Testing Matchup Myth #1: the Rematch

Myth #1: It's hard to beat the same team twice in one season
Myth #2: You can throw out the records for a rivalry game

In this first edition of the two part series, I will be taking on myth #1.

Billy Sims and the Sooners would
get revenge and redemption

The principal idea seems to be that the winner of the first game has less to prove in round 2, is overconfident entering the game, and therefore does not prepare as well or play as hard. The game 1 loser is looking for revenge or redemption.

In modern-era college football, teams play a second time in a bowl game or conference championship game. This is important for two reasons: first, it means that the teams are relatively evenly matched; second, it means that there is a whole new set of motivational variables (e.g. if the team is happy or disappointed to be in that particular bowl game) that will dilute the importance of seeking revenge or redemption for the loser.

There is a second countervailing logic: the winner of the first game already divined a game plan that wins. The loser will need to reevaluate its game plan, and faces a degree of uncertainty that the game plan will be effective. In other words, if the two teams are otherwise evenly matched, the team that won the first game has a better chance of winning the second game precisely because it won the first game.

The Choke at Doak: 31-3 to 31-31; The 5th quarter
in the French Quarter was no better for Florida

So, let's look at the numbers. Since 1950, there have been 49 rematches in college football. (Florida State tied in game 1 in 1994 - the infamous Choke at Doak.) The average score in game 1 has been 29.5-16.4, and in game 2, 31.0-17.7. Home teams were 31-16-1 in game 1. Most game 2s were played on neutral fields; home teams were only 4-6.

Game 1 winners were 29-18 in second games (62%). Simplistically, 62% is less than 100%, so game 1 losers did better in game 2, but 62% is also more than 50%, so game 1 winners were still more likely to win game 2.

Thinking about this logically, the team that won the first game was probably the better team, and so we would expect them to win the second game more often than not. Based on their performance throughout the season, we would have expected game 1 winners to win 61% of game 2s. In reality, they won 62%. In other words, game 1 winners improved their chances of winning the rematch by 1 percentage point.

BYU/UCLA 2007

On average, game 1 winners won the rematch 26.4 to 22.5. We would have expected game 1 winners to win 26.6 to 22.0 on average. That means game 1 losers outplayed game 2 expectations by .79 points. Based on game 2 scores and a pythagorean-style win/loss adjustment, game 1 losers should have won 45% of game 2s, but they only won 38%. Game 2 losers played slightly better by the scoreboard, but they were unlucky when it came to actually winning games.

In conclusion, it is not hard to beat a team twice in the same season - winning or losing game 1 has no effect on winning or losing game 2. But it is hard to blow a team out twice in the same season. So Nebraska/Washington Part II might be closer than 55-21, but don't expect Washington to pull off the upset just because they lost the first time around.

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.

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.

Locker's Excessive Celebration

Things to keep in mind: Rule 9-2, Article 1(a)(2) "After a score or any other play, the player in possession immediately must return the ball to an official or leave it near the dead-ball spot." Jake Locker violated this rule and was accordingly awarded a 15 yard penalty. You might not like the rule, but referees are not Supreme Court Justices, sitting in court to judge a rule's constitutionality. But more to the point, the penalty is not the reason Washington lost.

I repeat, the excessive celebration penalty is not why Washington lost the football game.

The extra point was blocked near the point of contact, so the yardage makes little difference. BYU had three guys in the backfield with a chance to block it. Washington lost the football game because they didn't block on the kick attempt.

He didn't miss the extra point--it was blocked, and blocked by a team that consistently gets a good rush on pressure kicks.

BYU was the better team throughout the game and deserved to win-and probably would have won in overtime. I feel sorry for Locker-he played a great game-but maybe he should spend a little more time with the rule book before their next game.

Quick Note: South Carolina and Vanderbilt

Remember, just because South Carolina beat NC State does not mean they're ready for a breakout year. NC State has now lost two straight games with a final score of a lot to zero, the last defeat coming last season at the hands of Maryland-not a top 25 team.

And just because Vanderbilt beat SC does not mean they're good. They upset an SC team last year that everyone thought was one the verge of a breakout year, but the Commodores were not good last year either.

There are plenty of elite teams in the SEC. I'm not convinced that South Carolina or Vanderbilt are among them.

Games to Watch in Week 2

Miami (-21.5) [NA] at Florida [1-0, +11.5]

NCAAF - Will U Florida beat U Miami (Fla) by 21.5 points September 6, 2008?

Why we care: Two big names, one big rivalry and a Saturday at the Swamp. And if that’s not enough, throw in a Heisman winner, three Mr. Floridas, and a ton of trash talk from U fans on the comment boards because their team looked good against Wilson Academy for the Deaf and Blind.

What to watch for: With speed and playmakers at the skill positions for both teams, this game will be decided . . . at the line of scrimmage. The Miami #1 and #2 at QB are both freshmen with 1 game of experience between them. The receivers also don’t strike fear in anyone, which is really too bad for the Canes, because that was Florida’s achilles heel last year. Instead, Miami will need to run the ball behind a massive offensive line that should be able to wear down the smaller Florida front.

On the other side, Miami will use a lot of nickel and dime packages to keep tags on Florida’s receivers and speedy, but not bulky, running backs. If Miami can get pressure on Tebow with the four down linemen, Miami may be able to slow down the Gator offensive juggernaut.

Miami’s inexperience may play a role, but it was Florida’s lack of execution against Hawaii that kept the Warriors in the game for the first 18 minutes.

Misc: Miami and Florida are currently 16^th and 17^th all time in average margin of victory, respectively (7.24 and 7.19). If Florida wins this game by 30 points or more, they will pass Miami and move up to 16^th all time.

Pick: Florida by 20

West Virginia (-8) [NA] at East Carolina [1-0, +14]

Why we care: If East Carolina can win this game, watch out BCS because you might just have a very deserving party crasher. And West Virginia looked beatable as they got outgained by Villanova.

