WEBVTT - BONUS: Midseason Q&A

0:00:02.040 --> 0:00:04.720
<v Speaker 1>Welcome to the solid verbal.

0:00:04.880 --> 0:00:05.600
<v Speaker 2>Ill that for me.

0:00:06.680 --> 0:00:09.680
<v Speaker 1>I'm a man, I'm forty. I've heard so many players say, well,

0:00:09.720 --> 0:00:11.640
<v Speaker 1>I want to be happy. You want to be happy

0:00:11.680 --> 0:00:13.640
<v Speaker 1>for day? Edith state is that?

0:00:13.720 --> 0:00:14.440
<v Speaker 3>Whoo whoom?

0:00:14.960 --> 0:00:19.120
<v Speaker 1>And Dan and Tye.

0:00:18.280 --> 0:00:21.239
<v Speaker 2>Welcome back to the solid verbe of boys and girls.

0:00:21.280 --> 0:00:25.599
<v Speaker 2>My name is ty That guy over there is Dan Rubinstein. Yeah,

0:00:25.640 --> 0:00:28.600
<v Speaker 2>this is a bonus verbal that you got tonight.

0:00:28.680 --> 0:00:29.600
<v Speaker 1>It's a Thursday.

0:00:30.000 --> 0:00:33.479
<v Speaker 2>We normally put a show out on a Wednesday. But

0:00:34.240 --> 0:00:36.000
<v Speaker 2>Dan Rubinstein, let's talk about this.

0:00:36.080 --> 0:00:38.360
<v Speaker 1>Why are we doing this? Q and A show? What's up?

0:00:39.400 --> 0:00:43.120
<v Speaker 3>We take our cues from the great Edward James Olomos,

0:00:43.640 --> 0:00:47.000
<v Speaker 3>who familiar with his filmography, Edward James Almos.

0:00:47.240 --> 0:00:51.640
<v Speaker 2>I'm familiar with Edward Norton, but ed you know Edward

0:00:51.760 --> 0:00:52.559
<v Speaker 2>James Almos.

0:00:52.720 --> 0:00:54.000
<v Speaker 1>I have no idea who that is.

0:00:54.360 --> 0:00:57.160
<v Speaker 3>Okay, So he starred in which I haven't seen. But

0:00:57.200 --> 0:00:59.920
<v Speaker 3>he was the star of Battlestar Galactica, which I'm sure

0:01:00.040 --> 0:01:00.440
<v Speaker 3>you've heard of.

0:01:00.440 --> 0:01:00.920
<v Speaker 1>I've heard of.

0:01:01.120 --> 0:01:04.680
<v Speaker 3>Yes, he was this, well, not the star but a

0:01:04.680 --> 0:01:07.920
<v Speaker 3>co star in La Bamba, the Richie Valens story.

0:01:08.120 --> 0:01:09.319
<v Speaker 1>Okay, yep, you.

0:01:09.280 --> 0:01:12.199
<v Speaker 3>Know Pada bay la La Bamba yep, yep, he is.

0:01:12.240 --> 0:01:14.959
<v Speaker 3>He is an esteemed actor I think, probably into his

0:01:15.040 --> 0:01:19.520
<v Speaker 3>seventies now, and he had a role which I would

0:01:19.560 --> 0:01:23.080
<v Speaker 3>I would venture to guess seventy one percent of kids

0:01:23.120 --> 0:01:26.319
<v Speaker 3>that grew up in southern California at some point we're

0:01:26.400 --> 0:01:30.640
<v Speaker 3>forced to watch this movie in school, probably in seventh

0:01:30.720 --> 0:01:34.560
<v Speaker 3>eighth grade, and the name of that film was Stand

0:01:34.600 --> 0:01:39.480
<v Speaker 3>and Deliver. And it's about an inner city teacher who tutors,

0:01:39.600 --> 0:01:42.679
<v Speaker 3>or not tutors, but teaches a bunch of kids who

0:01:42.720 --> 0:01:45.680
<v Speaker 3>nobody thought would amount to anything academically leads them to

0:01:46.000 --> 0:01:49.800
<v Speaker 3>big ap calculus. I want to say, scores, very inspiring,

0:01:49.920 --> 0:01:53.160
<v Speaker 3>deep plot right there. I want it's a deep plot.

0:01:53.400 --> 0:01:56.680
<v Speaker 3>It's great, it's inspiring. And we take our cues because

0:01:56.720 --> 0:02:00.760
<v Speaker 3>we now both of us stand and deliver. Okay, we're

0:02:00.760 --> 0:02:02.720
<v Speaker 3>both standing and we're delivering a bonus show.

0:02:02.800 --> 0:02:03.160
<v Speaker 1>Right here.

0:02:03.360 --> 0:02:07.800
<v Speaker 2>I am standing, I'm hopefully delivering. I mentioned this to

0:02:07.800 --> 0:02:10.880
<v Speaker 2>you before we hit record, but normally now I don't

0:02:10.919 --> 0:02:13.519
<v Speaker 2>know about you. Actually I do know about you because

0:02:13.520 --> 0:02:15.920
<v Speaker 2>we've been doing this for ten plus or you're feeling

0:02:15.960 --> 0:02:20.960
<v Speaker 2>twenty two. Yeah no, no, not going tailor swift with this, Okay,

0:02:21.320 --> 0:02:23.639
<v Speaker 2>I don't feel like you have much of a radio voice.

0:02:23.880 --> 0:02:27.079
<v Speaker 1>Per se. I feel I have the radio voice. Well

0:02:27.080 --> 0:02:28.200
<v Speaker 1>you have the radio voice.

0:02:28.240 --> 0:02:30.680
<v Speaker 2>But just in general, if you meet you, if you

0:02:31.000 --> 0:02:35.160
<v Speaker 2>interact with you outside of our podcasting setting, the way

0:02:35.160 --> 0:02:38.600
<v Speaker 2>that you talk, your cadence, all that stuff, it's kind

0:02:38.600 --> 0:02:43.040
<v Speaker 2>of one to one. There's not much, not much. There's

0:02:43.080 --> 0:02:45.679
<v Speaker 2>not an additional layer if you will.

0:02:45.720 --> 0:02:46.359
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, yeah, yeah.

0:02:46.360 --> 0:02:46.400
<v Speaker 3>No.

0:02:46.440 --> 0:02:48.680
<v Speaker 1>I'm what you see is what you get.

0:02:48.960 --> 0:02:51.120
<v Speaker 2>And I'm kind of like that for the most part.

0:02:51.360 --> 0:02:55.600
<v Speaker 2>I'm the same human and my sensibilities are the same.

0:02:56.000 --> 0:02:58.680
<v Speaker 2>But I do tend to project in a way when

0:02:58.720 --> 0:03:02.440
<v Speaker 2>I'm recording that I wouldn't normally project. Like if CYB

0:03:02.680 --> 0:03:05.839
<v Speaker 2>broadcast that's right, a solid wife Kate were here, she'd

0:03:05.880 --> 0:03:08.040
<v Speaker 2>be downstairs and she would hear me yelling.

0:03:08.560 --> 0:03:10.400
<v Speaker 1>I don't do that in real life. I'm not. I'm

0:03:10.440 --> 0:03:13.000
<v Speaker 1>not that loud, that boisterous of a person in real life.

0:03:13.040 --> 0:03:14.240
<v Speaker 1>So where I'm.

0:03:14.160 --> 0:03:18.600
<v Speaker 3>Gonna sit down for turkey sausages and say welcome to dinner, exactly,

0:03:18.680 --> 0:03:19.160
<v Speaker 3>don't do that.

0:03:19.240 --> 0:03:21.040
<v Speaker 1>I don't. I don't project in that manner.

0:03:21.639 --> 0:03:24.000
<v Speaker 2>So what I was thinking about in the way over here,

0:03:24.080 --> 0:03:26.120
<v Speaker 2>because it was a long day at the office, as

0:03:26.120 --> 0:03:29.040
<v Speaker 2>I'm sure so many of our listeners have experienced for

0:03:29.560 --> 0:03:34.079
<v Speaker 2>themselves long day at the office, a little, a little,

0:03:34.160 --> 0:03:38.280
<v Speaker 2>just worn down from the week. I am going to

0:03:38.360 --> 0:03:42.200
<v Speaker 2>do my best to go sans radio voice tonight, So

0:03:42.240 --> 0:03:46.880
<v Speaker 2>you're gonna get raw, unfiltered, unfettered tie right from the

0:03:46.920 --> 0:03:50.640
<v Speaker 2>cane plant tonight. I'm going to do my best to

0:03:50.760 --> 0:03:55.040
<v Speaker 2>not project and just give you as authentic inexperience as possible.

0:03:55.040 --> 0:03:58.120
<v Speaker 2>I'm not gonna edit anything out. This is gonna be

0:03:58.360 --> 0:04:01.040
<v Speaker 2>raw and unedited. Yeah, this is time I unplugged. Tie

0:04:01.200 --> 0:04:04.800
<v Speaker 2>after dark, verbal after dark. That's what you're gonna get

0:04:04.800 --> 0:04:07.560
<v Speaker 2>here this evening. And furthermore, we haven't done a Q

0:04:07.680 --> 0:04:09.200
<v Speaker 2>and A show in a while. We were doing these

0:04:09.240 --> 0:04:11.680
<v Speaker 2>once a month in the off season. Yeah, if only

0:04:11.680 --> 0:04:14.600
<v Speaker 2>because we had nothing else to talk about, and now

0:04:14.720 --> 0:04:16.400
<v Speaker 2>we had to grow up and mature and all that

0:04:16.480 --> 0:04:19.360
<v Speaker 2>and talk about real life college football stuff. But we

0:04:19.440 --> 0:04:22.840
<v Speaker 2>still do get the questions, and we just wanted to

0:04:22.880 --> 0:04:24.400
<v Speaker 2>get people a bonus show. Actually, they're going to be

0:04:24.480 --> 0:04:27.960
<v Speaker 2>multiple bonus shows coming at you, not just last week,

0:04:28.040 --> 0:04:30.440
<v Speaker 2>but in the weeks to come, and which we can

0:04:30.480 --> 0:04:33.760
<v Speaker 2>get into here in a little bit. But you were

0:04:33.839 --> 0:04:37.160
<v Speaker 2>kind enough to solicit questions from I saw a variety

0:04:37.160 --> 0:04:38.240
<v Speaker 2>of different platforms today.

0:04:38.279 --> 0:04:43.200
<v Speaker 3>Yes, yes, And this is like the asterisk to today's

0:04:43.240 --> 0:04:45.640
<v Speaker 3>and the rest of the season's bonus Q and A shows,

0:04:45.640 --> 0:04:47.800
<v Speaker 3>which I don't know how bonus they are for announcing them,

0:04:47.839 --> 0:04:51.040
<v Speaker 3>but I'm glad we are announcing them because people can

0:04:51.080 --> 0:04:54.279
<v Speaker 3>expect them and it holds us accountable. The questions that

0:04:54.320 --> 0:04:57.200
<v Speaker 3>we are answering are questions that have to do with

0:04:57.320 --> 0:05:00.799
<v Speaker 3>this season itself. It's a mid season Q which will

0:05:00.880 --> 0:05:05.159
<v Speaker 3>devolve into latter season Q and a's whatever. But we

0:05:05.240 --> 0:05:08.599
<v Speaker 3>got a lot of really excellent questions. But like, hey,

0:05:08.640 --> 0:05:12.000
<v Speaker 3>if you could be any kind of popcorn and you

0:05:12.320 --> 0:05:16.200
<v Speaker 3>and you had to be a popcorn eaten by SEC coaches,

0:05:17.160 --> 0:05:18.919
<v Speaker 3>we will save those.

0:05:19.279 --> 0:05:20.839
<v Speaker 1>The coach questions are the ones.

0:05:21.680 --> 0:05:23.720
<v Speaker 2>Those are the ones that we kind of strike I

0:05:23.760 --> 0:05:26.480
<v Speaker 2>think almost instinctively at this point.

0:05:27.000 --> 0:05:29.880
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, your hypothetical coach questions, We've we've gone a lot

0:05:29.920 --> 0:05:32.279
<v Speaker 3>of directions with those, but we've gotten a lot of

0:05:32.320 --> 0:05:34.200
<v Speaker 3>like I'm moving to a new city, what should I

0:05:34.320 --> 0:05:37.279
<v Speaker 3>do for dating and a new job and apartment. We're

0:05:37.279 --> 0:05:40.440
<v Speaker 3>happy to talk about those type of hypotheticals for us

0:05:40.520 --> 0:05:42.839
<v Speaker 3>and for the but we're going to save those, yeah,

0:05:42.880 --> 0:05:47.159
<v Speaker 3>like February or June. So we're going to attack the

0:05:47.200 --> 0:05:51.800
<v Speaker 3>most relevant to the middle of the season questions that

0:05:51.839 --> 0:05:55.600
<v Speaker 3>have been asked of us today and then also at

0:05:55.680 --> 0:05:58.479
<v Speaker 3>least this week and next week. Do you remember the

0:05:58.520 --> 0:06:01.320
<v Speaker 3>episode is a flashback episode The Simpsons where Homer was

0:06:01.360 --> 0:06:05.400
<v Speaker 3>climbing up to a clubhouse in a treehouse and they

0:06:05.440 --> 0:06:09.240
<v Speaker 3>said it's the No Homers Club. Yeah, yeah, ye, and

0:06:09.279 --> 0:06:12.040
<v Speaker 3>then there was already a Homer and it was no Homers.

0:06:12.400 --> 0:06:15.320
<v Speaker 3>We're doing an only Homer's Club segment at the end

0:06:15.320 --> 0:06:18.360
<v Speaker 3>of these episodes. Today we are going to be joined well,

0:06:18.360 --> 0:06:21.200
<v Speaker 3>I will be joined by Jeff Schwartz, and we are

0:06:21.200 --> 0:06:23.200
<v Speaker 3>going to nerd out about the organ season thus far.

0:06:23.880 --> 0:06:26.640
<v Speaker 3>If you don't want to listen to that, that's cool,

0:06:27.400 --> 0:06:29.680
<v Speaker 3>Just stop the episode and move on with your life.

0:06:30.000 --> 0:06:31.880
<v Speaker 3>Next week we'll be doing some Notre Dame with the

0:06:31.920 --> 0:06:35.800
<v Speaker 3>Notre Dame guests, and you're going to flex those muscles,

0:06:35.839 --> 0:06:39.680
<v Speaker 3>Tye that you've been yearning to stretch so many musya

0:06:40.839 --> 0:06:43.800
<v Speaker 3>and you know it is squat sober Tye. As you know,

0:06:44.000 --> 0:06:47.800
<v Speaker 3>sure coaches with the Scroolers skip leg day, yep, never

0:06:47.880 --> 0:06:50.400
<v Speaker 3>skip leg day, I have real sore standing and delivering

0:06:50.440 --> 0:06:52.159
<v Speaker 3>as we speak. So that's what we're going to do.

0:06:52.240 --> 0:06:54.240
<v Speaker 3>And I'm ready to dive in with some q's and

0:06:54.279 --> 0:06:55.000
<v Speaker 3>a's if you are.

0:06:55.120 --> 0:06:57.320
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, absolutely the one thing that I would ask though.

0:06:57.960 --> 0:06:59.919
<v Speaker 2>But I'm really going to try to hold true on

0:07:00.080 --> 0:07:01.839
<v Speaker 2>this no radio voice thing.

0:07:02.680 --> 0:07:03.080
<v Speaker 1>Mm hmm.

0:07:03.320 --> 0:07:07.000
<v Speaker 2>And you've known me for a long time again, independent

0:07:07.160 --> 0:07:10.040
<v Speaker 2>of the whole podcast thing. If ever, I, if ever

0:07:10.120 --> 0:07:12.800
<v Speaker 2>I slip into radio mode, I want you to just

0:07:12.840 --> 0:07:16.080
<v Speaker 2>go buzz or make some sort of noise, okay, so

0:07:16.080 --> 0:07:18.960
<v Speaker 2>then I can try get level set and kind of

0:07:19.000 --> 0:07:21.200
<v Speaker 2>come back into just normal time mode.

0:07:21.320 --> 0:07:21.640
<v Speaker 1>Okay.

0:07:22.560 --> 0:07:25.239
<v Speaker 3>I think the low point of your radio voice, neess

0:07:25.320 --> 0:07:27.640
<v Speaker 3>was when you told Mama h to follow you on

0:07:27.680 --> 0:07:31.480
<v Speaker 3>Facebook fancred Twitter. That was weird and she didn't know

0:07:31.480 --> 0:07:35.400
<v Speaker 3>what you were talking about. And we want the real tie.

0:07:35.480 --> 0:07:37.080
<v Speaker 3>You're gonna get the real tie tonight, all right. Just

0:07:37.080 --> 0:07:39.080
<v Speaker 3>make sure that I make sure that I stay true

0:07:39.120 --> 0:07:42.760
<v Speaker 3>to myself. Do you have our our Dave Letterman sound? Uh?

