If TCU played in the Pac-10

Given the existing system, I have no beef with Oregon and Auburn playing for the national championship while TCU is left outs. But I do have a beef with a system that cannot consider an undefeated team with TCU's resume.* 

The difference between TCU and the two national title contenders is schedule strength - all three teams finished their regular seasons (plus conference championship game for Auburn) undefeated. TCU tore through its softer schedule, but would the Frogs have done against a tougher schedule - say, Oregon's schedule?

While we can't actually play the games, I've developed statistical techniques over the last several years to simulate games and seasons. We cannot know exactly what would happen without actually playing the games - anyone who tells you different is lying, ignorant, or both. But I can tell you, with a high degree of confidence, how likely it is that certain things happen. 

Without getting into the nitty gritty (you can find more detail here), the system simulates a team's performance against another team's schedule, adjusting for the different strengths and weaknesses of the teams, the location of the game, the sequence of games (team's play less well on average the week after a big game), etc.

TCU if facing Oregon's 2010 schedule:

TCU-Opp    [Odds]
60.3 - 3.0     [100%]  vs New Mexico
36.6 - 13.7  [94.6%]  @ Tennessee
61.1 - 3 .0   [100%]   vs Portland St.
36.4 - 15.9  [93.2%]  @ Arizona St.
31.3 - 27.6  [61.4%]  vs Stanford
42.4 - 11.5  [97.9%]  @ Washington St.
41.1 - 7.1    [98.6%]  vs UCLA
32.9 - 22.3  [78.2%]  @ USC
43.8 - 10.4  [98.5%]  vs Washington
29.1 - 13.4  [87.1%]  @ California
36.2 - 16.3  [92.7%]  vs Arizona
35.9 - 15.8  [92.2%]  @ Oregon St.

The toughest games would come against Stanford (61.4% chance of winning) and USC (78.2%), but TCU would have a better than 50% chance of winning every game on the schedule. All-in-all, TCU would have a 30.0% chance of finishing the season 12-0 and earning a spot in the title game. The Frogs would still need a few breaks, but 30% is much better than the real odds they had of playing for a national championship - zero. If TCU were to play through Oregon's schedule 1,000 times, we could expect them to win 10.9 on average.

                     TCU    Oregon
Undefeated   30.0%   63.7%
Exp. Wins      10.9      11.6

Oregon may be the better team - and my statistical model suggests they are - but if the two were to switch schedules, there is a good chance that TCU would be getting ready for a national championship game and Oregon would be celebrating a tough win the in Rose Bowl.

*Please feel free to learn more about the One Win Away proposition - the only logical solution to the college football national championship conundrum - here.

This Season's OWA Rankings

Earlier this month I laid out the logic of the One Win Away approach to the college football post-season. Tournaments are great for giving every deserving team a chance, but tournaments can weaken the regular season by admitting undeserving teams. The One Win Away approach is the perfect balance - only deserving teams are admitted into the season-ending tournament. Deserving teams are those that, if they were to beat the top-ranked team in a head-to-head, would then be ranked higher than that team - e.g. if Oregon beat Auburn, Oregon would then be ranked higher than Auburn. Therefore, by deduction, the team that wins the OWA tournament is also the team that had the strongest overall season. With the OWA approach, the size of the field will vary from year to year depending on the number of deserving teams, but there will typically be between 2 and 6 entrants.

I also suggested that the OWA field be selected using the BPR. Below is an analysis of this year's results and the OWA participants. The left column is the BPR rating, the right column is the OWA rating - the rating if the team were to beat Auburn. To qualify, a team's OWA rating must be higher than Auburn's OWA- rating in parentheses (Auburn's rating if it were to lose an additional game). Four teams would make the field this season - Auburn, Oregon, TCU, and Stanford. We would then have a 4 team tournament, with Auburn getting Stanford and Oregon getting TCU is the semi-finals. The WAC and Big 10 one loss teams might feel a little peeved for getting left out, but even with a win over Auburn they would still have faced a much softer schedule and have the same number of losses - admitting them into the OWA field would erase that.

One Win Away: The Perfect Compromise between Tournament and BCS

Should we BCS or should we Tournament? That is the question.

Beyond the Senator, the Presidents of universities and one large country, the billionaire NBA owner, the anti-trust lawsuit, the books and articles, what we really have are two competing logics. The debate is heated precisely because both sides are (mostly) right.

