How NOT to Bounce Back From a Shocking Loss

---

---

It was — beyond any doubt — the upset of the young college football season.

There may well be other upsets in the weeks ahead. As a matter of fact, experience tells me there will be other upsets. It's the nature of the beast.

But none will tear at my heart the way the upset in my one–time hometown of Little Rock did last Saturday night.

The beginning of any sports season brings with it fresh optimism for the future. That optimism is eventually dashed for most teams — earlier for some than for others — and, having been a fan of the Arkansas Razorbacks most of my life, as well as a graduate of the school, I long ago grew accustomed to the idea that, no matter how good the Razorbacks were, someone would knock them off.

(They have only had one unblemished season in my lifetime — but I was far too young to appreciate it.)

Usually, that someone was Texas. There were a couple of years in there in which Texas was the only team to beat the Razorbacks, but, mostly, the Texas loss was merely one of several. It wasn't always the first blemish. It was just the one you could always count on.

But sometimes the first loss came at the hands of a completely unexpected nemesis. I remember one particularly brutal season in which The Citadel, of all schools, upset the Razorbacks in the season opener — and cost the head coach his job.

None of those surprises could match Arkansas' overtime loss to Louisiana–Monroe last Saturday, though, and the voters in the Associated Press poll seem to agree with me. After all, Arkansas fell from #8 completely out of the poll.

But the Razorbacks will remain in the Top 25 conversation for at least another week. Top–ranked Alabama is in town today, and my guess is it won't be pretty.

On the other hand ...

This reminds me of my senior year at Arkansas. In early October, the Razorbacks lost to TCU for the first time in my life. A couple of weeks later, top–ranked Texas came to Fayetteville.

The general consensus was that Texas would win easily. My girlfriend and I had tickets to the game, but we considered — briefly — not going. In the end, though, we couldn't stay away. It was the only time the Arkansas–Texas game would be played in Fayetteville during our college careers, and we decided to go. If the game was out of hand by halftime, we agreed, we would leave.

As it turned out, the Razorbacks won, 42–11.

That's what it's always been like — at least, as far back as I can remember. Arkansas wins when it is supposed to lose and loses when it is supposed to win.

I'm not saying that is what will happen today. I'm just saying it has happened before — and I know because I was there.

I'll also say that playing the top–ranked team in the land the week after a shocking loss to an inferior foe is not the way to revive a team — especially one that gave up an average of 436 yards per game to the likes of Jacksonville State and ULM.

Makes me dread seeing what Alabama QB A.J. McCarron, currently the third–best passer in the country, is going to do to the Arkansas secondary.

This may be a brutal experience for Arkansas fans.

Idle: #5 Oklahoma

Today

• #1 Alabama at Arkansas, 2:30 p.m. (Central) on CBS: When I was in school at the University of Arkansas, the Razorbacks played the Alabama Crimson Tide for what was only the second time — ever.
  
  That really surprised me when I first heard it. The schools seemed like natural regional rivals. They just never scheduled each other.
  
  They've been playing each other regularly for the last 20 years, though, ever since Arkansas joined the Southeastern Conference. And Arkansas has performed pretty well, at times, but Alabama has owned the series since 2007.
  
  Most folks probably expect Alabama to extend that streak, given that Arkansas lost last week to a team it should have hammered — and, in the process, apparently lost its quarterback.
  
  ESPN has been reporting that QB Tyler Wilson, who suffered a head injury in last week's loss, will not play against Alabama. Former coach Bobby Petrino seems to have kept a stable of talented quarterbacks on his roster so there are some good backups available — but they lack the experience to remain cool in the face of Alabama's tenacious defense.
  
  And, although I really would love to see the Razorbacks win, I'm afraid that it just isn't in the cards this year. I pick Alabama.
• #2 USC at #21 Stanford, 6:30 p.m. (Central) on Fox: These schools first played each other 90 years ago — when Warren Harding was president.
  
  USC won seven of the first 10 meetings and has dominated the series overall, but Stanford has won four of the last five. Of course, that was accomplished with Andrew Luck in the lineup. Without him, I have to go with USC.
• Idaho at #3 LSU, 7 p.m. (Central) on ESPN3.com: These schools have met once before, in Baton Rouge in 1998, and LSU won, 53–20.
  
  Today's game is in Baton Rouge as well, but expectations are exceedingly low for Idaho.
  
  Actually, I don't think it would matter if the game was being played in Idaho — or if they had never faced each other before. I expect LSU to win by a wide margin.
• Tennessee Tech at #4 Oregon, 2 p.m. (Central) on Pac–12: Another first–time matchup that shouldn't be close.
  
  Oregon should have no trouble winning this one.
• Wake Forest at #5 Florida State, 11 a.m. (Central) on ESPN: These schools became conference rivals 20 years ago, but they were already familiar with each other, having met 10 times as nonconference opponents.
  
  In all, they have played 30 times, and Florida State has dominated the series about as thoroughly as is possible. The Seminoles are 23–6–1 in the series — but, ironically, Wake Forest has won two of the last three games played at FSU.
  
  Can Wake Forest make it three of the last four? Well, I guess anything is possible — but not necessarily probable. I expect Florida State to win handily.
• Florida Atlantic at #7 Georgia, 6:30 p.m. (Central) on CSS: These schools are meeting for the first time.
  
  And I refer you to the Tennessee Tech–Oregon game. Using the same logic, I pick Georgia.
  
• Alabama–Birmingham at #8 South Carolina, 6 p.m. (Central) on FSS: South Carolina dodged a bullet in the opener against Vanderbilt.
  
  But UAB hasn't had a winning season since 2004. I expect South Carolina to trounce UAB tonight.



• James Madison at #9 West Virginia, 3:30 p.m. (Central) on ROOT: I'm not sure if West Virginia is a Top 10 team.
  
  But I cannot imagine the Mountaineers losing this game. I pick West Virginia.



• #20 Notre Dame at #10 Michigan State, 7 p.m. (Central) on ABC: These teams first met just before the turn of the century — including that day back in 1899, they have played 69 games in all.
  
  Folks with long memories will tell you the teams fought to a 10–10 tie when they were the top two teams in the country in 1966. Notre Dame has been the winner more frequently, regardless of the venue, but the Irish have lost the last two times they have visited Michigan State.
  
  And my instincts tell me they will lose for the third straight time. It may be a relatively close score, at least when compared to some of the other matchups in the Top 25 this week, but when that final gun sounds, I expect Michigan State to be the winner.



• Furman at #11 Clemson, 2 p.m. (Central) on RSN: Another first–time matchup, and I just can't see Furman staying with Clemson long enough to make it interesting.
  
  I expect Clemson to win easily.



• California at #12 Ohio State, 11 a.m. (Central) on ABC: It's been 40 years since these schools last met on the football field.
  
  It's been even longer (more than 90 years) since California beat Ohio State. Since that lone victory for the Bears over the Buckeyes, Ohio State has won five straight.
  
  Make that six for Ohio State.



• #13 Virginia Tech at Pittsburgh, 11 a.m. (Central) on ESPNU: This is actually a more extensive series than you might think.
  
  These schools have faced each other 11 times since 1993, and Tech has won seven of them, including the last three in a row.
  
  Times have changed. The teams were competing in the same conference in all their previous meetings but no more so they haven't played in nearly a decade.
  
  But this year they are renewing their series as a nonconference game for both schools. I don't expect a change in the outcome, though. I pick Virginia Tech.



• #14 Texas at Ole Miss, 8:15 p.m. (Central) on ESPN: These schools have played six times — but this will be their first encounter since 1966.
  
  Texas won all but one of those previous games.
  
  It would be nice to think that this game will be a throwback to the 1960s, when both schools were forces in football. But, with only eight wins in their last 26 games, the Rebels face quite a challenge against the Longhorns.
  
  And I don't think they're up to it. I pick Texas.



• North Texas at #15 Kansas State: This is an intriguing match for me — but not because I think it will be close. I don't.
  
  But it intrigues me because I hold degrees from Arkansas and North Texas. Arkansas beat Kansas State in the Cotton Bowl last January, and now KSU is hosting North Texas.
  
  It will be the second time in the last four games that one of my alma maters has faced K–State. I fully expected Arkansas to win the Cotton Bowl, and, likewise, I fully expect North Texas to lose today.
  
  Obviously, my pick is Kansas State.



• #16 TCU at Kansas: When I was growing up in Arkansas, a game between TCU and Kansas would have been regarded as the Toilet Bowl of college football.
  
  The TCU football program is more highly regarded today, and some of the teams the Frogs will be facing in their new conference will be first–time foes. But TCU and Kansas have played each other 28 times in the past.
  
  It's safe to say they know each other — or, at least, they know a lot about each other.
  
  They haven't faced each other in 15 years, and TCU hasn't beaten Kansas since 1994.
  
  I've found that history is frequently a useful guide in anticipating the outcomes of future events — when it is applied to some human endeavors — but such history in sports is practically ancient history and has little, if any, bearing on what will happen.
  
  Having said that, though, I expect TCU to win.



• Massachusetts at #17 Michigan, 2:30 p.m. (Central) on Big Ten Network: I would expect this to be a much more competitive matchup if it was in basketball.
  
  But in football — in the Big House of Ann Arbor — I expect Michigan to win by a substantial margin.



• #18 Florida at #23 Tennessee, 5 p.m. (Central) on ESPN: Before the season began, I never would have predicted that both of these schools would be ranked when they played each other in mid–September.
  
  Nevertheless ...
  
  Each team holds a slight advantage at home. If there is a genuine historical edge for either team, it may be the fact that Florida has won seven consecutive games against Tennessee.
  
  The Volunteers have only had three winning seasons since the last time they beat the Gators. Florida, meanwhile, won two national championships and a Heisman Trophy — and the Gators haven't been through a season in which they lost more games than they won since 1979.
  
  Having said that, I suppose it is to be assumed that I pick Florida to win this game — which, in fact, I do — but I think it will be very entertaining, and I expect the score to be close.



• North Carolina at #19 Louisville, 2:30 p.m. (Central) on ABC: History says this game should be entertaining.
  
  Louisville is 1–1 at home (Carolina is 2–2). Half of the games in the series have been decided by a touchdown or less; of course, there have also been blowouts (such as the time in 2005 when Louisville won, 69–14, or the game the year before that Louisville won, 34–0).
  
  As Forrest Gump might say, you never know what you're going to get. Still, I will go with the favorite — Louisville.



• Houston at #22 UCLA, 9:30 p.m. (Central) on Pac–12 Network: This will only be the seventh time these schools have met, but there is a definite pattern. The home team is 2–1, which means that history favors the Bruins.
  
  So, too, I suppose, does common sense. UCLA, after all, is coming off what appears to be a major victory over Nebraska, and is ranked in the Top 25. That's pretty heady stuff for a program that has won only three bowl games in the last 14 years.
  
  But I'm inclined to think UCLA will be up to the challenge and will defeat Houston.



• South Carolina State at #24 Arizona, 9:30 p.m. (Central) on Pac–12 Network: It's hard to imagine South Carolina State traveling across the country to Arizona — and emerging with a win.
  
  Of course, as last Saturday's game in Little Rock demonstrated, anything really can happen. But I don't think anything like that will happen at Arizona tonight. I pick Arizona to win by a wide margin.



• #25 Brigham Young at Utah, 9 p.m. (Central) on ESPN2: This will be the 88th edition of this series, and Utah has dominated it — although the Utes have been far more successful at home (34–16–3), where this year's game will be played.
  
  That should work in the Utes' favor, right?
  
  Actually, I think it will.
  
  Look, it's still early in the season, and, let's face it, many teams are ranked simply because they were successful in the past. But, aside from a handful of early tests, most teams remain unknown quantities.
  
  So the fact that BYU is ranked and Utah is not does not mean much to me.
  
  I predict a very close game, and I pick Utah to win it.

Last week: 18–6

Season: 40–6

Notre Dame, Purdue Renew Rivalry Today

---

Purdue and Notre Dame renew their rivalry today.

---

College football is loaded with traditions and rivalries.

And there may be no other program in America that is as rich in its football history as Notre Dame.

When one thinks of Notre Dame's rivals, one's thoughts may turn to Southern California, Michigan, Navy and Michigan State. And, to be sure, those are great rivalries.

But, today, Notre Dame will face its instate rival, Purdue, and I would put the Notre Dame–Purdue rivalry up against any of those others.

It was a fixture in the first six seasons that the legendary Knute Rockne coached the Fighting Irish, but they stopped playing each other after the 1923 season and didn't revive the series until a couple of years after Rockne's death in 1931.

I don't know if it was regarded as a rivalry in those days — if it was, it was a sporadic one that went between meetings for years at a time.

The series didn't become an annual thing until 1946, but the schools have faced each other in every year since, often producing memorable performances.

Of course, rivalries are always more interesting if at least one of the teams is ranked — and, this year, the Irish are ranked.

Whether they will be ranked when the season is over is another matter.

But it can be said — without reservation — that Notre Dame is ranked this weekend.

Idle: #9 West Virginia

Today

• Western Kentucky at #1 Alabama, 2:39 p.m. (Central) on SEC Network: These teams have only met once, in 2008, and 'Bama won, 41–7.
  
  But I don't think anyone who watched 'Bama dismantle Michigan last week could possibly doubt that the Tide can handle Western Kentucky, probably by a wide margin.
  
  I pick Alabama.
• #2 USC at Syracuse, 2:30 p.m. (Central) on ABC: This will be the second straight year these teams have played.
  
  That's quite an improvement in frequency, considering that the teams had met only twice prior to that — in 1924 and 1990.
  
  The Trojans have won all three previous meetings, and, while I expect them to lose at least once this season, this won't be a weekend when they lose. I have to go with USC.
• Washington at #3 LSU, 6 p.m. (Central) on ESPN: This is the third time these schools have met on the football field.
  
  LSU won both of the previous encounters by an average margin of 17 points. The Tigers are tough to beat in Baton Rouge, and I feel confident in predicting that LSU will win this game.
• Fresno State at #4 Oregon, 5:30 p.m. (Central) on Pac–12: These two teams have actually played each other eight times before.
  
  It's been an interesting series. Fresno won the first two games, but Oregon has won every contest played since 1996.
  
  As good as the Ducks have been for the last few years, I fully expect Oregon to win this game.
• Florida A&M at #5 Oklahoma: These teams will be meeting for the first time.
  
  But this is OU's home opener. I don't know if the Sooners are the fifth best team in the land, but I'm confident that Oklahoma will be able to handle Florida A&M.
• Savannah State at #6 Florida State, 5 p.m. (Central) on ESPN3.com: These teams will be meeting each other for the first time.
  
  They have no history to help observers anticipate the outcome.
  
  But is that necessary? It seems to me that Florida State should cruise to victory in this one.
• #7 Georgia at Missouri, 6:45 p.m. (Central) on ESPN2: Missouri's first SEC opponent is a team they have only played once before — in the January 1960 Orange Bowl.
  
  Georgia won that game, 14–0.
  
  Obviously, a game played more than 50 years ago has little in the way of insight to offer. But, in general, Georgia is probably the favorite to win. The Bulldogs, after all, were undefeated on the road last year, and they have won more than three–fourths of their road games since 2000.
  
  However, Missouri was 5–1 at home last year, and the Tigers have won 80% of their home games since 2000.
  
  Besides, Georgia will be without four defensive starters. So this looks — to me, at least — like the irresistible force meeting the not–quite–as–immovable object. I think it will be a close game.
  
  In what will probably be regarded as an upset, I will take Missouri to win by, perhaps, a field goal.
• Louisiana–Monroe at #8 Arkansas, 6 p.m. (Central) on ESPNU: This is one of those series the Razorbacks started after they joined the SEC 20 years ago.
  
  It wasn't part of the Arkansas experience I had in Fayetteville. The schools first met more than a decade after I finished school there.
  
  But this will be the 10th time they have played, and Arkansas won the first nine by an average margin of about three touchdowns.
  
  I watched Arkansas' season opener on the internet last week, and I had some issues with the defense (which, supposedly, would be better this season). The Razorbacks might very well struggle against top–ranked Alabama, their opponent next week, but I see no reason why Arkansas should not beat Louisiana–Monroe.
• East Carolina at #9 South Carolina, 11:21 a.m. (Central) on SEC Network: These teams first met in 1977, and South Carolina won the first eight encounters.
  
  But East Carolina has held the upper hand in five of the eight games played since 1991.
  
  And it is tempting to pick ECU to win this one, but I think South Carolina is just too good — and should win by three touchdowns.
• #11 Michigan State at Central Michigan, 2:30 p.m. on ESPNU: Believe it or not, the first two times these schools faced each other, Central Michigan was the winner.
  
  This will be the ninth time these schools have squared off, and Michigan State has been 5–1 since losing those first two meetings.
  
  But this year will be different, if only because Central Michigan will be the host — for the first time.
  
  Is that going to change the outcome? I doubt it. I pick Michigan State.
• Ball State at #12 Clemson, 11:30 a.m. on ACC Network: There is an interesting pattern in this rarely played series.
  
  The first meeting came in the 1992 season. Clemson won that game. The teams did not meet again for 10 years. Clemson won the 2002 rematch.
  
  Both games, like the one that will be played today, were played at Clemson. And I expect the outcome to be about the same — Clemson by about 20 points.
• #13 Wisconsin at Oregon State, 3 p.m. (Central) on FX: When these teams met last season, it was their first meeting in 50 years.
  
  But the outcome did not change, only the margin. Wisconsin barely won the 1961 encounter, but the Badgers rolled over the Beavers last year.
  
  I expect Wisconsin to win by perhaps a touchdown.
• Central Florida at #14 Ohio State, 11 a.m. (Central) on ESPN2: These schools have never faced each other before, and I am inclined to believe that the Buckeyes will win the game.
  
  I know that is based on the schools' reputations (or lack thereof), but I also know that UCF has had a fair amount of success in recent years. So I expect a close game — say, Ohio State by five.
• Austin Peay at #15 Virginia Tech, 12:30 p.m. (Central) on ESPN3.com: This one is a first, just like the Florida State game.
  
  And I am inclined to believe that Virginia Tech will be an easy winner. Nothing more needs to be said.
• #16 Nebraska at UCLA, 6:30 p.m. (Central) on Fox: This may be the most entertaining game on the schedule, and it is already an interesting series.
  
  These schools have faced each other 10 times — but it has been nearly 20 years since their last encounter.
  
  Both schools have hosted the other five times, and home field advantage clearly plays a role in the outcome. Nebraska is 4–1 in its home games against UCLA, and UCLA is 3–2 in its home games against Nebraska.
  
  Consequently, the smart pick when these teams are facing other is the home team, whichever team that may be.
  
  UCLA is the home team this time — and the Bruins might very well win the game — but I'm going to go with Nebraska.
• New Mexico at #17 Texas, 7 p.m. (Central) on Longhorn Network: These teams have played each other twice before, but this will be their first meeting since 1988.
  
  The outcomes of those previous meetings were remarkably consistent. Both were 47–0 victories for Texas. Those other two games were played in Austin, as tonight's game will be.
  
