This article appeared in last week’s Daily Texan and it may be the single dumbest thing I’ve ever read…
Championship revelry a sham
By Eric SeufertThe 2005 “National Champion” Longhorn football team apparently deserves a pat on the back, although I couldn’t tell you why. Sure, winning a football game is an accomplishment – kudos.
But I am under the impression that this is the first national title we’ve won in 35 years. My question to the Longhorns: Where are the other 34?
America was founded on an ideology of consistently outperforming our enemies and allies, not self-congratulation at the initial throes of success. Texas’ 34-year losing streak brings to mind a similar struggle that America endured, and, thanks to the continuous efforts of our sage statesmen, ultimately routed: the Cold War.
Jack Kennedy didn’t drink himself stupid on Sixth Street after making Khrushchev tuck tail out of Cuba in ’62. Ronald Reagan didn’t appear on The Tonight Show after devising the Star Wars defense program. No, the heroes of the Cold War recognized and appreciated the fact that defeating the Soviets would require diplomatic endurance and that no one success could ensure ultimate victory. Longhorns, take notice: We may have won a battle, but we have yet to win the war.
Truth be told, isn’t all this celebrating a little un-American? I don’t see George W. Bush throwing up the horns with regards to the Iraqi war, and I think democratizing the Middle East bears more weight than a 3-point squeaker on the old gridiron. If the president of the United States can exercise humility in the face of globally recognized humanitarian victory, I think a couple of jocks can limit their festivities to spirited locker-room antics.
The truth is, no one likes a braggart, and the fanfare that has accompanied our Rose Bowl win smacks of arrogance. A brash show of dominance is no way for a champion to act, and I should know – I’m a winner. In fact, just last week I was intimate with a woman whom most people would consider “out of my league.” Did I call up my buddies the next day to boast about my exploits? No – I asked her for a ride home and humbly went about my business. Don’t kiss and tell, Texas, it’s not classy.
The point I’m masterfully illustrating is that our one big win is being overshadowed by our schoolboy glee. I can understand the desire to let loose a little – heck, I’ve been known to crack open a frosty while hunting down non-performers in my stock portfolio – but the merrymaking has been taken too far. We should be celebrating on a level that matches our accomplishment, and tossing the pigskin around doesn’t warrant an all-out orgy of buffoonery.
Let’s scale back the partying, Texas. If only one out of my 35 investments was making me money, I wouldn’t be downing shots at Maggie Mae’s – I’d be having a stern discussion with my broker.
Unbelievable. The Daily Texan was a pretty good read when I was in school and I know the sports coverage was well worth ignoring an Economics professor for, so I hope this article isn’t a reflection on it’s current standards.
In addition to being completely stupid, his whole argument is based on the premise that winning a college football national title and making money off an investment are remotely similar. That comparison fails in so many ways, namely that only one team (okay, maybe two teams) is crowned champion of college football every season while the success of one stock has little to do with the success of another. In a bull market it’s feasible that a majority of stocks will have positive returns and even in a market downturn there’s plenty of opportunities for profits. It would be a much better analogy if each year only a single stock made money and only a single investor could own that stock.
I bet you sure would be throwing some blowout if that single investor was you three times in 42 years. Wouldn’t you Eric?
reply to #1
Brandon 97
February 1st, 2006 at 9:10 am
Apparently it was a bad attempt at humor, as the satire has been lost on everyone who read the article, including myself. However, other reports have indicated that it was supposed to be satirical.