The BCS Supporters are Right
Tournaments, especially large tournaments, make the regular season less important. Look at it this way: when the selection show ends, the typical team in college basketball's NCAA tournament has a 1.6% chance of winning a national championship; the best team has a 20-25% chance. This means that, over the course of the tournament, the best team (if it wins) improves its chances from 25% to 100% over six games, an average of 15% per game. That best team entered the season with a 15% chance of winning the national championship based on talent alone. Over the course of a 30 game regular season it improves its chances by 10%, or about .33% per game. (With a tournament invite almost guaranteed, its chances improve as it earns a better seed). A typical team improves its chances from, say, .1% to 1.6% over 30 games, or .05% per game. I don’t think many coaches are going to motivate their guys by emphasizing that today they can win 1/300th, or 1/2000th, of a national championship. And the fans don’t get that excited about it either. They wait until March, when the games are 45 times (for the best team) or several thousand times (for a typical team) more important.*

And college basketball is not the worst case of meaningless regular season games. The best pro baseball teams have a 35% chance of taking home a World Series ring when the playoffs start and a 10% chance at the beginning of the season. That means each game, even for the best team, is worth about 1/663rd of a World Series title – and the most important thing they do in each regular season game is avoid season-ending injury. NBA regular season games are worth 1/280th of a world championship for the best team, and the best NFL team looks to earn 1/92nd of a Super Bowl in each regular season game.

In college football, the best team can earn 2.5% or 1/40th of a national championship per regular season game on average. Even if other leagues only played 12 regular season games, college football would still have the most important games. Literally, every game counts.

93-81 does not a champion make

Unimportant regular season games are a problem for a couple reasons. First, fans and players don’t care as much. Second, and more pertinent to this discussion, the championship poorly reflects a team's performance over the course of the season. That, to me, is a serious problem. The '87 Twins were actually outscored in their run to an 85-77 regular season record. They would have finished 5th in the AL East, but they won their pennant and the World Series. The definition of a champion is subjective, but if you are happy putting a ring on the '87 Twins because they won 8 of 12 games after being significantly outplayed by several teams over a 162 game season, you're crazy. I support Cinderellas, but a real Cinderella goes to work from day one, not moments before midnight.

Tournament Supporters are Right
With a 64, or 65, or 68 team tournament, everyone has a shot at winning the national championship. That regular season game may only be worth 1/2000th of a national championship, but for Auburn and Utah in 2004, Boise State in 2006 and 2009, and TCU this year, every regular season game was worthless. I would rather crown the '87 Twins than completely dismiss half of a league from consideration.

This is not a touchdown

I was there when Kellen Moore led Boise State for a last minute score and win against Virginia Tech. Boise fans felt like they were a step closer to a national championship. I was not there when Brotzman missed a couple of field goals against Nevada, but I’m sure Boise fans felt like their national title hopes took a huge step back. In reality, the two games had the same effect on Boise State’s claim on a national championship: no effect whatsoever. As far as the race for the national championship is concerned, it never happened. An undefeated Boise team would have been passed over for a spot in the title game just the same as a two loss Boise team.

So, the solution is not as simple as a single national championship game or a tournament. You can leave out the ’04 Auburns and '08 Utahs, or you can crown the ’87 Twins, ’09 Fresno States, '85 Villanovas and ’95 Rockets.Good news? I have found a way to screen out the '87 Twins while letting in the '04 Auburns.


The One Win Away Approach 
Tournament logic asserts that because team A beat team B in a tournament game, team A is a more deserving champion. But that logic ignores a season of previous results. Georgetown beat Villanova twice during the season. A few days before the NCAA tournament, Georgetown won the Big East tournament and Villanova was eliminated in the semi-finals. Villanova (25-10), Georgetown (35-3); Georgetown won 2 of 3 head-to-head matchups. Villanova wasn't the better team and it didn't have the better season, but Villanova was two points better than Georgetown for 48 minutes (.042 points/minute), so they are your national champs.

In the One Win Away approach, Villanova isn't invited to dance. An invitation is offered, instead, only to those teams that are One Win Away. One Win Away generally means that if team B beat team A, we would then say that team B had the better season. Using the One Win Away Approach, we start by inviting the #1 team in the country. We then invite only those teams that, if they were to beat the #1 team, could then claim to have had a stronger season then the team they just beat**. In a typical college football season, you would have between 3 and 6 teams that meet that criterion. We would also invite any undefeated teams. The invitees would then be organized in an 8 team tournament. If there are fewer than 8 teams with invitations, the top seeds get byes.

By inviting only One Win Away teams to our tournament, it logically follows that the team that wins the tournament is also the team that has had the strongest overall season. It is, therefore, the perfect compromise.