  Texas has struggled in recent years — but not as much as New Mexico, which has finished 1–11 in each of the last three seasons — and the Longhorns have lost as many as they have won in Austin in the last couple of years, but I expect Texas to prevail, probably by a wide margin.
• #18 Oklahoma State at Arizona, 9:30 p.m. (Central) on Pac–12: Historically, OSU holds a 5–3 advantage over Arizona.
  
  But that really doesn't mean much to the current groups because, before the teams resumed their series in the 2010 Alamo Bowl, they had not met since World War II.
  
  Arizona had a rough season last year. The Wildcats enjoyed modestly better years in the preceding seasons, and they will be hosting the Cowboys for the first time since 1942 — which also happens to be the last time Arizona beat Oklahoma State.
  
  Oklahoma State is not the same team that went 12–1 last year, but the Cowboys do still have some of the talent that made that season possible. I expect Oklahoma State to win.
• Air Force at #19 Michigan, 2:30 p.m. (Central) on ABC: These teams have played only once before — in 1964 when Michigan prevailed, 24–7.
  
  The Wolverines didn't cover themselves with glory last week against Alabama, but I expect Michigan to notch its first win of the season this week.
• Grambling at #20 TCU, 6 p.m. (Central) on FSSW: TCU was idle last week — so no one really knows if the Horned Frogs are worthy of being ranked.
  
  This season is going to be one in which TCU will have to prove itself — repeatedly — against some old foes — Texas, Texas Tech, Baylor — and some fairly new ones — Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas State.
  
  I don't believe, though, that the Frogs will face much of a challenge in their season opener. I pick TCU to win this one.
• Miami (Fla.) at #21 Kansas State, 11 a.m. on FX: These teams met for the first time last season, and it was a pretty close game. KSU won but only by four points, 28–24.
  
  The rematch is being played in Kansas, as was last year's game, and I expect the same outcome — but not the same margin. I think Kansas State will win by a wider margin this time.
• Purdue at #22 Notre Dame, 2:30 p.m. on NBC: This has to be the oldest series on today's Top 25 schedule.
  
  These schools met for the first time in 1896, and this will be the 81st contest between them. Notre Dame has dominated the series, winning 53 times, including the last four in a row and six of the last seven.
  
  I expect Notre Dame to make it five in a row, but I think it will be close.
• Missouri State at #23 Louisville, 2:30 p.m. on ESPN3.com: I don't know much about Louisville — except that the Cardinals have had some pretty good seasons in recent years.
  
  And all I really know about Missouri State is that the school was known as Southwest Missouri State when I was in college at Arkansas.
  
  But I have heard nothing that would lead me to conclude that Missouri State is capable of going into Louisville this afternoon and winning this game.
  
  Just the opposite, in fact. I think Louisville will win by a wide margin.
• #24 Florida at Texas A&M, 2:30 p.m. (Central) on ESPN: The Aggies officially begin their existence as members of the SEC today.
  
  Their opponent is Florida, a team the Aggies have played twice before — but not since the 1977 Sun Bowl.
  
  Most people probably will pick the Gators in this game, but the Aggies have won roughly three–fourths of their home games in the last three years. I'm going to pick Texas A&M in an upset special.
• Duke at #25 Stanford, 9:30 p.m. (Central) on Pac–12: This isn't a very extensive series — the teams have met only three times — but the visiting team has won every time.
  
  Actually, I think that pattern will change this year. I expect Stanford to win, perhaps by three touchdowns or more.
  
  Other than jet lag, I expect Duke to bring little to tonight's game.

Last week: 22–0

Season: 22–0

Let the Games Begin

---

Ninth–ranked South Carolina and Vanderbilt bring
Top 25 football back to your living room tonight.

---

I grew up in the South so it probably goes without saying that I am a football fan.

By the same token, I suppose it would also go without saying that I am a NASCAR fan — except I am not. I also don't care for iced tea or chicken–fried steak.

So I don't fit the Southern stereotype precisely — although I do like watermelon, biscuits and gravy, grits, cornbread, turnip greens and fried catfish. Not to mention peach cobbler.

And I do enjoy watching football games — especially college football games.

And Top 25 college football returns tonight. Some are renewals of rivalries. Most appear to be first–time meetings. Most of the time, Top 25 teams roll over their early foes, and I expect that to happen a lot this weekend.

But there are a few nuggets scattered about for the discerning football viewer.

Whatever. Football is back. Let the games begin.

Idle: #20 TCU

Today

• #9 South Carolina at Vanderbilt, 6 p.m. (Central) on ESPN: These teams have faced each other 21 times, and South Carolina has won 17. As members of the SEC East, they have been meeting every year since South Carolina joined the conference in 1992.
  The Gamecocks have won 10 of the last 12 meetings between the schools and own a three–game winning streak. I have to go with South Carolina.

Friday

• #24 Boise State at #13 Michigan State, 7 p.m. (Central) on ESPN: This is the first–ever meeting between these schools, and it is the first meeting of the season between two ranked teams. There's another one coming up on Saturday night between Michigan and Alabama.
  Boise State has enjoyed considerable success in recent years, but Michigan State plays in a more high–profile conference. And the Spartans are at home besides. I expect Michigan State to win by 10.
• San Jose State at #21 Stanford, 9 p.m. (Central) on Pac–12: These two West Coast teams are familiar foes, having played each other 58 times since 1950.
  Stanford has dominated the series, 43–14–1, with most of the games having been played at Stanford. In fact, San Jose State hasn't won at Stanford since Sept. 9, 2000.
  I don't think that will change. Give me Stanford.

