After the second go-around, we are stuck at 3-3 for the season on the numbereds, right up there with a coin flip. A special thanks goes out to Dustin Sherer of Wisconsin for the genius move of throwing a backward pass off a FSU defender's hand, resulting in a 75 yard defensive score to get the Champs Sports Bowl of to an appropriate start. Anyway, NC State covered despite losing Russell Wilson on the last play of the first half.(With NC State leading 17-6) If Wilson doesn't get hurt, the Pack wins that game outright. As a result they didn't, of course helped along by a fake FG for a TD, a blocked punt and 2 personal foul penalties that kept scoring drives alive late for Rutgers. A win is a win though. (Provided that you didn't wait until 10 minutes before kickoff to play the game, and then failed to buy the spread back to 6 1/2 or 7.) The following games are over the next couple days, just short of New Year's Day. I'll have those plays tomorrow night.
7. Nevada -2 1/2 v Maryland: Sorry for the lateness here. I didn't realize that this was a day game, but it is. This is somewhat of a fade of Maryland, because there is no way that they have any desire at all to be in Boise over the holidays. If there is ever a team that doesn't need some sort of lack of motivation away from home, it's Maryland, who routinely dials up their most sickly performances in games like this. The Terps are true cowards, a group of coward's cowards, if you will. They've already lost handily on the road as a DD favorite to MTSU early this year, and now they have to travel across the country to what I assume will be freezing cold to play in a game they want no part of against an opponent they can't get jacked to play. Oh, and by the way, said opponent is a bad matchup for them. Maryland relies heavily on their running game, and Nevada just happens to be ranked 4th in he country against the run. If Maryland is going to win this game, they will need to have Chris Turner throw for 350+, something he is not used to doing. Nevada also will likely have the better of Maryland in their own ground game, as they are ranked #1 in the country in rushing offense per carry. Maryland has been gashed at times this year. Unless Maryland has been heavily schooled on the art of "sacking up", I think we can expect a clunker performance here, and and happy trip back to Reno for the Wolf Pack with a coveted win over a BCS opponent under their belt.
8. Oregon St -2 1/2 v Pittsburgh: Get the spread under 3 while you still can, though it's pretty readily available. If it moves to 3, I'd buy it down, but that's just me. Wanny deserves some credit here. He's pretty much avoided any additional "AAAAAAAPPPPPP" moments since the opening upset loss to Bowling Green. However, he will be thoroughly outclassed in the coaching department by Mike Riley in this one. The spread has fallen because the Rodgers brothers are probably not going to play. James, the smallish wide receiver, has a broken collarbone, so he is out, but the jitterbug RB Jacquizz says he will play. Who knows, but even if those two don't play, I still like OSU here. Despite the perceived prowess of Pitt's running game, on a per carry basis, they are downright mediocre, and will struggle to convert 3rd downs on this Beaver defense. The Beavs also sport a big edge at QB, regardless if it's Moevao of Sean Canfield behind center. The Beavs also are coming off a shellacking when all the chips were on the table in their rivalry game with Oregon, so they will be looking for redemption. A small spread like this has me interested when the coaching, QB and motivation edges are all on the same side.
