps one of our attorneys recalls when the Earned Income Tax Credit was enacted.

  • The Archdiocese of Washington is a diocese that is traditionally led by a Cardinal. It was just a matter of time that Archbishop Wuerl would receive the red hat.

    From his many years serving as bishop of his home Diocese of Pittsburgh, Cardinal-designate Wuerl was known as being very adept in dealing with all sorts of people from the most politically powerful to the captains of industry. He angered many in the Pittsburgh Diocese when certain old ethnic parishes that had declining membership and severe financial problems were closed, but those decisions were the right ones to make.

    On the other hand, Archbishop Wuerl was not known to be overly friendly to the Pittsburgh Latin Mass Community. He disappointed me when he gave permission for John Kerry, who is married to John Heinz’ widow, to receive Communion despite Kerry’s abortionist stance. Teresa Heinz inherited a vast sum from her late husband (but she is not in control of H. J. Heinz Company) and owns an estate in the north suburbs of Pittsburgh.

    Priestly vocations have struggled here during and after Cardinal-designate Wuerl was here, which is a little odd because Pittsburgh is one of the 20 biggest dioceses in the US (almost 800K Catholics).

    Pittsburgh will now have two representatives in the College of Cardinals. Cardinal DiNardo of Galveston-Houston is the other “yunzer” – he grew up in suburban Pittsburgh but was born in Steubenville, Ohio (36 miles from the Point).

    Congratulations to both Cardinal-designate Burke (whom I admire and respect greatly) and Cardinal-designate Wuerl.

  • Good man, Art! I am most gratified by your endorsement of the social democratic gains from the New Deal onwards. I am sure you are vigorously opposing the GOP attempt to cut unemployment benefits amidst the biggest economic slowdown since the Great Depression. And I am sure you support universal healthcare, though would you go as far as Cardinal Marx and call for public provision?

  • MM & Art:

    Nope. not here; not in my thread. You guys can go fight elsewhere.

    And Burke’s job typically comes with the red hat, like him or not.

    Yes, but that fact that Burke has the job + the hat shows that Burke’s views are not nearly as far-fetched to the Vatican and the Pope as some have suggested. While Burke’s appointment doesn’t mean the Pope agrees with Burke on everything, it gives his thoughts a little more credibility than many have given them.

  • The naming of cardinals is like the Roman Catholic version of Calvinball (would that make it deSalesball?). Everyone invents their own way of keeping score, and most people seem to win.

  • Cardinal Wuerl is a world-class catechist. Bravo and congratulations.

    I also like Cardinal Burke, and whatever else one makes of his appointment to Rome, he hardly seems to have been silenced by it.

    I imagine those recently appointed to sees which traditionally have cardinals will get them once their emeriti turn 80–Dolan, Vigneron, etc. Abp. Gomez will have the longest wait.

TAC NFL Rankings, Week 6

Tuesday, October 19, AD 2010

Parity continues to reign. We’re starting to get the idea that in the NFC, it’ll probably be an NFC South showdown between the Dirty Birds of Atlanta and the Saints who finally had an offensive breakthrough this week, and the Giants and Eagles playing spoilers. However, the AFC looks to be far beyond the NFC.

To the rankings!

Continue reading...

8 Responses to TAC NFL Rankings, Week 6

  • No love for my Jets? It is okay there will be payoff in AFC Championship game. As the Jets and Baltimore meet again. I don’t think the Steelers will be there…

  • No love for my Jets?

    I don’t know, ranking them 2nd seems like a decent amount of love.

    It is okay there will be payoff in AFC Championship game.

    I certainly hope so.

  • I think MJ is entering the ‘Tito CFB zone’ with his Ravens rating. The Ravens beat his #1 team (the Steelers) and his #2 team (the Jets), then took his #3 team (the Pats) to overtime on the road. And somehow they can’t crack the Top 10 at 4-2?

    Also how do wins against the Lions (awful), Panthers (even worse), Texans (mediocre), and Chicago (bad, but lucky so far) make the Giants a top 5 team?

  • I agree with John, Giants shouldn’t be on the list. Eagles should definitely be ahead of them on the list.

    Also, I definitely called it last week that the Steelers would be the new #1.

  • I think MJ is the great equalizer in my humble opinion!

    😉

  • I agree with John, Giants shouldn’t be on the list. Eagles should definitely be ahead of them on the list.

    With this year, it’s more a question of “who’s better?” The Eagles did thrash the Falcons (of which I am most appreciative, I assure you) but the rest of their wins aren’t great (Detroit Jack & San Fran) and they can’t pick a QB. I’m not sure you’re giving the Texans win enough credit; the Texans have been very formidable (it is the 1st half after all; second half choke is still 2 games away). Also in the Giants favor is that their losses (Colts & Titans) aren’t as bad as the Eagles’ (Pack & Washington). It’s close but I still put the Giants ahead.

    I think MJ is entering the ‘Tito CFB zone’ with his Ravens rating.

    Lol, I agree though I would not be surprised if I get a change of vote from him.

  • If you’re going by the criteria of who’s beaten who, then we probably couldn’t pick a top five let alone a top ten.

    I still gotta love Tito. When I saw that someone had actually put the Cardinals in the top ten – at number eight no less – I didn’t even have to look to know who put them there.

  • Ahh it’s always fun to talk football 🙂 Nice job guys 🙂

TAC Pro Rankings Week 5(Updated)

Friday, October 15, AD 2010

It’s Friday, so it’s our normally scheduled time for pro football rankings! Ok, this is a few days late, but I had a monstrous week.

That’s something almost all NFL teams have dealt with. Everyone know has a loss, and most of those losses weren’t pretty. A few teams are really plagued with injuries (Packers & Saints), a few teams look really overrated (Vikes & Cowgirls), and a few teams puzzle (Pats & Colts). Where this end up is anyone’s guess, as this is a year for parity. 

Continue reading...

4 Responses to TAC Pro Rankings Week 5(Updated)

  • I think it’s significant that after the top four we all varied so wildly in our rankings. Tells you all you need to know about how much flux there’s been this season.

  • As a fan of the AFC division, I’m happy to see that 6 of the 10 are AFC teams (including 4 in the top 5). We’ll see how Sunday/Monday changes the rankings, but I think Steelers will be back at #1 after the Ravens lose to Brady & the Patriots.

  • I think it’s significant that after the top four we all varied so wildly in our rankings. Tells you all you need to know about how much flux there’s been this season.

    Yeah, I put the Saints at 5 but have no justification really for it other than down the road I think they won’t be as bad as everyone else. This poll is very fluid after the top 4. I imagine the Bucs, who didn’t get a vote this week, may end up becoming #5 if they win this week. WHICH FOR THE LOVE OF GOD THEY BETTER NOT 😉

  • Sorry to go ot, but I had no idea we could “like” posts, nor that if you scrolled over a commenter’s photo you can see either their website or biographical info.

    Anyway, yeah, I might take the Bucs seriously if they win. And I’ll really have to tune out all sports radio if – shudder – the Redskins beat the Colts on Sunday night.