Saturday

• Hawaii at #1 USC, 6:30 p.m. (Central) on FOX: I'm not sure how I feel about USC.
  I honestly think the Trojans are overrated, but I really think they should beat Hawaii. USC has played Hawaii five times before and won each time by double–digit margins.
  Absent any reason to do otherwise, I pick USC to win this game, but things will get tougher for the Trojans as the season wears on.
• #8 Michigan at #2 Alabama, 7 p.m. (Central) on ABC: These schools have faced each other three times in the postseason (with Alabama winning each time), but they have never played during the regular season.
  I think it will be close — with a final margin of three or four points — but I'll take the defending national champion, Alabama.
• North Texas at #3 LSU, 7 p.m. (Central) on ESPN: LSU is 4–0 all time against North Texas, and each victory was lopsided (LSU's win in their last meeting — in 2008 — was the closest, and LSU won that game by nearly 40 points).
  The Tigers are sure to be thinking about being in the national championship game this year — and may not be as focused on North Texas as they should. It might be a prime opportunity for an upset, but I'm not sure North Texas has the horses to pull it off.
  I'll go with LSU.
• #4 Oklahoma at UTEP, 9:30 p.m. (Central) on FSN: Oklahoma buried UTEP in the teams' other two encounters, but both of those games were played at OU.
  Will the change of scenery make a difference? I doubt it. I take Oklahoma.
• Arkansas State at #5 Oregon, 9:30 p.m. (Central) on ESPN: This will be the first meeting between these schools.
  As I have written here many times, I grew up in Arkansas. And ASU was never really much in football.
  Oh, occasionally, ASU would enjoy flashes of success, but I have heard nothing that suggests the Ducks will have any problem in this game. I pick Oregon to win.
• Buffalo at #6 Georgia, 11:21 a.m. (Central) on SEC Network: These schools are meeting for the first time.
  Many observers believe Georgia will have a great season, and perhaps the Bulldogs will. Beating Buffalo will mean little — except that Georgia is taking care of business as expected.
  And I believe Georgia will take care of business.
• Murray State at #7 Florida State, 5 p.m. (Cental) on ESPN3: I don't think these schools have ever played a football game against each other.
  But, honestly, it hardly matters. The Seminoles are in the Top 10. They're playing at home.
  I fully expect Florida State to win the game.
• Jacksonville State at #10 Arkansas, 7 p.m. (Central) on ESPN3: I believe this is the first meeting between Jacksonville State and Arkansas.
  To be honest, I always feel a little uneasy about picking an Arkansas game because I think I will come across as biased if I pick the Hogs — being a graduate of the school and all.
  But, frankly, I can't see Jacksonville State winning this one. The Razorbacks might very well lose to Alabama or LSU — or anyone else in the SEC on any given Saturday — but I can't see any circumstances that would permit Jacksonville State to win.
  I pick Arkansas.
• Marshall at #11 West Virginia, 11 a.m. (Central) on FX: You'd think these schools would natural rivals, wouldn't you?
  The campuses, after all, are only about 160 miles apart.
  But the teams have only met seven times. West Virginia has won them all, usually by wide margins although the game at Marshall two years ago was won by a field goal.
  I expect West Virginia to improve to 8–0 against Marshall.
• Northern Iowa at #12 Wisconsin, 2:30 p.m. (Central) on Big Ten Network: This is another one of those matchups that looks, on paper, like a natural neighborhood rivalry — the schools are about 160 miles apart, but they have never played each other before.
  And I just can't see Northern Iowa winning this one. I pick Wisconsin.
• Auburn at #14 Clemson, 6 p.m. (Central) on ESPN: This series goes back more than a century.
  The teams met for the first time in 1902, and they have played 46 times since.
  The advantage in the series belongs to Auburn, nearly three to one. And, until Clemson beat Auburn last season, Auburn had won 14 straight times (including two bowl games).
  But it is Clemson that enters the game this year ranked in the Top 25, thanks in large part to the ACC title Clemson won last year. Sports Illustrated reports the Clemson coach wants to build on that achievement, the Tigers' second ACC crown in three years.
  To borrow a word that is probably more often associated with basketball, Auburn is a bubble team in college football in 2012.
  The Tigers are generally well regarded, but they need some quality wins — and the Clemson game gives them an early opportunity — before they can crack the Top 25.
  If Cam Newton was still wearing an Auburn uniform, I might be inclined to pick Auburn. But I'm going to go with Clemson.
• Wyoming at #15 Texas: This will be the fifth time these teams have played.
  Texas won all four of the previous games, three of which were played in Austin.
  The teams are back in Austin this weekend, and I expect Texas to prevail.
  I'm certainly no devotee of the Longhorns, and I have my doubts about whether they deserve to be ranked where they are, but I am pretty sure they can handle Wyoming.
• Southern Miss at #17 Nebraska, 2:30 p.m. (Central) on ABC: Nebraska won the first two games between these schools, and Southern Miss won the third and most recent game.
  But none of the players on either roster has any experience playing the other school. Their last meeting was in 2004.
  I really don't know much about either team yet, but, going strictly on reputation, I'll take Nebraska.
• Miami (Ohio) at #18 Ohio State, 11 a.m. (Central) on Big Ten Network: This will be the third meeting between these schools — but the first since 2005.
  Ohio State is 2–0 in the series. And I have heard nothing that suggests that Miami (Ohio) could pull off a road upset.
  I'll go with Ohio State.
• Savannah State at #19 Oklahoma State: Troy Hambrick and Shannon Sharpe are Savannah State exes who went on to have careers in the NFL. But, otherwise, Savannah State hasn't been very noteworthy in athletics.
  In fact, the only time I can recall that the school made sports news was back in 2005 when its basketball team became the first Division I team to lose all its games. That isn't much of a legacy.
  Oklahoma State, on the other hand, has been one of the nation's top programs for several years. If not for a late–season loss to Iowa State, OSU might have played for the national title.
  Even so, the Cowboys beat Baylor, Oklahoma and Stanford last year. I see no reason why Oklahoma State should not prevail over Savannah State.
• Missouri State at #22 Kansas State: Missouri State was Southwest Missouri State for many years.
  The name was changed to Missouri State in 2005, and these two schools have played each other twice since then (with KSU rolling to victory both times). I don't know if they played each other when the school was still known as SMSU.
  But that doesn't really matter. I expect Kansas State to win the game.
• Bowling Green at #23 Florida, 2:30 p.m. (Central) on ESPN: These teams are meeting for the first time ever.
  Over the years, Bowling Green has had its moments, but Florida plays in the SEC. The Gators' returning players are always conditioned by their conference experience; by definition, that makes them better prepared for the start of a new season.
  And Florida is at home. Need I say more? I'll take Florida.

Sunday

• Kentucky at #25 Louisville, 2:30 p.m. (Central) on ESPN: This will be the 22nd meeting of these rivals, and it's been about as close as it could be. Kentucky holds a narrow 11–10 advantage in the series.
  It's a lot more intriguing as a basketball rivalry, but it's still a rivalry — and it is a game I expect Louisville to win.