What would a One Win Away tournament look like? In 2004, USC, Oklahoma and Auburn would be the top 3 seeds. California, Utah and Texas would also get an invite. Louisville would probably be left to watch from the comfort of their own homes, already having 1 loss and a significantly weaker schedule than the top teams. USC and Oklahoma would get byes, Auburn would play Texas and California would play Utah. The winners would get Oklahoma and USC, respectively, in the semi-finals.

Why it works: Every team in the country has a shot. We get a tournament, and the winner of the tournament will also be the team that has had the most complete season-when team A beats team B, that really does mean it is the more deserving champion. This would make the regular season slightly less important for those two teams that control their own destiny, but it would be infinitely more important for everyone else - overall, regular season college football games would be more, not less, influential in awarding the national championship.

Why it might not work: We need some way of finding the “One Win Away” teams. This is relatively easy to find using the BPR, but rankings are, inherently, somewhat subjective – especially rankings that must account for hypothetical wins. Also, the “One Win Away” approach requires a flexible postseason which makes planning and marketing much more difficult. A lot of rich and powerful people are deeply invested financially, emotionally, and intellectual in the existing system.

The "One Win Away" approach is, at least logically, the perfect compromise between a single national championship game and a tournament. Unfortunately, I have never known the sports world to be motivated by logic.

* These are, admittedly, back of the envelope calculations, but the logic is sound and the estimates lean towards the conservative.
** This does not mean they would, themselves, become the #1 team in the country, but they would, at least, be One Win Away from the new #1.

Time for a Change-the MWC and the BCS

I asked at the beginning of the year how many wins the MWC could pull off against BCS conference teams. The answer was 9. They finished 9-5 against the BCS with wins over almost every team in the Pac-10 and traditional powerhouses Michigan and Alabama. And San Diego State, easily the worst team in the conference, almost pulled out a W against the Domers.

If we include Boise State (and the Mountain West should be working hard to net Boise as its 10th team), the MWC+Boise State would have wins over every team in the Pac-10 except Washington State (lack of opportunity), Cal (the only Pac-10 team to pull out a regular season victory against the Mountain West), and USC (lack of opportunity?).

And we should note that Utah beat Alabama not with trick plays or 8 Alabama turnovers, but because they were honestly the better team. All but 3 of Alabama's points came off Utah mistakes. Alabama's offense looked like, well, an SEC offense, racking up 200 yards while giving up 8 sacks. Utah moved the ball in the air and on the ground, picking up first downs from the wildcat formation late in the game. Utah was every bit as athletic as Alabama.

And why is this all important--because Utah won their conference by the hair on their chinny-chin-chins. They cashed in on some powerful karma against both TCU and BYU. The MWC was very good this year,

and that wasn't a fluke.

TCU is structurally advantaged compared to, say, Texas Tech. It's not a big school, but it's in the heart of the most dense football talent in the country, and they have been playing football well for quite some time. The true loyalists might be few in number, but they are rabid about their team (see Miami).

BYU can recruit nationally (and internationally). It is a large school with large numbers in attendance at the games-better than any team in the Big East. The Cougars won a title 25 years ago (more recently than just about every team in any of the major conferences). It has a long, strong tradition of potent offenses that quarterbacks and possession recievers want to be a part of and can now draw in Tongans/Samoans (who, except for Manti Te'o, seem to be criminally ignored by the major recruiting services) using the Mormon connection.

Utah draws on the same Tongan/Samoan population and many of the top notch athletes in the region that are not interested in the lifestyle at BYU. They, like BYU, can also nip players from California. Utah, along with BYU and TCU, have sent many notable athletes to the NFL.

Conclusion-the top three teams of the MWC are more legitimate than the top three teams of the Big East. The bottom six of the MWC are every bit as legitimate as the rest of the Big East. There is no rational explanation why the Big East has an automatic spot and the MWC does not.

I propose two solutions. First, the MWC should steal Boise State. Boise State has been succesful everywhere, regardless of the coach and despite the Mickey Mouse field, and they have a BCS bowl win. That top four has been as successful as the top four in any other conference over the last few years. The MWC could then demand inclusion in the BCS.

Second, the MWC champ and the WAC champ play for the bi-conference championship and an automatic spot in the BCS. I have been championing this idea for years. The conferences do not now have championship games, and there is a natural rivalry between the two. If this had been in practice last year, BYU and not Hawaii would have played Georgia and we would have had a better game. If this had been in practice this year, and Utah had beat Boise State, they would have as legitimate a claim as anyone else to the national championship.