What to watch: How many people does East Carolina put in the box and get away with it. East Carolina’s DL isn’t bad, but West Virginia’s offensive line is arguably the best in the land. And, by the way, WVU has a RB and QB that are pretty dangerous with the ball. East Carolina has to force QB White to put the ball in the air while still having one or two guys back in the secondary to play defense. If they can hold WVU to under 400 total yards (a task Villanova achieved), East Carolina’s offense is good enough (and West Virginia’s defense bad enough) that they just might score enough points to win.

Misc: I wonder if Skip Holtz will get really goofy like his dad when he gets really old, too.

Pick: East Carolina by .5

Texas Tech (-10) [NA] at Nevada [NA]

Why we care: Last year, these two teams scored a combined 987 points and gave up 755 points. That's a lot.

What to watch for: Tech will get its first test against a good offense this season. Tech will score plenty of points to win, but if Nevada is able to get its running game going, things will open downfield and Nevada will put its own mark on the scoreboard. This will all come down to Nevada’s ability to win the battle at the line of scrimmage—if the undersized Nevada O-line can open some holes, the Texas and OU lines will open up bigger holes down the road.

Misc: Nevada was averaging 36.25 points a game last year until they were shutout in their bowl game against New Mexico. That is the largest drop in production from regular season to bowl game in college football history.

Pick: Tech by enough (covers)

BYU (-6.5) [NA] at Washington [0-1, -20.5]

Why we care: Because it’s important

What to watch for (extended edition): This year, Jake Locker was supposed to make good on all the grandiose promise he brought with him to Washington. He proved his mobility in 2007, but he completed a paltry 47.3% of his passes. He struggled with making both the correct read and then the accurate pass. But last weekend Locker was good on only 12 of 28 passes, amassing less than 4 yards per attempt. And Locker wasn’t the only Husky to struggle offensively; RB Chris Polk used 14 carries to amass 19 rushing yards, making Lockers 3.7 yards per attempt much more appealing.

BYU’s offense, on the other hand, looked like it was going through the Friday runthrough. Max Hall was 34 of 41 for 486 yards and 2 TDs, TE Dennis Pitta showed that the Cougar run of NFL quality tight ends was not coming to an end just yet, and RB Harvey Unga picked up where he left off in 2007—which means he ran like a truck with quick feet.

But all was not roses for when the Cougars had the ball. Four turnovers in one quarter helped Northern Iowa stay in the game into the 4^th quarter, and, most disconcerting, one of the fumbles was another example of Hall’s small hands letting go when he gets hit. Fumble bugs make upsets possible.

BYU’s defense was good, but not far from perfect. Two of Northern Iowa’s scores (and almost all of their yards) came from plays of 69 and 76 yards, exposing again a potential weakness at the second level of the defense. QB Pat Grace also gave BYU fits, again demonstrating that the Cougar defense struggles against athletic quarterbacks (ala Jake Locker).

Oregon’s defense, on the other hand, was never given a real chance because they were forced all day against Oregon to defend short fields. If the Huskies fail to move the ball again, expect BYU to rattle off another 40+ points against Washington with Unga racking in 150+ yards rushing. If Locker can make some big plays with his legs and, more important, hit some receivers down field, Washington could make this a game.

Misc: Max Hall transferred from Arizona State because he couldn’t win the starting job at QB. In 2007, ASU QBs were sacked 55 times and BYU QBs were sacked only 20-proof that sometimes not winning can be a small victory in itself.

Pick: BYU by 15

My Statistical Crystal Ball

(Open your own statistical crystal ball here; internet explorer only)

It’s difficult to know what the future has in store based on the first weekend, but with a little statistical maneuvering, we can make some meaningful predictions.

Using data from the last couple of years and regression analysis, I’ve developed a formula to help us predict how many games a team will win. Using the points scored and the yardage in the game, and adjustments for the strength of the opponent and the conference in which the team plays (team’s in tough conferences will win fewer games than an equal team in a lesser conference), we can get a pretty good guess at how many games a team will win.

Above are calculations for a couple of Big East schools and the attached excel file (you can only view it in internet explorer, sorry) can be used to make the same or any other calculations. Three quick notes: first, the only adjustment for strength of the schedule is conference. If you know that a particular team has an unusually difficult out-of-conference schedule, subtract a little from the expected win total, and vice-versa. Also, statistical predictions have a hard time with extremes, and so the values will appear hedged—even Alabama's performance can't score it an estimated win total that is much above 10. Finally, this calculates the number of wins in a 12 game regular season. Conference championship and bowl games are extra.

Good Sign/Bad Sign

Now its time for a little Good Sign/Bad Sign. Every week I will pick out one team from each BCS conference and one non-BCS team and discuss the good signs and bad signs from their last performance.

Texas (Texas 52, Florida Atlantic 10)

The Good-The Longhorns won big against a non-BCS conference opponent, something they struggled to do last year. They are finally starting to utilize some of that athletic ability that so often goes to waste under Mack Brown.

The Bad-Texas wins in blowout fashion, but still Colt McCoy, the Vince Young antithesis, leads the team in rushing. This reflects poorly on the UT running backs, but it also has to make you worry about McCoy’s durability.

Last year Texas finished 109^th in the nation in pass defense and this season they have added two freshman in the secondary. Florida Atlantic’s Rusty Smith threw for more yards in the first half (226) than McCoy in the game (222). It makes you wonder what a Graham Harrel, Sam Bradford, Zac Robinson or Chase Daniel could do against this secondary.

Auburn (Auburn 34, UL-Monroe 0)

The Good-The Tigers ran for more than 300 yards and kept another opponent off the scoreboard. That’s always good. And Auburn’s Robert Dunn returned a punt back for a touchdown, displaying un-Auburn like-offensive pizzazz.

The Bad-Auburn scored only two offensive touchdowns and threw for 85 yards in a new, wide-open spread offense. Tony Franklin, Auburn’s new offensive coordinator summarized the performance, “We stink.” Auburn will need a passing game to beat LSU.