Others: The Holiday Bowl appears to me to be lined about right...Okie St and Oregon are very similar squads, but OSU is much more balanced with their ability to throw the ball. Oregon has a much better run defense than OSU though, so the chances of Oregon dominating with the run game are certainly there. Since it's a LaVette family play, and since I'm getting points (3 should be available) I'll be on Oregon, but I can certainly see why the oddsmakers and public are on OSU.....At first glance, Rice (-3)v Western Michigan looked like a gimme, what with Rice lining up in their home city against a MAC squad as a short favorite, but upon further reflection, Rice's defense is so terrible that I can't lay points with them. Despite an intense love affair with the Owls by the general public, this line has fallen to 2(and since gone back up to 3) WMU has the kind of offense to keep Rice's defense on the field all the live long day. WMU will have the edge in all facets of that matchup, whereas I don't think Rice will be able to run it effectively. Look for WMU's Jamarko Simmons to catch about 15 balls for maybe 225 yards. The same might be true with Rice's Jarrett Dillard, as the Owls will certainly get on the scoreboard, but I think Rice's inability to play any defense will ultimately cost them in this game......Minny/Kansas sits at KU -9. That's a tossup. If Eric Decker is healthy(which is a mystery) he will have all kinds of success with KU's secondary, but so will all of KU's receivers against the Goofers. The line looks about right. I might actually not even play this one. (Forget I said that, quickly.)Gun to head, I'd go with the dog, of course.....Everyone in the free world is on BC (-3 1/2) in their tilt with Vandy. I really see this one as a stalemate..neither offense is going to be able to move the ball on the other, and the game is in Nashville, so forgive me if I don't see BC as the obvious play here. Vandy actually does a good job of converting for TDs in the red zone, a stark contrast to BC, who often settles for FGs. IN a low scoring game, 3 1/2 is significant.....The AF/ Houston line continues to fluctuate between 3 1/2 and 4. These teams already played once this year so it's hard to pick out the motivational edge. At the outset I was anticipating a Houston play, since they have been putting up pinball machine type numbers recently, but their defense is so bad that It makes it hard. Consider that AF beat this team in September without even completing a pass. They've made some changes since then to upgrade the passing attack. Actually, there might be as much of a mismatch for Houston trying to stop AF when they throw it as there is for AF on D. Kind of a tossup, but I'll be taking the points. MWC is still a step above CUSA in my opinion as well.....LSU is getting 4, 4 1/2 in some circles in their game against LSU. The motivational edges are all there for LSU; underdog status against a perceived weaker program, some bad performances to make up for, etc. However, this is the mother of all coaching mismatches, so intangibles will go the way of GA Tech. Having said that, the public is so ingrained on Ga Tech in this one that the spread might go up to 4 1/2. If so, LSU is the value side. Both teams are relatively new to their roles as Dog/favorite here, and I think it will have an effect. Also, Ga Tech is terrible in the red zone, while LSU is pretty good, and there is a big advantage in the kicking game for LSU. There exists the possibility that G Tech will have several open possessions after long drives, and that is not conducive to covering a number. That's it for now. I'll be back soon for more on the Jan 1 games and beyond.
Wednesday, December 31, 2008
Saturday, December 27, 2008
Bowl Musings Continued (Part 2)
1-2 to start, not surprising since I have gotten off to bad starts the past couple of years. I have to say, though, that I think you can make a case for all 3 being the right side. For example, a confluence of about 8 events had to come together for TCU to avoid covering the Poinsettia Bowl. They had more first downs than Boise had rushing yards for crying out loud. How do you outgain a team by 225+ yards, outrush them 250-23 and only win the game by 1? I', still trying to figure that out myself. As for BYU, they played like complete dogshit, effed up just about every play they ran, didn't cover a soul the entire game, yet still had to absolutely shit the bed in the last 5 minutes to blow the cover. If BYU showed up and played with any resolve at all, they win the game by DD. Oh well, what can you do? Besides scream obscenities at the TV for a two hour span, that is.
4.Wisconsin +6 v Florida St: Frankly, I see no discernible advantage for either team in this game. Generally Florida St would have a distinct speed advantage over any Wisconsin squad, but this isn't necessarily a fast Florida St team. They rely more on size and position in the passing game, and less on speed, so Wisconsin matches up pretty well with them. Both teams run it well and stop the run ok, and struggle throwing the ball, though I think Christian Ponder is a little more turnover prone than Scherer is for the Badgers. Also, I would be surprised if FSU has faced an offensive line as good as Wisconsin's with the exception of Florida, who ran roughshod over the Noles in a deluge. If Florida St struggles to stop the run(and Clay could be primed for a big day), I can rather easily see an outright win for Wisconsin, since FSU is certainly not explosive on offense, and Wisconsin is no pushover on D. The spread has moved to 6, and 70% of the public is on FSU. There isn't a lot of logic behind that in my opinion. Florida St could win by 7 or more, but I think an outright by the Badgers is just about as likely.
5. NC State +7 v Rutgers: Rutgers has definitely proved themselves as one of the most improved squads during the course of this year. A the beginning of the season, they looked like the Washington Generals..a running comedy of errors. As the season wore on, however, and I guess as they moved deeper into the Big East schedule, Mike Teel got his wits about him and started letting his explosive receiving corps make plays for him. As a result, they have won their last 5, and outgained their opponent in 3 of those 5 by 300+. Explosiveness in the passing game and a myriad of turnovers have led to this. However, at the end of the day, I think Mike Teel comes up short in the gumption department in games that mean something, and this bowl game against a legit opponent means something. Now, you might be thinking, "Legit opponent? NC State? 6-6 NC State? Yes. They are 6-6, it's true, but with Russell Wilson under center, they are 5-3 and a perfect 8-0 against the spread. Keep in mind that NC State was a dog in every one of their lined games this season and went 6-6. Not bad when you put it in that context. Also, if you are going to give me a TD with a team coached by Tom O"Brien with a solid running game and a QB with a 16/1 ratio, I am a taker, especially if that team is getting a TD from a 7-5 team out of the Big East. Strong public fade as well, I like this one.
6. Louisiana Tech pk v Northern Illinois: Listen, neither of these teams are worth a crap, both play in conferences with questionable teams at best, NIU squeaked out a 6-6 record, La Tech a 7-5 record. However, I think there are enough positives as this matchup takes shape to put me solidly in La Tech's side here. Early in the season, La Tech was downright putrid on offense, especially in the passing game, because they had a QB (Taylor Bennett) who literally could not throw a spiral off the broad side of a barn. Once they made the move to Ross Jenkins, they at least went from utterly helpless to somewhat competent. At the same time, they started running the ball better. Their MO is run the ball and stop the run. and it's a good thing for them too, because they cannot stop the pass to save their lives. Luckily for them, NIU can't really throw it, so it's a favorable matchup for them. NIU has had some success on offense, but only against teams ranked in the bottom 25-30 in total defense. When they played anyone with a pulse on defense, they struggled mightily. In order to win this game, NIU is going to have to throw it and throw it often. That is not their comfort zone. La Tech is ranked 11th against the run, and has a shut down performance of Nevada on their resume. Keep in mind that Nevada is the top rushing attack in the country. Louisiana Tech has a better running game than Northern, they stop the run better than NIU and the game is in their backyard. They definitely look like the value side in this one.
Others: I lean to North Carolina (+2) in the opener on Saturday in Charlotte over West Virginia. North Carolina is fast enough on defense to stick with Pat White, and there are rumors that Noel Devine's ovaries hurt, so he might not play. Major coaching advantage for UNC as well in this one, and TJ Yates is back healthy on offense, so we'll likely see an improvement in their passing game.....The Miami/Cal line is going up, having reached 10. It might get higher. I originally liked Cal at around a TD because of the major advantage they'll have running he ball on Miami, but if this line keeps going up, a Jacory Harris led attack for Miami is much better than a Robert Marve led attack. Hard to back Miami, though when they've given up 691 yards on the ground in their past 2 games and are now facing the #8 per carry rushing attack in the country. If it sticks at 10 or maybe goes down, I'll probably pull the trigger on the favorite.....Northwesterm/Mizzou(-12 1/2) is a tough one. Mizzou is so bad on defense that they are hard to back at DD, but Northwestern's offense is severely overrated, and they will struggle to stop Mizzou's attack unless there is some kind of common knowledge being shared with the square jawed Pat Fitzgerald. (The NW coach, not the guy prosecuting our bag of shit Governor Blago). If there's some sort of method to getting pressure on Chase Daniel that NW can follow, I would like them, but I fear for them. I really do. I'll probably be taking the points though....I mean NW is 9-3 aren't they? That's it for now. More to come probably Monday night.
