My new theory on the Big 10

I've always opposed the idea that the stature of the Big 10 has fallen because Yankees are slower on average than their southern counterparts. No one has ever provided me evidence to that effect. After Ohio State lost to LSU, I showed that speed was not the issue. Instead, I have argued that the South is benefiting from a growing talent pool (in terms of athletes, students, and donors) while the Midwest is hunting for minnows in a shallow, stagnant, and shrinking pond-its demography, not genetics, weather, or proximity to the Gulf of Mexico.

But Ohio State consistently gets the best talent from the Midwest and also pulls five star recruits from Florida. Their classes are as good, and as fast, as the classes that USC, Texas and Florida are grabbing. Ohio State was every bit as physically talented as USC but lost anyway. Why do they fold against top caliber teams?

The answer came to me while I was watching Ohio State's otherwise dominant defense collapse at the end of each half against USC. The Big 10, and especially its elite, do not condition the same way they do in the South. Its happened with the Buckeyes before. Texas went to a no-huddle hurry-up offense a year ago and the Ohio State D was barely staying upright by the end of the drive. Lack of conditioning, and perhaps even a lack of practice, make you look slow.

If Exhibit A is a fatigued Buckeye, Exhibit B is the Rich Rodriguez experience at Michigan. Rodriguez expects his players to practice and condition like everyone else and players start to rebel. Why? They haven't done it before. And now that they have taken on a big league conditioning regiment, Michigan is quickly looking like a contender again-they are faster at every position, even at positions that are still filled by Lloyd Carr guys.

Exhibit C: Notre Dame is in the Big 10 culturally if not physically. Notre Dame also recruits nationally, so the slowness of Yankees should not be a problem. But the knock on Notre Dame is their teams have been slow, right? But the real problem has not been raw speed-if you look at the Notre Dame recruiting classes for the last 8 years their classes have not been slower than, say, Navy or Syracuse. But they've looked slow recently because they haven't trained hard enough. They have suffered from both the Big 10 culture and Charlie Weis' self-constructed image as a super genius whose teams can outsmart others even if they are not as physically prepared.

This does not rule out depth as a possibility. While Big 10 teams can have some very good players, and Ohio State and Michigan can even field an entire first team of very good players, it is harder to get the depth of talent that a USC or Florida has (demography again). Lack of depth can make you look slow and can cause you to tire early.

This week's games: Notre Dame at Michigan

Considering that these two teams have hit new historic lows the last couple of seasons, this game is absurdly attention grabbing nationally. But it warrants the attention. First, it is the undercard of a weekend that will make or break the Big 10. Wins by the Wolverines and Buckeyes would catapult the Big 10 out of pee-wee league status. We also have two coaches that are on the ropes and need to win early and often. And both teams looked they were ready to do just that after impressive debuts.


Michigan's offense is much improved from a year ago (watching Sheridan and Threet do their best Pat White impressions was always good for a laugh). And a much maligned defense underperformed relative to its talent last season, and showed signs of moving in the right direction against Western Michigan. But this Michigan team, like last year's, is too prone to mood swings, and a hostile crowd at home just exacerbated that last season. Consequently, the first 10 minutes of this game will be crucial. If Clausen-to-Floyd gets rolling early (and I think it will), it could be a very long day for the blue-and-gold with silly mistakes, schematic breakdowns, and lackluster effort. On the other side, it will come down to speed-does Notre Dame field enough speed to keep Robinson from breaking a long touchdown? If so, Notre Dame will cover its 3.5.

Games to Watch in Week 3

So far this season I am 9-1 picking winners and 6-3 against the spread-7-2 if Urban Meyer hadn't insisted on kicking that last second field goal against Miami. If I had avoided emotional picks (i.e. games involving Nick Saban, Urban Meyer and BYU), I'd be perfect.

Ohio State (+10.5) [-22] at USC [+25.5]

Why we care: These two schools have combined for 9 AP national championships and 1,451 wins.

NCAAF - Ohio State @ USC - Who will win?

What to watch for: 1) The condition of Beanie Wells' toe. Ohio State's backups proved to the world last week that the OSU O-line is overrated because it has been blocking for a super-premiere back, and when they are blocking for mortal runningbacks, the Ohio State running game suffers. The USC defense will not get worn down like that of Ohio. No Beanie, no W for the Buckeyes.
2) The matchup of the USC receivers and Ohio State secondary. Ohio State has the advantage here, and if they are able to rely on a lot of man coverage and stack 8 in the box, USC could have trouble moving the ball. Sanchez will not be able to make plays with his feet the way "Boo" did last week for the Bobcats (especially if their are still some subconscious concerns about the infamous knee) which will make USC predictable offensively.

Misc: A 10 point spread historically means that OSU has about a 1 in 5 chance of winning this game (which is remarkably consistent with Hubdub).

Pick: USC by 5

Kansas (+2.5) [+.75] at USF [-7]

Why we care: A win for USF will rank it officially as the class of the Big East, a title it might then hold indefinitely.

What to watch for: The Kansas pass rush. Kansas may have the best linebackers and secondary in the Big XII (which, by the way, is a much better conference than the Big East). But if the pass rush gives Bulls' QB Matt Grothe time to move and create, he will. On the other side, Todd Reesing is completing more than 3 of every 4 passes and Kansas has two backs getting more than 5 yards a carry. They will score their points, but USF's George Selvie will put enough pressure on an untested line to get a few stops. Kansas will also, then, need some stops to avoid getting outscored (aka losing).


Misc: In 2004, these teams combined for 8 wins, a mark both surpassed individually last year.

Pick: Kansas by 5

Georgia (-7) [+15.5] at South Carolina [+2.75]

Why we care: The wrong team came out on top of this one last year.

NCAAF - Georgia @ South Carolina - Who wins ATS?

What to watch for: The over/under. The line opened at 8, but money was heavy on South Carolina +8. This tells me that people expect the game to be low scoring. If South Carolina can stay within 7 into the 4th quarter, this could be anyone's ball game. If Georgia can score some points early, SC won't be able to keep up.

Misc: Its been a really, really long time since Spurrier had a quality season.

Pick: Georgia by 10.

Michigan (+1.5) [-5] at Notre Dame [-14.5]

Why we care: If you thought Ohio State and USC had combined for a lot of championships and wins . . .

What to watch for: Can Sam McGuffie break out? I see no reason to believe that Notre Dame will score an offensive point in this game. Last year, ND finished 116th in scoring (near the bottom) and 119th in total yards (that is the bottom). To kickoff this season, Cal Poly outgained them by 141 yards against a mutual opponent. And Michigan actually plays solid D.
On the other side, Notre Dame returns a secondary that was 2nd in the nation in pass D. Against a typical Rich Rodriquez team, that stat would be pointless, but Michigan, if you haven't noticed, doesn't have a mobile quarterback. The Domer run defense, though, was exploitable and had to be rebuilt after last season. With a good scheme and better execution, UM RB McGuffie could have a big day, helping Michigan score those 3 points it will need to win.

Misc: Scouts Inc. gave ND the advantage in terms of coaching. Huh?

Pick: Michigan by 3

Temple (+6.5) [+12.5] at Buffalo [12]

Why we care: (Bet you weren't expecting this one) In 4 games against D1A opponents, these two perennial crappers are +39 in margin of victory and +24.5 against the spread.

What to watch for: I'll be frank-I haven't watched either of these teams in a couple of years, so I could regurgitate something I've read in Athlon or Scouts, but instead I'll advice you to seek it yourselves. I am excited to watch these two teams duke it out on ESPN360, though.

Misc: Temple does actually have a football team and they, like the more distinguished BB team, are called the Owls. Both Buffalo and Temple are in the MAC (East). Eleven of the 119 D1A teams play in smaller stadiums than Buffalo.

Pick: Buffalo by 6.5

Other Don't Missers: Wisconsin at Fresno, UCLA at BYU--When power conference reps travel to meet the mid-majors, interesting things can happen.

