All That and a Bag of Mail: Titan Cheerleaders Honor Boobs
Published on: October 12, 2012 | Written by: Clay Travis
I hate the Steelers with the all-encompassing and penetrating fury of a thousand suns shining at once.
So, yeah, last night's Rob Bironas kick on the final play of the game was extremely gratifying.
26-23 Titans, bang.
The win was almost as gratifying as our beaver pelt traders of the week, the Tennessee Titan cheerleaders and their breast cancer awareness t-shirts.
What better way to show football fans how important protecting boobs is than by clothing some of the best boobs in America in tight pink t-shirts?
Yep, our beaver pelt traders of the week are the Titans cheerleaders, like Tiffany, who kindly posted this pic of the cheerleaders in their outfits.
(Props to Heidi, the blonde cheerleader on the far left. She's on our coed kickball team here in town.)
Now that you love boobs even more than you did before -- which you probably didn't even think was possible -- let's move on to All That and a Bag of Mail.
Chris McCrillis Tweets a question:
"In the spirit of debate season, could anything top Mrs. Chizik v. Mrs. Malzahn?"
It would be extraordinary.
I love the idea of what they might disagree on -- can you imagine them debating how to respond to Iranian nuclear goals -- but I might love their points of agreement even more.
Mrs. Chizik; "I think Mrs. Malzahn made a good point about how if mankind could live in peace with the dinosaurs then we should be able to live in peace in America today."
Mrs. Malzahn: "And your idea to have a flash mob for the Alabama game was genius. The devil won't know what hit him!"
Brendon Gordon @uselesssgrant Tweets:
"What would happen if Jefferson Pilot Sports covered the Presidential debates. How would they incorporate social media?"
Oh, man if there was a Southern SNL putting our old friends Dave Baker, Dave Neal, and Dave Rowe in charge of the presidential debates would be an amazing skit.
First, and this would definitely happen, at some point the camera would swing off the candidates and come to rest directly behind someone's head for about ten minutes. Second, the audio from the 1988 Ole Miss-Vandy game would inexplicably start playing midway through. Third, Dave Rowe would interrupt the candidates after three minutes and growl, "There's an upset in the making!"
Would anyone else pay to see Dave Rowe break down the electoral college map and explain how it works?
As for social media, the carrier pigeons they sent out to poll the electorate would not arrive back in time to include in the broadcast.
Brad Baker asks:
"Who is the most likely current SEC head coach to change schools within the conference after the season?"
I don't think this is very likely, but there's really only two coaches I could see even having the opportunity to do this -- Dan Mullen and James Franklin.
You can arrive at these two guys by process of elimination: Saban, Miles, Muschamp, Richt, Sumlin, and Spurrier aren't leaving their current jobs for another SEC job.
No one would take Joker, Dooley, John L. Smith, Pinkel, or Chizik. (Indeed four of these guys, all but Pinkel, may get fired at the end of the season.)
Hugh Freeze is too unproven.
That leaves us with Mullen and Franklin as the only options. Of the two Mullen is more proven, and Franklin needs to finish the final seven games strong to be desired by other schools. I told you before the season that I liked Mullen to win ten regular season games, something that State has never done in its history. If he pulls this off, Mullen will be an incredibly hot name again since he would have taken State to two New Year's Day bowl games in four years. That's unheard of for State. (When you consider a coach's job, it's important to consider the history of the program he's taken over, not just his overall record).
If Franklin, with his team now sitting at 2-3, finds a way to go at least 4-3 in his final seven -- which I think he has a good chance of doing -- he will have started at Vandy with back-to-back bowl seasons, something no one has ever done before at the school. Given how well Franklin has recruited, the Dores should be pretty good by year three. That would give him a chance to go to a bowl three straight years. At that point Franklin would be one of the hottest names in the coaching university. After two straight years of bowl games, he'd be hot as well, but if you don't see a job opening that you'd like to be at for the next ten years or so, why move? And would Auburn or Tennessee be those places? Because I'm pretty sure Arkansas and Kentucky wouldn't be.