West Virginia (West Virginia 48, Villanova 21)

The Good-WVU can throw the ball. Pat White was 25/33 for 208 yards, 5 TDs and only one pick.

The Bad-399-354. Either West Virginia’s defense is no good or . . . ? Getting outgained by Villanova makes the team look a little vulnerable against a South Florida offense that could have scored 50 points on Saturday on one leg.

Clemson (Alabama 34, Clemson 10)

The Good-Virginia Tech 22, East Carolina 27; you play in the ACC, not the SEC.

The Bad-Rushing Yards: 0. If the offensive line is really that bad, Clemson might not be good enough to win a conference championship in the Sun Belt.

USC (USC 52, Virginia 7)

The Good-Did you see Mark Sanchez’s bomb to Ronald Johnson? That kid might be something special. You always have to be happy with a 52-7 win against a team that was a serious contender in a BCS conference just 9 months ago.

The Bad-The knee dislocated in a non-contact drill. I broke a foot in a non-contact drill 9 years ago and it’s still a problem. Durability could be an issue for Mark Sanchez. And, by the way, Joe McKnight is no Reggie Bush.

Illinois (Missouri 52, Illinois 42)

The Good-Juice Williams: 26/42, 451 yards, 5 TDs. The Fighting Illini outscored Missouri 21-7 over the last 17 minutes of the game.

The Bad-Missouri’s offense slashed through the Illini defense like chopped liver; that’s two games in a row in which the defense has been thoroughly abused by a first class offense.

Fresno State (Fresno State 24, Rutgers 7)

The Good-They traveled across the country and beat a solid BCS team in Rutgers. Sophomore Ryan Mathews ran for 163 and 3 touchdowns on 26 carries. Those are very good numbers

The Bad-Bulldog QB Tom Brandstater was 11 of 24 throwing the ball. That’s not a very good number.

Quick Notes: Opening Day

Head Ball Coach has a defense. South Carolina made a statement in their opener. In beating NC State 34-0, they gave up only 49 passing yards and forced 4 turnovers. But we knew SC’s defense was good. If the 4 Gamecock turnovers and offensive hiccups were just products of first game jitters, this Spurrier team could be for real—which means they finish 4^th in the SEC East.

The Runaround. Miami is fast. Really fast. Or Charleston Southern has tried to field a team of professional speed walkers. It's too bad no one was there to see the performance-even the fanciest camera angles couldn't hide all the empty seats.

What could’ve been and what can be. In January, Ryan Perriloux was the projected starter of the defending national champions. Now, LSU will start a Harvard transfer at QB and Ryan Perriloux is the starting QB at Jacksonville State. The entire town of Jacksonville couldn’t fill the visitor’s section at LSU’s Tiger Stadium.

Georgia Tech showed some potential in becoming a well-oiled Paul Johnson machine. The wide receivers were either making pancake blocks 30 yards downfield or catching goofy passes from QB Josh Nesbitt after releasing from the infamous “run haphazardly and get wide open” route. Half the time I had no idea where the ball was, and then I would find that it was 20 yards downfield and in the hands of someone I was pretty confident started the play on the sideline. Jonathan Dwyer, playing the hybrid running back/fullback B-Back position in Johnson’s scheme, will run for 1000+ yards this season and make the position a sexy one at Georgia Tech despite being only two inches from the QB’s butt.

But the Jackets still have a ways to go. The 2 fumbles and 70 yards of penalties can be reduced or eliminated. Josh Nesbitt completed only 5 of 12 passes. Last year’s Navy team hardly let the ball touch the grass on fumbles or incompletions and was penalized less than 30 yards a game.

Player that impressed. UConn’s RB Donald Brown is a stud. He is a known commodity in the Big East, but doesn’t get the recognition he deserves nationally. Against Hofstra, he demonstrated great vision and the ability to pop through the seam. He doesn’t have the bulk to carry the load for an entire game, but he won’t have to.

On the Money. I made two picks for Thursday's games and was an impressive 2-0 straight up and against the spread. The problem with achieving perfection this early in the season, though, is that I can only go down from here.

Games to Watch in Week 1

You should watch every game this weekend, but if you have a job or a life or a limited attention span, here's where you should focus your energies.

Legend: Team1 (line) [ATL in ‘07] vs./at Team2 [ATL in ‘07] (location)

Illinois (+8.5) [-0.42] vs. Missouri [-10.51] (St. Louis)

Why we care: It’s the only game this weekend that puts two really good teams on the same field.

What to watch for: First, how does Illinois recover from the loss of RB Mendenhall? Second, enjoy the Daniel to Maclin show.

Misc.: Missouri was better at football than Arkansas last year. In fact, matching those two up in a bowl game was an insult to the Big 12.
Missouri coaches and players have probably all invested in second homes in St. Louis to offset the hotel expenses. Regular season college football is not supposed to be played at neutral sites-only bowl games.

Pick: Missouri by 10.

Utah (+4) [-5.12] at Michigan [3.44]

Why we care: This is the first of a series of games pitting MWC teams against beatable BCS opponents, which will be important for legitimating a BYU (or Utah) run at a BCS bowl. Oh, yeah, and Michigan hired a new head coach.

What to watch for: The Michigan offense. Michigan is only two years away from a late season #2 ranking and a year away from a preseason #5. If the offense clicks, this could be a tough team (and Rich Rodriguez might just get a big head—the shame). If not, Utah will run away with this game and the year of the MWC begins.

Misc.: Last year, Rich’s team was called the Mountaineers. Last year, Rich’s new team lost to the Mountaineers. Last year, Rich’s team almost won a DI-A national championship. Last year, Rich’s new team wasn’t good enough to win the DI-AA national championship.

Pick: Utah by 5.

Troy (-6) [-9.65] at Middle Tennessee [-2.32]

Why we care: Two of the three best teams in the Sun Belt will be taking the field in Murfreesboro this Thursday. For Sun Belt teams, conference titles and a chance to knock off a BCS team are everything.