0:07:43.320 --> 0:07:47.320
<v Speaker 1>Hold on talk a little bit while I find it. Oh, okay, cool,

0:07:47.720 --> 0:07:48.920
<v Speaker 1>We've got a lot of good questions here.

0:07:48.960 --> 0:07:53.680
<v Speaker 3>We asked four questions from Twitter, Reddit, Facebook, and Soliverbaltgmail

0:07:53.720 --> 0:07:55.760
<v Speaker 3>dot com to which any of those you can always

0:07:55.840 --> 0:07:57.200
<v Speaker 3>send questions.

0:07:57.240 --> 0:07:58.920
<v Speaker 1>But we got a lot of good ones.

0:07:58.960 --> 0:08:03.320
<v Speaker 3>There's a couple of slightly off topic sub questions, but

0:08:03.440 --> 0:08:05.320
<v Speaker 3>I feel like we are we are really going to

0:08:05.400 --> 0:08:08.520
<v Speaker 3>hone in on stuff that is relevant to this season. Also,

0:08:08.720 --> 0:08:12.400
<v Speaker 3>Ty is drinking I believe sparkling water and tonight I

0:08:12.440 --> 0:08:15.760
<v Speaker 3>am drinking a ginger turmeric tea with a little bit

0:08:15.760 --> 0:08:17.640
<v Speaker 3>of honey. Okay, I got it. That is I found

0:08:17.880 --> 0:08:18.440
<v Speaker 3>my instrument.

0:08:18.560 --> 0:08:19.600
<v Speaker 1>Sorry, it took me so long.

0:08:19.640 --> 0:08:22.200
<v Speaker 3>I had to rebuild my sound welcome back. I was

0:08:22.240 --> 0:08:24.080
<v Speaker 3>talking about my tea. Here we go, Here we go.

0:08:25.120 --> 0:08:28.640
<v Speaker 2>Congratulations Skippy, you've got mail, You've got mail on the

0:08:28.760 --> 0:08:32.680
<v Speaker 2>solid rubal. That took a lot longer than expected because

0:08:32.760 --> 0:08:38.120
<v Speaker 2>my soundboard app crashed on Sunday morning. When everything else

0:08:38.160 --> 0:08:41.440
<v Speaker 2>crashed for us, so did the soundboard and I've had

0:08:41.480 --> 0:08:42.000
<v Speaker 2>to rebuild it.

0:08:42.000 --> 0:08:43.280
<v Speaker 1>So all the buttons aren't place yet.

0:08:43.320 --> 0:08:45.800
<v Speaker 2>But as often as we can here on the program,

0:08:45.840 --> 0:08:49.840
<v Speaker 2>we try to pay homage, homage.

0:08:49.320 --> 0:08:54.400
<v Speaker 1>To Harver Ballers and whatever questions come in. So here

0:08:54.400 --> 0:08:54.600
<v Speaker 1>we go.

0:08:54.679 --> 0:08:56.280
<v Speaker 3>That was a little radio voice. It was little radio

0:08:56.400 --> 0:08:57.960
<v Speaker 3>was it right there? I'm sorry, Yeah, a little bit,

0:08:58.320 --> 0:09:01.520
<v Speaker 3>It's okay. First question from Shoeless Sean. This is a

0:09:01.520 --> 0:09:04.520
<v Speaker 3>good entry point. How are you two doing? How are

0:09:04.520 --> 0:09:04.920
<v Speaker 3>we doing?

0:09:05.840 --> 0:09:06.920
<v Speaker 1>Yeah?

0:09:07.240 --> 0:09:10.800
<v Speaker 2>Like life as as a as an item or just independent?

0:09:11.120 --> 0:09:13.200
<v Speaker 1>What is this question? When someone says, how are interpret it?

0:09:13.360 --> 0:09:13.840
<v Speaker 1>Interpret it?

0:09:13.880 --> 0:09:14.120
<v Speaker 2>How you?

0:09:14.160 --> 0:09:15.760
<v Speaker 1>How you like? How are we doing?

0:09:15.840 --> 0:09:18.960
<v Speaker 3>Let's say how are we doing together? In conjunction, the

0:09:19.040 --> 0:09:21.319
<v Speaker 3>show is doing well? The show is doing well, the

0:09:21.360 --> 0:09:22.520
<v Speaker 3>show continues to grow.

0:09:24.440 --> 0:09:26.920
<v Speaker 2>I feel like, and maybe I can only speak for

0:09:27.000 --> 0:09:30.880
<v Speaker 2>me with this, but I feel like me personally and

0:09:31.000 --> 0:09:34.520
<v Speaker 2>us collectively, we've really been able to dial up our

0:09:34.559 --> 0:09:38.000
<v Speaker 2>personality and bring out more of who you and I

0:09:38.040 --> 0:09:39.800
<v Speaker 2>are just as college football fans. So I think we're

0:09:39.840 --> 0:09:42.280
<v Speaker 2>doing well, and the numbers would seemingly indicate that too.

0:09:43.200 --> 0:09:44.880
<v Speaker 3>Yeah. I think we're pinning our ears back and really

0:09:44.880 --> 0:09:52.320
<v Speaker 3>getting after it. I think we are. Shoeless Sean also says,

0:09:52.360 --> 0:09:56.640
<v Speaker 3>do you have any annual autumnal outings away from college

0:09:56.679 --> 0:09:58.760
<v Speaker 3>football season? As we enter into autumn and then we're

0:09:58.760 --> 0:10:01.600
<v Speaker 3>gonna I promise we're getting into colleg football topics. I

0:10:01.679 --> 0:10:06.200
<v Speaker 3>really don't. I'll take this one first. I outings. I

0:10:06.240 --> 0:10:09.520
<v Speaker 3>don't have any kids. I live across the country from

0:10:09.600 --> 0:10:13.800
<v Speaker 3>most of my family. So outings wise, it's just generally

0:10:13.880 --> 0:10:16.720
<v Speaker 3>with Jody with an eye and we keep it pretty simple.

0:10:16.880 --> 0:10:19.720
<v Speaker 3>We will go for walks. You know, we have Central

0:10:19.760 --> 0:10:22.319
<v Speaker 3>Park and Prospect Park obviously, so only a slim amount

0:10:22.360 --> 0:10:24.480
<v Speaker 3>of people can relate to that that are listening. But

0:10:24.960 --> 0:10:28.360
<v Speaker 3>I'm a big outdoors person walking running, you know, I'll

0:10:28.400 --> 0:10:30.680
<v Speaker 3>listen to a podcast while going for a walk. That's

0:10:30.880 --> 0:10:33.959
<v Speaker 3>I'll like a good crisp baar walk. So that's that's

0:10:34.000 --> 0:10:35.040
<v Speaker 3>all I can really offer.

0:10:35.640 --> 0:10:37.800
<v Speaker 1>Okay, Well, I have an outing coming up this weekend.

0:10:37.880 --> 0:10:40.400
<v Speaker 2>I talked about the five k that I'm going to

0:10:40.480 --> 0:10:44.240
<v Speaker 2>run right that I haven't trained for at all, and

0:10:44.320 --> 0:10:46.560
<v Speaker 2>some folks were asking, like, is it a costume five

0:10:46.640 --> 0:10:49.959
<v Speaker 2>k where you get to run as Captain America or No,

0:10:50.040 --> 0:10:52.840
<v Speaker 2>it's not. It's just a normal race over here in

0:10:52.880 --> 0:10:56.000
<v Speaker 2>Bethlehem that I do every year with my family.

0:10:55.720 --> 0:10:56.520
<v Speaker 1>Which would be cool.

0:10:57.760 --> 0:11:04.160
<v Speaker 2>It's also going to be ti Vember next month, my birthday. Yeah,

0:11:04.200 --> 0:11:07.160
<v Speaker 2>so that's sort of a yearly thing. But no, beyond

0:11:07.880 --> 0:11:09.880
<v Speaker 2>beyond the usual stuff, we got Trick or Treat Night

0:11:09.920 --> 0:11:11.439
<v Speaker 2>coming up. Do you guys do Trick or Treat Night?

0:11:12.760 --> 0:11:14.760
<v Speaker 3>Yeah? We actually just got an email in our building

0:11:14.800 --> 0:11:16.679
<v Speaker 3>to sign up because there are some kids in our

0:11:16.720 --> 0:11:20.200
<v Speaker 3>building to sign up so that they can knock on

0:11:20.200 --> 0:11:21.199
<v Speaker 3>the door and get some candy.

0:11:21.280 --> 0:11:23.120
<v Speaker 1>I think we're gonna go big with the candy. Yeah,

0:11:23.160 --> 0:11:24.760
<v Speaker 1>I was gonna ask you about that because.

0:11:24.520 --> 0:11:26.680
<v Speaker 3>I want to develop that reputation. I want to develop

0:11:26.679 --> 0:11:27.840
<v Speaker 3>the full size reputation.

0:11:28.160 --> 0:11:31.320
<v Speaker 2>I pulled an all time old man move a couple

0:11:31.440 --> 0:11:34.640
<v Speaker 2>months ago. Now, as it relates to Halloween.

0:11:34.240 --> 0:11:36.280
<v Speaker 3>Would you give away some walnuts?

0:11:36.320 --> 0:11:40.720
<v Speaker 2>No? I thought I probably told you about this, but

0:11:40.760 --> 0:11:41.480
<v Speaker 2>I guess they didn't.

0:11:41.559 --> 0:11:41.640
<v Speaker 1>What.

0:11:42.080 --> 0:11:44.720
<v Speaker 2>I was up at Wegman's and I saw and that

0:11:44.800 --> 0:11:49.560
<v Speaker 2>they were offering the big bags of kit Kats, and

0:11:49.600 --> 0:11:53.760
<v Speaker 2>I think the mini Snickers bars. They're offering some kind

0:11:53.760 --> 0:11:58.360
<v Speaker 2>of sale. And I saw this and I was thinking

0:11:58.400 --> 0:12:00.360
<v Speaker 2>back to last year where I didn't have any and

0:12:00.360 --> 0:12:01.640
<v Speaker 2>and I was just caught off guard and had to

0:12:01.720 --> 0:12:03.280
<v Speaker 2>run out and buy a bunch of stuff. And they

0:12:03.280 --> 0:12:04.880
<v Speaker 2>get you through the nose if you buy it late.

0:12:04.880 --> 0:12:05.960
<v Speaker 2>It's like Valentine's Day.

0:12:06.520 --> 0:12:07.160
<v Speaker 1>So I went.

0:12:07.600 --> 0:12:11.000
<v Speaker 2>I came home with like ten bags, ten deluxe bags

0:12:11.040 --> 0:12:14.719
<v Speaker 2>of candy because they were three dollars apiece. And I'm

0:12:14.760 --> 0:12:16.920
<v Speaker 2>not kidding. I did this at the end of like July,

0:12:17.880 --> 0:12:20.160
<v Speaker 2>and I came home and Kate said, what the hell

0:12:20.240 --> 0:12:20.440
<v Speaker 2>is that?

0:12:20.840 --> 0:12:21.679
<v Speaker 1>Why did you do this?

0:12:21.840 --> 0:12:24.000
<v Speaker 2>Oh? I guess for Halloween, just so we want to

0:12:24.040 --> 0:12:27.000
<v Speaker 2>be ready, And she's like, you do realize Halloween is

0:12:27.000 --> 0:12:30.199
<v Speaker 2>three and a half months away. And that kind of

0:12:30.240 --> 0:12:32.160
<v Speaker 2>dawned on me that maybe I was I was turning

0:12:32.160 --> 0:12:32.920
<v Speaker 2>into an old man.

0:12:32.840 --> 0:12:34.160
<v Speaker 1>At that point. But I am ready to go.

0:12:34.240 --> 0:12:37.120
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, we've got kit kats and we've got I believe

0:12:37.120 --> 0:12:39.079
<v Speaker 2>it's those Hershey's miniatures.

0:12:39.080 --> 0:12:40.800
<v Speaker 1>So we got a bunch of that ready to go.

0:12:41.000 --> 0:12:43.880
<v Speaker 3>Oh great call, all right, Derek wants to know. And

0:12:43.920 --> 0:12:45.880
<v Speaker 3>I'm going to give you some contenders here for you

0:12:45.920 --> 0:12:49.320
<v Speaker 3>to choose from. Okay, biggest surprise so far this year,

0:12:49.520 --> 0:12:53.120
<v Speaker 3>good and bad, and I'm going to I'm going to

0:12:53.320 --> 0:12:54.040
<v Speaker 3>weld this.

0:12:54.120 --> 0:12:55.160
<v Speaker 1>I'm going to bend it.

0:12:55.240 --> 0:12:58.440
<v Speaker 3>Hopefully it's a malleable enough interpretation, not just good and

0:12:58.480 --> 0:13:02.520
<v Speaker 3>bad but sort of disappointing bummers, really cool things. I'm

0:13:02.520 --> 0:13:05.080
<v Speaker 3>gonna give you some options here, all right, yep. So

0:13:05.200 --> 0:13:08.320
<v Speaker 3>these are the good, positive things that have been a

0:13:08.320 --> 0:13:13.320
<v Speaker 3>little bit unexpected. Hawaii six and one Cole McDonald's for

0:13:13.360 --> 0:13:15.840
<v Speaker 3>a ton of yards being already Bowl eligible after our

0:13:16.200 --> 0:13:20.720
<v Speaker 3>really low expectations, Colorado with a down couple of years,

0:13:20.720 --> 0:13:23.720
<v Speaker 3>but certainly surging even after the loss of the loss

0:13:23.760 --> 0:13:29.800
<v Speaker 3>to USC the magnitude of Tua's season, we figured he'd

0:13:29.800 --> 0:13:34.680
<v Speaker 3>be good, not world destroying. What Iowa has looked like

0:13:34.679 --> 0:13:37.800
<v Speaker 3>on offense recently, because we obviously have an immense amount

0:13:37.800 --> 0:13:39.040
<v Speaker 3>of loyalty to Nate Stanley.

0:13:39.120 --> 0:13:41.480
<v Speaker 2>I was told we're in at Iowa show now because

0:13:41.480 --> 0:13:43.280
<v Speaker 2>we haven't provided them two weeks running.

0:13:43.520 --> 0:13:45.920
<v Speaker 3>Is that still that's on you? You set up our

0:13:45.960 --> 0:13:46.480
<v Speaker 3>preview doc.

0:13:46.640 --> 0:13:48.480
<v Speaker 1>I did set up there. I'm you know what it is.

0:13:48.480 --> 0:13:51.520
<v Speaker 2>When we veered strong in the direction of NC State,

0:13:52.080 --> 0:13:53.520
<v Speaker 2>we veered away from Iowa.

0:13:53.559 --> 0:13:56.640
<v Speaker 1>We became pro anti Iowa on this program.

0:13:56.720 --> 0:13:59.160
<v Speaker 3>What's the It's there's some sort of law. Is in

0:13:59.240 --> 0:14:02.000
<v Speaker 3>Newton's law for every reaction, there's an equal and opposite.

0:14:02.000 --> 0:14:04.480
<v Speaker 1>I don't know that would be those two programs.

0:14:04.840 --> 0:14:09.040
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, Buffalo and how good their offense has looked in

0:14:09.080 --> 0:14:11.160
<v Speaker 3>a down year for the MAC Buffalo has looked strong.

0:14:11.320 --> 0:14:14.440
<v Speaker 3>And I would say Utah State, Utah State and the

0:14:14.440 --> 0:14:20.600
<v Speaker 3>Mountain West. There are other smaller situations within teams, within programs,

0:14:20.640 --> 0:14:23.600
<v Speaker 3>within conferences, whatever that are interesting in a positive way,

0:14:23.840 --> 0:14:25.840
<v Speaker 3>but those are the ones that I have in a

0:14:25.880 --> 0:14:26.600
<v Speaker 3>positive direction.