Monday

• Georgia Tech at #16 Virginia Tech, 7 p.m. (Central) on ESPN: These schools first met in 1990, and they've been playing annually since 2004 — a total of nine games, and Virginia Tech has won two–thirds of them.
  An interesting pattern has emerged, however. Georgia Tech won the first game, then lost the next two meetings. In 2006, Georgia Tech won for the second time — and then lost the next two games.
  Once again, in 2009, Georgia Tech snapped its two–game losing streak to Virginia Tech — and Virginia Tech went on two win the next two after that.
  Consequently, it is Georgia Tech's turn — so I'm going to take Georgia Tech in an upset special.
  Most people — certainly the preseason polls — regard Virginia Tech as the better team, but, you see, this pattern doesn't respect records.
  The last time that Georgia Tech beat Virginia Tech, the Hokies went 10–4, and the only time that Georgia Tech won at Virginia Tech, the Hokies went 10–3.

Murder in Munich

---

---

When the Summer Olympic Games opened in Munich 40 years ago today, its motto was "the Happy Games."

Germany — which was divided into East and West in 1972 — was hosting its first Olympics since Nazi Germany hosted the 1936 Games in Berlin. West Germany was eager to provide a contrasting image to the world, reassuring all who watched that the Germany of 1972 was not the Germany of 1936. It was a place where people of all races and religions could come and compete peacefully.

More than 7,000 athletes from 121 nations participated in those Summer Games, and there were, as always, memorable moments.

• American swimmer Mark Spitz won seven gold medals, setting a standard that stood for more than 35 years.

• Soviet gymnast Olga Korbut captured the hearts of viewers around the world — as well as a few medals.

• America's basketball team lost the gold medal to the Soviets in a controversial finish. The Americans refused to accept the silver medal, which is still in Switzerland.

But the 1972 Olympic Games are not really remembered for any of those things. They are remembered mostly for acts of unbelievable barbarism and cruelty.

---

---

The image that emerged from the 1972 Games was not one of joy and optimism. It was more accurately summed up in a photograph by Kurt Strumpf of the Associated Press showing an Arab terrorist — a member of a group calling itself "Black September" — wearing a ski mask at the living quarters of the Israeli athletes.

The members of Black September broke into the Olympic Village on Sept. 5, 1972, and took 11 Israeli hostages. Two resisted and were killed on the spot; the rest were executed later.

A West German police officer and five terrorists were killed as well.

Initially, Olympic events were suspended, but then the International Olympic Committee's president declared, "The Games must go on!"

And so they did.

But the atmosphere was different. There was no longer a joyful feeling of brotherhood. Back here in the United States, it seemed that people were watching with their collective breath held and their fingers crossed, just hoping to finish the Games without anyone else being hurt or killed.

And it was with a sense of relief — and a collective release of held breath — that the world witnessed the comparatively peaceful conclusion of the 1972 Summer Olympics.

Fortunately, the Olympics have not been disrupted by violence — just politics — in the four decades since.

But, sadly, the threat has not diminished.

I don't know what the answer is.

We can continue to pretend that nothing like that can possibly happen again — until it does.

Or greater steps can be taken to truly promote the concepts of brotherhood and friendly competition.

That may be nearly impossible to achieve, given the vast differences and ancient animosities between some cultures. The Hatfields and McCoys had nothing some of these disputes.

But it may be the only plausible goal. Terrorism in the 20th century was bad enough with automatic weapons, but terrorism in the 21st century might involve nuclear weapons — the so–called "dirty bombs".

Still largely theoretical, these bombs wouldn't be as efficient as conventional nuclear weapons, but they could be capable of contaminating everything within a certain range of ground zero with high doses of radioactive material.

The detonation of such a bomb certainly would get the world's attention — and that is what terrorists crave.

They can also achieve attention through an invitation to negotiate, which may not be preferable, but it usually involves a lot less violence.

The time may be coming when the officials of the Olympics have to decide how they will continue to pursue their own goals while co–existing with those who wish to do them harm.

Augusta's Glass Ceiling

The decision by Augusta Golf Club to admit two women to its membership may be "better late than never," as the Boston Globe sneers.

And, with all the politically motivated accusations of a "war on women" being bandied about, I guess it really isn't surprising that Augusta may have felt a certain amount of pressure to end its long–standing prohibition against female members.

Fact is, though, that the PGA bears a certain amount of responsibility for this. More than 20 years ago, as Martha Burk writes for CNN, Augusta had to open its doors to blacks when an Alabama country club's restricted membership came under fire.

The PGA insisted that clubs that discriminated on the basis of race or gender would not be allowed to host a tournament, and some clubs, including the one in Alabama, complied in full. Others did not.

"But there was one exception — Augusta National," writes Burk. "It did open to black men 'after being pistol–whipped behind closed doors,' according to one major golf writer who was around at the time. But it drew the line on the girls."

As even a casual golf observer like myself can tell you, Augusta's policy has not kept the Masters from being one of the four major tournaments on the PGA's schedule every year. Burk is absolutely right when she says the PGA has been "officially ignoring its own policies and looking the other way."

So the PGA has been enabling Augusta's ban on women members.

Now, I'm not a golfer, and I have never been a member of a country club. Over the years, I have visited the country club in Dallas on the Fourth of July to watch fireworks displays, and, once or twice, I have joined my parents and their friends (who were our hosts) for dinner there. But that has been all.

A country club's membership policies really don't concern me — nor, for that matter, do the membership policies of any club. I figure, if a club doesn't want me to be a member for one reason or another (my age or where I grew up or where I went to school or anything else), that is the club's business.

(I'm tempted, at this point, to quote — or at least paraphrase — Groucho Marx's assertion that he wouldn't want to belong to a club that would have someone like him for a member.)

I might feel differently — probably would feel differently — if I was a member of a group that had felt the sting of discrimination, but I'm not. I'm white and male, two groups that have been regarded, historically, as privileged in this country (although many members of both groups haven't felt particularly privileged in the last few years).

And I do understand why many women feel that shattering Augusta's glass ceiling is important. It is symbolic — if nothing else — not unlike Sandra Day O'Connors' appointment to the Supreme Court or Sally Ride's historic trip to space or the vice presidential nominations of Geraldine Ferraro and Sarah Palin.

Or the rumors that have been floating periodically this year about Hillary Clinton replacing the vice president on the national ticket this fall.

I don't mean to suggest that those events were only significant in a symbolic sense. They represented breakthroughs for women. Other women have followed O'Connor to the Supreme Court and Ride into space.

And someday, a woman will be elected president or vice president.

It's empowering to be allowed where you've never been before. I get that.

But I also get that there are millions of people who are without work or have only part–time jobs, millions who have lost their savings and most of the value of their homes, millions who will never be able to retire and who will have to work until, literally, they drop.

It seems to me there are more important things to be concerned about right now than the membership policies of a country club, even one that hosts a PGA major event.