Good Sign/Bad Sign Week 2

Non-BCS: Notre Dame
Good Sign: They won. In fact, they are now on pace to win 4 times as many games as they did in 2007. Clausen was solid, completing 57% of his passes, averaging just under 7 yards per pass, and got better as the game progressed-managing an almost heroic 4th quarter. The O-line was able to get a push and showed a recognition that they have blocking assignments, which allowed the Domers to scratch out more than 100 yards on the ground. The 4th quarter domination also demonstrated that the Domers have a little depth and are better conditioned than last year-and maybe, just maybe, they got their fight back.
Bad Sign: The score was 13-7 when SDSU fumbled in the Notre Dame end zone early in the 4th quarter. San Diego State had more total yards than Notre Dame and should have won, but the Aztecs gave the game away. San Diego State is really bad but still had a better chance of beating the Irish than they did Cal Poly. This is the easiest game on the schedule for Notre Dame and the Domers barely snuck by with a W.

Big East: USF
Good Sign: South Florida unofficially won this game by 3 touchdowns. They more than doubled UCF in yards and first downs. Grothe put up impressive numbers while he comfortably waited in the pocket as long as he needed for receivers to get open. Statistical domination is a better predictor of future performance than domination on the score board.
Bad Sign: A bad special teams mistake (91 yard touchdown return in on UCF's first offensive touch) and an inability to get the ball in the end zone allowed UCF to hang around, and then a complete inability to establish the funning game let UCF make their run in the 4th quarter. Grothe was the teams leading rusher, getting 20 carries-way too many-and just 2.7 yards per attempt. Being one dimensional makes it harder to convert in the red zone and to effectively run out the clock, both weaknesses that haunted the Bulls on Saturday.

Big Ten: Penn State
Good Sign: Here's why Penn State is quickly becoming my Big 10 favorite. First, Daryll Clark. He can stretch the field through the air (15 yards per completion, 215 yards passing against Oregon St), and then he can tuck it and run (12 yards per carry, 61 yards rushing)-that combo has given many of the Big 10 defenses fits. RB Evan Royster will get over 1,000 yards rushing (141 yards against Oregon St), so the offense is far from one dimensional. Then defense is solid, but more important, Penn State has demonstrated an ability to jump out early on teams and force them into a passing contest. With Wisconsin's and Ohio State's combination of lines and backs, that could be invaluable. I am officially off the Ohio State bandwagon and on the Penn State one.
Bad Sign: I don't know . . . their coach is really old?

Big 12: Texas Tech
Good Sign: On a day in which Graham Harrell struggled, Tech still won. Inconsistency has been a big problem for Tech, but they now have the depth of options that it didn't bite them too hard. They got a special teams touchdown early when the offense was completely out of whack and then 3 rushing touchdowns to pull away. The backs were productive, which gives Leach one more option if the day-to-day offense isn't clicking.
Bad Sign: Saturday's numbers may be more of a trend than a hiccup. Coordinators have had an off-season to analyze the Harrell to Crabtree connection, which is one reason it might be less reliable-take out the 82 yard reception against Nevada and Crabtree's numbers are quite pedestrian this season. Nevada outgained Tech as they moved the ball effectively on the ground and through the air, so aspirations for the defense might have been premature. Tech is still averaging 8 yards per pass attempt this season, but if that numbers drops to 6.5 against stiffer Big 12 defenses, folks in Lubbock might be very disappointed this season.

SEC: Kentucky
Good Sign: 5, 0, 370 = total points, total touchdowns, and total yards allowed this season. And one of those opponents was Louisville. Granted this is not the Louisville of the Bobby Petrino era and Norfolk St does not scare many opponents, but those numbers are the mark of solid, mistake free defense regardless of the opponent.
Bad Sign: Kentucky will need a very good defense to succeed in the SEC, because the offense isn't there. Kentucky has been trying to replace former QB Andre Woodson, and the dismissal of QB Curtis Pulley didn't help. Consequently, the Wildcats have managed only 147 yards passing in each of their first two games. They racked up 298 yards against Norfolk St., but those yards will be harder to come by against real opponents. The 210 yards of offense against Louisville might be the norm for this Kentucky team, which could make for a very long season.

ACC: Georgia Tech
Good Sign: The Yellow Jackets took a triple option offense to Boston College, faced off against one of the best run defenses in the country, and came home a winner.
Bad Sign: Tech's offense did not win this game. They managed only 162 yards on the ground on Saturday and dropped it 3 more times. The defense played well, but if Boston College had been able to convert its three short field goals into touchdowns, this game wouldn't have been close. At some point you start to wonder if this team this season with this group of athletes will ever get Paul Johnson's offense rolling.

Pac 10: Oregon
Good Sign: It is a statistical fact that demonstrating an ability to throw the ball against much weaker opponents is a better predictor of future success than running the ball, because it doesn't require any offensive sophistication to boll over 150 lb nose tackles. But running for 408 yards against a D1A opponent, even if that opponent was Utah State, is still impressive. Oh yeah, and they threw the ball effectively with two different quarterbacks. And the defense's work against Locker a week earlier now looks more impressive after he ran free against BYU.
Bad Sign: Their quarterback still isn't named Dennis Dixon and the running back dares to be someone other than Johnathon Stewart. That step down in athleticism will catch up with them against the more athletic defenses in the Pac 10.

People's Poll 2: The Masses Speak Again

With one weekend under our belt, the "participation" in the people's poll has increased dramatically. With this influx of new "voters", rankings became unstable. Among the more surprising victims are Miami, who fell out of the top 25 despite an impressive performance, Notre Dame, whose value fell without running a play, Georgia Tech, South Florida and Wisconsin. Virginia Tech got a boost despite losing and Kansas jumped five spots after beating the mighty Florida International.

My Notes on Week 1

Pitt was supposed to be good this year because they have recruited well and they won the backyard brawl against West Virginia last year in shocking fashion. We learned on Saturday that Pitt is not good, Pitt had one very bad game, or Bowling Green has risen from the dust to become a top 25 team. Because Pitt has not yet been good, I would go with option #1: The Pitt Panthers are still not good at football.

We had questions about Clemson’s line and what kind of contribution Alabama would get from its host of incoming freshmen was a big unknown. We now have the answers: Clemson’s line didn’t matter because Alabama was also better at every other position. I realized 5 minutes into the game that the Tigers had no chance—Clemson’s Tommy Bowden seemed to get the hint pretty quickly, too. But before we sing the praises of the SEC, I need to see what Tennessee does against UCLA and I need an explanation for the performances of Mississippi State (lost to LA Tech) and Arkansas (4 point win over Western Illinois).

East Carolina has a solid team, and Hokey fans should not be embarrassed by that loss, but they should be embarrassed by the beatdown they received—on offense, defense and (gasp) special teams. The ACC can be scratched for this season and the rest of the decade—it will not again be a player on the national stage until 2010.

Utah beat Michigan. Watching the game I came to the following conclusions: 1) In the first half the Utah offense was decent, as was the Michigan defense. 2) In the second half the Utah offense was bad and the Michigan defense was decent. 3) Throughout the game the Utah defense was better than advertised (which shouldn’t be surprising since they were 5th in the nation in scoring defense in 2007) and even better than Michigan’s defense. 4) Rich Rodriguez must have used tapes of the 2007 Notre Dame offense to prepare his team—Michigan’s offense was atrocious. The scary thing about Utah is they usually get much better over the course of the season.

We learned very little about the top 5 teams in the country, except that Beanie Wells might have a stress micro-fracture in his foot. We also learned that Hawaii and Virginia have taken huge steps back this year from last year (which we expected). Missouri looked nigh unstoppable, but the Tiger faithful should be a little concerned that Juice Williams was throwing the ball around with ease against their defense (451 yards, 5 TDs). Or maybe Juice has evolved into a version of Peyton Manning that runs a 4.4.

Texas Tech again racked up a ton of yards, but their win over Eastern Washington did not fill anyone with fear and trepidation. There is a very good reason why Tech leads the nation in passing yards every year but had fewer points per game in Big 12 play than both Oklahoma and Missouri—it is very nice to be able run the ball in the red zone. Tech needs consistency, but they also need to be able to ground out tough yards in tight spaces to be an elite team.

And App. St.’s Armanti Edwards is quite pedestrian when he plays against elite college football talent.

Shocking state of the day: Arkansas State ran for 255 yards in their win against a Big 12 opponent.