0:14:26.720 --> 0:14:29.920
<v Speaker 2>Well, so I would I would push back on the

0:14:29.960 --> 0:14:34.560
<v Speaker 2>to A thing because it might be a surprise the

0:14:34.600 --> 0:14:37.840
<v Speaker 2>heights to which Alabama's gone, but it's still to A

0:14:37.960 --> 0:14:41.880
<v Speaker 2>and it's still an incredible safety net for him playing

0:14:41.880 --> 0:14:43.960
<v Speaker 2>in that system, having all that talent around him, so

0:14:44.400 --> 0:14:47.040
<v Speaker 2>he could he could be even better than he is now,

0:14:47.040 --> 0:14:48.960
<v Speaker 2>and I'm not sure it would truly be a surprise,

0:14:49.400 --> 0:14:53.520
<v Speaker 2>not for me. And also on the Colorado front, I'm

0:14:53.560 --> 0:14:56.840
<v Speaker 2>afraid to say that we didn't expect great things from

0:14:56.840 --> 0:15:00.000
<v Speaker 2>Colorado because the angry free range Colorado hate that way

0:15:00.160 --> 0:15:04.480
<v Speaker 2>come away. That's true, as you know from reading the emails. Yeah,

0:15:04.520 --> 0:15:08.320
<v Speaker 2>I compostable. The answer for me is LSU because oh

0:15:08.520 --> 0:15:11.600
<v Speaker 2>good answer. When we did our ama on the subreddit

0:15:11.880 --> 0:15:14.600
<v Speaker 2>reddit dot com slash our slash solid verbal if you're

0:15:14.600 --> 0:15:17.720
<v Speaker 2>playing along at home, I think I said back then

0:15:17.800 --> 0:15:21.160
<v Speaker 2>that LSU is going to go seven and five and

0:15:21.840 --> 0:15:24.840
<v Speaker 2>Coacho was going to get fired. It's it's apparent to

0:15:24.880 --> 0:15:26.640
<v Speaker 2>me that that's not going to happen at this point.

0:15:26.720 --> 0:15:30.080
<v Speaker 2>LSU clearly having a really good year up to I

0:15:30.080 --> 0:15:33.720
<v Speaker 2>think fifth in the latest Top twenty five. Even if

0:15:33.720 --> 0:15:36.080
<v Speaker 2>they fall off from this point four, which I don't

0:15:36.080 --> 0:15:38.480
<v Speaker 2>think is going to happen, it's still is far going

0:15:38.480 --> 0:15:41.440
<v Speaker 2>to exceed those expectations. So for me, for me, I

0:15:41.480 --> 0:15:45.040
<v Speaker 2>think LSU is definitely the good surprise. The bad surprise

0:15:45.080 --> 0:15:47.320
<v Speaker 2>on the flip side. Also in the SEC would be Auburn.

0:15:48.200 --> 0:15:50.080
<v Speaker 2>And I'm not going to say I was the highest

0:15:50.080 --> 0:15:52.520
<v Speaker 2>in the world on Auburn, but for Auburn to be

0:15:52.720 --> 0:15:54.800
<v Speaker 2>at this breaking point now, it feels like they're at

0:15:54.800 --> 0:15:57.320
<v Speaker 2>a breaking point with this game this week again, so

0:15:57.360 --> 0:16:01.400
<v Speaker 2>old Miss I picked Old Miss outright, and I think

0:16:01.440 --> 0:16:04.560
<v Speaker 2>you went Auburn if memory served. I should know this

0:16:04.560 --> 0:16:06.080
<v Speaker 2>because we just did the show yesterday.

0:16:06.160 --> 0:16:07.440
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, I think I have Auburn winning.

0:16:07.520 --> 0:16:09.760
<v Speaker 2>Yeah. Yeah, But it just it feels like they're at

0:16:09.760 --> 0:16:12.960
<v Speaker 2>a breaking point. They have not gotten that rushing game

0:16:13.080 --> 0:16:16.280
<v Speaker 2>on track. Jared Stidham has definitely fallen short of at

0:16:16.360 --> 0:16:19.360
<v Speaker 2>least my expectations. So for me, they would be the

0:16:19.520 --> 0:16:21.840
<v Speaker 2>surprise on the bad side.

0:16:22.680 --> 0:16:25.760
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, losing to Tennessee will warp, will warp some minds,

0:16:25.800 --> 0:16:29.080
<v Speaker 3>this iteration of Tennessee, which I think Tennessee will be

0:16:29.280 --> 0:16:31.920
<v Speaker 3>a pretty good program with Jeremy Pruitt, but at this point,

0:16:32.000 --> 0:16:34.640
<v Speaker 3>losing that comfortably at home to Tennessee that gets people's

0:16:34.680 --> 0:16:38.880
<v Speaker 3>eyes popping open like saucers. The other contenders I have

0:16:38.960 --> 0:16:41.760
<v Speaker 3>here because I do obviously have Auburn there, and I

0:16:41.800 --> 0:16:43.480
<v Speaker 3>don't know if I'm fully bought in as Auburn. As

0:16:43.520 --> 0:16:47.040
<v Speaker 3>the disappointment, They're definitely disappointing, but their defense has you know,

0:16:47.040 --> 0:16:49.240
<v Speaker 3>when the offense hasn't totally let them down, They've looked

0:16:49.280 --> 0:16:51.880
<v Speaker 3>good for long stretches of this season. I would say

0:16:51.960 --> 0:16:56.480
<v Speaker 3>Wisconsin just with what their defenses look like Stanford and

0:16:56.520 --> 0:17:00.880
<v Speaker 3>that is, you know, a multi pronged explanation with losses

0:17:01.000 --> 0:17:04.119
<v Speaker 3>and Bryce Love just simply not being healthy enough to

0:17:04.200 --> 0:17:06.480
<v Speaker 3>really get there, the offensive line taking a step down.

0:17:06.560 --> 0:17:09.960
<v Speaker 3>Khalil Tate's health, I don't think anybody questions his ability,

0:17:10.440 --> 0:17:14.720
<v Speaker 3>but what Arizona has looked like with Khalil Tate sort

0:17:14.760 --> 0:17:18.040
<v Speaker 3>of just struggling to maintain health, what a pretty.

0:17:18.400 --> 0:17:22.439
<v Speaker 2>What about Kevin someone at Arizona? Yeah, I expected a

0:17:22.440 --> 0:17:25.800
<v Speaker 2>lot more on that front. I would also bolt on

0:17:26.040 --> 0:17:30.200
<v Speaker 2>Michigan State too. Michigan State of course beat Penn State.

0:17:30.440 --> 0:17:33.000
<v Speaker 2>They just went to Penn State, and I know, I know,

0:17:33.160 --> 0:17:36.359
<v Speaker 2>and maybe they're turning a corner. But wow, let's say

0:17:36.359 --> 0:17:39.520
<v Speaker 2>the first five games for Michigan State got me a

0:17:39.520 --> 0:17:40.240
<v Speaker 2>bit underwhelmed.

0:17:41.080 --> 0:17:43.159
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, and then they've worked through their own injury and

0:17:43.200 --> 0:17:45.960
<v Speaker 3>continue to work through their own injury issues. TCU's offense,

0:17:45.960 --> 0:17:48.960
<v Speaker 3>I think is pretty surprising that they haven't been able

0:17:49.000 --> 0:17:52.760
<v Speaker 3>to not even maintain but look somewhere in the neighborhood

0:17:52.760 --> 0:17:56.760
<v Speaker 3>of where they've been offensively with a new quarterback. Everything

0:17:56.760 --> 0:17:58.240
<v Speaker 3>about Louisville is my answer.

0:18:00.119 --> 0:18:03.240
<v Speaker 1>Or I mean, think about the perception of the ACC.

0:18:03.440 --> 0:18:07.560
<v Speaker 3>Right now, it's Clemson and some of Miami, and now

0:18:07.640 --> 0:18:10.639
<v Speaker 3>Miami is losing to Virginia, so it's basically Clemson and

0:18:10.680 --> 0:18:13.400
<v Speaker 3>hopefully they continue to look good with the true freshman quarterback.

0:18:13.760 --> 0:18:17.480
<v Speaker 3>That's not a great reputation. It's okay to have a

0:18:17.560 --> 0:18:20.280
<v Speaker 3>one great team and the rest if you're the Pac twelve.

0:18:20.880 --> 0:18:23.399
<v Speaker 3>But the ACC, and especially where the ACC has been

0:18:23.440 --> 0:18:25.840
<v Speaker 3>these past few years, really looking like one of the

0:18:25.880 --> 0:18:28.520
<v Speaker 3>deeper conferences, a really good slate of quarterbacks as recently

0:18:28.560 --> 0:18:30.640
<v Speaker 3>as a couple of years ago. I mean, the ACC

0:18:30.720 --> 0:18:33.920
<v Speaker 3>made Nate Peterman look good. That was fun, and now

0:18:33.920 --> 0:18:36.960
<v Speaker 3>he's a disaster. But think about our perception of the

0:18:37.000 --> 0:18:38.040
<v Speaker 3>ACC right now.

0:18:38.119 --> 0:18:40.520
<v Speaker 1>If Louisville were pretty good, if.

0:18:40.440 --> 0:18:42.919
<v Speaker 3>The defense definitely took a step back, but if Puma

0:18:42.920 --> 0:18:46.399
<v Speaker 3>pass had worked out and they were competitive and fun,

0:18:46.480 --> 0:18:49.920
<v Speaker 3>even if not a hugely winning team, you'd have Clemson, Louisville,

0:18:49.960 --> 0:18:52.320
<v Speaker 3>and maybe to a lesser extent, Virginia Tech and Miami.

0:18:52.480 --> 0:18:54.880
<v Speaker 2>I assume that you're not mentioning NC State because we're

0:18:55.240 --> 0:18:57.520
<v Speaker 2>just assumed to be an NC State podcast this point.

0:18:57.560 --> 0:18:59.040
<v Speaker 3>We are in NC State Park. How could you be

0:18:59.040 --> 0:19:00.240
<v Speaker 3>disappointed with NCACT eight?

0:19:01.000 --> 0:19:02.320
<v Speaker 1>All right, let's do another one.

0:19:03.400 --> 0:19:07.119
<v Speaker 3>So Louisville, Louisville cratering BBG. Can you rank the twenty

0:19:07.160 --> 0:19:08.879
<v Speaker 3>eighteen We've got a lot of people asking a similar

0:19:08.960 --> 0:19:13.200
<v Speaker 3>question the twenty eighteen coaching hires, coaching carousel hires.

0:19:13.400 --> 0:19:15.840
<v Speaker 1>Okay, so what's that. Well, we're not gonna want to

0:19:15.880 --> 0:19:16.920
<v Speaker 1>give you some names.

0:19:17.080 --> 0:19:18.760
<v Speaker 3>No, I'm just gonna give you some names, and I'm

0:19:18.760 --> 0:19:20.960
<v Speaker 3>gonna give you a head to head who you've been

0:19:21.040 --> 0:19:24.520
<v Speaker 3>more impressed with within the context of what they have

0:19:24.640 --> 0:19:28.240
<v Speaker 3>and what they've done and where they appear to be going. Okay, Okay,

0:19:29.080 --> 0:19:32.920
<v Speaker 3>Joe moorehead and Dan Mullen. You know those two programs

0:19:32.960 --> 0:19:33.800
<v Speaker 3>are related to.

0:19:34.520 --> 0:19:36.400
<v Speaker 2>Of course, you would put those two against each other,

0:19:36.520 --> 0:19:38.920
<v Speaker 2>of course, and they played each other.

0:19:39.160 --> 0:19:41.960
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, Well, Dan Mullen for me, is the answer.

0:19:42.359 --> 0:19:46.080
<v Speaker 2>And maybe maybe he's starting from a place where he

0:19:46.240 --> 0:19:51.000
<v Speaker 2>had more higher level talent, but there was definitely more

0:19:51.000 --> 0:19:54.200
<v Speaker 2>of a veteran presence for Joe Moorehead and it's taken

0:19:54.280 --> 0:19:55.960
<v Speaker 2>him a little bit to figure it out. I think

0:19:55.960 --> 0:19:57.800
<v Speaker 2>Mississippi State's going to be fine. They've got a big

0:19:57.840 --> 0:20:00.520
<v Speaker 2>game this weekend which we should find out obviously a

0:20:00.560 --> 0:20:03.800
<v Speaker 2>little bit more about the Bulldogs. But for me, I

0:20:03.880 --> 0:20:08.359
<v Speaker 2>just I feel like Dan Mullen has reinstated a sense

0:20:08.400 --> 0:20:11.560
<v Speaker 2>of hope at Florida and that's really what they were missing.

0:20:11.600 --> 0:20:15.960
<v Speaker 2>Felipe Franks has gotten better at quarterback. Yeah, I would

0:20:16.000 --> 0:20:18.879
<v Speaker 2>go Mullen, but Joe Morehead's doing a good job in

0:20:18.920 --> 0:20:19.880
<v Speaker 2>his own right too.

0:20:20.200 --> 0:20:22.359
<v Speaker 3>And that I mean this is, you know, potentially one

0:20:22.400 --> 0:20:24.200
<v Speaker 3>of the most important hires when you're a head coach

0:20:24.200 --> 0:20:27.119
<v Speaker 3>in the SEC. The Todd Grantham higher defensive coordinator has

0:20:27.200 --> 0:20:30.640
<v Speaker 3>looked very good earlier. So yes, I think Dan Mullen

0:20:30.640 --> 0:20:32.960
<v Speaker 3>has done a strong early job for the Gators. Chip

0:20:33.040 --> 0:20:34.639
<v Speaker 3>Kelly against Scott Frost.

0:20:35.280 --> 0:20:42.479
<v Speaker 2>Ooh, I guess I go Chip Kelly. Okay, at this point,

0:20:42.640 --> 0:20:43.800
<v Speaker 2>is it fair to go chip Kelly?

0:20:45.480 --> 0:20:46.120
<v Speaker 1>Uh?

0:20:46.240 --> 0:20:49.840
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, I would say the battle that he has is

0:20:50.000 --> 0:20:53.400
<v Speaker 3>probably a little more uphill because of the division he's

0:20:53.480 --> 0:20:57.720
<v Speaker 3>coaching in at the moment and just the the open

0:20:57.840 --> 0:21:02.800
<v Speaker 3>nature of it. But I like the high I like

0:21:02.840 --> 0:21:04.320
<v Speaker 3>the fit, I like the higher little bit more. The

0:21:04.320 --> 0:21:07.600
<v Speaker 3>thing I'd be worried about a little is recruiting seems

0:21:07.600 --> 0:21:09.800
<v Speaker 3>to be trending in a better direction for Scott Frost

0:21:09.800 --> 0:21:13.320
<v Speaker 3>and Nebraska then for Chip at UCLA. They have not

0:21:13.440 --> 0:21:15.960
<v Speaker 3>really brought in any big, big names. It's been a

0:21:15.960 --> 0:21:18.600
<v Speaker 3>sort of slow role for them. If you're looking into

0:21:18.600 --> 0:21:21.040
<v Speaker 3>the future. So I actually may go Frost here, I

0:21:21.320 --> 0:21:24.480
<v Speaker 3>may go really Frost. Well, yes, I think, I think

0:21:24.560 --> 0:21:27.840
<v Speaker 3>because he is on an ascension, whereas Chip Kelly isn't.

0:21:27.840 --> 0:21:31.439
<v Speaker 3>Necessarily I think I like that the idea of Scott

0:21:31.480 --> 0:21:33.080
<v Speaker 3>Frost shooting star a little bit better.

0:21:33.520 --> 0:21:35.240
<v Speaker 2>Okay, Yeah, I mean, I think you can make a

0:21:35.240 --> 0:21:37.280
<v Speaker 2>good case for both of them. I probably go Chip Kelly.

0:21:37.800 --> 0:21:40.840
<v Speaker 2>It just seems like they're figuring out the system and

0:21:41.480 --> 0:21:45.879
<v Speaker 2>UCLA within the context of a season. This season is

0:21:45.920 --> 0:21:49.000
<v Speaker 2>playing better, and if they do start to win, if

0:21:49.000 --> 0:21:51.119
<v Speaker 2>he can get more of his guy here at all

0:21:51.119 --> 0:21:53.439
<v Speaker 2>the time, right his guys, if you can get if

0:21:53.480 --> 0:21:55.679
<v Speaker 2>you can get his guys in there, I think we

0:21:55.720 --> 0:21:58.680
<v Speaker 2>could be in a position where, you know, Chip Kelly

0:21:59.280 --> 0:22:01.879
<v Speaker 2>wins a little sooner than expected at you Ceiling.

0:22:02.840 --> 0:22:04.400
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, I think the good news for both of those

0:22:04.400 --> 0:22:07.280
<v Speaker 3>that they have in common is incredibly promising true freshman

0:22:07.359 --> 0:22:10.400
<v Speaker 3>quarterbacks I've thrown into the fire. Yeah, and and there's

0:22:10.440 --> 0:22:13.560
<v Speaker 3>an encouraging situation with both. Finally, we'll end with this

0:22:13.720 --> 0:22:19.680
<v Speaker 3>had to head Jimbo Fisher yep, I'll indulge you. Mario

0:22:20.200 --> 0:22:23.400
<v Speaker 3>crystal Ball, how would you rank their performances?

0:22:24.800 --> 0:22:29.840
<v Speaker 2>I like, I like what Mario crystal Ball is doing

0:22:31.320 --> 0:22:34.480
<v Speaker 2>at Oregon. I like that he is trying to build

0:22:36.080 --> 0:22:39.840
<v Speaker 2>a physical presence up front, something that we talked about

0:22:39.840 --> 0:22:43.280
<v Speaker 2>on the show yesterday, how he's trying to get more physical.