So, having said all of this, I think Mullen is the only potential job changer in conference. And I don't think he'll get an offer at Tennessee or Auburn. If you don't get those offers, he's not leaving for Arkansas or Kentucky.
So I put low odds of any coaching move in conference.
Andy H writes:
"You are the AD at UGA. Do you keep the status quo of UGA being the best second-tier football program in the SEC, or overhaul the program in hopes of becoming an elite school?
Please keep in mind Georgia's history: we have only been truly "elite" for one three year period, from 1980-1982, and that was on the back of the greatest college running back of all-time, Herschel Walker. Why is that? With Georgia's talent base, money and facilities, what is keeping us from breaking through to that next level?"
I'm getting this question from a lot of Georgia fans in the wake of the debacle against South Carolina.
And there's no easy answer.
After 12 years I think it's pretty clear that Richt isn't going to win a national title at Georgia.
But it's also clear that Richt isn't going to completely submarine the program. Over his 11 years and counting Richt is 111-39. That's pretty damn good when you compare him with Ray Goff and Jim Donnan, but Richt's only won two SEC titles and the last of those came seven years ago.
So when do you take a risk on hiring someone new? Basically, how do you decide to toss aside good in a quest for great?
Because it's awfully easy to regress if you make the wrong hire. (See Vols, Tennessee.)
I agree with you that Georgia is an amazing job, but do you have confidence that you could definitely get someone better than Richt? I don't. So if I was a Georgia fan I'd be inclined to keep on keeping on and just hope that my team wouldn't tank in big games.
Which you know, inevitably, will happen.
I just don't think you can get rid of Richt right now.
By the way, if Georgia loses to Florida would this be the most disappointing 10-2 season in SEC history? I think so.
This ties in well with our next question.
"Would the Vols be in better/worse/same shape they are in now if hey had just kept Fulmer?"
The Vols would be in better shape if they'd kept Fulmer.
Let me tell you why.
In the final years of Fulmer there was a near mutiny when Fulmer got a guaranteed contract extension if he won eight games. Now the most ardent of the Dool-Aid drinkers would put up a statue to Dooley for managing eight wins in his third season.
That's because somewhere along the way, a false narrative has set in for Tennessee fans. I call it the Vol Lost Cause. Lane Kiffin planted the idea that no one could have come in and taken over the program because Fulmer left things in such bad shape.
It's just false.
In 2008 Tennessee had a very talented team and Fulmer made a disastrous decision to hire Dave Clawson to run the offense. John Chavis's top five defense couldn't deal with how bad the offense became. So Tennessee tanked, finishing 5-7. (Fulmer would have finished 6-6 if he hadn't been fired the week of the Wyoming game.)
Lane Kiffin arrived, ran off nearly 30 scholarship players, and won seven regular season games.
But the 2009 team was pretty good, Vegas favored them in nine regular season games. And Kiffin destroyed Georgia and South Carolina while also losing to an awful UCLA team and a mediocre Auburn team. Not to mention the pasting that Ole Miss put on Kiffin and co.
Six UT players were drafted in 2009, second only to Alabama in the SEC that year.
So the talent was pretty good when Kiffin took over.
Then Kiffin bolted, Dooley arrived, and there was still enough talent to be favored in six games in 2010. Dooley won six. Last year the Vols were favored in six games again. Dooley won five. This year the Vols have already been favored in four games -- and will be favored in at least four more -- so eight seems pretty reasonable.
Since Fulmer left the Vols are 21-22 over the past 43 games.
Fulmer went 152-52 in sixteen seasons.
He never had close to a stretch that bad.
Hell, in his final four seasons, the ones that drove Vol fans wild, Fulmer went 29-21, which was the worst 50 game stretch he ever had.
Eleven months before he was fired Tennessee had a fourth quarter lead on eventual national champion LSU in the SEC title game. Since Fulmer's firing John Chavis has proven that he's one of the top defensive coordinators in the game. Do you think the UT defense would have tanked under him?