How the Irish Lost their Fight

When I hear “Irish”, I think of potato famines, soccer hooligans, leprechauns, lots of green, lots of alcohol, and the NRA. When I hear “Fighting Irish”, I envision the Golden Dome, Touchdown Jesus, Ara, Lou, Frank, and, of course, Knute, tradition, history, championships, four horsemen (of the non-apocalyptic variety) and everyone’s favorite diminutive college football player not named Flutie.

Last year, Coach Weis and his charges left the Fight at home.

“Three-and-nine doesn't even sound right, especially in the same sentence as Notre Dame” -Senior fullback Asaph Schwapp in Athlon Sports

That’s because the Domers haven’t been that inept since 1963. Ara Parseghian arrived in 1964. Over the next quarter century, the Fighting Irish won 4 AP national championships, a couple Heismans, and a lot of football games.

Ara Parseghian, Dan Devine and Lou Holtz did as much in that run to revolutionize football as Knute Rockne himself several decades earlier. In 1966, Notre Dame and Michigan State gave college administrators, coaches, broadcasters and journalists a taste of the potential draw for college football, and thus reinvented the way the game is marketed.

Less dramatically, in 1993 a story about a steel mill worker who gets in one play for Notre Dame inspired one of the better sports movies of all time that was alternatively titled, “Notre Dame is Cooler than Your Stupid School.” It grossed over $20 million at the box office and people will forever think “Rudy” when an athlete is carried from the field.

College football is better off because of Notre Dame, its tradition, accomplishments, and fans. College football will be better off in the future if the Irish get their Fight back.

But in 2007, the neighbor boy’s pee-wee football team would have looked like the ’85 Bears against the Fight-less Irish. More important, Notre Dame football, like the variety played in Nebraska, seems to be drifting into a state of permanent mediocrity since the resignations of the most recent members of their respective coaching pantheons in the last half of the 90’s.

The old excuse for any gridiron failure is that Notre Damers are too smart to be good at football. This justification was invented with Deemphasis in the 50’s – that good schools sacrifice athletic accomplishments for academic acumen. “Notre Dame”, administrators cried, “is not a football factory”. To retain this image, Notre Dame has theoretically restricted its access to some athletes that are talented on the field, but not in the classroom.

Paul Hornung, a Domer legend, brought this excuse to the forefront when he controversially proposed in 2004 that Notre Dame lower its academic standards to attract more black athletes.

Apparently, this fine academic institution wasn’t good enough to keep Mr. Hornung from shoving a foot in his mouth.

But even if we ignore the stupidity of publicly making that kind of comment, we can see that it’s not even true. If Paul Hornung thinks it’s hard to recruit the best talent to South Bend, try recruiting 5 star athletes to Annapolis. But high standards and military commitments didn’t keep Paul Johnson and the Midshipmen of Navy from beating our dear Irish in 2007.

Boston College is the nation’s other Catholic university with tough admission standards, but while Notre Dame sent out the nation’s least productive offense, BC spent a good portion of the season in the top 5, played for the conference championship, and graduated a Heisman candidate.

And when it comes to recruiting African-American athletes, Notre Dame has an inside track paved with gold compared to Brigham Young University, a program that has won as many national championships, produced as many Heismans, and won more games than Notre Dame since the end of the 1970’s.

If Charlie Weis, a fatter gentleman competing in a world dominated by young, flamboyant coaching personalities, can pull in one of the nation’s best recruiting classes after a 3-9 season, recruiting athletes to South Bend is not the problem.

If recruiting isn’t the issue, the next potential target of our inquisition must be the coaching.

If you would have asked a solid Notre Dame football fan about the future of Notre Dame football in early 2003, it would have been all roses. Ty Willingham had pulled out a 10 win season and a top-5 recruiting class. And the guy was as snappy dresser, the snappiest in Notre Dame coaching history. If you ignored the SC beat down, all was well in South Bend.

The situation was very similar to what Ohio State had experienced a year earlier with the arrival Tressel (assuming, of course, that you also think sweater vests are snappy). The team was scrappy and tough, winning games that they should have lost. Ty Willingham won every coaching award worth accepting, and some coaching awards were invented just to make him feel even better about himself.

