‘Disgusted’: Readers not happy with players opting out of bowls
Editor’s note: Unfortunately, we don’t have room in the print edition for all of the great reader feedback we’re getting. For more of the letters, go to Dispatch.com. Have more comments, questions? Reach out to me at bwhite1@dispatch.com.
On opting out of bowl games
To the editor: I’m an OSU graduate from the ‘80s and completely disgusted with the selfishness of the four football players opting out of the Rose Bowl. What? Playing in the granddaddy of bowls isn’t worth your time without a national championship in play? I guess you should have done better against Michigan. The fans were disappointed also and still ready to cheer in Pasadena, but these selfish children are taking their “toys” and going home.
In the real world, one has to repay on obligations. These four self-focused individuals should be required to reimburse the university the full value of their scholarships so someone more deserving can enjoy an education. Chris Collings, Marion, Mass.
To Brian: As disconcerting as it is to learn that four players opted out of the Rose Bowl, it’s especially aggravating that the news comes 30 days after they last played a game and, I assume, have still been practicing. How many practice reps have they deprived players who still want to represent the university from having, which would have better prepared them for the game? Dennis Singleton, Dayton
To Dennis: Not much news comes out of top-secret OSU practices, but I’d think that the moment the players decided to sit out, their practice reps went to others.
On Ohio State-michigan
To the editor: I just have to comment on the recent letters from Robb Price and Robert Oyster regarding Michigan’s offensive line. If Michigan’s line holds so much, how was Georgia able to record four sacks and seven tackles for loss and stop Michigan’s powerful running game? Too bad the great John Madden passed away before the Michigan vs Georgia game. Do you think if Madden was still alive and healthy enough to watch the game, he would have changed his mind on who the greatest offensive line he ever saw? Ask Aidan Hutchison.
Don’t even get me started on Alabama’s offensive line. If you don’t believe me, ask Luke Fickell.
Tommy Hahlen, Dublin
On the College Football Playoff
Dear Mr. White: So, the fans are clamoring for a 12-team College Football Playoff, eh? To review the bidding, this year’s marque No. 1 vs. No. 12 first-round tilt would have ended up roughly Alabama 63, BYU 7; and the No. 2 vs. No. 11 clash would have come up pure Michigan: a Spartans v. Wolverines rematch — good for the state up north, bad for the remaining 49.
As the weeks plod on, mediocre to good quarterbacks will get hurt, giving way to transfer-portal-eyeing backups and “projects,” and the four-game grind to the summit can only increase the number of Nil-enriched opt-outs.
But the bottom line is: Do we really think the CFP organizers can scrounge up a dozen worthy teams when, to date, they’ve never been able to find four? Jon Armstrong, Columbus
To Jon: You’re correct about the No. 1 vs. No. 12 matchup being lopsided, but there would be plenty of interest in all of the others. I’m in favor of an eight-team playoff that should eliminate lopsided games.
On Kirk Herbstreit
To the editor: For my money, Kirk Herbstreit is the best football analyst on TV. However, commenting on OSU in the second quarter of the Rose Bowl game when Utah was gashing the Buckeyes, he made what has to be the dumbest statement of his TV career, something close to: “I don’t think missing five defensive starters is the problem.” Nelson French, Columbus
To Nelson: Not to be a Herbstreit apologist, which I’m not, but I believe he was saying the Ohio State defense had issues even at full strength. The Oregon and Michigan games showed that.
On bowl advertising
To Brian: Saturday at noon (Jan. 1), I settled into my favorite chair, in front of my big-screen TV, in my favorite room (aka man cave) to spend the entire day getting my fill of college football. The teams didn’t disappoint. All competed fiercely. But there was more on-screen competition between a green gecko lizard, a marching band and a couple of NFL quarterbacks wanting to make sure they got a better deal than I got.
They were all competing for my insurance business! They each kept running the same play over and over, and like any good defense I knew what was coming every time. They were all losing yardage with me.
Seems like if they really wanted my insurance business, they would stop spending money on TV ads and just lower the insurance premiums they want me to pay. I would see that as a touchdown!
Well, by halftime of the Sugar Bowl I was having trouble staying awake. I took care of that with a six-pack of Dr. Pepper.
Mark Palmer, Bexley
On sports on TV
To the editor: Wow, what a great day. I get to watch the Buckeyes in the Rose Bowl. NOT! That’s not until my wife gives me an early birthday present by signing up for a trial subscription to a cable network so we can watch the game.
It is a crying shame that this is the norm. And what about all of those folks who are not fortunate enough to be able to pay for cable? College football is big, big money, but it should not be an elitist’s game.
Yeah, I’m considered an old guy (i.e. 63), but I’m not old-thinking. I know my way around computers, cell phones, the latest apps and trends. I also know painting a piece of #$@* black and calling it a bowling ball doesn’t make it a bowling ball. It’s high time that our money-mongering society puts their fellow sports fans on equal ground. Let’s go back to the good ol’ days and enjoy what progress has prevented. Give me four channels and forget pay-to-play cable.
William H Brumfield, Columbus