Quick Note: Week 4 Results

1) The BYU Defense-BYU has not allowed a point in two complete games now. The last points against the Cougars were score by Jake Locker and, notably, not Washington's kicker. Inexperience and lack of depth on defense were supposed to be BYU's achille's heel when the season kicked off, but the Y has pitched shoutouts even when they've thrown out the scout team in big blowouts. They aren't Auburn or anything, but as Wyoming's Devin Moore put it, "They were a little faster than I though they were."

2) Auburn/LSU-I don't care what SEC backers say, beating Mississippi State 3-2 is not a good thing, and Auburn finally got a small taste of comeuppance. This was a tight game between two very evenly matched teams that was essential decided by two injuries. The first injury was that inflicted by LSU's Andrew Hatch. QB Jarrett Lee's performance in the first half had been so bad that he was not going to see the field again--until Hatch was knocked unconscious. Then, all of a sudden, Jarrett Lee was back in the spotlight and he couldn't screw up if he tried. Auburn also suffered some breakdowns in the secondary and, for the first time in the game, LSU was able to make them pay.

The second big injury was suffered by Auburn's RB Brad Lester. Ben Tate was going to get most of the carries anyway, but the change of pace between the two was beginning to give LSU some headaches. And as time was running down, Lester could have been used out of the backfield to add a little unpredictability to an otherwise painfully predictable offense.

3) South Florida-the Bulls need to drop a few spots. Beating Kansas was a nice, but needing a big comeback at home-against a team that looks more like a 20-30 type team instead of the top 10 team of last year-does not merit a sub-teen ranking. And now that they have struggled against both UCF and FIU, they are getting no love from me. But, of course, since they play in the Big East, which might not be as good as the MWC from top to bottom this season, they'll probably finish the season with two losses and a trip to a BCS bowl.

4) One fifth of the top 25 is currently held by the MWC and the WAC. These five teams have gone a combined 17-1 over a schedule that has included Oregon, Washington, UCLA, Rutgers, Michigan and Wisconsin, not to mention in-conference foes (and teams that went bowling a year ago) in New Mexico and Air Force. The MWC teams will beat each other up a little, and TCU has a tough task ahead in going to Oklahoma, but if one the three survives the ringer, Boise State or Fresno State wins and Tulsa continues its winning ways, we could be on path to a major BCS logjam.

Quick Note: The Brewing BCS Crisis

What do East Carolina, BYU, Utah and Fresno State all have in common? They might all be better than the automatic BCS invitees from the ACC and Big East. This could be a very big problem.

After Clemson, Virginia Tech, Rutgers and Pitt were dismantled last weekend and West Virginia was manhandled on Saturday, new ACC and Big East frontrunners Wake and USF needed a long last second field goal and overtime,respectively, to stay unbeaten. If West Virginia is down and Pitt, Virginia Tech, Miami and Florida St are trying to rebuild, these two conferences are mediocre at best.

This kind of thing has happened before. Pitt was no match for Utah in their 2005 BCS showdown and Boise St proved it belonged at the party by beating Big 12 champ OU.

But this year we could have the four non-BCS standouts finish with one loss between them while the ACC and Big East send 3 or 4 loss champs. Things could get even more complicated if Notre Dame is good again and Ohio State plays in another national championship game. All of a sudden, you've got to tell Utah or Fresno State that they got to take their undefeated record and top 12 ranking to the Crap Bowl in early November-or lock out Florida, Georgia, LSU, Auburn, Missouri, OU, etc. from a BCS bowl because they couldn't win the Big 12 or SEC-whose divisions are more talented this year than the Big East and ACC combined.

This talk might be a little premature-BYU still gets UCLA, Wisconsin is awaiting Fresno St, and East Carolina has road games against Virginia, UCF and Southern Miss. Wake and USF are still undefeated despite the scares. But you got to believe that the non-BCS conferences will be producing at least two solid representatives, and the Bowl Championship Series picture will get very crowded.

MWC 2008 Preview

It could be a big season for the Mountain West. BYU has received most of the publicity so far, but a different storyline might emerge as being more significant by season’s end, especially if BYU falters in conference play.

Here are my big questions for the MWC:

1) Can BYU succeed in its “quest for perfection”?
a. Who will win in Salt Lake during Thanksgiving weekend?
2) How many BCS teams will fall to MWC opponents this season?
3) What is the MWC’s BCS future?