The Olympic Spirit

---

---

Like most Americans, I guess, I have been watching the Summer Olympics these last two weeks, rooting for the USA and all that.

And, as we near the conclusion of the 2012 Games, we have had some memorable moments but not necessarily iconic ones.

Well, I'll make a couple of exceptions on that one.

Although I already knew the outcome, last night I watched the women's beach volleyball gold–medal game — and applauded Kerri Walsh and Misty May on winning their third consecutive gold in the event.

After all, everyone knew it would be their final match together. It was a special moment.

I would say that watching them in that match, knowing it was the last one, was comparable to watching Michael Jordan play his final game of basketball or Babe Ruth play in his final game of baseball.

Except that, with only two athletes per team, it probably had more in common with tennis. So watching them play was probably like watching the final championship match between Martina Navratilova and Chris Evert.

They are legends of their sport — even if their sport, like so many Olympic sports, grabs our attention for a few days every four years.

Between now and 2016, if I watch beach volleyball at all, it probably will be accidental, a case of stumbling onto a broadcast while looking for something else to watch.

And I may stop and watch it for a few minutes — until I remember that there are other channels to check and, after making a mental note to return to the broadcast if I don't find something else to watch (which I probably will not do, settling instead for something that is vastly inferior), I will move on.

The Olympics make us temporary fans of sports we seldom watch at any other time.

I've seen nothing on the field to compare with the final seconds of the U.S.–U.S.S.R. hockey game of 1980 or the American gold rush at the 1984 Games in Los Angeles.

Or Kerri Strug's one–foot landing to secure the all–around gold medal for the U.S. gymnastics team in 1996.

Fortunately, though, we've had nothing similar to the killings of the Israeli athletes by terrorists at the 1972 Games in Munich — an event that has been rarely mentioned, at least in the TV coverage I have seen.

Maybe I have missed it, but I was sure that someone would say something about it since 2012 is the 40th anniversary of that indisputably dark chapter in Olympic history.

But it has been all but ignored at these Games.

---

---

Well, others may have overlooked the anniversary — either intentionally or unintentionally — but Aly Raisman did not.

Raisman, an 18–year–old American gymnast and "official Jewish heroine of the 2012 Olympic Games," in the words of Haaretz Israeli News' Allison Kaplan Sommer, saluted the "Munich 11" on the occasion of what must be considered her greatest personal triumph to date — her gold medal–winning performance in the floor exercise.

Leonard Greene of the New York Post put it this way:

"The martyrs were remembered this week during a London ceremony filled with sadness and reflection," Greene wrote. "But not a peep about them has been said publicly in the one place where it counts — at the Summer Games on Olympic soil."

Until Raisman.

Dream Fulfilled

---

---

In two days, the 2012 Summer Olympics will begin, and most sports fans will turn their attention to London for two weeks.

But it is worth remembering that 20 years ago today, America's professional "Dream Team" basketball squad made its debut at the Summer Olympics in Barcelona.

The 1992 Summer Games are remembered for many reasons:

• They were the last Summer Olympics to be held in the same year as the Winter Olympics.
• For the first time in more than 30 years, South Africa was allowed to compete.
• For the first time in nearly 30 years, Germany competed as a united country.
• The countries that had formed the Soviet Union until the year before were allowed to compete as a Unified Team.
  
  Under that banner, they won more medals than any other country.

And it was the first time that pro basketball players were allowed to compete; the United States formed its team from the very best the NBA had — Michael Jordan, Larry Bird, Magic Johnson.

The 1988 Olympic squad had been quite talented, too, but all the players were college players, and they finished third. Hopes were high in America in 1992, higher than they had been in, perhaps, 20 years — ever since the United States lost a controversial gold–medal game to the Soviet Union at the 1972 Games and refused to accept the silver medal.

For 20 years, that loss to the Soviets had gnawed at the American psyche. Prior to that day, the United States had not lost an Olympic basketball game since the sport was added to Olympic competition in 1936. The Americans had practically sailed through their first eight games, but they found themselves trailing the Russians at halftime and struggling in the final minutes.

With three seconds showing on the clock, the Americans were fouled and a player was awarded two free throws. He made the first and was in the process of shooting the second when the buzzer sounded; the Soviets had called a timeout. The player continued with his shot and made it, giving the Americans a one–point lead.

Under the rules that existed at the time, the ball was live, but play was stopped when the Soviets insisted they had called a timeout. There was some commotion at the scorers' table, play resumed and, eventually, the Soviets scored and won the game. The timeout and the ensuing sequence of events was a sore spot that never completely healed.

Even when the U.S. hockey team beat the mighty Soviet team in the 1980 Winter Games, the loss by the 1972 basketball team lingered and festered.

The Dream Team avenged the 1972 defeat and the disappointing 1988 finish in a big way — they went undefeated at Barcelona, winning every game by an average margin of 44 points. The Americans beat the Croatians twice, including in the gold–medal game, and Croatia did manage to hold the United States to its two lowest winning margins — 32 and 33 points.

The Americans' most lopsided victory came in the opener, a 116–48 win over Angola. The United States never scored fewer than 103 points, and its opposition never scored more than 85. And neither happened in the same game.

The Dream Team was kind of anticlimactic, though.

I mean, with all that talent, all that star power, it was practically regarded as a foregone conclusion that the U.S. basketball team would win the gold medal — and that none of the games would be close.

It all went as expected, too. There was no real suspense, no real drama. Only a diehard basketball fan could probably tell you who the Americans defeated in the gold–medal game.

But, for a true sports enthusiast, the absence of even a hint of uncertainty about the eventual outcomes, rendered the games mildly interesting. The only real issues to be settled were which player(s) would lead the team in scoring and rebounds.

Few championship games in any sport, amateur or professional, have been as lopsided as the U.S.'s game with Croatia. The U.S. did trail Croatia — briefly — in the first half, but that was about as much suspense as there was in any of the Dream Team's games.

When it was over, Sports Illustrated suggested that the Dream Team had been the most dominant team ever assembled in any sport.

I doubt that anyone argued the point.

The Conspiracy of Silence

---

---

"The most saddening finding is the total disregard by the most senior leaders at Penn State for the safety and welfare of Sandusky's child victims. ... Four of the most powerful people at ... Penn State ... failed to protect against a child sexual predator harming children for over a decade."

Freeh Report

---

I have a friend who has been a Penn State fan for — well — his whole life.

And I have thought of him every time the tragic story of Penn State and Jerry Sandusky has been in the news.