0:22:43.920 --> 0:22:47.880
<v Speaker 3>And trust me, Jeff and I will momentarily okay.

0:22:48.640 --> 0:22:51.399
<v Speaker 2>So I think that I think that's an important step

0:22:51.480 --> 0:22:57.280
<v Speaker 2>that we knew was in crystal Ball's background, but maybe

0:22:57.280 --> 0:23:00.199
<v Speaker 2>didn't expect to see so soon at Oregon. So that

0:23:00.280 --> 0:23:04.679
<v Speaker 2>to me has had an outsided impact on how I

0:23:04.720 --> 0:23:08.120
<v Speaker 2>feel about this comparison. A and M scares me to death.

0:23:08.800 --> 0:23:13.240
<v Speaker 2>They scared me to death. But I think my answer

0:23:13.280 --> 0:23:18.960
<v Speaker 2>here would probably be crystaball by a hair because I'm

0:23:19.000 --> 0:23:24.080
<v Speaker 2>seeing things I didn't quite expect at Oregon. And on

0:23:24.160 --> 0:23:26.040
<v Speaker 2>the A and M side, it just A and M's

0:23:26.160 --> 0:23:29.280
<v Speaker 2>very good, really soon under Jimbo. It's clear that he's

0:23:29.320 --> 0:23:30.120
<v Speaker 2>having an impact.

0:23:30.920 --> 0:23:33.720
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, both inherited a good amount of talent on both sides.

0:23:33.840 --> 0:23:37.040
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, I just I feel like we should have seen

0:23:37.080 --> 0:23:39.720
<v Speaker 2>this all along at A and M. And it's just

0:23:39.840 --> 0:23:43.680
<v Speaker 2>taken Jimbo half a season here to assemble the parts

0:23:43.720 --> 0:23:45.879
<v Speaker 2>and get them playing the way that they should have

0:23:45.880 --> 0:23:48.240
<v Speaker 2>all along. Whereas Oregon, I didn't expect to see them

0:23:48.240 --> 0:23:49.360
<v Speaker 2>playing physical football.

0:23:51.119 --> 0:23:55.040
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, and I would I measured about crystal ball because

0:23:55.320 --> 0:23:59.800
<v Speaker 3>that Washington game was a probable Washington win. And so

0:24:00.960 --> 0:24:03.920
<v Speaker 3>I'm not fully ready to fully hop on board with

0:24:04.480 --> 0:24:07.240
<v Speaker 3>Oregon playoff contender, even though we got some questions about

0:24:07.280 --> 0:24:09.960
<v Speaker 3>that they're not a playoff contender. They're just not. I

0:24:10.080 --> 0:24:14.160
<v Speaker 3>watched every play of this team. They're not the case.

0:24:14.200 --> 0:24:17.280
<v Speaker 3>For Mario Cristabal, though, is both with what he's done early,

0:24:17.440 --> 0:24:22.520
<v Speaker 3>the level of competition that Oregon has beaten or almost beaten,

0:24:22.680 --> 0:24:26.080
<v Speaker 3>and the same kind of goes for Texts A and M.

0:24:26.119 --> 0:24:29.360
<v Speaker 3>With how competitive they were against Clemson, certainly not competitive

0:24:29.359 --> 0:24:32.720
<v Speaker 3>against Alabama. I'm a little higher on crystaball I think

0:24:32.840 --> 0:24:35.880
<v Speaker 3>right now, just because he doesn't have Alabama in his division,

0:24:36.160 --> 0:24:38.760
<v Speaker 3>just because he has already beaten the class of the division.

0:24:38.920 --> 0:24:41.719
<v Speaker 3>So within that context, I'm going crystal ball. But I

0:24:41.720 --> 0:24:44.600
<v Speaker 3>think Jimbo Fisher should have texts A and M threatening

0:24:44.600 --> 0:24:46.080
<v Speaker 3>double digits pretty consistently.

0:24:46.160 --> 0:24:48.359
<v Speaker 1>My only caveat if I could.

0:24:49.080 --> 0:24:52.160
<v Speaker 2>If Moregan loses this week against Wazoo, I'm gonna switch

0:24:52.240 --> 0:24:55.360
<v Speaker 2>my answer over to Okay, Jimbo Fisher.

0:24:55.520 --> 0:24:56.359
<v Speaker 1>You're upfront about it.

0:24:56.400 --> 0:25:00.359
<v Speaker 3>I respect that, all right, Tom f wants to say,

0:25:00.440 --> 0:25:03.119
<v Speaker 3>And no, LSU beats Alabama, so that'd be in a

0:25:03.200 --> 0:25:07.439
<v Speaker 3>couple of weeks and wins the SEC Championship, so presumably

0:25:07.440 --> 0:25:11.520
<v Speaker 3>over Florida or Georgia, Notre Dame in Clemson remain undefeated,

0:25:11.600 --> 0:25:15.520
<v Speaker 3>Clemson wins the ACC Championship, what scenario keeps BAMA out

0:25:15.840 --> 0:25:19.520
<v Speaker 3>of the playoff from there? So repeating the mode the

0:25:19.560 --> 0:25:22.600
<v Speaker 3>method by which they got into the playoff last year,

0:25:23.119 --> 0:25:24.800
<v Speaker 3>not winning division, getting into.

0:25:24.600 --> 0:25:29.359
<v Speaker 1>The final four. What would keep them out if they so?

0:25:29.600 --> 0:25:31.880
<v Speaker 3>Okay, so, in this scenario, I'm gonna give you, I'm

0:25:31.880 --> 0:25:34.639
<v Speaker 3>Sorry'm gonna give you a further baseline. LSU is in,

0:25:35.200 --> 0:25:38.760
<v Speaker 3>LSU is in the playoff, they win the s LSU, Right,

0:25:38.800 --> 0:25:43.399
<v Speaker 3>So LSU Notre Dame Clemson, LSU in with presumably one loss,

0:25:43.480 --> 0:25:47.120
<v Speaker 3>Notre Dame Clemson undefeated. Who is that fourth team that

0:25:47.280 --> 0:25:48.800
<v Speaker 3>keeps Alabama out?

0:25:49.040 --> 0:25:52.920
<v Speaker 2>Okay, Well, first off, I don't think there is one,

0:25:53.080 --> 0:25:54.600
<v Speaker 2>because I don't think the Big Twelve is getting a

0:25:54.600 --> 0:25:57.359
<v Speaker 2>team in. I don't think the Pac Twelves getting a

0:25:57.400 --> 0:26:00.720
<v Speaker 2>team in. I don't think the ACC is getting a

0:26:00.760 --> 0:26:02.879
<v Speaker 2>second team in there. I wouldn't even know who that

0:26:03.040 --> 0:26:07.880
<v Speaker 2>team would be. I think the only scenario that would

0:26:07.920 --> 0:26:12.720
<v Speaker 2>keep Alabama out would be another loss somewhere on the

0:26:12.760 --> 0:26:15.399
<v Speaker 2>schedule for Alabama. And I don't know if it's going

0:26:15.480 --> 0:26:20.600
<v Speaker 2>to be the week after against Mississippi State, if it's

0:26:20.600 --> 0:26:22.600
<v Speaker 2>gonna be the Iron Bowl the last week of the year.

0:26:22.680 --> 0:26:26.320
<v Speaker 2>But I think in a scenario where they've only got one,

0:26:26.320 --> 0:26:28.520
<v Speaker 2>you don't think an undefeated Ohio State would get in.

0:26:28.880 --> 0:26:32.680
<v Speaker 2>Forgetting Ohio State never mind, yeah, never mind, No Ohio

0:26:32.760 --> 0:26:33.880
<v Speaker 2>State would get in for sure.

0:26:34.240 --> 0:26:38.840
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, I would say undefeated Ohio State. I would say

0:26:38.960 --> 0:26:42.000
<v Speaker 3>if Michigan runs the table from here and potentially beats

0:26:42.000 --> 0:26:45.360
<v Speaker 3>Oklahoma twice, I totally forgot the Big Ten. That's that's

0:26:45.359 --> 0:26:47.600
<v Speaker 3>how long I know it's been. I know it's been

0:26:47.640 --> 0:26:48.080
<v Speaker 3>a long day.

0:26:48.160 --> 0:26:52.159
<v Speaker 2>I apologize, just redact strike everything from the record that

0:26:52.200 --> 0:26:52.640
<v Speaker 2>I just said.

0:26:52.680 --> 0:26:53.520
<v Speaker 1>I'm not editing it out.

0:26:53.520 --> 0:26:58.280
<v Speaker 3>Send Jim Delaney a telegram. I apologize. Best so undefeated

0:26:58.320 --> 0:27:01.440
<v Speaker 3>Ohio State. Yes, I don't think that's a question. I

0:27:01.440 --> 0:27:04.720
<v Speaker 3>don't think that's a serious question. If Ohio State runs

0:27:04.720 --> 0:27:08.800
<v Speaker 3>the table and beats Wisconsin or Iowa, I guess in

0:27:08.840 --> 0:27:11.560
<v Speaker 3>the Big Ten championship game, although not the most impressive,

0:27:12.040 --> 0:27:16.719
<v Speaker 3>they're taking care of business and they scheduled well. Texas

0:27:16.960 --> 0:27:19.680
<v Speaker 3>running the table, I don't think they will, but if

0:27:19.680 --> 0:27:23.600
<v Speaker 3>they do, it's a bad loss, but probably not. You

0:27:23.640 --> 0:27:26.560
<v Speaker 3>know what's worse. I guess getting murdered by Iowa like

0:27:26.600 --> 0:27:29.600
<v Speaker 3>Ohio State did last year, not getting in or losing

0:27:29.640 --> 0:27:31.920
<v Speaker 3>relatively close to a probably.

0:27:31.480 --> 0:27:34.399
<v Speaker 1>Average Maryland team. I don't know.

0:27:34.720 --> 0:27:39.600
<v Speaker 3>Beating Oklahoma twice is a pretty sizable feather. And then

0:27:39.640 --> 0:27:43.200
<v Speaker 3>I would say Michigan with as if Notre Name runs

0:27:43.240 --> 0:27:47.120
<v Speaker 3>a table and that's Michigan's only loss. That's as good

0:27:47.240 --> 0:27:51.360
<v Speaker 3>a loss as losing to LSU away from home, both

0:27:51.359 --> 0:27:54.760
<v Speaker 3>away from home, and that would then mean Michigan beats

0:27:54.760 --> 0:28:00.480
<v Speaker 3>Ohio State in Columbus, they've already beaten Wisconsin. They would

0:28:00.520 --> 0:28:04.200
<v Speaker 3>then have Michigan State wins and a Penn State win

0:28:04.720 --> 0:28:09.120
<v Speaker 3>and then you know again potentially over Wisconsin again and Iowa.

0:28:10.000 --> 0:28:13.360
<v Speaker 3>I would put Michigan in over Alabama not winning their division.

0:28:13.359 --> 0:28:15.880
<v Speaker 3>If Michigan were to win the Big Ten championship at

0:28:15.880 --> 0:28:16.720
<v Speaker 3>twelve and one.

0:28:16.720 --> 0:28:19.560
<v Speaker 2>If Alabama has one loss and doesn't win the SEC,

0:28:20.200 --> 0:28:21.760
<v Speaker 2>would you put them in over Notre Dame.

0:28:24.600 --> 0:28:27.840
<v Speaker 3>It to me at this point Notre Dame has a

0:28:27.880 --> 0:28:31.720
<v Speaker 3>style point responsibility to me. To my eyes, that mean

0:28:31.840 --> 0:28:36.720
<v Speaker 3>nothing to this process because Notre Dame has what Florida State,

0:28:36.800 --> 0:28:42.000
<v Speaker 3>Northwestern Navy, Syracuse and Yankee Stadium USC I might be

0:28:42.000 --> 0:28:46.680
<v Speaker 3>forgetting somebody, but especially after struggling with Pitt, who by

0:28:46.680 --> 0:28:51.240
<v Speaker 3>the way, is like fully in the ACC Coastal race

0:28:51.520 --> 0:28:55.400
<v Speaker 3>right at two and one, Notre Dame is they now

0:28:55.440 --> 0:28:58.400
<v Speaker 3>have a style point responsibility to me, and if they

0:28:58.800 --> 0:29:02.600
<v Speaker 3>play down consistently, I think pretty hard about it.

0:29:02.600 --> 0:29:04.960
<v Speaker 2>It's an interesting dilemma. I think that's the road the

0:29:05.440 --> 0:29:09.320
<v Speaker 2>conference champions. Yeah, I think that's the real dilemma here.

0:29:09.320 --> 0:29:11.640
<v Speaker 2>And I apologize to everyone for screwing that up. Believe me,

0:29:11.680 --> 0:29:15.200
<v Speaker 2>it has been a failure. Okay, you're good, But a

0:29:15.200 --> 0:29:18.040
<v Speaker 2>one lost Alabama against an undefeated Notre Dame, I think

0:29:18.120 --> 0:29:19.280
<v Speaker 2>is an interesting proposition.

0:29:19.480 --> 0:29:23.440
<v Speaker 1>I'm a Notre Dame fan. Everyone knows that Alabama. It's

0:29:23.440 --> 0:29:24.240
<v Speaker 1>a style point thing.

0:29:24.480 --> 0:29:26.200
<v Speaker 2>I don't know what it's a thing of. I think

0:29:26.240 --> 0:29:28.600
<v Speaker 2>Alabama is a better team. I think there's any denying

0:29:28.600 --> 0:29:31.160
<v Speaker 2>that Alabama's best team in the country. To leave them

0:29:31.280 --> 0:29:34.720
<v Speaker 2>out in favor of really any team, to me is

0:29:35.240 --> 0:29:38.240
<v Speaker 2>doing them a disservice because Alabama is so damn good.

0:29:38.680 --> 0:29:40.440
<v Speaker 2>You got to win the games in the schedule. That

0:29:40.600 --> 0:29:42.160
<v Speaker 2>is a system that we set up here. So if

0:29:42.200 --> 0:29:46.120
<v Speaker 2>they lose, and depending how badly they lose, is all hypothetical.

0:29:46.680 --> 0:29:48.480
<v Speaker 2>Of course, you can make a case for leaving them out,

0:29:48.520 --> 0:29:50.520
<v Speaker 2>but for me, that's a hard sell because I just

0:29:50.520 --> 0:29:52.120
<v Speaker 2>think they're the best team in the country. They're blowing

0:29:52.160 --> 0:29:55.120
<v Speaker 2>everyone out. These games have not even been competitive so far, but.

0:29:55.440 --> 0:29:57.560
<v Speaker 3>We got My favorite question is one we're not going

0:29:57.640 --> 0:29:59.800
<v Speaker 3>to answer, but it's related to that, to what you

0:30:00.360 --> 0:30:02.240
<v Speaker 3>and we just were talking about. And somebody asked about

0:30:02.240 --> 0:30:05.320
<v Speaker 3>Ian books NFL chances and that was my favorite thing.

0:30:05.840 --> 0:30:10.560
<v Speaker 1>Next topic. All right, here we go.

0:30:10.560 --> 0:30:13.480
<v Speaker 3>Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah bah. How

0:30:13.480 --> 0:30:15.320
<v Speaker 3>are we doing? We've already answered that question.

0:30:15.600 --> 0:30:16.280
<v Speaker 1>Okay, here we go.

0:30:17.200 --> 0:30:21.040
<v Speaker 3>This is from either copper Nick or maybe Copernicuss. It's

0:30:21.040 --> 0:30:23.400
<v Speaker 3>short for but Copper Nick.

0:30:23.520 --> 0:30:23.680
<v Speaker 1>Ten.

0:30:24.080 --> 0:30:25.880
<v Speaker 3>You must build a team that can beat Alabama. You

0:30:25.880 --> 0:30:28.360
<v Speaker 3>can use any player coach from any other team. Who

0:30:28.400 --> 0:30:31.840
<v Speaker 3>do you pick? And I will I will adjust this

0:30:31.920 --> 0:30:35.400
<v Speaker 3>question a little bit too. Last year, our power Richard

0:30:35.520 --> 0:30:38.640
<v Speaker 3>Johnson and I did this with specific units. If we're

0:30:38.640 --> 0:30:42.880
<v Speaker 3>going to build a super team to beat Alabama, where

0:30:42.920 --> 0:30:46.840
<v Speaker 3>would we go with said super team? I would go

0:30:47.040 --> 0:30:48.680
<v Speaker 3>this is me and I'll give you some time to

0:30:48.680 --> 0:30:49.960
<v Speaker 3>think about this tie.

0:30:50.320 --> 0:30:52.680
<v Speaker 1>I would go probably with Justin Herbert at quarterback.

0:30:53.600 --> 0:30:57.160
<v Speaker 3>I would go with the Wisconsin offensive line, and I'm

0:30:57.160 --> 0:30:59.640
<v Speaker 3>only I can't repeat any of these any of the

0:30:59.640 --> 0:31:03.000
<v Speaker 3>school I'd probably look at Ohio State at running back,

0:31:03.360 --> 0:31:06.480
<v Speaker 3>if not running back, receiver. And if I were to

0:31:06.480 --> 0:31:08.680
<v Speaker 3>go Ohio State at running back, I'll probably go Oklahoma

0:31:08.760 --> 0:31:12.120
<v Speaker 3>at receiver. Defensive line is Clemson. It's a pretty easy

0:31:12.120 --> 0:31:17.040
<v Speaker 3>call for me. Linebacker, I like Auburn's guys, I like

0:31:17.320 --> 0:31:22.640
<v Speaker 3>Washington's guys. I will probably go Auburn there. Defensive backs,

0:31:22.680 --> 0:31:25.120
<v Speaker 3>I'll I think I'm just gonna lock in LSU there

0:31:25.320 --> 0:31:28.320
<v Speaker 3>with Grant Delpit and Greedy Williams. I think that's my

0:31:28.440 --> 0:31:30.920
<v Speaker 3>answer if I'm gonna if I'm gonna go across the

0:31:31.160 --> 0:31:33.560
<v Speaker 3>major position groups, and it did hurt not to take

0:31:33.600 --> 0:31:36.040
<v Speaker 3>special teams with LSU and Cole Tracy, but I'm going

0:31:36.080 --> 0:31:37.680
<v Speaker 3>to leave that too open to interpretation.

0:31:38.160 --> 0:31:40.800
<v Speaker 1>I would go Trace McSorley and coach who would you

0:31:40.800 --> 0:31:41.640
<v Speaker 1>go with? Coach wise?

0:31:42.840 --> 0:31:47.320
<v Speaker 2>Uh, coach, can we bring Hugh Freeze out of retirement?

0:31:47.360 --> 0:31:50.440
<v Speaker 2>You seemed to have a lot of success against against Alabama.

0:31:50.440 --> 0:31:54.080
<v Speaker 1>It's a good answer. Trace McSorley is my answer. At quarterback.

0:31:54.720 --> 0:31:58.720
<v Speaker 2>He does enough okay with his legs and with his arm.

0:31:59.200 --> 0:32:01.160
<v Speaker 2>I think to cause it's you need a dual threat guy.

0:32:02.000 --> 0:32:05.120
<v Speaker 2>I would take Old Missus wide receivers because they're big

0:32:07.000 --> 0:32:08.000
<v Speaker 2>and very talented.

0:32:08.920 --> 0:32:09.440
<v Speaker 1>Mm hmmm.

0:32:09.840 --> 0:32:13.520
<v Speaker 3>Probably we've seen them against Alabama's defense backs well, we have.

0:32:13.720 --> 0:32:15.600
<v Speaker 3>But that's why I went away from Old Miss.

0:32:15.840 --> 0:32:21.160
<v Speaker 1>That's a good point. Who did you go with? Oklahoma's? Oklahoma?

0:32:21.680 --> 0:32:24.120
<v Speaker 1>I'm still gonna go, like Hollywood, give Old Miss another chance,

0:32:24.160 --> 0:32:27.440
<v Speaker 1>all right, okay go I agree with you running backs,

0:32:27.440 --> 0:32:28.080
<v Speaker 1>Ohio State.

0:32:29.440 --> 0:32:34.200
<v Speaker 2>We'll take Wisconsin offensive line sure, Clemson defensive line sure,

0:32:34.240 --> 0:32:35.160
<v Speaker 2>Auburn linebacker.

0:32:35.160 --> 0:32:35.880
<v Speaker 1>I agree with that.

0:32:36.240 --> 0:32:39.920
<v Speaker 2>I might go Michigan defensive backfield, very good on the

0:32:39.920 --> 0:32:43.200
<v Speaker 2>defensive backfield, very good defensive You could take Michigan's entire

0:32:43.240 --> 0:32:44.040
<v Speaker 2>defense if you want it.

0:32:44.200 --> 0:32:46.120
<v Speaker 3>I would take Yeah, I would take Michigan at linebacker

0:32:46.160 --> 0:32:47.400
<v Speaker 3>as well. I kind of forgot about that.

0:32:47.600 --> 0:32:50.400
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, but you can make you can make a case for.

0:32:51.960 --> 0:32:54.760
<v Speaker 2>A variety of different answers there on the defensive side.

0:32:55.040 --> 0:32:55.880
<v Speaker 1>Yeah. Okay.

0:32:56.240 --> 0:32:58.880
<v Speaker 3>Uh And so you coach wise, I hate your Trace

0:32:58.920 --> 0:33:00.840
<v Speaker 3>McSorley pick, by the way, I know alough you didn't.

0:33:00.840 --> 0:33:02.360
<v Speaker 1>You hate Trace McSorley just in general.

0:33:02.400 --> 0:33:04.280
<v Speaker 3>So I don't need Trace McSorley. I watched him play

0:33:04.280 --> 0:33:06.720
<v Speaker 3>against Michigan State last week and I was inking, Alabama

0:33:06.800 --> 0:33:10.240
<v Speaker 3>big game quarterback. Okay, big game quarterback. It was pretty

0:33:10.280 --> 0:33:18.320
<v Speaker 3>big game big game quarterback. Next question, we got a

0:33:18.360 --> 0:33:25.160
<v Speaker 3>couple of Iowa State questions. Let's go to how embarrassed

0:33:25.200 --> 0:33:27.520
<v Speaker 3>are all involved parties going to be when no one

0:33:27.560 --> 0:33:30.280
<v Speaker 3>sees Iowa State Texas because the game got exiled to

0:33:30.320 --> 0:33:33.760
<v Speaker 3>the Longhorn Network. I totally disagree with the premise of

0:33:33.800 --> 0:33:39.240
<v Speaker 3>this question. That's from Jacob. I loved watching Army Oklahoma

0:33:39.320 --> 0:33:43.400
<v Speaker 3>on an illegal stream. There was something, There's something very

0:33:43.520 --> 0:33:47.280
<v Speaker 3>bonding about everybody being in this same weird position and

0:33:47.320 --> 0:33:52.280
<v Speaker 3>having to go to Twitch or periscope or a weird

0:33:52.400 --> 0:33:56.040
<v Speaker 3>stream that's installing malware as you speak, as you watch

0:33:56.600 --> 0:34:01.080
<v Speaker 3>on your computer, that's tracking your every movement. And that's

0:34:01.120 --> 0:34:03.280
<v Speaker 3>how many of us. If this game is close, if

0:34:03.280 --> 0:34:05.560
<v Speaker 3>this game is interesting, if this game has stakes, are

0:34:05.600 --> 0:34:06.320
<v Speaker 3>going to watch.

0:34:06.520 --> 0:34:10.680
<v Speaker 1>It does give a feeling of mystery to it, doesn't it. Yeah?

0:34:11.239 --> 0:34:13.960
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, if a tree falls in a forest kind of element, Yeah,

0:34:14.120 --> 0:34:16.400
<v Speaker 3>it really happened. And this, by the way, was one

0:34:16.440 --> 0:34:18.640
<v Speaker 3>of the more interesting games last year. It was what

0:34:18.760 --> 0:34:22.880
<v Speaker 3>I think seventeen ten, seventeen seven Texas wins in ames.

0:34:22.920 --> 0:34:25.239
<v Speaker 3>That was the Jacob Park maybe the last Jacob Park

0:34:25.239 --> 0:34:29.440
<v Speaker 3>game for Iowa State. Wow and cut, thank you, Thank you,

0:34:29.719 --> 0:34:34.960
<v Speaker 3>and Iowa State's defense became weirdly influential. Everybody started running

0:34:35.000 --> 0:34:36.919
<v Speaker 3>a crazy dime in the Big twelve.

0:34:37.000 --> 0:34:39.319
<v Speaker 1>I like that. Jesse wants to know.

0:34:39.400 --> 0:34:43.120
<v Speaker 3>Has the fourteen playoff devalued the New Year six? It

0:34:43.200 --> 0:34:45.080
<v Speaker 3>used to be that making a New Year six game

0:34:45.360 --> 0:34:48.400
<v Speaker 3>was a huge accomplishment. Now it seems like a consolation prize.

0:34:49.080 --> 0:34:52.480
<v Speaker 1>I well, yes and no.

0:34:53.440 --> 0:34:57.680
<v Speaker 2>I think the BCS devalued, to be honest, I think

0:34:57.719 --> 0:35:00.000
<v Speaker 2>the BCS de valued the balls the second they moved

0:35:00.000 --> 0:35:05.680
<v Speaker 2>moved away from the old system where everyone would play

0:35:05.719 --> 0:35:09.279
<v Speaker 2>whatever Bowl matchups they ended up with, and then the

0:35:09.400 --> 0:35:12.520
<v Speaker 2>voters would decide who the champion was whenever they moved

0:35:12.520 --> 0:35:16.239
<v Speaker 2>away from that system, in which essentially.

0:35:15.880 --> 0:35:17.920
<v Speaker 1>Bowl games weren't.

0:35:17.480 --> 0:35:20.239
<v Speaker 2>Fully exhibition games the way they are now when they

0:35:20.280 --> 0:35:23.640
<v Speaker 2>moved away from that, and now to the current model.

0:35:23.360 --> 0:35:28.799
<v Speaker 1>Where we have a quote unquote true national championship game.

0:35:28.840 --> 0:35:31.960
<v Speaker 2>We did previously or tried to with the BCS, and

0:35:32.000 --> 0:35:35.080
<v Speaker 2>we do now obviously with the playoff system. Yeah, I

0:35:35.080 --> 0:35:38.200
<v Speaker 2>think by default the values those other games. I don't

0:35:38.200 --> 0:35:39.239
<v Speaker 2>think there's any way around it.

0:35:40.520 --> 0:35:44.319
<v Speaker 3>I remember loving New Year's Day so much more a

0:35:44.360 --> 0:35:48.720
<v Speaker 3>while ago, and it's hard to say more. Multiple things

0:35:48.760 --> 0:35:52.200
<v Speaker 3>aren't true. It's hard to say that. That was so

0:35:52.400 --> 0:35:54.920
<v Speaker 3>much more fun when that was all we knew and

0:35:54.960 --> 0:35:55.640
<v Speaker 3>all we had.

0:35:55.719 --> 0:35:56.279
<v Speaker 1>When you were.

0:35:56.200 --> 0:35:59.840
<v Speaker 3>Watching you know, Wisconsin, Stanford or you know whoever in

0:35:59.880 --> 0:36:02.200
<v Speaker 3>the Rose Bowl and you have a fun Sugar Bowl

0:36:02.320 --> 0:36:04.880
<v Speaker 3>and an Orange Bowl would be Florida State and somebody

0:36:04.960 --> 0:36:09.400
<v Speaker 3>Florida State Nebraska. There was that element of we're the

0:36:09.440 --> 0:36:14.120
<v Speaker 3>only sport that weirdly has five kind of four championship games,

0:36:14.200 --> 0:36:17.759
<v Speaker 3>six championship games. There was something that was cool about that.

0:36:18.000 --> 0:36:21.279
<v Speaker 3>Well in a very misleading way. Well yeah, no, So

0:36:21.400 --> 0:36:24.319
<v Speaker 3>I think there's two questions here. The question that Jesse

0:36:24.600 --> 0:36:28.279
<v Speaker 3>asked us is are those bowl games devalued? And I

0:36:28.280 --> 0:36:30.680
<v Speaker 3>think the answer is yes, if you're asking me if

0:36:30.719 --> 0:36:34.840
<v Speaker 3>New Year's Day as a football holiday has been devalued,

0:36:34.840 --> 0:36:37.319
<v Speaker 3>And that's a resounding guess. And I'm with you on

0:36:37.400 --> 0:36:37.960
<v Speaker 3>that front.

0:36:38.200 --> 0:36:40.560
<v Speaker 2>Whenever they got away from that old bottle where we

0:36:40.680 --> 0:36:42.719
<v Speaker 2>just had more games and it was more higher level

0:36:42.760 --> 0:36:46.040
<v Speaker 2>matchups that we could watch on New Year's Day, that

0:36:46.200 --> 0:36:48.600
<v Speaker 2>was the best. I love that as a kid. You

0:36:48.600 --> 0:36:50.520
<v Speaker 2>don't get that anymore. You have a couple hand you

0:36:50.600 --> 0:36:53.439
<v Speaker 2>have a handful of games that are spaced out. But yeah,

0:36:53.600 --> 0:36:55.799
<v Speaker 2>there used to be more games on New Year's Day,

0:36:55.800 --> 0:36:57.600
<v Speaker 2>and it was just a football palooza, kind of like

0:36:57.640 --> 0:37:01.120
<v Speaker 2>a college football Saturday, with really matchups that we wouldn't

0:37:01.120 --> 0:37:03.799
<v Speaker 2>have otherwise. That was fun And if there were any

0:37:03.800 --> 0:37:05.440
<v Speaker 2>way to get back to that, I'd be all for it.

0:37:06.760 --> 0:37:10.560
<v Speaker 3>There was something, I swear, I'm going to try my

0:37:10.600 --> 0:37:12.960
<v Speaker 3>best not to get gross here. Tie not gross, but

0:37:13.160 --> 0:37:17.879
<v Speaker 3>you know, deeply sexual. There was something when spreading all

0:37:17.920 --> 0:37:21.000
<v Speaker 3>of those games around like that and knowing that was it,

0:37:21.040 --> 0:37:25.759
<v Speaker 3>that's all we had. There was something about it just

0:37:26.000 --> 0:37:30.160
<v Speaker 3>being I'm really trying hard not to be gross, so

0:37:30.480 --> 0:37:33.040
<v Speaker 3>I'm not going to be. All I'm gonna say is

0:37:33.680 --> 0:37:35.719
<v Speaker 3>as it relates to the playoff, I think the fore

0:37:35.800 --> 0:37:38.759
<v Speaker 3>play may be better than the main event. Okay, I

0:37:38.800 --> 0:37:43.239
<v Speaker 3>don't look forward to the playoff like I do trying to.

0:37:43.400 --> 0:37:46.920
<v Speaker 3>I don't look forward to the actual playoff itself as

0:37:47.000 --> 0:37:49.719
<v Speaker 3>much as I like seeing it all sort out in

0:37:49.760 --> 0:37:52.680
<v Speaker 3>the coming in the weeks leading up to it. Yeah,

0:37:53.239 --> 0:37:56.560
<v Speaker 3>the playoff is not a fun experience right now. No, Well,

0:37:56.600 --> 0:37:58.360
<v Speaker 3>I mean, and part of that is the inevitability of

0:37:58.400 --> 0:38:01.200
<v Speaker 3>Alabama and teams like Ohio and Clemson being there more

0:38:01.239 --> 0:38:03.959
<v Speaker 3>often than not, So there is there's nothing really fun,

0:38:04.000 --> 0:38:06.200
<v Speaker 3>whereas like the Rose Bull you have like Washington Purdue

0:38:06.200 --> 0:38:08.799
<v Speaker 3>one year, I really love the Rose Bowl. So okay,

0:38:09.000 --> 0:38:10.439
<v Speaker 3>that's where I stand right now.

0:38:10.520 --> 0:38:12.359
<v Speaker 1>All right, we'll go where are we going next? Here?

0:38:14.080 --> 0:38:20.080
<v Speaker 3>Let's go to Jason Horvath wants to know what must

0:38:20.080 --> 0:38:25.920
<v Speaker 3>Michigan do to beat Ohio State? Well, so what is

0:38:25.920 --> 0:38:28.760
<v Speaker 3>our state of the mid season with Ohio State and Michigan.

0:38:29.400 --> 0:38:33.360
<v Speaker 2>We talked about Ohio State's defense a little bit on

0:38:33.400 --> 0:38:38.800
<v Speaker 2>the show yesterday, and even on Sunday they're given up points.

0:38:38.920 --> 0:38:44.360
<v Speaker 2>They're not as impenetrable as we've seen in recent years,

0:38:44.400 --> 0:38:47.000
<v Speaker 2>probably as they could be this year. It seems like

0:38:47.040 --> 0:38:48.760
<v Speaker 2>that's a real tendency and that's part of the reason

0:38:48.760 --> 0:38:51.799
<v Speaker 2>why Purdue is only like a two touchdown dog at

0:38:51.800 --> 0:38:54.560
<v Speaker 2>home because they score points, and you can put up

0:38:54.600 --> 0:38:57.319
<v Speaker 2>points against Ohio States. So I think what Michigan has

0:38:57.360 --> 0:39:00.360
<v Speaker 2>to do is, first off, they need to control clock

0:39:00.520 --> 0:39:03.640
<v Speaker 2>because Ohio State, with Dwayne Haskins and all of their

0:39:03.680 --> 0:39:06.040
<v Speaker 2>weapons on offense, they can strike you pretty darn quick.