What to watch for: Last year, Troy had a legitimately good offense, averaging 453 yards a game, scoring 41 against Oklahoma State in a winning effort and another 34 against Georgia in a loss. Troy has to replace a QB Haugabook, though, and Thursday will be our first competitive look at new QB Jamie Hampton.
Middle Tennessee, on the other hand, has to replace almost everyone. Thursday’s game will help us decide whether the Blue Raiders are competing or rebuilding in 2008.

Misc.: Last year, Troy knocked off BCS foe Oklahoma State and Middle Tennessee State came a sliver from knocking off a very good Virginia team. In the next several weeks, the Troy Trojans will travel to LSU, Ohio State and Oklahoma State.

Pick: Troy by 10.

Wake Forest (-13) [-3.48] at Baylor [1.75]

Why we care: The beginning of the Art Briles era in Waco. Baylor has been competitive in the past under the great Grant Teaff, and could be again if Briles is able to make more out of less talent with a quirky offense (as Mike Leach has done at Texas Tech). If Baylor does become competitive again, the Big 12 South will be the best division in college football, hands down.
Some people care about ACC football, too. If Clemson slips, Wake Forest should get their shot at Virginia Tech in the ACC championship game-a game that will belong to the Atlantic representative.

What to watch for: With QB Riley Skinner, RB Josh Adams and 9 starters on defense back from last year’s team, we should know what to expect from Wake Forest. The question marks are all on the Baylor side. QBs Kirby Freeman and Robert Griffin have the talent to run a dynamic offense, but experience in the offense and the skill players around them to make it click have gone AWOL. The Baylor defense was horrible last season and we can anticipate a repeat performance.

Misc.: I probably played in 20 high school football games in stadiums larger than Wake’s Groves Stadium. One of those games was against Waco High.

Pick: Wake by 20.

Appalachian State (NA) [NA] at LSU [-4.56]

Why we care: University of Michigan 32 Appalachian State University 34

What to watch for: The QBs. Mountaineer QB Armanti Edwards is supposed to be the real deal – Wikipedia page and all. He looked like it against Michigan last year, but then again, Oregon’s Dennis Dixon looked like he could have walked on water had it been raining a week later in the Big House. LSU is reloading, but LSU recruits well enough to reload. Inexplicably, LSU will need to rely on a 47 year-old Harvard transfer at QB in Andrew Hatch. This game gives us a sneak peak of LSU’s new team and of Heisman hopeful Armanti Edwards against legitimate talent.

Misc.: Let’s just say, hypothetically speaking, that App. State pulls this one out. Could they get Les Miles fired, too?

Pick: LSU by 25. (Les, your job is safe until Alabama comes to town.)

Clemson (-5) [-5.08] vs. Alabama [1.83] (Atlanta)

Why we care: The national sports media have collectively built a shrine to Nick Saban and his unachieving Crimson Tide. This game also represents Clemson’s first test.

What to watch: Line play when Clemson has the ball. The Alabama D-line is not going to win many games singlehandedly, but it just might win this one if the Clemson O-line is as poor as some fear. Clemson’s D is good enough to keep Alabama in check and the offensive skill guys for Clemson are good enough that, if given time, it could be a long day for the Tide.

Misc.: I don’t like Nick Saban.

Pick: Clemson by 10[0?].

The Ohio State University: Too Legit to Quit

Three minutes into the first half, Matt Flynn fell on his own fumble at the LSU 6 yard line. Twelve minutes later, LSU’s Harry Coleman fell on a fumbled punt at the LSU 16. In a game in which LSU was outgained, 2 turnovers were the deciding factors, but Ohio State lost the ball to LSU, not LSU to Ohio State. If those fumbled balls had proven too slippery for Coleman and Flynn, we would have a different national champion for the 2007 college football season.

Price represents the probability that Ohio State will be the BCS outright national champion in 2008.

Now, generally intelligent and well-informed, but myopic, college football commentators are making broad generalizations that Ohio State shouldn’t be allowed to compete for the national championship in 2008 because their schedule is soft and they don’t have the talent and speed to compete with the SEC. Garbage.

Here are some things to remember before we make that same mistake. First, the Ohio State team of 2007 was supposed to be a rebuilding project. Ohio State went to the Sugar Bowl because the rest of the contenders across the country missed the bus. Let’s review.

Georgia couldn’t even win their own division because they got blasted by a quality, though not title contending, Tennessee team. It is prerequisite that any team interested in playing for the title of best team in the country should first establish themselves as the best in their six team division. The same goes for Kansas.

West Virginia had a golden ticket, but they and Missouri got locked in a fierce game of hot potato and threw it away. I would agree that the Big East was probably stronger than the Big 10 last year, but WVU lost twice (which is more than once) in one of the weaker BCS conferences.

Virginia Tech was on a roll at the end of the season and suffered only two losses to two good teams, but the Hokies were already handed a 41 point loss by LSU. You don’t get a rematch when you call on the mercy rule in your first meeting.

Oklahoma could have made a strong argument, having lost twice in a much tougher Big 12. But after watching their bowl game performance, and considering their own record in bowl games recently, I don’t think we would have been any better off. And Missouri has no claim, suffering the same number of losses as OU with a softer schedule and, coincidentally, having lost twice to Oklahoma.

Here is a list of USC’s second order losses (teams that beat teams that beat USC): Notre Dame (3-9), Washington (4-9), Washington State, Oregon (9-4), Oregon State (2x), California (7-6), UCLA (2x) (6-7), Arizona (5-7), Arizona State (10-3), and TCU (8-5). It is somewhat remarkable that USC won the conference championship despite marking first or second order losses to every team in the conference. The Pac 10 may have been tougher than the Big 10, but USC’s work in the Pac 10 did not warrant a shot at the title.

(On a side note, speaking of second order losses, 4 teams accomplished the rare feat of earning a spot on their own second order loss list: BYU, UCLA, Virginia Tech, and Boston College. Oklahoma, Missouri, UCF and Tulsa could have joined this list if their conference championship games had turned out differently.)