4.Wisconsin +6 v Florida St: Frankly, I see no discernible advantage for either team in this game. Generally Florida St would have a distinct speed advantage over any Wisconsin squad, but this isn't necessarily a fast Florida St team. They rely more on size and position in the passing game, and less on speed, so Wisconsin matches up pretty well with them. Both teams run it well and stop the run ok, and struggle throwing the ball, though I think Christian Ponder is a little more turnover prone than Scherer is for the Badgers. Also, I would be surprised if FSU has faced an offensive line as good as Wisconsin's with the exception of Florida, who ran roughshod over the Noles in a deluge. If Florida St struggles to stop the run(and Clay could be primed for a big day), I can rather easily see an outright win for Wisconsin, since FSU is certainly not explosive on offense, and Wisconsin is no pushover on D. The spread has moved to 6, and 70% of the public is on FSU. There isn't a lot of logic behind that in my opinion. Florida St could win by 7 or more, but I think an outright by the Badgers is just about as likely.
5. NC State +7 v Rutgers: Rutgers has definitely proved themselves as one of the most improved squads during the course of this year. A the beginning of the season, they looked like the Washington Generals..a running comedy of errors. As the season wore on, however, and I guess as they moved deeper into the Big East schedule, Mike Teel got his wits about him and started letting his explosive receiving corps make plays for him. As a result, they have won their last 5, and outgained their opponent in 3 of those 5 by 300+. Explosiveness in the passing game and a myriad of turnovers have led to this. However, at the end of the day, I think Mike Teel comes up short in the gumption department in games that mean something, and this bowl game against a legit opponent means something. Now, you might be thinking, "Legit opponent? NC State? 6-6 NC State? Yes. They are 6-6, it's true, but with Russell Wilson under center, they are 5-3 and a perfect 8-0 against the spread. Keep in mind that NC State was a dog in every one of their lined games this season and went 6-6. Not bad when you put it in that context. Also, if you are going to give me a TD with a team coached by Tom O"Brien with a solid running game and a QB with a 16/1 ratio, I am a taker, especially if that team is getting a TD from a 7-5 team out of the Big East. Strong public fade as well, I like this one.
6. Louisiana Tech pk v Northern Illinois: Listen, neither of these teams are worth a crap, both play in conferences with questionable teams at best, NIU squeaked out a 6-6 record, La Tech a 7-5 record. However, I think there are enough positives as this matchup takes shape to put me solidly in La Tech's side here. Early in the season, La Tech was downright putrid on offense, especially in the passing game, because they had a QB (Taylor Bennett) who literally could not throw a spiral off the broad side of a barn. Once they made the move to Ross Jenkins, they at least went from utterly helpless to somewhat competent. At the same time, they started running the ball better. Their MO is run the ball and stop the run. and it's a good thing for them too, because they cannot stop the pass to save their lives. Luckily for them, NIU can't really throw it, so it's a favorable matchup for them. NIU has had some success on offense, but only against teams ranked in the bottom 25-30 in total defense. When they played anyone with a pulse on defense, they struggled mightily. In order to win this game, NIU is going to have to throw it and throw it often. That is not their comfort zone. La Tech is ranked 11th against the run, and has a shut down performance of Nevada on their resume. Keep in mind that Nevada is the top rushing attack in the country. Louisiana Tech has a better running game than Northern, they stop the run better than NIU and the game is in their backyard. They definitely look like the value side in this one.
Others: I lean to North Carolina (+2) in the opener on Saturday in Charlotte over West Virginia. North Carolina is fast enough on defense to stick with Pat White, and there are rumors that Noel Devine's ovaries hurt, so he might not play. Major coaching advantage for UNC as well in this one, and TJ Yates is back healthy on offense, so we'll likely see an improvement in their passing game.....The Miami/Cal line is going up, having reached 10. It might get higher. I originally liked Cal at around a TD because of the major advantage they'll have running he ball on Miami, but if this line keeps going up, a Jacory Harris led attack for Miami is much better than a Robert Marve led attack. Hard to back Miami, though when they've given up 691 yards on the ground in their past 2 games and are now facing the #8 per carry rushing attack in the country. If it sticks at 10 or maybe goes down, I'll probably pull the trigger on the favorite.....Northwesterm/Mizzou(-12 1/2) is a tough one. Mizzou is so bad on defense that they are hard to back at DD, but Northwestern's offense is severely overrated, and they will struggle to stop Mizzou's attack unless there is some kind of common knowledge being shared with the square jawed Pat Fitzgerald. (The NW coach, not the guy prosecuting our bag of shit Governor Blago). If there's some sort of method to getting pressure on Chase Daniel that NW can follow, I would like them, but I fear for them. I really do. I'll probably be taking the points though....I mean NW is 9-3 aren't they? That's it for now. More to come probably Monday night.
Friday, December 19, 2008
2008 Bowl Musings Part 1
As we move to the bowls this year, I feel significantly more comfortable looking at the lines this year than I did in the previous two years. I can vividly remember, both last year and the year before that, staring at the lines and drawing a blank. Not really the case this year. Actually, handicapping the bowls is a different animal overall than handicapping the regular season. You have to take motivation into consideration more now, and coaching, while always important, is even moreso now because of the time off, and the structure needed to adequately communicate and execute a game plan. So, having said that, there are generally three areas I look for edges among teams in bowl season:
1. Who has the motivational edge?
2. Who has the smarter/better coach?
3. Who has the better QB?
This isn't the end all be all for a bowl matchup, but if you can find a team with edges in all 3 areas, you're probably looking at a team that should be a DD favorite, and if you don't see that, you probably have yourself a very logical play. In most cases you won't see a big discrepancy in these areas, so I won't be harping on them constantly in the write ups, but when they're there, I'll let you know. I'm going to start with the first week or so of games up until Christmas.
1. BYU +3 v Arizona: Ok, here is one game where all three of the aforementioned factors might be on one side. Actually, I know that Bronco Mendenhall is a superior coach to Mike Stoops, and frankly so does Mike Stoops and everyone on both teams. Truthfully, both of these teams were not very good when they ventured on the road this year. BYU was shellacked in their game at TCU, and imploded in the 4th quarter at Utah. Arizona, meanwhile, gave up 55 points at Oregon, 36 at New Mexico, 28 @ Wazzou, the most pathetic excuse for a football team we saw all year, and 24 in an embarrassing run D display at Stanford. The two teams are similar in the passing game, both offensively and defensively, with perhaps a slight edge to BYU due to a recent move toward a more conservative running attack for Arizona. But there isn't much of a comparison in the running games. Arizona is giving up more than 5 yards a rush on the road, and Harvey Unga and company can run it for sure, as their 7.0 per rush numbers vs the 14 rush D in the country (Utah) attest. I think BYU will have their way with Arizona's porous D in Vegas, and I think the motivational edge favors BYU as well, as MWC teams generally salivate at the chance to knock off a Pac 10 school, and they have an ownership in this bowl as the one representing their conference. Definite edge at QB, certain edge in coaching, and I also think.the motivational edge favors BYU here. And I get 3 points? OK.
2. TCU -2 v Boise St: It's become clear that in most cases, fading Boise for any reason is generally not a good idea. It's unclear at times how they get it done, but complete dismantlings of pretty decent teams often happen when Boise gets their hands on them. Taking a look at this year's team, they went undefeated again, garnering a lot of positive press(obviously) in the process. They score 45-49 every week against the dregs of the WAC(which was considerably down this year), and their defense is very good. However, they are in a place where few teams should want to find themselves, and that is looking toward a date with the TCU Horned Frogs. TCU's defense is absolutely brutal to play against, and they are frothing at the mouth right now due to some perceived dissing or a general lack of attention from the CFB press. Coach Gary Patterson was livid after his season ended because some talking head said something nice about BYU when the nicety should have been directed at TCU. Patterson is certainly still seething about that game in November when TCU's kicker shit the bed on two short FGs resulting in Utah's eventual theft of a game TCU dominated in Salt Lake. Patterson publicly begged for a shot at Boise. In my opinion, there is no doubt that TCU will have a motivational edge in this one, as even though TCU is certainly a formidable opponent, I think it is difficult for Boise to be as excited to play them in the Poinsettia Bowl as they would have been to play a BCS heavyweight. Boise also has not faced a defense even in the same stratosphere with TCU all season. In fact, only 3 of their opponents are ranked even in the top 75 in total D. TCU has played Oklahoma, Utah and BYU, and pretty much destroyed everyone else on their schedule. Perhaps the Boise pixie dust will prevail once again, but this time they are playing a well coached, pissed off, legitimate top 12 team looking to prove something. If Boise wins this, hats off to them, but I think they are headed into a hornet's nest.
