We have basically stopped paying close attention to Ted Miller's stale and boilerplate analysis on his ESPN "Pac-10 blog." It is crystal clear by now that he is basically a corporate robot who is blogging just to shill for the conference and hype up the games that are scheduled to be broadcast on the Disney run ABC/ESPN.
Yet even for a corporate robot once in a while you stumble into lines that are beyond eye opening. Kind of like lines like this one, which Miller posted in reaction to news about Southern Cal getting stripped of its 2004 national championship by the Football Writers Association of America (emphasis added):
USC fans should take solace in this: After all the symbolic slings and arrows are thrown, everyone knows that USC walked away from the 2004 season as the consensus national champion, at least in terms of the football part of football. Nothing it did wrong -- by any measure -- gave it a competitive advantage.
ROFL. Of course if Miller had any shred of intellectual honesty he would have noted that if the Trogans were a law abiding program, they would have kept Bush off the field when it was obvious to everyone else around LA football scene that he was on the take. In fact Miller writes this in the same post:
[W]hatever you feel about the severity of NCAA penalties, the Trojans used an ineligible player -- Reggie Bush -- that season.
Uh yes. The Trojans cheated by using "an ineligible player" yet they didn't gain any kind of "competitive advantage" from it. And people wonder why so many ESPN analysts are reviled, mocked and lampooned around the country. Fight on Teddy.