USC and Georgia may have been better teams in January, but the beautiful thing about college football is that you have to perform from September through November, too. Ohio State, two seasons in a row, has punched their card to the title game by playing good, consistent ball throughout the regular season. If Ohio State is one of the best two teams from September to November in 2008, they should again be packing their bags for another trip to the BCS title game.

But we hear that Ohio State plays in a weak Big Ten and doesn’t actually have the talent to compete against the best teams in the country. Again, garbage. Any recruiting service worth its salt will tell you that Ohio State has had top 5 recruiting classes 2 of the last 3 years. The OSU not only has grabbed the best talent from Ohio, Pennsylvania and Illinois (good high school football states), but they have also nicked five star athletes from the South. Their 2008 signees included 2 kids from Florida, 1 from Texas, and 1 from Maryland in the top 100 nationally, including ATH Lamaar Thomas who has the speed to make Trindon Holiday nervous in a foot race.

Florida only signed 5 kids from the South in the top 100 nationally.

Ohio State is too slow though, right? Sure the SEC is faster than the Big 10 and produces more pro talent at the speed positions, but the Big 10 doesn’t play for national championships—Ohio State does. Here’s a comparison of the average 40 time by unit for Ohio State and LSU in 2007:

Offensive Line and Tight End (starting 6):
OSU – 5.06 LSU – 5.05

Runnning Back (3 deep):
SU – 4.45 LSU – 4.45

Fullback:
OSU – 4.50 LSU – 4.60

Receiver (4 deep):
OSU – 4.55 LSU – 4.44

Defensive Line (starting 4, 1 reserve):
OSU – 4.80 LSU – 4.80

Linebackers (3 starters):
OSU – 4.65 LSU – 4.57

Secondary (4 starters):
OSU – 4.48 LSU – 4.53

Quarterback:
I don’t know, but LSU has the advantage here.

Conclusion—LSU was faster but not “me vs. Usain Bolt” faster. The difference between the two teams was small.

LSU looked so much faster in the Sugar Bowl, despite not actually being that much faster, because 1) LSU’s defense was coached by Bo Pelini. Players both play faster and look faster because of good coaching and scheming under Pelini. 2) LSU was accustomed to a faster pace from playing in the SEC. Ohio State had the capacity to play and that speed, but up to that point, their competition had not inspired them to. 3) LSU has more speed on the practice squad. If Tressel had allowed his first teams to go at it more in December practices, I have a feeling we wouldn’t have been able to notice a speed difference between the two teams.

OSU's Coach Tressel is a smart guy—you can tell because he wears a sweater vest and only smart guys wear sweater vests. I’m disappointed he didn’t make the necessary adjustments from 2006 to prepare for LSU, but we need to remember that a healthy LSU was really that much better than everyone else. In 2008, Tressel will have his team ready (and they won’t have to play anyone as stacked on defense as LSU was in ’07).

All this is important because Ohio State has another team that is ready to make a run for a national championship. The team will be loaded with about 47 returning starters and a Heisman-caliber running back in Beanie Wells (who has demonstrated in both national championship games that he is not too slow to compete against SEC defenses). According to Athlon Sports, Ohio State ranks in the top 10 in the country at every unit but defensive line.

More importantly, Ohio State has a schedule that could earn them some legitimacy. They play at USC, Wisconsin and Illinois (all potential top 15 teams) and also have Penn State and Michigan (who wasn’t too slow to compete against Florida last year) on the schedule. Assuming we grant one spot in the national championship game to the SEC champ, Ohio State would have just as much claim as any remaining contender based on strength of schedule.

It would be a real shame if we kept a team out of a national championship game just because they had proven to be second best the two years before.

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.

Big East Preview, 2008

I assumed the loss to Pitt had permanently scarred the West Virginia program. When Rich jumped ship, I thought we were about see a team whither away and fade into oblivion. But Coach Stewart stepped up and the Mountaineers beat down Oklahoma, stunning the world and, apparently, Bob Stoops.

This was supposed to be a sign that all was well in Morgantown, and with White, Devine, and an imposing offensive line back, the offense was going to again be unstoppable. But I think WVU lost more talent on offense in backs Slaton and Schmitt and WR Reynaud than they have picked up with a couple of recent middle of the pack recruiting classes. And the defense, which was better than most people recognized, was stripped clean. I think WVU will really get a run for its money this year in the Big East.

Question: What do Pitt and USF have in common?

Historically, these two programs have nothing in common (except for a lack of national championships in the 80's, 90's and this most recent decade), but last season they shared one important commonality - they beat West Virginia.

They have something else in common: they both have speed out the wazoo on defense. Pitt's defense was one of the best in the country, but the offense was so bad that they had to defend short fields and, consequently, gave up too many points. USF's biggest weakness on defense is that they are too speedy and lack the size to punish bruising backfields. Noel Devine is approximately 4 feet tall and weighs as much as Juice Williams did at birth. These two things - beating WVU and having speed - are not accidents.

In 2008, after losing to Auburn at home, White and Co. will need to win at Pitt and against USF the last two weeks of the season to win a Big East championship and finish in the top 15. I don't know if they will be able to pull it off. And if things don't go well in Boulder on September 18th, WVU could be looking at 4 losses in 2008.

If West Virginia falls from grace, who will take their place. In my mind, three teams in the Big East (USF, Rutgers, and Pitt) are ready to step forward while three others (Louisville, Cincinnati, UConn) have stepped back. And Syracuse is still Syracuse (relishing the glory days of Jimmy Brown and 1959).

Rutgers will have to replace Ray Rice but is now a real program with athletes that can fill in the holes as they appear. Solid quarterback play and a more open offense will help the Scarlet Knights compete, but a tough schedule will make life hard. They have to travel to West Virginia, Cincinnati, Pitt and South Florida between October 4 and November 15. If they can win three of four of those games, they should be Big East champs and BCS bowl bound. If not (the more likely scenario) they will be looking at another 8 or 9 win season, which is nothing to be ashamed of.

