Tuesday, November 3, 2009
Saturday, January 3, 2009
Time for a Change-the MWC and the BCS
I asked at the beginning of the year how many wins the MWC could pull off against BCS conference teams. The answer was 9. They finished 9-5 against the BCS with wins over almost every team in the Pac-10 and traditional powerhouses Michigan and Alabama. And San Diego State, easily the worst team in the conference, almost pulled out a W against the Domers.
If we include Boise State (and the Mountain West should be working hard to net Boise as its 10th team), the MWC+Boise State would have wins over every team in the Pac-10 except Washington State (lack of opportunity), Cal (the only Pac-10 team to pull out a regular season victory against the Mountain West), and USC (lack of opportunity?).
And we should note that Utah beat Alabama not with trick plays or 8 Alabama turnovers, but because they were honestly the better team. All but 3 of Alabama's points came off Utah mistakes. Alabama's offense looked like, well, an SEC offense, racking up 200 yards while giving up 8 sacks. Utah moved the ball in the air and on the ground, picking up first downs from the wildcat formation late in the game. Utah was every bit as athletic as Alabama.
And why is this all important--because Utah won their conference by the hair on their chinny-chin-chins. They cashed in on some powerful karma against both TCU and BYU. The MWC was very good this year,
and that wasn't a fluke.
TCU is structurally advantaged compared to, say, Texas Tech. It's not a big school, but it's in the heart of the most dense football talent in the country, and they have been playing football well for quite some time. The true loyalists might be few in number, but they are rabid about their team (see Miami).
BYU can recruit nationally (and internationally). It is a large school with large numbers in attendance at the games-better than any team in the Big East. The Cougars won a title 25 years ago (more recently than just about every team in any of the major conferences). It has a long, strong tradition of potent offenses that quarterbacks and possession recievers want to be a part of and can now draw in Tongans/Samoans (who, except for Manti Te'o, seem to be criminally ignored by the major recruiting services) using the Mormon connection.
Utah draws on the same Tongan/Samoan population and many of the top notch athletes in the region that are not interested in the lifestyle at BYU. They, like BYU, can also nip players from California. Utah, along with BYU and TCU, have sent many notable athletes to the NFL.
Conclusion-the top three teams of the MWC are more legitimate than the top three teams of the Big East. The bottom six of the MWC are every bit as legitimate as the rest of the Big East. There is no rational explanation why the Big East has an automatic spot and the MWC does not.
I propose two solutions. First, the MWC should steal Boise State. Boise State has been succesful everywhere, regardless of the coach and despite the Mickey Mouse field, and they have a BCS bowl win. That top four has been as successful as the top four in any other conference over the last few years. The MWC could then demand inclusion in the BCS.
Second, the MWC champ and the WAC champ play for the bi-conference championship and an automatic spot in the BCS. I have been championing this idea for years. The conferences do not now have championship games, and there is a natural rivalry between the two. If this had been in practice last year, BYU and not Hawaii would have played Georgia and we would have had a better game. If this had been in practice this year, and Utah had beat Boise State, they would have as legitimate a claim as anyone else to the national championship.
Posted by The Lit Review at 5:35 AM 2 comments
Labels: Alabama, BCS, big east, Boise State, BYU, Cal, Georgia, Hawaii, Michigan, MWC, Texas Tech, USC, Washington State
Related Content:Monday, September 8, 2008
Quick Note: The Brewing BCS Crisis
What do East Carolina, BYU, Utah and Fresno State all have in common? They might all be better than the automatic BCS invitees from the ACC and Big East. This could be a very big problem.
After Clemson, Virginia Tech, Rutgers and Pitt were dismantled last weekend and West Virginia was manhandled on Saturday, new ACC and Big East frontrunners Wake and USF needed a long last second field goal and overtime,respectively, to stay unbeaten. If West Virginia is down and Pitt, Virginia Tech, Miami and Florida St are trying to rebuild, these two conferences are mediocre at best.
This kind of thing has happened before. Pitt was no match for Utah in their 2005 BCS showdown and Boise St proved it belonged at the party by beating Big 12 champ OU.
But this year we could have the four non-BCS standouts finish with one loss between them while the ACC and Big East send 3 or 4 loss champs. Things could get even more complicated if Notre Dame is good again and Ohio State plays in another national championship game. All of a sudden, you've got to tell Utah or Fresno State that they got to take their undefeated record and top 12 ranking to the Crap Bowl in early November-or lock out Florida, Georgia, LSU, Auburn, Missouri, OU, etc. from a BCS bowl because they couldn't win the Big 12 or SEC-whose divisions are more talented this year than the Big East and ACC combined.
This talk might be a little premature-BYU still gets UCLA, Wisconsin is awaiting Fresno St, and East Carolina has road games against Virginia, UCF and Southern Miss. Wake and USF are still undefeated despite the scares. But you got to believe that the non-BCS conferences will be producing at least two solid representatives, and the Bowl Championship Series picture will get very crowded.
Posted by The Lit Review at 7:46 AM 0 comments
Labels: ACC, BCS, big east, BYU, east carolina, Fresno State, Utah
Related Content:Tuesday, September 2, 2008
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.
Posted by The Lit Review at 12:53 PM 0 comments
Labels: big east, college football, predictions
Related Content:Wednesday, August 20, 2008
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.
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.
Posted by The Lit Review at 6:53 AM 0 comments
Labels: big east, college football, Pitt, Rutgers, USF, west virginia
Related Content: