NCAA expands college football to 35 bowl games

To become bowl eligible, your team must finish the season 6-6 or better. I've never really thought that being 6-6 was such a great accomplishment that it deserved an extra game at the end. But I always played along. However, this expansion just reinforces my point. How much more watered-down can these meaningless games become? I mean come on, not to state the obvious, but 6-6 is just one game better than a losing season! You should have to be 7-5, in my opinion, but that's neither here nor there.

Anyways, this now means that 70 out of 120 FBS (Football Bowl Subdivision, a.k.a., Division I) schools will get to go to a bowl game. Wow, what a privilege. 58% of all teams can now "earn" a bowl bid. In comparison, only 65 (likely soon to be 68**) out of 347 men's basketball teams make it into the NCAA tournament. That's 19% (or 20% with 68 teams).

Sadly this is just another ploy for more money. Instead of the NCAA wasting time with expanding the bowl system, they should be working on something the fans actually want. (As well as the players, many would argue.) Like, oh, I don't know, maybe figuring out how to organize a playoff system so there can be a true champion?

I hate how corrupt the NCAA is at the top. I know, you probably couldn't tell, huh? Where's the DCAA (Democratic Collegiate Athletic Association) when you need it. 

Source: ESPN

**At least they didn't totally mess up March Madness by expanding to 96 teams. I can live with 68; even endorse it. Now I just wish they would make the play-in games bubble teams playing for a spot at maybe a 10 or 12 seed, instead of for a 16 seed as it stands now.

Papa John's Pizza has an amazing special

Big Mountains

I was doing some reading on the world's highest/tallest/biggest mountains. It turns out there are a few definitions. You'll get one answer based on highest elevation, a different based on total height, and another based on total height starting from the Earth's core. Click here to see a nice summary of what I'm talking about. However, one definition that makes a lot of sense to me that seems to have no official standing, is the continuous rise in elevation that you would essentially have to climb in order to reach the summit. Or more simply, the Valley To Summit elevation, or what I'm going to call "VTS".

A couple of examples:

• Mount Everest in Nepal has the highest elevation at 29,029 ft (8,848 m) above sea level. As Everest's base sits on the Tibetan Plateau at about 17,000 ft (5,200 m), the VTS elevation is only about 12,000 ft (3,658 m). 
• Mauna Kea is the tallest mountain (when measuring from the sea floor) at over 30,000 ft (9,144 m). But again, the VTS elevation (in this case sea level because it's an island) is only 13,803 ft (4,207 m).

So what is the mountain with the largest Valley To Summit elevation you ask? Well, to be sure, I don't know. As mentioned above, there is no official list that I could find. However, here are the two biggest that I could locate:

• Mount McKinley has the biggest change. At 20,320 ft (6,194 m) above sea level, the VTS ends up being over 18,000 ft (5,500 m) as the valley floor sits at only 2,000 ft (610 m). That's 1.5 times larger than Mount Everest. Now that's a mountain!
• Mount Kilimanjaro comes in second at 19,341 ft (5,895 m) above sea level. It has a VTS elevation of approximately 15,100 ft (4,600 m) from the surrounding valley.

The Valley To Summit measurement makes the most sense to me because it essentially tells you the minimum amount of mountain you would have to climb to get to the top; if you were standing at what the average person would consider the "bottom". To me, it shows the "real" vertical rise. Think about it, if you are looking at a trail that goes to the top of a mountain, what's one of the first things you consider? The vertical change.

Now, I'm sure some smarty-pants out there will say, "What about a peak's prominence? Isn't that what you are talking about?" You would be close, but not exactly right. I thought topographic prominence was what I pictured VTS being equal to. But it's not. In my opinion, the geography geeks got too nerdy and messed up the definition when they made it. I mean, does it really matter how Mount McKinley relates to a taller peak in Argentina? Maybe. But not to the average Joe Shmoe, or even the average hiker. Oh well, maybe VTS will start catching on as an official stat. I can only hope.

Drag & Drop email attachments in Gmail (Finally!)

Google announced earlier today that you can now drag & drop files into Gmail to attach them to your message, instead of having to browse for the file like usual. Right now it only works with Google's Chrome browser, and Firefox 3.6.