NCAA Football: Who will win the Big East Championship?

South Florida put themselves on the map last season (but only figuratively because most college football fans still couldn't tell you in which city USF resides). A more mature Grothe and healty RB Matt Ford should mean the offense is better than last year. They were hit bad at corner, but the defense should still be reliable. If they can win some big games at home against Kansas, Pitt and Rutgers, the skies the limit for this team.

It's about time for Pitt to break out. Three straight years now Pitt has dominated the recruiting scene in the Big East. Injuries last season held the offense in check, but watch for Sean McCoy to have a stunning season now that defenses will have to account for QB Stull and WR Kinder. The defense will be first class again, and their performance will actually show up on the score board when the offense starts clicking. They won't be great, but it won't take greatness to win the Big East this year.

And my much awaited prediction for Syracuse? They'll suck once again and forever.

Vote No on a Tournament in College Football

Global warming and a tournament in college football--in both cases, a person can expect to get roasted if they oppose the popular consensus. Our understanding of global warming (both its effects and the potential solutions) is built largely on myths. This is, unfortunately, also the case with a tournament in college football. A tournament would not magically identify the best team in college football and it would bring with it serious baggage. I'll here try to explain how I see the issue and convince you that the topic deserves real debate.

I think I can summarize the arguments for a tournament in college football in two categories: 1) the current system does not necessarily identify the best team in the country and 2) the current system is anti-climatic. I'll take these on one at a time.

Does the current system identify the best team in the country? No. It's not supposed to, its supposed to identify the national champion--an ill-defined concept that breeds disagreement and debate. The reason we cannot agree on a national champion in college football is not that the BCS is flawed but that no one knows what it means to be a national champion in college football. In college basketball or college baseball or any other significant sport, the champion is the winner of a tournament. Its a definition, not a theological truth that was spawned during the creation of sport.

Before the BCS, the national champion in college football could be defined literally as the highest ranked team and substantively as the team that was able to accumulate the most quality wins while losing as rarely as possible. Now, the substantive definition is similar but the literal definition under the BCS is a bit more convoluted--it is the team that receives the most points after a summation of various polls. Because the substantive definition uses two variables (quality wins and losses) and because the quality of a win falls on a fuzzy continuum, the application of this definition is subjective--how good are particular wins and how damning are particular losses?

If you remember nothing else, though, remember that never in college football nor at any time in any sport that I can think of is the champion the "best team". One reason is that we don't really care about the best team, but the team that has performed at the highest level. Those are different things.

But then try to define which team performed at the highest level. As the trend-o-matic demonstrates, a team's performance varies across a season. Do we find the team that has had the highest average performance, the team that has had the highest minimum, or the team that achieved the highest level at any particular time in a season? If you want a tournament, you're taking option three since the tournament can only identify the best team at the very end of the season without giving us any perspective on the team's relative performance through the season.

How often were the Giants better than the Patriots during the 2007-2008 season? Only during the Super Bowl; from September until kickoff, the Patriots were significantly better. But because the Giants had three hours during which they outperformed the Patriots, the Giants were crowned as the champions of the NFL. That, to me, is a weak definition of a champion and one that college football can avoid.

Which leads to the next issue--even if we are to place too much weight on a team's performance at the very end of the season for naming a champion, a tournament will often fail to identify which team is performing at the highest level. I discuss this more fully here, but the crux of the matter is that a team's performance, because of natural fluctuations in the players', coaches', and referees' biologies, luck, and other random events, will vary from game to game and moment to moment. Consequently, the more teams we send to the tournament, the more games teams have to win, and the less likely it is that the best team will get spit out at the end.

And any tournament in college football, in time, will expand.

2) The BCS bowl system is anti-climatic. I agree completely with that concern, but the solution is not a tournament. Ohio State had to wait almost 50 days from beating Michigan to playing LSU. I assume OSU fans stayed interested, but I had moved on to other interests (NFL, NBA, NHL, etc., there were plenty of options). Even the two weeks for the Super Bowl is too long in my opinion, but the wait for bowls in college football is ridiculous. And playing at neutral locations far from either team is a second problem (though USC and LSU have had quasi-home national championship games and that shouldn't happen either).

College football should have post-season games that run up against the most exciting regular season in sports--and why is it the most exciting regular season in sports? Because it doesn't end in a massive tournament that invites Oral Roberts and American University (or even Fresno State).

But moving up bowl games is the only change I can propose. I don't want a tournament-defined national champion in college football because that will strip some of the importance of week 1 and will make college football like everyone else. I stand behind a "highest average performance" definition, but without a complete round robin so every team gets a chance to play the rest, such a definition is inherently subjective. I could write my own algorithm to identify the team with the highest average performance, but it will only be my opinion--there is no law in heaven that defines what it means to be a national champion in college football.

Addendum: If we did have a tournament, it can admit only conference champions. One very nice consequence would be that non-conference games would not affect a teams chances at winning a national championship. Consequently, teams would bulk up their non-conference schedule for the experience and cash--but remember, college basketball also started with a tournament that allowed only conference champions and now people are pushing to extend it from a field of 65 to 96. Don't play with fire.

Big XII North, 2007(8) (P)review

Last year, some teams in the Big XII North finally caught a few splinters from the ugly stick and started hitting back. They even sent a team to a BCS bowl for the first time since Kansas State in '03 and then Nebraska in '01 (if my memory serves me correctly). But in the end, the South continued its reign.

So what should we expect from the land of prairie, corn, cows and, in small isolated gatherings, people? Here are my big questions for the Big XII North in 2008:

1) Will we see a repeat performance from Kansas?
2) Will we see a repeat performance from Nebraska?
3) Can someone from the North win the Big XII?

(See here and here for an explanation of the Performance and Reputation graphs, respectively.)