Notre Dame is a school of tradition, which is a synonym for myth. Listen to a Domer talk about the four horsemen and you would think they scored a touchdown on every play. Watch “Rudy” and you’ll never realize that Notre Dame was quite mediocre in Rudy’s big year. The standards, set by almost mythical creatures, are too high to live up to, but have one successful season at Notre Dame and fans will have you convinced that Rockne-like success is your birthright. You will be labeled a “Golden Boy” until you fail and start getting the hate mail—but Notre Dame is not a football factory.

Ty Willingham bought into the hype and, consequently, his team lost that scrappy mentality. In 2003, Notre Dame lost its Fight. They opened the season with a tough win over Washington State (a good team), but then got blasted by Michigan. The wheels quickly fell off and Coach Willingham was getting death threats.

In comes the next candidate for apotheosis—Charlie Weis. The program was in disarray, but he is able to get folks to rally around him. He got the Fight back. He has two very successful seasons with Ty Willingham’s players, and praise is dumped on him faster than he can dig out from under it.

Charlie Weis, like Willingham, bought the hype. Rumor has it that Coach Weis forgot in Spring 2007 that football was a contact sport, thinking he could out-scheme opponents—he was smart enough to win games with his brain. That lack of physicality in practice led to poor performances on Saturdays. Really poor performances. “Worst offense in the country” kind of performances. And offense is supposed to be Weis’s forte. In 2007, Notre Dame lost its Fight.

This was a best case scenario for the Irish. Notre Dame, like Michigan, was engulfed in its own mythology and needed a dose of reality (which, in Michigan’s case, came in the form of Appalachian State). Charlie Weis was humbled but the situation did not become unmanageable. Some players left, but more are arriving. The coaches, players and fans have reevaluated their expectations, and, hopefully, the Irish have got their Fight back.

But let this be a warning to the college football nation (including you, Alabama). A little success creates expectations and cultures of hero worship that can be self-destructive. They lead to instability and performance-inhibiting self-aggrandizement. And impossibly-high standards of success and myths of the past are much easier to build up than to bring down.

Week 10 Recap and the Field Goal Calculator

With one game left this weekend, I thought it was about time to report on the initial results from the Matrix's first weekend. All in all, things have gone well. The Matrix correctly picked the winner in 38 of 53 games and was 27-21 against the line.

And it could have been better. If you look back at the picks (table) from last week, you might notice that Oregon is listed as the road team against Arizona State. Unless Arizona State has decided to start playing its home games thousands of miles from home, this is a typo. The Matrix gives teams a bonus if they are playing at home, and, in this case, gave Oregon's "at-home" credit to Arizona State. This mistake shifted the prediction, in this case, by about nine points. In other words, if the Matrix would have been fed accurate data, it would have been correct.

Then there is Rice and Texas. After ragging on these two teams last week, they put up a combined 52 points in the 4th quarter to win and cover the spread. Cincinnati put up 31 in the 1st quarter to do the same. And then the Demon Deacons felt the Cavalier curse and missed what would have been the winning field goal in the last seconds.

But I found a more worrying issue when I looked more closely at the results from the Matrix. Against the line, the Matrix was 0-2 when it gave one team an 80% chance or greater of covering. One, which I mentioned before, was Rice and their 20 point comeback. The other was Iowa State, who seems to actually be a much better team these days. The Matrix was most accurate when it gave one team only a small advantage.

The game of the week, in my opinion, lived up to its billing (that I gave it). Navy wins in triple overtime on a failed two point conversion attempt. Historic. I'm a bit biased towards the midshipmen - I love to watch their offense - but how could anyone that isn't a Catholic not jump on the Navy bandwagon after that game.

The Field Goal Calculator

The field goal calculator is my initial attempt to create an adjustable system that can estimate the number of points that a team will get on average if they kick a field goal or go for it on 4th down. The calculations come from an earlier blog and are not, by any means, perfect, but I think it is a good starting point.

Here, I have provided an excel spreadsheet so users can play with it themselves. The spreadsheet has 4 entries and a graph. You can adjust it for the leg strength of the kicker (average = 0), the accuracy of the kicker (average = 0), the average yards per play for that team, and the number of yards the team needs to get a first down. The graph shows how many points that team could expect to get if they went for it or if they kicked the field goal from various points on the field.

Download Field Goal Calculator.xls