How long is it going to take Tennessee to get back to Atlanta with Dooley? Will it ever happen?
So, to answer your question, there's really no doubt that Tennessee would be in better shape if it had never fired Fulmer. Hindsight is always clear, but is there any Vol fan who would have fired Fulmer if he or she had known the next four seasons the Vols would be 21-22 without a single bowl win?
Eric Timmerman asks:
"What percentage of SEC fans would trade a national championship for never seeing boobs again?"
Boobs are, by far, the number one body part draft pick for men.
I mean, by a substantial margin. There isn't a close second.
In fact, if you broke down the happiness level of the average man, like 19% of his overall happiness is directly correlated to boobs and/or cleavage. Men reading this are nodding right now. For instance, if a guy gets to take an elevator ride on his way to lunch and the girl in the elevator with him has great boobs, his happiness level soars just based on that limited boob interaction.
And he's not even seeing a bare breast then, just riding in the elevator with nice boobs.
Really, the boob is God's greatest creation for the propagation of the species. From the age of about nine until he dies, bare boobs never get old for men. Women reading this think I'm exaggerating for comedic effect. I am dead serious.
So this is a major hit to men. What you're really asking me to evaluate is boobs vs. football wins.
Next, I think you have to break this down by fan base. Because some fan bases are spoiled. Like Florida, Alabama, and LSU fans would never make this deal because they feel pretty good about their odds of getting a title again.
Hence why give up boobs?
You can probably eliminate Kentucky fans as well since they really only care about basketball. And they just won a title.
No way these four fan bases are giving up boobs.
Whereas Vandy, Ole Miss, Mississippi State, Arkansas, Missouri, South Carolina, and Arkansas are all hurting for titles. All of these fan bases truly doubt that they'll ever win a national title in their lifetimes.
Then you have Tennessee, Georgia, and Auburn fans, who think they'll win a title again, but might be willing to give up boobs for the guarantee.
Personally, there is no way I'm making this trade.
(There's also the wrinkle here, are you giving up sex too? Or do you have to have sex "Sex in the City" Carrie Bradshaw style, where she always wore her bra while having sex? Not exposing the boobs while having sex is like eating an ice cream sandwich with the wrapper on, it just makes no sense).
So I think a tiny percentage of men under the age of 50 are making this deal.
But if you're over the age of fifty and a fan of any SEC school but Florida, Bama, LSU or Kentucky, I think a minority would take the deal, like ten percent.
Boobs are nearly undefeated..
John Conger asks:
"Which program is in bigger trouble? Auburn or Arkansas?"
For this season, Auburn by far.
The Tigers are probably going 4-8 at best.
Arkansas still has a decent chance of making a bowl this year.
Going forward, Auburn has recruited better, but Arkansas will have guaranteed hope with a new coaching hire. If Auburn sticks with Chizik, then doomsday looms. But if Auburn fires Chizik and both Arkansas and Auburn are starting with new coaches for next year, I think Auburn rebounds faster because the overall Tiger talent is better.
One of the things I enjoyed most about last football season was #cbsdrink. Now living in a city with no friends or family, I would love the have the opportunity to drink with my internet friends. I also personally think the Carolina vs. LSU game is big enough to warrant its own rules.
Will you think about bringing it back?"
How old do you think I am?
I'm four years older than you, but in these four years I've already come around to the idea of a sugar momma. So I've aged quite a bit.
Apologies for not being on top of #cbsdrink. The problem this week is that South Carolina vs. LSU is on ESPN. Next week's game hasn't been selected yet, but I'll be on the road at LSU - A&M. So it might be hard for me to manage the drinking game. Especially since CBS still hasn't picked their game of choice.
But here's what I'll do, I guarantee a CBS drinking game next week no matter who is playing.
It's time to drink with Uncle Verne again.
Also, please poll old Sarasota retirees on whether they'd give up boobs for a title.
Even they're not giving this up, right?