1) Kansas has an all time record of 554-550-58 for an all time winning percentage below 51%, and has scored a total of 11 points more than their opponents. Nebraska, on the other hand, has won 70% of its games all time and has scored 14,000 more points than its opponents.1 But last year, Kansas scored 37 more in one game than that particular opponent (it is also notable that Kansas scored 76 against the Nebraska basketball team as well).

Kansas was a consistent, solid, and underrated team from beginning to end last year. Mangino made some brilliant personnel moves (whether his own or those of his staff I don't know, but the result is the same) and some guys that the big schools didn't want turned out to work together like clockwork. In the end, though, you can't always expect former QB's to succeed at wide out, thugs to not get in trouble, and players the big schools didn't want to dramatically exceed expectations. For Kansas to have continued success they have to recruit, and Lawrence is still not a high school kids dream destination.



For 2008, though, Kansas has three big things going for it. One, a successful basketball program breeds ready made fans that are looking for something to cheer for (see Texas A&M basketball for an example). Two, they have some stars and many cogs back from a very good team a year ago. Three, they have another soft schedule. They'll lose at OU, but could win the rest and get a second shot at the Sooners on a neutral field. A repeat of last year is too much to ask for, though, and I expect Kansas to lose three this year and finish second to Missouri and Missouri can then make snide remarks about the Cotton Bowl.

2) Nebraska hit rock bottom last year when they demonstrated the human sieve against the Aggies, but then were able to rebound to a more respectable level. This level (about 20 on the Trend-O-Meter, see above) is where Nebraska belongs and will finish again this next year.

The truth of the matter is that Nebraska is on the wrong end of a demographic shift in the United States. As I noted earlier, Tom Osborne achieved more per capita in Nebraska than any coach ever, but now Nebraska is settling back where it belongs. Demography is destiny. A shrinking population relative to other states means that Nebraska has less talent and resources to pull from, and all that tradition will melt into oblivion as the program shrinks into mediocrity.

3) Generally, expect the South to continue its dominance and to even recover some of its big stick shrapnel from the North. Focusing more on the Big XII championship game, though, the North has in Missouri a potential contender that could bring the title north again. But, as always, the Big XII is OU's to lose.

Big 12 South, 2007(8 P)review

I think its important, before we get lost in the hype about certain teams this year, to look back at what these same teams did with their talent last year because, on average, more than 75% of the team is the same as last year. I'm using two measures that I developed to measure performance and reputation over the course of a season. Today, I'm focusing on the Big XII South.

My big questions for the Big 12:
1) Is Tech ready for a breakout year?
2) Who will win the Red River Shootout?
3) Is Oklahoma State on the way up or down?
4) Who will win the Big 12 South?


1) Texas Tech spent most of the season down in the pack in the Big 12 South. After losing the shootout to Oklahoma State, Leach asked for more from the defense and, generally it delivered. With Graham and Crabtree putting up ridiculous numbers, Tech became a real force and arguably one of the better teams in the country. If Leach (the best offensive mind in college football?) can change the status quo in Lubbock on the defensive side of the ball, Tech can realize some pretty high expectations.



2) OU started the season in 2007, behind the ridiculous start of Bradford, in high form which it never again realized. If Mr. Melton is right and Sam is regressing toward a mean, OU could be in for a mediocre season. On the other hand, while UT finally showed some signs of life against Arizona State after a whipping by rival A&M, Colt is not getting any better and super recruiter Mack Brown has not been incredibly successful without the incredible hulk under center. For now, I'll go with the Sooners.


3) (Performance is the solid line and Reputation the dotted line). Oklahoma State? Over-Rated! Oklahoma State never achieved that high of a level last season despite touting "the best offense ever." I doubt expect anything more this next season. With money and flash, they are a popular dark horse, but popular opinion last year and this year continues to rank them in the middle of the pack where they belong. Don't get lost in the hype.

4) Who will win it--dare I say Texas Tech? No, I daren't. Tech will be very successful this season and win a lot of games, but I think Leach needs at least one more year to instill an attitude of expectations that produces the consistent play necessary to win a conference half-championship. This year, like every year, the Big 12 South is OU's to lose.

My College Football Kickoff

A blog devoted to statistical rankings and ratings can be a little dull the first few weeks of the season and devoid of content before the season starts, but I've decided to throw in my two cents and subjective predictions along with everyone else. Here are some things that stick out to me:

1) USC vs. Florida national championship game.

The only thing that attracts my ire like LA sports teams is Urban Meyer. Nothing against these two programs or their fans, but I always want them to fail. I even committed the damning heresy of urging Vince Young into the end zone in Pasadena a few years ago because that special place in Hell reserved for traitors of college football fandom seemed so much better than the alternative.

But here's how it will go down.

USC beats the OSU at home and they will lose no more than one game this season, so Ohio State is not losing a championship game this year. Oklahoma will lose to Texas Tech or Texas and finish behind the Trojans as well. In the SEC, Florida will score 100 points a game as long as Tebow is healthy and they will beat Georgia in Jacksonville. Florida's strength of schedule will be enough to help them edge out one loss OU and Ohio State as long as they lose no more than one game and they will have the head-to-head win against Georgia.

The team most likely to crash the party, in my opinion, is OU, who should beat a Texas team that will take another step down since 2005 and will play Tech in Norman.

2) For the love of all that is holy, get Notre Dame out of your preseason polls.

Notre Dame will go to a bowl game because their schedule boasts powerhouses North Carolina, post-Paul Johnson Navy, Stanford and Syracuse, but giving them a ranking at this point is a crime against humanity-even Robert Mugabe wouldn't so egregiously fix poll outcomes. Notre Dame didn't just have a bad year in 2007, they had, arguably, the worst offense in DI-A and would need to leap frog about 55 teams from last year to pull their way into the top 25-and the problem last year wasn't talent but know-how (aka coaching). And preseason polls matter, because they determine whether or not teams are even on the map, and Notre Dame, despite their name and their coach's name and even their qb's name, need to earn their spot on the map like everyone else.

3) BYU should downplay its potential for this season

Bronco is a stud and a motivational guru, but BYU will fail in its Quest for Perfection. The offense will be good, but it was better two years ago and will be better next year. The defense will be suitable for the MWC, but vulnerable to talent. They will lose at Washington, at TCU or, most likely, at Utah (against whom they have needed miracles to win the last two years) and all the publicity that they inspired this year will haunt them as they try to make a run with a better team next year. Talk of BCS glory and even Heisman contention is not just ridiculous but counter-productive.

4) Texas Tech will have a typical Tech season

Tech is unpredictable. They can score 60 one week and 10 the next. They always play well against some teams (for example, Texas A&M) and poorly against others. Despite what most people believe, Tech's problem has not been its defense, but its inconsistency on offense and defense. Tech may win its good games by more and maybe even pull out a victory in a bad game, but the record at the end of 2008 will not be much different than the past few seasons.

5) Illinois and Kansas will take steps back towards mediocrity

First, I should put this in perspective. Illinois finished second in the Big 10 and then got exploited in their bowl game. To those from the South, Illinois never left mediocrity. But a Mendenhall-less Illini cannot be carried to much success this season by a quarterback that has achieved the same level of accuracy with a football as I have in my golf game. Kansas had a season to be proud of last year, but the truth is they exploited a soft schedule by playing solid football. They have some talent on offense, but they won't turning too many heads. I hope Jayhawk fans enjoyed the success they experienced in the 2007-2008 academic year because it won't be repeated anytime soon.

6) And the winner of the 2008 Heisman trophy is . . .

"Boy oh boy this must be a good award!"

Much of this season (metaphorically) rests on Tebow's (literal) shoulder. If he stays healthy, with his talent, the weapons around him and Florida's offensive scheme, he will run away with a second Heisman. Georgia's Moreno is another obvious choice--tons of talent on a team with tons of talent, and he would be the front runner in my mind if Tebow stumbled and Georgia worked its way into the national championship game. Bradford and Daniels in the Big 12 will both put up big numbers as will Devine in the land of snuff and rusted cars.

Then there is Michael Crabtree. The guy is not only in a system where he can put up numbers that make you squint and check your prescription, but he is also an incredible talent. If Tech is able to redefine itself this season as a real football team instead of a high scoring gimmick, Crabtree could even overtake a best performance from Timothy in Gainesville.

7) Not Again

If the BCS picture this year shakes down like it did last year, with teams blowing big games against inferior teams, losing quarterbacks at crucial moments, and under-performing squads backing into national championships, I think I'm going to become a Hockey fan. We need two teams that both have legitimate claims to the title and have separated themselves from the pack. But if that's Florida and USC, I think I'm going to be sick.

Week 15 Rankings

Complete Week 14 Ratings Table Here

According to the Matrix, the national championship game already took place, in San Antonio, on Saturday, and Oklahoma won.

I mentioned yesterday how Stoops was trying to manipulate the national championship game with his vote. Well, this is how that kind of manipulation occurs statistically. It is a bootstrap technique. Missouri's rating is dependent on OU's rating because both of Missouri's losses came at the hands of the Sooners. Oklahoma's rating, likewise, depends on Missouri's, because Oklahoma's two biggest wins came against Missouri. When Missouri loses to Oklahoma, Oklahoma's stock is boosted, which lessens the penalty levied on Missouri for losing twice to them, which, again, boosts Oklahoma's stock for having beaten them, etc.

That, of course, does not mean the system is flawed. If you look at the way these two teams have performed, with the exception of Oklahoma's games against Colorado and Tech, you will not find a more impressive record in the country.

Missouri, though still #1, took a hit. Last week, it was consensus number 1 (in all three polls the Matrix generates) with huge leads over everyone but West Virginia. If West Virginia had not managed to choke as no other team has ever choked before or ever will again (Pitt is now the nation's second hottest team according to the Recent rating), Missouri would have dropped to 2 and, in fact, could have potentially dropped below Oklahoma in the Hybrid poll as well.

USC and Ohio State still sit comfortably at #1 and #2 with the nation's best defenses. Florida still has the highest performing offense, but Navy (from the wishbone, no less) is now nipping at the heels of the Gators.

The Vandals have made a strong move to the bottom of the list as the nation's worse team, claiming a title Florida International had been coveting all season. The Gophers are the worst team from a BCS conference - Brewster's really taking things a whole new direction. The amazing thing about the 1-11 season is that it should never happen. Minnesota actually has a history of success in the game, a massive student body (=fans in the stadium and revenue for financing facilities), and is in the Big 10. Ironically, Minnesota payed Brewster more per win than any other team in the country.

That is not the case with football failures SMU and Rice. They were almost competitive for years in the SWC but, like Baylor, cannot compete with the larger schools in Texas - especially since SMU can't get away with putting together the best team money can buy anymore. Despite all the talent in that fine state, Texas has three of the nation's six worst teams (with the Mean Green joining the others at 118). At the other end, Texas has no teams in the top 25 according to the Matrix.

Before moving on, I would like to congratulate Washington for scoring this season's most difficult schedule. Unfortunately, the strength of that schedule is very visible in their record this season.

I thought I would end this with a brief discussion of the rating measures you can find on the table.

Performance - A rating based only on margin of victory and opponent strength.
Potential - Based on the performance rating, but tries to take into account match-ups and "luck" that might have distorted a teams performance rating.
Elo - A rating based on wins and losses and opponent strength.
Hybrid-2 - A combined rating that takes into account the first three rating approaches.
Strength of Schedule (SOS) - this is the mean of a team's opponents' ratings. I have included it as an additional piece of information - it is not used in the calculations of any ratings.
Recent - A rating of a team's recent performance relative to its average performance - a Recent rating does not mean that a team is good, only that it is playing better than before.
Consistent - the consistency rating is read like a golf score - a low number means the team has been relatively predictable.
Efficiencies - These are relatively self-explanatory. A higher number means that a team has demonstrated a higher level of efficiency in that area.

Complete Week 14 Ratings Table Here