Each time, I hoped it would be the last time I would hear about Sandusky. But each time I have been wrong.

And now, I think, the shame that he brought to the university will live in infamy. It might have, anyway, but now I am certain of it.

See, my observation in my life has been that, once something has a commission or a committee assigned to investigate it — and that investigating body issues a report — that is what happens.

The Warren Commission, the Ervin Committee, the Tower Commission, the 9–11 Report. You can find 'em in any history book.

And now you'll be able to find one in the story of Penn State.

So, with the knowledge that Sandusky was convicted several months ago on nearly four dozen counts of sexual abuse and related crimes and with today's release of the Freeh Report that implicated Sandusky's former boss, late coach Joe Paterno, Penn State ex–President Graham Spanier, former athletic director Tim Curley and former vice president Gary Schultz, I wonder if this is really the end for this story.

There will be a report on the library shelves of every college and university — including, I presume, Penn State — that will testify to Penn State's shame.

Sandusky will spend the rest of his life in prison. Of his high–ranking enablers, Paterno — the respected and beloved coach whose high standards were legendary — was an "integral part" of an active effort to avoid negative publicity, today's report said.

And that is a tragic blow to the legacy of a man who was held in such high regard even by his foes.

For, you see, that is a revelation that rips at the very fabric of America. In what may be a mindless (and dangerous) automatic reflex, Americans have always placed great faith — blind faith — in authority figures — teachers, pastors, coaches — and I think most people could tell you of at least one authority figure who influenced the course of their lives.

So deeply ingrained is this faith in authority figures that the mind recoils from the thought that someone in whom such trust has been placed could so callously toss it aside — and that others, the highest–ranking officials at a major university, could engage in a conspiracy to prevent his crimes from becoming known to the public.

They were more than simply enablers. They held positions of trust, and they violated that trust.

And now there is a report — under the name of none other than the former director of the FBI — that bears witness to the "total disregard" they showed for the children who looked to them for guidance.

People have been known to get over many things. They are resilient beyond anything that can be imagined.

But one thing people almost never seem to get over is betrayal.

Sibling Rivalry

---

---

She needed three sets to do it, but Serena Williams held off a determined Agnieszka Radwanska to claim her fifth Wimbledon singles title Saturday.

"I always wanted everything Venus had," she joked after being reminded (for what, I am sure, was not the first time) that her sister Venus also has five Wimbledon singles titles — including one she claimed against Serena in 2008 (although three of Serena's titles have been won against Venus, including a 2009 rematch).

Serena has now won 14 Grand Slam titles, and, at the age of 30, the window for her to match Chris Evert and Martina Navratilova (with 18 each) may be closing — and the odds that she can match the all–time leader, Steffi Graf (22), may be nonexistent.

But even at 30, people speak in awe of Serena's serve, even her second serve, which most players seem to treat timidly. It is the best in the business, they say — and when I say "they," I include in that group Chris Evert, who was a commentator during today&apos's match.

Serena had the proper appreciation for her serve, Simon Cambers wrote in The Guardian, but she seemed baffled by its power.

"My serve really helped me throughout this tournament," she told Cambers. "I can't describe why it was so good or how it was so good. It's not like I practise it that much. I just had the rhythm."

Radwanska, who was seeded third, was no easy mark.

Serena cruised to a 6–1 victory in the first set but then faltered in the rain–delayed second set and had to hold off the hard–charging Radwanska in the third set, 6–2.

Over and over again, Radwanska seemed to be on the brink of overcoming Serena in that final set, just as she had in the first, but, in the end, the result was the same.

ESPN's announcers spoke of Radwanska's competitive nature, how the fact that she made it to the women's singles championship would not be enough for her, and that certainly appeared to be the case. Clutching her runnerup plate, she almost seemed to be in mourning.

Before the match, she had spoken with confidence of her chances to upend Serena.

A three–set duel clearly did not satisfy her.

I expect we will see her in Centre Court again.

Capturing the Color of Competition

---

---

When I heard that sports artist LeRoy Neiman had died at the age of 91, I knew I wanted to write about him — but I was torn.

I didn't know if I should write about him on my sports blog or my arts/entertainment blog.

After all, Neiman produced paintings and prints of musicians and other celebrities, too.

---

---

And he did it well.

He brought their personalities to the canvas in colorfully descriptive ways — but he also did that with sports topics.

And, as someone who worked for several years as a sports copy editor, I have an abiding appreciation for the magic that photographers make with the topics they are assigned to cover.

Many of the most exciting, most dramatic photos I have ever seen were of sports events. Neiman simply did with a brush what photographers once did with film.

---

---

They used to call the great Secretariat Big Red. Well, I guess I'm using the word they a bit loosely. Secretariat's owner, Penny Chenery Tweedy, called him that — but the rest of the world called him Secretariat.

In his portrait of Secretariat, Neiman emphasized the red in his coloring (which was never that obvious to me when he was running — that may have been the quality of the color in our TV set, but he always looked chestnut brown to me). I guess you could say he exaggerated it, much as a cartoonist would exaggerate an unusual physical characteristic of a human subject.

I first became acquainted with Neiman's work in magazines like Sports Illustrated, which often showcased his paintings of memorable moments, like Dwight Clark's reception in the January 1982 NFC championship game.

Or great Olympic performances. Or golf tournaments.

---

---

Mostly, though, I associate Neiman's artwork with Muhammad Ali. Neiman often did a painting following a big fight, and his work was always in great demand whenever Ali fought another big–name boxer, like George Foreman or Joe Frazier.

I kind of got the impression at the time that Ali was one of Neiman's favorite subjects. Perhaps he was. Artists are human, after all, and they certainly have their preferences, just like anyone else.

But I don't know that for certain. If Neiman ever spoke in an interview about preferring to paint Ali more than anyone else, I never read or heard it.

Perhaps William Grimes of the New York Times put it best when he wrote that Neiman "cast himself in the mold of French Impressionists ... chroniclers of public life who found rich social material at racetracks, dance halls and cafes."

Neiman may have been sort of like Red Smith, who once said that he believed that people went to sports events to have fun, then they picked up the newspaper the next day to read about it and have fun all over again.

Perhaps Neiman's way of having fun was to re–create great sports moments on his canvas.

His work is, in its way, iconic — moreso, I think, than Andy Warhol's paintings of Campbell's soup cans because at least it captures the color of life. It isn't merely a painter's version of the negative of a still life.

I will miss Neiman every time a memorable moment occurs in sports.