They also made a nice improvement that brings tighter integration with Gmail and Google Calendar, which aides in shared calendar use. In addition, you can now insert a calendar invite into your message without switching to Google Calendar.

To read up on the full details click the following links for details:

Gmail Drag & Drop

Gmail and Calendar Invitations

Opera Mini Web Browser - iPhone App

As far as I know, this is the first legitimate third party web browser that Apple has approved for use; which is a pretty big accomplishment in itself. If you haven't tried it yet, or even heard of it, I would suggest you give it a try. My time with it has shown to have much faster load times on almost any page compared to the native Safari browser. Also, it has a "tab" feature that I prefer over the page switching of Safari, and other features such as a "Speed Dial" page for quick access to frequently visited sites. Although, as nice as some of it features are, I have noticed two pretty big shortcomings:

1. It doesn't seem to load the iPhone formatted web apps like Safari does. For example, any Google web app does not load like you would be familiar with. You either have to deal with the basic HTML site, or the generic mobile web site. This also happens with other sites such as ESPN, Facebook, Wikipedia, and I'm sure just about everything else.

2. Zooming and multitouch don't work as expected. You single tap to zoom, which can be pretty handy actually, but, there is no fine tuning with pinch-to-zoom support. This leaves you stuck with either viewing the entire page, or a single element. There is no in between.

If they can fix these two problems it would be a five star app, no question. For now I give it about three out of five, as it doesn't take advantage of the full iPhone experience, but it's pretty dang fast. However, if you surf full web sites on a regular basis, this will soon become your preference over Safari.

Opera Mini Web Browser (Caution: Launches iTunes)

iPhone OS 4.0

Apple had their release preview of what the next iPhone operating system (OS) will include. There are over 100 new user features, but here's the rundown of the top seven:

1. Multitasking - Just what you think it is. You will be able to run multiple third party apps at the same time, with an easy way to switch between the open apps. To quote Steve Jobs, "Now we weren't the first to this party, but we're gonna be the best. Just like cut and paste." If multitasking works as well as cut and paste, he will probably be right. Also, this is big for the iPad in many ways. Will you be able to turn your iPad into a phone via Skype? Let's hope so. The potential to have unlimited data and VOIP calling over 3G for $30/month just got that much closer to reality.
2. Folders - Again, just what you think. Will be able to organize your apps into folders. Can even put folders in the bottom dock. This will be nice, no more swiping through six home screens to find what  you are looking for. Used to be limited to 180 apps on your phone, now you can have up to 2,160. (Who would ever have that many apps? I have no idea.)
3. Enhanced Mail - Unified inbox, multiple Exchange accounts, fast inbox switching, organize by thread (This is a big one for me. So annoying not having it.), open attachments with apps.
4. iBooks - Meh, whatever. More money for them. I get it. Most likely useless for many people. Will have some nice sync functions between multiple devices, and you get Winnie the Pooh for free!
5. Enterprise - Support for multiple Exchange accounts, Exchange Server 2010, new VPN options, better data protection, mobile device management, wireless app distribution.
6. Game Center - Hello social gaming network. Play against your friends or other people. Keep track of stats and whatnot.
7. iAd - Mobile advertising. First impression: blah. But developers need to make money, so now they have an easier/better way to put ads in apps. Also, up till this point, Apple wasn't getting a slice of the advertising pie, as all ads were being provided by third parties. Ads will keep you in your app when you click on them instead of booting you out to Safari. Can be interactive. Apple sells and hosts the ads. Revenue will be split 60/40 developer to Apple. Everything is done in HTML5. (Ha! Nice jab at Flash, Steve.) Ads can be so interactive that they are almost an app inside an app. Games, video clips, maps, music, and more. It actually is pretty impressive how interactive the ad can be, all while keeping you in the original app. Nothing like the old iPhone ads. All-in-all, this probably won't dramatically increase ads in free apps (probably some though); it's just now Apple is officially in the advertising business. Can't believe I talked about ads this much, but ads get the developers money for their free apps. (Not to mention money for Apple, too.) Apps is what the iPhone is all about. So, Apple wants as many apps as possible. Comprende?

iPhone OS will be available this summer for the iPhone 3GS and iPod touch 3rd gen (most recent). Here's the big bummer though, older versions of the iPhone and iPod touch won't support all features. Namely, multitasking. OUCH. You know what though? I have an iPhone 3G, and it already feels slow. I mean, it is almost two years old. I can't imagine it being able to handle multitasking on top of its current slowness. So, even though it sucks to have to buy a new phone to get multitasking, it's probably for the best. Not saying I will be buying the next iPhone for the sake of multitasking, just saying in general.