1) 2006 was one of BYU’s more productive seasons and, unfortunately, more attractive draft classes. The defense, which was sufficient in 2006, was still in tact in 2007, but the offense was in rebuilding mode last year. The beginning of the season was rough, but the Cougars were able to take advantage of Ute injuries and Horn Frog off-the-field challenges to slide into another conference championship. BYU was rarely the conference’s best team at any particular point in the season—they were just the best team on the field at the time they were playing.

(Performance and Reputation ratings are explained here and here)

This year’s team is still riding the laurels of that 2006 team which has now been completely stripped on both sides of the ball. The offense should be competent, but not explosive, and the defense is full of question marks. The Cougars should win, but might lose, non-conference games against Washington and UCLA and road games at TCU and Air Force. If they are still without blemish come Thanksgiving, though, another Holy War classic could be in the making.

Utah outperformed BYU most of last season (even when they were on the same field), but struggled with injuries and inconsistency. They will again field a very competitive team this year and will be wanting revenge after two heartbreaking Holy War losses in consecutive years (2006, 2007). Best case scenario for BYU, this game is a toss-up.

I give BYU a 12% chance of running the table in the regular season, which are better odds than any team not coached by Pete Carroll. That gives them a 12% chance of crashing the BCS party this season.

2) What do Arizona, Arizona State, Cal, Colorado, Iowa State, Michigan, Notre Dame, Oklahoma, Oregon State, Stanford, Texas A&M, UCLA, and Washington all have in common? First, they are all in BCS conferences (or, in ND’s case, have special BCS arrangements). Second, they all run the risk of losing regular season games to MWC opponents.

The teams most at risk of losing are UCLA (@ BYU), Arizona (@ New Mexico), Stanford (@ TCU), Washington (vs. BYU), Iowa St. (@ UNLV), and Oregon St. (@ Utah). Other games on the list would be upsets, but few of them are out of reach. If MWC teams could knock off a few other big names on the list—Utah @ Michigan would be huge and TCU @ Oklahoma and San Diego State @ Notre Dame (which is mildly possible if Weiss decides to field another 4 win team) would also be big—the MWC could see its price rise quickly. If BYU heads the way and wins a BCS bowl game, this conference and the WAC might be raising their voices against the current system.

3) This brings me to the MWC and WAC BCS futures. The two conferences have produced BCS teams three of the last four years and could be sending a fourth in five. And they have a much better winning percentage in BCS bowl games than, for example, OU.

I propose that, if the two conferences have respectful seasons this year, the MWC and WAC bid to lock up a BCS spot for a bi-conference champion. The champions of the two conferences meet for a bi-conference championship game during the same weekend that the Big XII, SEC and ACC are having their conference championship games. There is no doubt in my mind that these two conferences could consistently produce a team as competitive as some of those sent to represent the Big East and ACC in years past—and even the Big XII just two year ago.

Bowl Picks 5 - BCS Bowls

Complete Bowl Picks

The Matrix and the folks in Vegas don't seem agree about the BCS matchups. In most cases here, I take the side of the folks in Vegas.


Rose Bowl. Illinois vs. USC

If Illinois were to win this game, they might start next season in the top 5 and Ron Zook would be elected governor of Illinois. The only offense of note in this game is Illinois' run game which will face up against the 2nd most efficient run D in the country. The Illini, though, already beat the 3rd ranked run defense (the Ohio State). Mendenhall is as good of a runningback as any in the country and Juice is another dangerous running back who throws the ball more than most. USC, though, also touts a tough running game that now, in the form of Joe McKnight, is showing a little more explosiveness. USC is the better team and is essentially playing at home, but they don't have the fire power to put Illinois away.

The Matrix - USC by 8.3, 39.8% against the spread

Sugar Bowl. Georgia vs. Hawaii

All season, I wanted this mediocre Hawaii team to lose so they wouldn't get to this point and embarrass the non-BCS fraternity. Hawaii is undefeated because they have played the 105th toughest schedule in the nation - they beat Louisiana Tech by 1, got lucky against San Jose State and have a loss against Nevada in my unofficial record keeping. They are a better team when Colt is on the field, but who's to say Georgia won't get a couple of solid hits and knock him out of the game in the 1st quarter. And QB Colt Brennan will take his shots, because Hawaii has no running game and the Georgia lineman can pin back their ears and speed rush. Georgia's pass D is not spectacular, but it has the speed in the secondary it needs to contain Hawaii's receivers. On the other side, watch RB Knowshon Moreno to have a big game. He is in my RB top five (with McFadden, Charles at Texas, Patrick at OU, and UCF's Kevin Smith). I'm not as impressed with Georgia as others, but I think they have the speed to be where the Hawaii players are and the strength to put them down once they get there.

The Matrix - Georgia by 3.7, 33.1% against the spread

Fiesta Bowl. West Virginia vs. Oklahoma

These two teams would be playing in the national championship game but they suffered freakish upsets when their quarterbacks got knocked out. West Virginia was hit the hardest, because they lost in the very last game to a rival and because they have fewer opportunities to win titles than OU. Now, after being kicked in the gut, Rich Rodriquez has gutted the coaching staff. Pat White will have some time to recover from bruisings, but WVU, a 1-dimensional run offense, will be facing one of the nation's best run defenses. To make matters worse, by the end of the season OU's offense was as effective as as I've seen all year. QB Bradford rarely lets the ball touch the ground or an opponent, and OU's stable of NFL running backs runs through holes opened up by a dominant O-line. And Stoops is a better coach than whoever WVU will be able to pick out from the pee-wee league. Personally, I have loved watching WVU for the last two seasons and hope them the best after Rich jumped ship, so I hope they can at least keep this game close for the first half. If the game stays reasonably close, this will be the game to watch this bowl season.

The Matrix - Oklahoma by 1.2, 35.1% against the spread

Orange Bowl. Virignia Tech vs. Kansas

I agree with everyone else that Missouri, not Kansas, should be in this game. But here's why Kansas is good: QB Todd Reesing has completed more than 60% of his passes for 3200 yards. The human sledgehammer RB Brandon McAnderson has rushed for over 1,000 yards, averaging 6 yards per carry and scoring 16 times. And they have a top 10 defense in adjusted yards per play. Watching the game, I was convinced that Kansas was better than Missouri, but made rare mistakes that cost them the game (and, therefore, Missouri should be in this game). I've only watched two Hokies games in their entirety, and one of those was the slaughtering LSU put on them, so my impressions maybe skewed. But Virginia Tech's "stifling" defense has only managed to stifle two offenses worth noting (BC and Clemson) and Kansas will bring in the best offense they have seen all season. And Virginia Tech will struggle against a Jayhawk defense that has allowed fewer opponent-adjusted yards per play than the Hokies own. It is also significant that Kansas has no significant injuries. On the other hand, Kansas has won all year against inferior opponents with inferior talent and Virginia Tech's speed may be their undoing.

The Matrix - Virginia Tech by .8, 43.1% against the spread

National Champion Game. Ohio State vs. LSU

I was thinking I would make a special blog entry for this game or do something to set it apart until I remembered that I don't actually care all that much about this game. These two teams deserve to be in this game, but this season will go down with 1990 and 1984 as seasons in which a national champion was named only because we feel compelled to name a national champion - not because any team merited the title.

This hogwash about Ohio State not being able to deal with a mobile quarterback is, well, hogwash. Ohio State has a solid defense with real athletes. Only one team broke 20 against the Buckeyes this year, and Illinois (who managed 28, 32 less than Arknasas against LSU) are not similar to LSU in style. And Tressel & Co. can have the athletes to game plan in the two weeks they have running up to the game - and they can watch film on what 13 other teams have tried to stop Crowton's very undynamic offense.

The real story, in my opinion, for this game is going to be the health of LSU. Here is the injury report for LSU from NOLA.com:

Linebacker Darry Beckwith (12/3, right ankle) is probable for the BCS National Championship on 1/7 against Ohio State. Running back Trindon Holliday (12/3, ankle) is probable for the BCS National Championship on 1/7 against Ohio State. Wide receiver Early Doucet (12/3, shoulder) is probable for the BCS National Championship on 1/7 against Ohio State. Quarterback Ryan Perrilloux (12/3, finger) is probable for the BCS National Championship on 1/7 against Ohio State. Quarterback Matt Flynn (12/3, shoulder) is probable for the BCS National Championship on 1/7 against Ohio State. Defensive tackle Charles Alexander (12/3, knee) will miss the BCS National Championship on 1/7 against Ohio State. Guard Will Arnold (12/3, viral infection) is questionable for the BCS National Championship on 1/7 against Ohio State. Left tackle Mark Snyder (12/3, knee) will miss the BCS National Championship on 1/7 against Ohio State.

That's a long list and includes a lot of critical contributors. LSU has better athletes and was dominant before injury slimmed their ranks, and will win if they have their team back.

The Matrix - Ohio State by 1.9, 73.3% against the spread