« April 2011

June 2011 »

Archive : May 2011

May 19, 2011


I think the answer to that question is a resounding 'yes'.

Colin Cowherd made a point the other day that had me nodding in agreement.

Think about it. We're dealing with money here. Lots and lots and lots of money. Cold, hard cash. Who is better at dealing with money?

Owners? or young athletes (many of whom have come from poverty) who are suddenly given millions and cajillions of dollars and expected to know what to do with it and know how to deal with people that have lots of it and have had lots of it for a long time (see: Mike Tyson, Plaxico Burress, MC Hammer, etc)?

The scene is like a bunch of cocky middle school punks with sideways hats and sagging sweat pants walking into a Merrill Lynch, Manhattan board room with Donald Trump, Warren Buffet, John D. Rockefeller, King Tut, and Oprah sitting across the table.

Those guys don't have a chance. They couldn't convince that group to buy them some belts.

The owners will eventually get what they want. The players will play (because many of them don't want to do anything else). And we'll have a season.

Think about it.

If you're an NFL player who gets paid hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars to play football and you have the option of either not playing and going and getting a real job, or saying that you'll play two extra games and making some other concessions...what would you do?

That's right.

You'd shut up and play ball.

Do I think there should be 18 games? Heck no.

Do I think the owners are playing a little too hard-ball and asking a little too much? You bet.

But do I think the NFLPA has any better chance of winning this battle than I do of beating Lady Gaga in an arm wrestling match? Nope. She's strong...deal with it.

At the end of the day, we'll be watching football on September 11, 2011 (can't believe it's been 10 years) and the owners will be bathing in golden wash basins in pools of brand new Benjamins and drying off with copies of the "Players Demands" packets which will have found their way into the recycle bins by then.

  • mark rogers
  • May 19, 2011 4:07 PM


It was an historic draft last month for first-year, full-time head coach Jason Garrett and the owner of 22 years, Jerry Jones, in a few ways.

First of all, Jerry Jones has NEVER used the Cowboys first pick on an offensive lineman. Something the club did with the 8th overall pick when they chose the best lineman in the Pac-10 in 2010, Tyron Smith.

Also, only three times in Jerah's history have the Cowboys not made a single trade on draft day. The last time that happened? Bill Parcells first draft as head coach.

And finally, it's been a while since Dallas had such a disparity between offensive and defensive players in a draft (6 offensive, 2 defensive).

This coming one year after the Cowboys set a franchise record for points allowed and ranked in the mid-20s in total defense last year. Did this happen because Garrett is an offensive minded coach? Did we fail to answer big-time needs on the defensive side of the ball? Or did Dallas just pick the eight best players left on the board when it was their time to pick?

I guess time will tell. What the club does in the free agency market could also make up for the disparity. So I'm not too worried about it yet.

I am a big fan of the top defensive pick for Dallas this year. Bruce Carter is a converted safety and will play LB in the NFL. He's big (6-3, 233), fast (sideline to sideline speed) and had 207 more career tackles at UNC than I did at ACU. He tore his ACL in November which is probably why we even got him with our second pick. He'll recover from that and should make an impact on special teams immediately.

I also like the DeMarco Murray pick. If you've ever watched this kid play, you have been entertained...and if you say you haven't, that just means you hate OU.

Murray set OU career records for total touchdowns (only the 4th person in Big 12 history to score at least 60 TDs), points scored, kickoff return average, and all-purpose yardage, and he was hurt ALOT his first couple of years in crimson.

The good news is that he stayed healthy his senior year, but just imagine what he might have done to the record books without the injuries. The guy is a special talent and, if he can stay health (a-hem), he should be a serviceable back/kick-off returner.

I like the OL pick from Missouri State because the kid never missed a start in 4 years (44 games) which means he's pretty tough. I also like the Wisconsin O-lineman because of the type of offense Wisconsin runs. You have to be a man-child to play OL for that scheme.

Free agency should be interesting in light of all what's going on with the lockout. Players we may move or have to replace are Marc Colombo and Marion Barber.

Overall, I thought it was a well played, conservative draft.

OH...and the last time we didn't make a trade was 2003. Included in that draft? Terrence Newman, Jason Witten and Bradie James...and they added Romo in rookie free agency. Not a bad turnout...

Hopefully we'll be able to look back in seven or eight years and say the same thing about 2011 - or what I'm dubbing "The Year The Cowboys Returned to Greatness and Won the Super Bowl". Makes for a long t-shirt, but there are a lot of "big" Cowboys fans out there.

1st game is against the Jets on September 11.

  • mark rogers
  • May 19, 2011 3:49 PM

May 4, 2011


It certainly looks like that's the direction the ship is heading, but let's breakdown some key terms before we discuss.

Division 1 used to be broken into two classes: Division 1-A and Division 1-AA (referred to as "one-double-a"). Several years ago, the NCAA changed the parlance of their heirarchy and renamed them to FBS and FCS which stand for Football Bowl Subdivision and Football Championship Subdivision.

Football Bowl Subdivision is the division formerly known as "d1". It inluces the big boys: Texas, Alabama, Florida, OSU, Tech, etc.

Football Championship Subdivision is the division formerly known as "one-double-a". It includes the schools that you don't really hear of on a national stage unless one of them beats a ranked FBS school (aka Appalachian State over Michigan or James Madison over Virginia Tech) or a big name coach comes from the FCS ranks to big time success on the next level (aka Jim Tressel).

Soon after the change was made, no one had adopted the new terms. Everyone still says "d1" or "one-double-a" much to the NCAA's chagrin I'm sure. Oh well...worse things have happened to the NCAA - see "Cam Newton" "Reggie Bush" "Marcus Dupree" or "Ryan Leaf".

All that to say that if ACU does join the ranks of D1, it will be as a member of the FCS division. Pretty obvious, just want to be clear.

Committees, groups, pundits and just about everybody else has looked at three options for ACU: 1 - stay in D2, 2 - move down to D-3, and 3 - move up to FCS.

Option 2 would pretty much be an atmospheric move, so we can rule that one out.

Negatives of moving up revolve around a large "application" cost and the risk of losing the school's national prominence on the track and football stages which those programs enjoy right now.

If ACU goes up, they would join the Southland Conference and would have to undergo a 5-year transition period in which no sports could compete for a national championship.

The NCAA REALLY wants schools to be serious about the move. Thus the 1.4 million dollar "fee" and 5-year transition period.

The positives revolve around changes in how scholarships are awarded and divided, academic improvements, and an increase in visibility and prestige (which is huge for universities nowadays).

I didn't realize that Butler is about the same size as ACU as far as students and student-athletes. Butler is also similar in cost of tuition. All they've done is play for a national basketball championship the last two years.

Small schools can compete in some sports - everything but football unfortunately.

The ACU facilities already meet FCS standards so there would be no need to renovate or add anything that doesn't need to be renovated or added anyway (see "new track stadium" or "Elmer Gray is falling apart").

So will ACU move up? Only time will tell. The decision will likely be made sometime towards the end of the year.

I'm in favor of moving up. Now if we can just get all the naysayers to sit down.

  • mark rogers
  • May 4, 2011 4:37 PM