The iPad will be getting 4.0 this fall. Why the long wait? Not sure.

Some other notes: About the only thing missing that I was expecting/hoping for was some sort of Exposé/widget function. Especially on the iPad. When Steve was asked about it he said, "Anything is possible." Also, when asked if there were plans to support Flash or java being supported, he answered plainly, "No." 

As far as closing applications when you are done using them, According to Apple, "You don't have to." "In multitasking, if you see a task manager... they blew it."

I for one will enjoy the update. The folders and enhanced mail are worth it alone. What do you think? Excited about this? Leaves you wanting more?


For images and the full details of the iPhone OS 4.0 event, you can go here to Engadget.com.

Honda U3-X Personal Mobility Device

This thing is dope! Small, portable, and easy to store transportation. Not sure how well it would handle bumps and uneven terrain, but pretty cool none-the-less. Definitely could see these catching on in big cities if they could make them cheap enough.

Check out the video over at Engadget.com

Possible/Probable expansion of March Madness

I really hope this is an April Fool's Day joke, but sadly, I don't think it is.

During the last couple of days, the sports world is reporting that the NCAA is considering the likely expansion of March Madness to 96 teams. That's right. Ninety-six.

The purpose of a tournament is to find the best team and crown them champion. So that means only "the best" teams should get into the tournament to begin with. By having so many teams, all you do is dilute the tournament as a whole.

• Fact 1: A #16 seed has never beaten a #1 seed. (I'm sure it will happen some day, but that's beside the point.)

• Fact 2: The highest seed to ever win the tournament was Villanova in 1985, who was #8. That would have made them somewhere around the 32nd best team going into the tournament. 

Right now there are 65 teams. Does anyone really think that a team coming into the tournament ranked in the 40's or higher will actually win the whole thing? Well, I'm sure someone does, but I'm sure someone believes there's a leprechaun living in their closet, too. You get my point.

So what will having 96 teams accomplish? Oh, that's right, money. The NCAA is after your money. Which is the main reason college football still doesn't have a playoff. The bowl system makes the NCAA (and schools) way too much moola for them to change anything; except maybe add more bowl games.

On top of all of this, the NCAA is so hypocritical is makes me sick. They claim one of the main reasons they won't do a football playoff is because the athletes would have to miss too much class. But then they turn around and are talking about expanding one of the biggest tournaments in all of college sports. (Not to mention the fact that the lower level football schools already have a playoff system.) Right now, teams go home for a couple of days between the weekends of playing. With the current expansion proposal, that would not be possible, as they would have games starting on Tuesdays. (i.e., they miss more class time.)

I see an expansion to 96 teams doing a few things, much of which I have gathered from the combination of many sources:

1. The regular season ceases to matter. This is the biggest issue, in my opinion. If everyone and their brother gets in, who will truly care about their regular season games?
2. Conference tournaments suffer as the best teams let their benches play most of the time.
3. We watch an additional "half-round" of opening games with some of the most boring upsets anyone has ever seen. Will we really care if the 96th best team beats the 36th best team? Or if the 10th best Big East team beats the 9th best Big 12 team? Probably not.
4. People stop caring about filling out brackets because it becomes a mental chore, all culminating in...
5. The death of the best thing that happens in sports all year. Its mutilated remains laid at the altar of the almighty dollar.

Going back to the fact that a #16 has never beaten a #1, none, and I repeat none, of the additional teams that would get in under a 96 team bracket (teams 66 - 96) would have a realistic chance of winning the whole tournament. NONE.

The bottom line: the NCAA is considering this expansion to line their pockets, and not for the integrity of the game.

I propose the creation of a new authority in college athletics. The DCAA. The Democratic Collegiate Athletic Association. If there was a vote on what the fans and players wanted to see in college sports, I can almost guarantee that the majority of people want the best tournament in college sports, March Madness, left alone, and they want to see a true champion in college football determined by a playoff.