0:39:08.160 --> 0:39:10.439
<v Speaker 1>Michigan needs to control the clock. With their rushing game.

0:39:11.120 --> 0:39:13.279
<v Speaker 2>We know they like to run the ball and at

0:39:13.320 --> 0:39:17.000
<v Speaker 2>Shaye Patterson needs to avoid turnovers. Quite frankly, I think

0:39:17.000 --> 0:39:19.360
<v Speaker 2>there is that streak in him where he tries to

0:39:19.360 --> 0:39:22.040
<v Speaker 2>make something out of nothing. He needs to not do that,

0:39:22.120 --> 0:39:23.960
<v Speaker 2>and the defense needs to find a way to distrup

0:39:24.040 --> 0:39:26.680
<v Speaker 2>Dwayne Haskins. I don't know if the formula to beat

0:39:26.680 --> 0:39:29.360
<v Speaker 2>Ohio State is as complex as it has been in

0:39:29.400 --> 0:39:32.560
<v Speaker 2>previous years. Lord knows, they still have the talent, but

0:39:32.800 --> 0:39:34.920
<v Speaker 2>I think whatever, you've got such a high level defense

0:39:34.960 --> 0:39:37.880
<v Speaker 2>the way Michigan does this year and an offense that

0:39:37.920 --> 0:39:41.279
<v Speaker 2>does seem to be improving, the calculus isn't quite as

0:39:42.040 --> 0:39:44.320
<v Speaker 2>isn't quite as complicated now. They just need to play

0:39:44.560 --> 0:39:46.600
<v Speaker 2>their best game of the year, which is no small task,

0:39:47.239 --> 0:39:49.839
<v Speaker 2>and they need to shut down certain assets, and they

0:39:49.880 --> 0:39:52.000
<v Speaker 2>need to shut down certain aspects of that Ohio State

0:39:52.040 --> 0:39:53.959
<v Speaker 2>offense to really give themselves a puncher's chance.

0:39:55.239 --> 0:39:57.879
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, I think Michigan can play them pretty much head

0:39:57.960 --> 0:39:59.719
<v Speaker 3>up on defense. I don't think they need to do

0:39:59.719 --> 0:40:01.600
<v Speaker 3>any thing. I don't think it's that complex.

0:40:01.680 --> 0:40:03.560
<v Speaker 1>I just they need to play really solidly.

0:40:04.520 --> 0:40:06.279
<v Speaker 3>Yes, I think they have the talent on all three

0:40:06.360 --> 0:40:08.640
<v Speaker 3>levels that they just play their own game and they're

0:40:08.640 --> 0:40:10.160
<v Speaker 3>in a good place. The game is in Columbus, which

0:40:10.200 --> 0:40:14.000
<v Speaker 3>will post an incredible challenge Offensively, I think that's where

0:40:14.000 --> 0:40:19.240
<v Speaker 3>everything is for Michigan because keeping this defense well rested

0:40:19.320 --> 0:40:22.600
<v Speaker 3>is huge, and if they're able to generate some bigger

0:40:22.600 --> 0:40:25.600
<v Speaker 3>plays on the ground with Chris Evans and Karan Higdon

0:40:26.040 --> 0:40:30.160
<v Speaker 3>and Shaye Patterson continues to sort of evolve within the

0:40:30.239 --> 0:40:33.560
<v Speaker 3>Jim Harbaugh Pep Hamilton offense, if they're able to get

0:40:33.600 --> 0:40:36.279
<v Speaker 3>more consistent performances from their pass catchers, I know Nico

0:40:36.360 --> 0:40:38.960
<v Speaker 3>Collins is the latest to sort of step up. I

0:40:38.960 --> 0:40:41.960
<v Speaker 3>think that's enormous because I think you're right. Ohio State

0:40:42.800 --> 0:40:46.160
<v Speaker 3>has a good defense, but not a great great defense

0:40:46.280 --> 0:40:47.920
<v Speaker 3>right now. And maybe by the end of the season,

0:40:47.920 --> 0:40:49.719
<v Speaker 3>maybe they're more of a grower, maybe they'll come into

0:40:49.800 --> 0:40:52.640
<v Speaker 3>their own, But right now, I think Michigan has a like,

0:40:52.680 --> 0:40:54.160
<v Speaker 3>if you had to give me a zero out a

0:40:54.200 --> 0:40:57.840
<v Speaker 3>one hundred percent chance of Michigan going to Columbus and

0:40:57.880 --> 0:41:01.400
<v Speaker 3>winning this game outright probably as I don't know, two

0:41:01.480 --> 0:41:03.240
<v Speaker 3>and a half, three and a half point dogs, whatever

0:41:03.320 --> 0:41:06.480
<v Speaker 3>somewhere around there, what percent chance.

0:41:06.239 --> 0:41:12.440
<v Speaker 1>Would you give it? What percent would I give.

0:41:14.120 --> 0:41:16.879
<v Speaker 3>Michigan going to Columbus and just win winning the game

0:41:16.920 --> 0:41:23.680
<v Speaker 3>out right, correct, man, I I got I'd probably give

0:41:23.719 --> 0:41:29.640
<v Speaker 3>him like a thirty to forty percent chance.

0:41:30.000 --> 0:41:33.200
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, I think that's where my head is. My head had.

0:41:33.040 --> 0:41:35.360
<v Speaker 2>Thirty eight Yeah, yeah, I mean I think they have

0:41:35.440 --> 0:41:37.600
<v Speaker 2>eight percent. They have a pretty good chance of doing it.

0:41:39.120 --> 0:41:41.480
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, all right, So that's where we're at right now.

0:41:41.480 --> 0:41:43.480
<v Speaker 3>With that, that'll change this weekend. We'll go a long

0:41:43.520 --> 0:41:45.080
<v Speaker 3>way with Michigan playing Michigan State.

0:41:45.239 --> 0:41:45.439
<v Speaker 1>Yeah.

0:41:46.480 --> 0:41:48.719
<v Speaker 3>With the success Notre Dame has had thus far since

0:41:48.719 --> 0:41:51.040
<v Speaker 3>Brian Kelly, Gosh, we are steering into Notre Dame, aren't

0:41:51.040 --> 0:41:55.440
<v Speaker 3>we all? Homer episode? Yeah, with his success the Irish

0:41:55.480 --> 0:41:57.600
<v Speaker 3>have had thus far since Brian Kelly made the switch

0:41:57.800 --> 0:42:00.680
<v Speaker 3>from Brandon Wimbush to Ian book. That's right pit by

0:42:00.680 --> 0:42:07.560
<v Speaker 3>not one, not two, not three. Do you envision more

0:42:07.600 --> 0:42:10.040
<v Speaker 3>coaches in the future being proactive when it comes to

0:42:10.120 --> 0:42:13.279
<v Speaker 3>switching quarterbacks prior to have it being forced upon them

0:42:13.400 --> 0:42:16.000
<v Speaker 3>via losses. I think this is one of the more

0:42:16.160 --> 0:42:21.360
<v Speaker 3>intriguing questions of the season overall, is managing quarterback play

0:42:21.400 --> 0:42:23.600
<v Speaker 3>in general. With what we've seen at I mean Nebraska

0:42:23.640 --> 0:42:27.440
<v Speaker 3>losing a quarterback before the season, starting with what's happening

0:42:27.480 --> 0:42:31.920
<v Speaker 3>at Georgia and Clemson, it's fascinating. Alabama, well, it's okay.

0:42:31.960 --> 0:42:37.439
<v Speaker 2>So not all situations are created equally, and I bring

0:42:37.520 --> 0:42:42.960
<v Speaker 2>that up. So we've had a couple instances of quarterback changes,

0:42:43.000 --> 0:42:47.040
<v Speaker 2>all of which were under different circumstances. Do we count

0:42:47.080 --> 0:42:51.680
<v Speaker 2>the Tua move in the National Championship last year as

0:42:53.000 --> 0:42:55.880
<v Speaker 2>falling under this cant making a change before losing? Yeah,

0:42:56.080 --> 0:42:59.440
<v Speaker 2>making a change before losing. So that's a very recent,

0:42:59.560 --> 0:43:02.600
<v Speaker 2>very note example of it working out. And then we've

0:43:02.600 --> 0:43:04.440
<v Speaker 2>had another one this year. Of course, with the move

0:43:04.480 --> 0:43:09.439
<v Speaker 2>to Trevor Lawrence away from Kelly Bryant. We've had it

0:43:09.560 --> 0:43:13.160
<v Speaker 2>to happen obviously at Notre Dame. Not every school has

0:43:13.440 --> 0:43:17.520
<v Speaker 2>the same embarrassment of riches that Alabama and Clemson have.

0:43:18.600 --> 0:43:20.320
<v Speaker 2>Who knows, we might see it at Georgia before the

0:43:20.400 --> 0:43:26.640
<v Speaker 2>end of the year two. But like I hesitate to

0:43:26.640 --> 0:43:29.440
<v Speaker 2>say that we're gonna see more of this, I just

0:43:29.480 --> 0:43:34.359
<v Speaker 2>think we're in a really extraordinary season where we knew

0:43:34.440 --> 0:43:36.280
<v Speaker 2>headed in there were gonna be a ton of quarterback

0:43:36.360 --> 0:43:39.600
<v Speaker 2>questions around college football, and we knew that this was

0:43:40.160 --> 0:43:43.759
<v Speaker 2>a possibility we would see some quarterback changes. I just

0:43:43.800 --> 0:43:45.880
<v Speaker 2>don't think we expected to see as many as we

0:43:45.960 --> 0:43:47.560
<v Speaker 2>have and to see, oh, by the way, so many

0:43:47.600 --> 0:43:49.880
<v Speaker 2>of them work out. I think these are kind of

0:43:49.920 --> 0:43:52.799
<v Speaker 2>extraordinary circumstances that you wouldn't see otherwise in a normal

0:43:52.840 --> 0:43:55.759
<v Speaker 2>college football season. So I don't necessarily think it's a

0:43:55.800 --> 0:43:58.719
<v Speaker 2>harbinger for anything to come down the line. I just

0:43:58.760 --> 0:44:02.200
<v Speaker 2>think it's just sort of one of those blips on

0:44:02.239 --> 0:44:05.480
<v Speaker 2>the radar where we had many situations in a very

0:44:05.480 --> 0:44:07.200
<v Speaker 2>short period of time all kind of work out.

0:44:08.960 --> 0:44:12.600
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, And I think it's this specific situation with Notre

0:44:12.680 --> 0:44:16.640
<v Speaker 3>Dame was because Notre Dame, with the talent on both

0:44:16.680 --> 0:44:21.840
<v Speaker 3>sides of the ball, wasn't separating itself from average to

0:44:21.960 --> 0:44:25.359
<v Speaker 3>below average teams. Yeah, and we also not meant to

0:44:25.360 --> 0:44:28.920
<v Speaker 3>insult those teams, but we had signs that Brandon Wimbush

0:44:29.040 --> 0:44:32.359
<v Speaker 3>was not leading touchdown drives where he should have been.

0:44:32.600 --> 0:44:35.239
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, And in that sense, it's very normal the way

0:44:35.280 --> 0:44:37.319
<v Speaker 2>that they moved away from him. It's dramatic because it's

0:44:37.360 --> 0:44:40.640
<v Speaker 2>Notre Dame, but we saw it all last season with Wimbush.

0:44:40.680 --> 0:44:42.279
<v Speaker 2>We did see a little bit of book come in

0:44:42.280 --> 0:44:44.960
<v Speaker 2>in big situations and perform. And though it was a

0:44:44.960 --> 0:44:47.040
<v Speaker 2>little bit unexpected to bring him in and start him

0:44:47.040 --> 0:44:50.080
<v Speaker 2>against wake Forest. I feel like that's a lot less

0:44:50.120 --> 0:44:55.320
<v Speaker 2>expected than the balls that Nick Saban had quite frankly

0:44:55.400 --> 0:44:58.960
<v Speaker 2>to bring in Yeah Tua in the National Championship, or

0:44:58.960 --> 0:45:02.040
<v Speaker 2>even the balls that Dabo Sweeney had to bring in

0:45:02.080 --> 0:45:05.920
<v Speaker 2>Trevor Lawrence over Kelly Bryant really.

0:45:05.600 --> 0:45:09.959
<v Speaker 1>With no body of work. That those, to me are.

0:45:10.239 --> 0:45:13.120
<v Speaker 2>Are really extraordinary that they would have the confidence to

0:45:13.160 --> 0:45:16.719
<v Speaker 2>go to those guys. Granted two had a little bit

0:45:16.760 --> 0:45:20.000
<v Speaker 2>of work last year beforehand, but still those to me

0:45:20.120 --> 0:45:23.880
<v Speaker 2>are incredible that the coaches would go to guys with

0:45:24.000 --> 0:45:27.520
<v Speaker 2>virtually no experience in key situations, and even this year

0:45:27.520 --> 0:45:32.120
<v Speaker 2>obviously with Clemsons. So the book move, though dramatic, is

0:45:32.120 --> 0:45:33.919
<v Speaker 2>is far more normal than some of the other ones

0:45:33.920 --> 0:45:34.359
<v Speaker 2>we've seen.

0:45:35.440 --> 0:45:38.319
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, the Clemson one is interesting because Kelly Bryant had

0:45:38.360 --> 0:45:40.880
<v Speaker 3>been good this year. I mean, obviously he hit a

0:45:40.920 --> 0:45:43.959
<v Speaker 3>wall against Alabama last year and most most teams did,

0:45:44.600 --> 0:45:48.440
<v Speaker 3>so we had a concept that Kelly Bryant may struggle

0:45:48.480 --> 0:45:53.080
<v Speaker 3>against the very best of competition. But this wasn't you know,

0:45:53.120 --> 0:45:57.160
<v Speaker 3>the Kelly Bryant situation. Wasn't Brandon Wimbush barely beating Ball

0:45:57.239 --> 0:46:01.640
<v Speaker 3>State or Vanderbilt or something like that. So that was

0:46:01.719 --> 0:46:03.960
<v Speaker 3>that's more surprising to me. But yeah, I think you're right.

0:46:03.960 --> 0:46:06.480
<v Speaker 3>I think most teams should have the luxury of switching

0:46:06.560 --> 0:46:11.360
<v Speaker 3>quarterbacks undefeated and only beating teams by by narrow margins.

0:46:11.719 --> 0:46:13.640
<v Speaker 3>That that's I think the unique quality of it.

0:46:13.719 --> 0:46:16.440
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, where are we going next?

0:46:16.440 --> 0:46:20.160
<v Speaker 3>Maybe final question? We'll see this because it was worded

0:46:20.200 --> 0:46:22.600
<v Speaker 3>so magnificently. Chris wants to know which team has the

0:46:22.640 --> 0:46:26.759
<v Speaker 3>biggest second half turnaround because every now and then they

0:46:26.760 --> 0:46:30.360
<v Speaker 3>fall apart, or because they're forever is going to start tonight?

0:46:33.320 --> 0:46:37.080
<v Speaker 3>Good job, Chris, great, That question is ti even I

0:46:37.120 --> 0:46:40.239
<v Speaker 3>tried to read it as dryly as possible to see

0:46:40.239 --> 0:46:43.560
<v Speaker 3>if you would pick up what I was throwing down. Okay,

0:46:43.680 --> 0:46:46.359
<v Speaker 3>so what the second half turnarounds? What is the question here?

0:46:47.280 --> 0:46:50.239
<v Speaker 3>So presumably a team that has been disappointing in the

0:46:50.239 --> 0:46:54.680
<v Speaker 3>first half of the season will come on strong. Okay

0:46:54.840 --> 0:46:57.960
<v Speaker 3>from this point on recording this October eighteenth, So there

0:46:57.960 --> 0:47:01.600
<v Speaker 3>are games tonight actually, so if like Stanford for example, yeah,

0:47:01.600 --> 0:47:04.760
<v Speaker 3>could be one of those teams. They are playing Arizona

0:47:04.760 --> 0:47:06.759
<v Speaker 3>State tonight. We'll see what happens. We may sound like

0:47:07.120 --> 0:47:09.480
<v Speaker 3>idiots by the time people listen to this. If they

0:47:09.480 --> 0:47:12.120
<v Speaker 3>get killed by ASU. But who, in your mind is

0:47:12.160 --> 0:47:15.800
<v Speaker 3>a prime turnaround candidate who, let's say has a losing

0:47:15.840 --> 0:47:16.840
<v Speaker 3>record right now.

0:47:16.800 --> 0:47:20.080
<v Speaker 2>Has a losing record. Okay, well, yeah, I'll give you

0:47:20.080 --> 0:47:24.320
<v Speaker 2>some candidates of TEA. Give me some options here, so from.

0:47:24.239 --> 0:47:29.640
<v Speaker 3>The ACC and I'll be realistic here. So I guess Louisville.

0:47:29.920 --> 0:47:31.680
<v Speaker 3>You know, they have pieces, They've had a really nice

0:47:31.719 --> 0:47:35.760
<v Speaker 3>receiving corps. They have a losing record. North Carolina, Georgia

0:47:35.880 --> 0:47:38.800
<v Speaker 3>Tech a top maybe twenty five to thirty offense in

0:47:38.840 --> 0:47:41.000
<v Speaker 3>Georgia Tech, but the defense has been kind of disappointing.

0:47:42.080 --> 0:47:46.120
<v Speaker 3>Kansas Kansas State both have losing records in the Big

0:47:46.160 --> 0:47:48.680
<v Speaker 3>twelve and the Big Ten. I think we can scratch

0:47:48.760 --> 0:47:53.360
<v Speaker 3>Rutgers off losing records. From the other side is just Nebraska.

0:47:53.360 --> 0:47:57.160
<v Speaker 3>Maybe Nebraska has a turnaround. You haven't stopped me yet,

0:47:57.200 --> 0:47:59.520
<v Speaker 3>so I'm not sensing you're feeling great about anybody.

0:47:59.760 --> 0:48:02.279
<v Speaker 1>I think, well, I'm going to go to one that

0:48:02.320 --> 0:48:04.600
<v Speaker 1>you haven't gotten to and one that you did. Yeah.

0:48:04.640 --> 0:48:09.799
<v Speaker 2>I'm intrigued by k State because, like we said on Barnes, Yeah,

0:48:09.840 --> 0:48:12.680
<v Speaker 2>like we said on the show, I think last Wednesday

0:48:13.000 --> 0:48:16.120
<v Speaker 2>and again on Sunday. If k State just decides if

0:48:16.120 --> 0:48:19.040
<v Speaker 2>it we're running every play, that might be more what

0:48:19.080 --> 0:48:22.480
<v Speaker 2>they're equipped to do at this point. So kse State

0:48:22.520 --> 0:48:24.800
<v Speaker 2>to me is one that I can see them turning around.

0:48:25.440 --> 0:48:27.840
<v Speaker 2>And I'm real curious to see what happens with UCLA

0:48:27.920 --> 0:48:28.919
<v Speaker 2>now because they're one in five.

0:48:29.239 --> 0:48:31.360
<v Speaker 1>That was gonna be my answer, Yeah, one in five.

0:48:31.560 --> 0:48:33.720
<v Speaker 2>It does seem like they're kind of making a shift

0:48:33.760 --> 0:48:38.920
<v Speaker 2>offensively as well. So if that system takes and they

0:48:39.040 --> 0:48:42.759
<v Speaker 2>keep having success, I think I think UCLA is a

0:48:43.760 --> 0:48:46.520
<v Speaker 2>is a pretty good answer. One answer that probably won't

0:48:46.520 --> 0:48:50.719
<v Speaker 2>translate to wins and losses, but just a team that

0:48:50.760 --> 0:48:53.080
<v Speaker 2>I think has had a turnaround this season. In many

0:48:53.120 --> 0:48:56.040
<v Speaker 2>regards Oregon State. We didn't talk about John Smith at all,

0:48:56.400 --> 0:48:58.560
<v Speaker 2>the job he's I think it'll translate into some losses,

0:48:58.600 --> 0:49:02.720
<v Speaker 2>but it'll translate into but there's definitely been a market

0:49:02.719 --> 0:49:06.600
<v Speaker 2>improvement in the revers this year, and that if you're

0:49:06.640 --> 0:49:09.960
<v Speaker 2>an Oregon State fan, if you're listening now, I don't

0:49:09.960 --> 0:49:12.000
<v Speaker 2>know how many we have, but I do think they

0:49:12.040 --> 0:49:14.719
<v Speaker 2>are better and I hope they continue down the path

0:49:14.719 --> 0:49:17.160
<v Speaker 2>that they've been going down so far this year because

0:49:18.120 --> 0:49:19.160
<v Speaker 2>there's been improvement.

0:49:20.000 --> 0:49:23.879
<v Speaker 3>It's a year zero situation. Yeah, and absolutely you can

0:49:24.000 --> 0:49:27.000
<v Speaker 3>tell that there is belief in Jonathan Smith, both among

0:49:27.080 --> 0:49:29.279
<v Speaker 3>the players on that team, guys transferring in. They have

0:49:29.320 --> 0:49:34.400
<v Speaker 3>some big name transfers coming in Addison Gums, Tristan Jebia, Gabbio, whatever,

0:49:35.200 --> 0:49:38.200
<v Speaker 3>Tijon Lindsay also from Nebraska, big names, big time recruits

0:49:38.239 --> 0:49:41.799
<v Speaker 3>from a past couple of years. UCLA is interesting to

0:49:41.840 --> 0:49:44.640
<v Speaker 3>me just because we've seen the momentum start with how

0:49:44.680 --> 0:49:47.200
<v Speaker 3>they played against Washington, you know, beating Cal.

0:49:47.280 --> 0:49:49.120
<v Speaker 1>They have Arizona this week. The back half of.

0:49:49.120 --> 0:49:54.440
<v Speaker 3>Their schedule is not great, but what they look like

0:49:54.560 --> 0:50:00.319
<v Speaker 3>against Utah, Oregon, USC Stanford should be an indicator and

0:50:01.120 --> 0:50:03.080
<v Speaker 3>it should perhaps pick up their.

0:50:03.000 --> 0:50:05.920
<v Speaker 1>Recruiting momentum a little bit, which is I think in need.

0:50:06.480 --> 0:50:08.879
<v Speaker 3>So definitely, I think those are my answers right now

0:50:08.960 --> 0:50:11.239
<v Speaker 3>that you know, you might not translate to wins. But

0:50:11.440 --> 0:50:14.400
<v Speaker 3>and even like Arkansas has looked pretty, they have some

0:50:14.520 --> 0:50:17.120
<v Speaker 3>fight to them. Yeah, even though it hasn't hasn't sort

0:50:17.160 --> 0:50:20.000
<v Speaker 3>of caught in the winds, call some plot, a little

0:50:20.000 --> 0:50:22.680
<v Speaker 3>bit of pluck, some pluck, he says. I'll tell you

0:50:22.680 --> 0:50:25.319
<v Speaker 3>one team I'm not in on, Yukon. I am not

0:50:25.480 --> 0:50:28.720
<v Speaker 3>in on sexy Randy eds huls Now Yukon.

0:50:28.880 --> 0:50:31.160
<v Speaker 2>We haven't played I think we haven't played sexier than

0:50:31.200 --> 0:50:31.799
<v Speaker 2>edsseel in a while.

0:50:31.800 --> 0:50:32.960
<v Speaker 1>Maybe on Wednesday we'll do it.

0:50:34.239 --> 0:50:35.560
<v Speaker 3>Can I give you a couple right now?

0:50:36.320 --> 0:50:40.080
<v Speaker 1>I mean, yeah, it's a free show, free country.

0:50:39.800 --> 0:50:42.000
<v Speaker 3>It's a free show, all right, before we get on

0:50:42.239 --> 0:50:43.360
<v Speaker 3>with Jeff Schwartz.

0:50:43.400 --> 0:50:45.960
<v Speaker 1>So here, hold on, here's what I wanted to like.

0:50:46.200 --> 0:50:48.680
<v Speaker 2>We're not editing any of the stuff out now because

0:50:48.800 --> 0:50:51.360
<v Speaker 2>we're enjoying ourselves here with the Q and A, and

0:50:51.400 --> 0:50:54.160
<v Speaker 2>we're already running close to an hour. We'll put out

0:50:54.320 --> 0:50:57.640
<v Speaker 2>your Oregon chat with Jeff is like a separate thing altogether. Okay,

0:50:57.760 --> 0:50:59.200
<v Speaker 2>all right, so we don't have to try and bolt

0:50:59.200 --> 0:51:01.600
<v Speaker 2>those two together. We'll just we'll make that a whole

0:51:01.640 --> 0:51:04.120
<v Speaker 2>separate thing and we'll close out strong here with the

0:51:04.160 --> 0:51:04.480
<v Speaker 2>Q and A.

0:51:05.320 --> 0:51:09.960
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, okay, are the following people sexier than Randy Edzel?

0:51:10.040 --> 0:51:12.759
<v Speaker 3>This comes to us as a game that I don't

0:51:12.760 --> 0:51:15.279
<v Speaker 3>know we started for no good reason a long time ago.

0:51:15.440 --> 0:51:18.880
<v Speaker 3>Definitely no good reason. This is all science, ty. You

0:51:19.040 --> 0:51:22.799
<v Speaker 3>just tell me if objectively these coaches are sexier than

0:51:22.880 --> 0:51:26.399
<v Speaker 3>Randy Edzel, and by all means you can have every

0:51:26.440 --> 0:51:29.000
<v Speaker 3>advantage and pull up a picture of Randy Etzel right now, yep,

0:51:29.239 --> 0:51:31.680
<v Speaker 3>to just get a sense for him his topography.

0:51:32.160 --> 0:51:36.800
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, if you're listing at home or at the office,

0:51:36.840 --> 0:51:39.640
<v Speaker 2>just pull up go to Google image search and pull

0:51:39.719 --> 0:51:43.200
<v Speaker 2>up the biggest you can filter by large images, get

0:51:43.200 --> 0:51:46.040
<v Speaker 2>the biggest, highest res image you can of Randy Edzel.

0:51:46.440 --> 0:51:47.960
<v Speaker 2>And if you're driving in a car, we can't. We

0:51:47.960 --> 0:51:51.080
<v Speaker 2>wouldn't advise you to do this while you're driving the car.

0:51:51.160 --> 0:51:54.120
<v Speaker 2>But maybe if you want to pull over somewhere and

0:51:54.160 --> 0:51:55.520
<v Speaker 2>just pull it up on your phone just so that

0:51:55.560 --> 0:51:57.920
<v Speaker 2>you can play along, play the home game with us here.

0:51:59.280 --> 0:52:04.920
<v Speaker 3>All right, Uh, let's start here with Charlie Strong.

0:52:05.960 --> 0:52:11.120
<v Speaker 2>Wow, that's a good I say. I think so, Charlie Strong,

0:52:11.160 --> 0:52:12.320
<v Speaker 2>looks like you could still play.

0:52:13.239 --> 0:52:19.600
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, yeah, this one's the tough one. Dabo Sweeney, No,

0:52:20.800 --> 0:52:22.279
<v Speaker 3>I don't think that's I don't think that's right.

0:52:22.480 --> 0:52:23.440
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, I know.

0:52:23.440 --> 0:52:26.319
<v Speaker 2>I've got I've got a split screen thing going on

0:52:26.400 --> 0:52:27.200
<v Speaker 2>right here, right now.

0:52:28.080 --> 0:52:31.239
<v Speaker 1>And uh no, it's it's no contest.

0:52:31.480 --> 0:52:33.680
<v Speaker 2>It's Dabo or excuse me, it's a It's not Dabo,

0:52:33.800 --> 0:52:37.279
<v Speaker 2>it's Randy Etzel, Okay.

0:52:37.320 --> 0:52:43.680
<v Speaker 3>Paul Christ No, Paul Christ. Wow, emphatic out of here,

0:52:44.000 --> 0:52:54.279
<v Speaker 3>Randy Etzel. Scott Frost mm hmmm, still Randy Etzel. Frost is, Yes,

0:52:54.640 --> 0:52:58.880
<v Speaker 3>it's it's Randy Etzel, Chris Peterson, Randy Edzel.

0:53:00.520 --> 0:53:03.480
<v Speaker 1>Wow, Randy Etzel. He seems like.

0:53:03.480 --> 0:53:05.319
<v Speaker 3>Chris Peterson, seems like he's a pretty good shave. I'm

0:53:05.360 --> 0:53:08.759
<v Speaker 3>learning all sorts of things about you, Justin Wilcox.

0:53:09.640 --> 0:53:13.320
<v Speaker 2>I'm not even sure I know what Justin Wilcox looks like. Really, Yeah, hold.

0:53:13.160 --> 0:53:16.280
<v Speaker 3>On, okay, pull up a picture Justin Wilcox.

0:53:16.440 --> 0:53:18.560
<v Speaker 1>Oh, okay, yeah, I know what you mean now.

0:53:18.760 --> 0:53:21.720
<v Speaker 2>I probably Okay, he says, well, you know, let's be honest.

0:53:21.760 --> 0:53:23.920
<v Speaker 2>I got to go Justin Wilcox here.

0:53:25.400 --> 0:53:27.560
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, I think I agree with you. Will must champ.

0:53:31.520 --> 0:53:34.200
<v Speaker 1>Randy Edzel. I think Randy Edzel is the answer.

0:53:34.320 --> 0:53:42.640
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, final Gus smells on Randy Edzel. Yeah, the sweater

0:53:42.719 --> 0:53:43.919
<v Speaker 3>vest thing is not working out.

0:53:44.000 --> 0:53:46.480
<v Speaker 2>There's a reason that we call this game sexier than Edsel.

0:53:46.520 --> 0:53:48.480
<v Speaker 2>It's not easy to be sexier than Randy Etzel.

0:53:49.440 --> 0:53:51.799
<v Speaker 3>This is what I'm learning. Who knew, ty?

0:53:51.960 --> 0:53:54.000
<v Speaker 2>This is why we played the high bar of Randy Edseel.

0:53:54.040 --> 0:53:57.280
<v Speaker 2>You play to win the game here, Okay, good.

0:53:57.040 --> 0:54:00.000
<v Speaker 3>To know well, we'll finish with somebody that has I'm

0:54:00.239 --> 0:54:02.960
<v Speaker 3>that didn't have anything to do with college football, but somebody

0:54:03.000 --> 0:54:03.640
<v Speaker 3>wanted to know.

0:54:04.560 --> 0:54:07.080
<v Speaker 1>Here's our final question. Where did it go? This was

0:54:07.680 --> 0:54:10.000
<v Speaker 1>Shiva doc Shiva doach.

0:54:10.719 --> 0:54:12.760
<v Speaker 3>Actually is a good we'll do college and non college

0:54:12.760 --> 0:54:15.400
<v Speaker 3>in this. If Georgia Tech decides to move from Paul Johnson,

0:54:15.440 --> 0:54:17.760
<v Speaker 3>move on, move forward from Paul Johnson after this season,

0:54:17.800 --> 0:54:20.480
<v Speaker 3>who do you think are prime candidates for the Georgia

0:54:20.480 --> 0:54:23.520
<v Speaker 3>Tech job A very good job, I would say, at least.

0:54:23.400 --> 0:54:25.759
<v Speaker 1>Potentially, Yeah, I think so.

0:54:26.120 --> 0:54:30.359
<v Speaker 3>Okay, So it's academics come into it with Georgia Tech. Right,

0:54:31.239 --> 0:54:33.800
<v Speaker 3>being the number two in your state is It's tricky,

0:54:33.840 --> 0:54:36.040
<v Speaker 3>But a state that's filled with talent, and in a

0:54:36.040 --> 0:54:39.560
<v Speaker 3>region that's filled with talent, and in a conference where

0:54:39.560 --> 0:54:43.760
<v Speaker 3>you can win a good chunk of games. Right, desirable city,

0:54:44.360 --> 0:54:53.200
<v Speaker 3>right man Ie lane lane train. I don't think it's

0:54:53.200 --> 0:54:55.080
<v Speaker 3>probably gonna happen with the lane train. That's a pretty

0:54:55.080 --> 0:54:55.640
<v Speaker 3>big jump.

0:54:55.960 --> 0:54:59.200
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, I as long as it's not the option for me,

0:54:59.360 --> 0:55:01.439
<v Speaker 2>you'd have to move away from the option. Don't don't

0:55:01.440 --> 0:55:04.359
<v Speaker 2>stick with that option system. The option, I know you

0:55:04.400 --> 0:55:06.319
<v Speaker 2>love it. I think it shades the way you look

0:55:06.360 --> 0:55:09.759
<v Speaker 2>at that job. But I don't think the answer here

0:55:09.840 --> 0:55:11.560
<v Speaker 2>is ken Neo Mantalolo.

0:55:12.680 --> 0:55:17.640
<v Speaker 1>Okay, disagree? So who do you have?

0:55:17.640 --> 0:55:21.440
<v Speaker 3>Give me some names? Neil Brown at Troy. A lot

0:55:21.480 --> 0:55:23.719
<v Speaker 3>of people thought he was going to be a growing name.

0:55:24.640 --> 0:55:25.600
<v Speaker 1>He's a decent name.

0:55:25.800 --> 0:55:28.640
<v Speaker 3>Scott Saderfield app State. I don't know what more you

0:55:28.680 --> 0:55:31.160
<v Speaker 3>want from him. Blake Anderson at Arkansas State.

0:55:31.280 --> 0:55:33.239
<v Speaker 1>This is me googling feverishly.

0:55:33.560 --> 0:55:35.040
<v Speaker 3>Jason Kandall, Toledo.

0:55:36.960 --> 0:55:40.560
<v Speaker 2>I would want a guy from the South, Okay, I

0:55:40.600 --> 0:55:41.920
<v Speaker 2>would want someone from down south.

0:55:42.520 --> 0:55:43.680
<v Speaker 1>How about this?

0:55:43.680 --> 0:55:46.560
<v Speaker 3>This was somebody whose name we mentioned not two and

0:55:46.560 --> 0:55:49.000
<v Speaker 3>a half minutes ago, but Charlie Strong.

0:55:51.480 --> 0:55:53.040
<v Speaker 1>Interesting, it's an interesting name.

0:55:53.080 --> 0:55:56.400
<v Speaker 3>Their defense would be instantly approved, improved.

0:55:56.600 --> 0:56:01.600
<v Speaker 1>He's got good familiarity with the South. Correct. Would he

0:56:01.640 --> 0:56:03.960
<v Speaker 1>want to leave South? Is Georgia Tech a better job

0:56:04.000 --> 0:56:04.680
<v Speaker 1>than South Florida?

0:56:05.280 --> 0:56:08.920
<v Speaker 3>Oh yeah, yeah, oh for sure is. Yes, It's an

0:56:08.920 --> 0:56:11.520
<v Speaker 3>a sec job and it's a quality acc Charlie Strong

0:56:11.600 --> 0:56:14.759
<v Speaker 3>loves he loves the state of Florida. I know you're

0:56:14.760 --> 0:56:20.200
<v Speaker 3>not that far away. Okay, you could convince people from

0:56:20.200 --> 0:56:22.640
<v Speaker 3>Florida to move to Atlanta. Atlanta is a great city.

0:56:22.920 --> 0:56:24.640
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, It's just true.

0:56:25.320 --> 0:56:26.799
<v Speaker 3>You don't have to sit in traffic that much if

0:56:26.800 --> 0:56:30.799
<v Speaker 3>you're a college student. I think Charlie Strong is It's

0:56:30.840 --> 0:56:31.279
<v Speaker 3>a good I.

0:56:32.160 --> 0:56:34.239
<v Speaker 1>Need time to think about this. I was unprepared for

0:56:34.280 --> 0:56:34.800
<v Speaker 1>this question.

0:56:35.280 --> 0:56:37.840
<v Speaker 3>That's okay, you are prepared for the second part of

0:56:38.320 --> 0:56:41.160
<v Speaker 3>Shiva Docs. Questions from Reddit. By the way, best national

0:56:41.200 --> 0:56:45.360
<v Speaker 3>fast food chain tie a first, Let's let's okay.

0:56:46.080 --> 0:56:47.719
<v Speaker 1>Good answer. Chick fil A is the answer I would

0:56:47.760 --> 0:56:48.560
<v Speaker 1>only answer.

0:56:48.280 --> 0:56:51.480
<v Speaker 3>How do you how do you define? And Chick fil

0:56:51.480 --> 0:56:53.240
<v Speaker 3>A fits this? How do you define fast food?

0:56:53.239 --> 0:56:54.840
<v Speaker 1>What is like? Is Chipotle fast food?

0:56:54.960 --> 0:56:58.759
<v Speaker 2>Some No, that would be casual dining or casual fast Yeah.

0:56:59.000 --> 0:57:02.560
<v Speaker 2>I think something with a through mm hmm is what

0:57:02.560 --> 0:57:05.920
<v Speaker 2>I would classify as best fast food or a fast

0:57:05.960 --> 0:57:07.520
<v Speaker 2>food traditional fast food.

0:57:07.520 --> 0:57:08.759
<v Speaker 1>For me, the answer is Chick fil A.

0:57:10.160 --> 0:57:13.000
<v Speaker 2>Do you have a favorite fast food burger? I like

0:57:13.080 --> 0:57:16.040
<v Speaker 2>the Wendy's classic single with cheese.

0:57:16.320 --> 0:57:18.480
<v Speaker 1>Oh wow. Didn't even have to think about it.

0:57:18.560 --> 0:57:21.760
<v Speaker 3>No, you didn't have to shuffle through your whopper experiences

0:57:22.040 --> 0:57:23.280
<v Speaker 3>big mac experiences.

0:57:23.560 --> 0:57:25.680
<v Speaker 2>The problem with the whopper is that there's too much

0:57:25.680 --> 0:57:28.840
<v Speaker 2>going on, and there's so much burger that the bun

0:57:28.920 --> 0:57:32.360
<v Speaker 2>falls apart and I read something a long time ago

0:57:32.440 --> 0:57:35.320
<v Speaker 2>on the McDonald's front that if you take the burger

0:57:35.400 --> 0:57:39.080
<v Speaker 2>out of the bun and throw it out on your

0:57:39.080 --> 0:57:42.920
<v Speaker 2>back deck, that the bacteria won't even attack it.

0:57:43.080 --> 0:57:45.040
<v Speaker 1>That it's not it's not real.

0:57:45.280 --> 0:57:48.160
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, there's enough preservatives to fight off nature.

0:57:48.520 --> 0:57:53.080
<v Speaker 2>And though though I've probably had a quarter pounder here

0:57:53.120 --> 0:57:56.200
<v Speaker 2>and there since reading that, I gotta be honest, it

0:57:56.280 --> 0:57:59.280
<v Speaker 2>scares the hell out of me. So okay, the answer

0:57:59.320 --> 0:58:02.400
<v Speaker 2>would definitely not be them.

0:58:02.440 --> 0:58:05.840
<v Speaker 1>What percent of the Chick fil A menu do you explore?

0:58:08.080 --> 0:58:12.600
<v Speaker 2>I'll usually go if I'm feeling dangerous, by the way,

0:58:12.720 --> 0:58:14.560
<v Speaker 2>Chick fil A not a sponsor.

0:58:14.120 --> 0:58:14.960
<v Speaker 1>No, not a sponsor.

0:58:15.000 --> 0:58:17.720
<v Speaker 2>I'll go if i'm a feeling If I'm feeling dangerous,

0:58:17.720 --> 0:58:21.400
<v Speaker 2>I'll go spicy chicken sandwich. But I've experimented with the

0:58:21.720 --> 0:58:24.600
<v Speaker 2>just Chick fil A sandwich, the regular Chick fil A sandwich.

0:58:25.120 --> 0:58:27.720
<v Speaker 2>I've done the cool Wrap combo, which I think is

0:58:27.760 --> 0:58:31.440
<v Speaker 2>the number six. I've done the nugs. Everyone's done the

0:58:31.480 --> 0:58:33.600
<v Speaker 2>nugs or the chicken tendos.

0:58:34.920 --> 0:58:37.000
<v Speaker 3>Do they currently have spicy nugs?

0:58:37.960 --> 0:58:41.120
<v Speaker 1>I don't know. They probably have sauce that could satisfy that.

0:58:41.200 --> 0:58:45.520
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, but I'm talking for you nug itself being that's

0:58:45.520 --> 0:58:48.360
<v Speaker 3>where Wendy's has an advantage. They have strong spicy nugs.

0:58:49.000 --> 0:58:52.440
<v Speaker 2>Right, No, I don't. I don't think so. I've done salads,

0:58:52.440 --> 0:58:56.080
<v Speaker 2>I've done the soup. I think I've done I've done

0:58:56.120 --> 0:58:58.800
<v Speaker 2>like the milkshake, some of the ice cream.

0:58:58.520 --> 0:59:01.600
<v Speaker 1>That they offer you. I've had a good swath of

0:59:01.640 --> 0:59:05.800
<v Speaker 1>the menu. My answer may be Jack in the Box?

0:59:06.840 --> 0:59:08.720
<v Speaker 3>Does Jack in the Box? I don't drive fast food?

0:59:09.400 --> 0:59:10.600
<v Speaker 3>Oh yeah, yeah, yeah, for sure.

0:59:10.680 --> 0:59:13.400
<v Speaker 2>Okay, you could tell that I'm not versed in the

0:59:13.400 --> 0:59:14.400
<v Speaker 2>ways of Jack in the Box.

0:59:14.440 --> 0:59:15.040
<v Speaker 1>Jack in the Box.

0:59:15.080 --> 0:59:20.120
<v Speaker 3>I honestly I will eat McDonald's for breakfast in an airport.

0:59:20.280 --> 0:59:22.080
<v Speaker 3>And this isn't for any real reason. I just like cooking.

0:59:22.240 --> 0:59:24.680
<v Speaker 3>I think fast food is delicious. It's just terrible for you.

0:59:25.920 --> 0:59:29.080
<v Speaker 3>I like Taco Bell, McDonald's is fine. I like a

0:59:29.160 --> 0:59:31.000
<v Speaker 3>McDonald's cheeseburger dipped in sweet and sour.

0:59:31.000 --> 0:59:31.200
<v Speaker 1>Fine.

0:59:31.240 --> 0:59:34.440
<v Speaker 3>Chick fil A is good. Jack in the Box is

0:59:35.200 --> 0:59:37.480
<v Speaker 3>way out in the forefront in terms of all day

0:59:37.520 --> 0:59:39.920
<v Speaker 3>breakfast or a breakfast jacket one in the morning if

0:59:39.960 --> 0:59:43.560
<v Speaker 3>you want it five pm. And everybody started copying them.

0:59:43.600 --> 0:59:49.680
<v Speaker 3>Their tacos are disgustingly wonderful. It's like a mystery meat situation.

0:59:49.800 --> 0:59:51.200
<v Speaker 3>The whole thing is fried together.

0:59:51.320 --> 0:59:51.600
<v Speaker 1>It's not.

0:59:51.640 --> 0:59:53.120
<v Speaker 3>They don't just fry the shell and then put in

0:59:53.160 --> 0:59:55.000
<v Speaker 3>some meat and lettuce. They fry the whole damn thing.

0:59:55.960 --> 0:59:59.080
<v Speaker 3>There's spicy chicken sandwiches, good good shakes. Jack in the Box.

0:59:59.120 --> 1:00:01.640
<v Speaker 3>My answer, does does In and Out have a drive through?

1:00:03.280 --> 1:00:03.480
<v Speaker 1>Yeah?

1:00:03.520 --> 1:00:07.680
<v Speaker 3>I mean it's by default, yeah, Oh, by default in

1:00:07.800 --> 1:00:11.120
<v Speaker 3>and Out it's a drive through. But I think In

1:00:11.160 --> 1:00:13.080
<v Speaker 3>and Out is delicious. Their fries aren't that good, and

1:00:13.120 --> 1:00:15.200
<v Speaker 3>it's not a national fast food chain. I don't think

1:00:15.200 --> 1:00:17.560
<v Speaker 3>they go past Utah, Texas or we.

1:00:17.560 --> 1:00:19.120
<v Speaker 1>Don't have any. We don't have any Jack in the

1:00:19.160 --> 1:00:23.959
<v Speaker 1>Box franchises over here in PA. Have you had Jack

1:00:23.960 --> 1:00:28.760
<v Speaker 1>in the Box? I don't think so. It's it's a weird,

1:00:28.960 --> 1:00:30.240
<v Speaker 1>terrific experience. Tie.

1:00:30.400 --> 1:00:32.640
<v Speaker 3>You can look into a bag and get some mazzarella sticks,

1:00:32.640 --> 1:00:34.560
<v Speaker 3>some egg rolls, okay, breakfast sandwich.

1:00:34.640 --> 1:00:36.640
<v Speaker 2>But if you take if you take the burger out

1:00:36.680 --> 1:00:38.480
<v Speaker 2>of the bun and throw it out on your back patio,

1:00:38.840 --> 1:00:42.720
<v Speaker 2>well the flies will the bacteria go after it?

1:00:42.800 --> 1:00:43.600
<v Speaker 1>Almost assuredly?

1:00:43.680 --> 1:00:43.760
<v Speaker 2>Not?

1:00:44.040 --> 1:00:46.360
<v Speaker 3>No, I'm sure it's in the same class. Oh, and

1:00:46.360 --> 1:00:48.880
<v Speaker 3>they also they have the sourdough option. Ty, okay, you

1:00:48.920 --> 1:00:50.200
<v Speaker 3>got a burger on some sourdough.

1:00:50.440 --> 1:00:50.920
<v Speaker 1>It's great.

1:00:51.440 --> 1:00:53.600
<v Speaker 2>All right, this has been This has been fun. I

1:00:53.600 --> 1:00:56.400
<v Speaker 2>don't think we've got time for any more questions. Here

1:00:56.480 --> 1:00:58.840
<v Speaker 2>is the deal. We'll do more of these as the

1:00:58.880 --> 1:01:01.640
<v Speaker 2>year progresses. We promise there's always demand for a Q

1:01:01.720 --> 1:01:04.560
<v Speaker 2>and a show. If you've got questions, If you want

1:01:05.040 --> 1:01:07.560
<v Speaker 2>questions answered, maybe you sent them in today, we didn't

1:01:07.600 --> 1:01:09.840
<v Speaker 2>get to them. We will get to them at some

1:01:09.920 --> 1:01:13.240
<v Speaker 2>point this season, whether it's a separate podcast, whether it's

1:01:13.240 --> 1:01:15.240
<v Speaker 2>just something we post on one of the social channels,

1:01:15.560 --> 1:01:17.840
<v Speaker 2>keep your eyes and ears peeled for when we might

1:01:18.280 --> 1:01:20.760
<v Speaker 2>do something like that. We'll do it again soon, we promise.

1:01:21.280 --> 1:01:23.600
<v Speaker 2>The other thing that we'll add. If you're looking at

1:01:23.640 --> 1:01:26.760
<v Speaker 2>your podcast feed and you see an Oregon show come

1:01:26.880 --> 1:01:30.280
<v Speaker 2>up after this one, it's because this is a thing

1:01:30.280 --> 1:01:32.160
<v Speaker 2>that we're going to try to do more of. So

1:01:32.240 --> 1:01:34.120
<v Speaker 2>Dan's going to talk to Josh Schwartz, our good friend

1:01:34.160 --> 1:01:37.920
<v Speaker 2>Josh Schwartz about Oregon football. Next week, We're going to

1:01:37.960 --> 1:01:41.280
<v Speaker 2>try and talk Notre Dame. We'll start off with two

1:01:41.280 --> 1:01:44.040
<v Speaker 2>of our homer pods, but then we really do truly

1:01:44.080 --> 1:01:47.160
<v Speaker 2>want to migrate into talking about some other teams with

1:01:47.200 --> 1:01:49.320
<v Speaker 2>other beat writers, just to try and get the lay

1:01:49.320 --> 1:01:52.000
<v Speaker 2>of the land. Whether it's a team of prominence, whether

1:01:52.040 --> 1:01:53.800
<v Speaker 2>it's not a team of prominence, just someone with an

1:01:53.840 --> 1:01:56.440
<v Speaker 2>interesting storyline. Feel free to reach out let us know

1:01:57.040 --> 1:01:59.080
<v Speaker 2>which teams you might be interested in hearing more about

1:01:59.280 --> 1:02:01.120
<v Speaker 2>if we talk a little bit more detail, because we

1:02:01.120 --> 1:02:02.560
<v Speaker 2>think it'd be a cool thing to do this time

1:02:02.600 --> 1:02:02.880
<v Speaker 2>of year.

1:02:03.320 --> 1:02:06.080
<v Speaker 1>Sound good? Yeah, yeah, yeah, only Homer is allowed.

1:02:06.200 --> 1:02:08.280
<v Speaker 2>All right, Well, for that guy over there, Dan Rubinstein,

1:02:08.360 --> 1:02:11.200
<v Speaker 2>thank you, sir for collecting all these questions, for putting

1:02:11.200 --> 1:02:13.600
<v Speaker 2>them in a document, and for not buzzing me the

1:02:13.640 --> 1:02:14.120
<v Speaker 2>whole show.

1:02:14.800 --> 1:02:15.680
<v Speaker 1>I didn't do the radio that.

1:02:16.440 --> 1:02:17.760
<v Speaker 3>I just I didn't want to throw you off your

1:02:17.760 --> 1:02:18.360
<v Speaker 3>game time.

1:02:18.640 --> 1:02:21.680
<v Speaker 1>I'm considerate. All right, Well, I tie he's Dan.

1:02:22.080 --> 1:02:25.360
<v Speaker 2>We're gonna catch you all momentarily, actually, if you're listening

1:02:25.440 --> 1:02:29.000
<v Speaker 2>to us in binge mode. But in the meantime, if

1:02:29.040 --> 1:02:30.600
<v Speaker 2>you don't listen to any of these shows, or at

1:02:30.640 --> 1:02:31.680
<v Speaker 2>least the next show that.

1:02:31.680 --> 1:02:33.960
<v Speaker 1>We're doing, we'll catch you all on Sunday. In the meantime,

1:02:34.000 --> 1:02:35.800
<v Speaker 1>stay STI