3. Notre Dame -1 @Hawaii: After watching the North Shore Country Day v New England Patriots level shitkicking that ND was subjected to in the LA Coloseum 2 weeks ago, it becomes pretty understandable as to why most people, especially those with a cynical, sarcastic anti-ND bent would think that ND is going to further embarrass themselves on the island against this hopelessly medicore Hawaii squad. Hawaii's MO is to lure some team to the island who is either overmatched or unmotivated so they can ambush them in pleasant weather conditions while their wild Samoan goon squad fanbase does the same to the unsuspecting polite vacationers on the other side. Well, I suspect that ND's team will be neither overmatched nor unmotivated, since they have become the laughingstock of college football over their last 2 games. Let's put those last 2 games aside and look at ND's season as a whole. Before the USC game they had outgained 8 straight opponents, including 3 bowl teams on the road. For the year, they have allowed only 327 yards per game, good for 38th best in the country. There is no doubt that they have a significant talent advantage, since this is a rebuilding Hawaii team, and Weis is facing a first year guy in Greg McMackin. Michael Floyd will be back, so their corners will have to deal with Golden Tate and Michael Floyd on either side, and Hawaii blitzes a lot, so there should be ample opportunities for Jimmy Clausen to beat man coverage if he can keep himself from being steamrolled by the rush.There is no excuse for Fat Charlie if he doesn't bust that bowl losing streak this year. If you can't beat the 4th best team in the WAC when you should have the motivational edge, you need to just forget about catching the plane back home, stay on the island and transition into a new, but well rehearsed role as a beached whale.
Others: I lean to Navy(+3) in the early game Saturday, but it's really hard to call that game because it's a rematch(boo). Navy won the first one on the road outright as a 12 point dog due to Riley Skinner's horrific day at the office. Most people would look at that game and chalk it up as a fluke because of all the turnovers, but Navy actually got the better of Wake in that game statistically as well, as they outgained them by more than a yard per play. Navy also generally matches up well with teams that can't blow them off the field offensively, but Wake, at #103 offensively, is not one of those teams. Kaipo looks good medically, and that makes Navy much more explosive because he does a much better job than the rest of yahoos Navy has suited up at Qb this year at getting the ball to Shun White. You can almost expect a couple of long runs from him in this game. Don't forget that Navy has shut out the last 2 teams they've faced (Army and NIU) and both of those teams are pretty similar to Wake offensively.......The Colorado St/Fresno game is a complete tossup, but since Fresno generally doesn't feel like giving a shit unless they are matched up with a BCS squad, they'll probably give a half assed effort, so I'll take the points with Colorado St, who definitely is capable up putting up 30+ on Fresno even on a good day for the Bulldogs.....No real opinion on Memphis(+12) v USF, but I guess I'll take the points, since Memphis does have a pretty good offense, and USF can't possibly care about this game, and they have turned in some brutal performances this year when they were not interested. The only problem is that Memphis has stunk up the joint in their games against decent defensive squads, which USF generally is(13th in total D).....No opinion on the New Orleans bowl, but for interest purposes, I'll take the points (Southern Miss +4 v Troy). USM has been great in their last 4 games, they have a good QB and some BCS caliber athletes. Troy might too, but they're not the ones getting 4.
That's it for now.....good luck, and I'll have more right around Christmas.
1. Who has the motivational edge?
2. Who has the smarter/better coach?
3. Who has the better QB?
This isn't the end all be all for a bowl matchup, but if you can find a team with edges in all 3 areas, you're probably looking at a team that should be a DD favorite, and if you don't see that, you probably have yourself a very logical play. In most cases you won't see a big discrepancy in these areas, so I won't be harping on them constantly in the write ups, but when they're there, I'll let you know. I'm going to start with the first week or so of games up until Christmas.
1. BYU +3 v Arizona: Ok, here is one game where all three of the aforementioned factors might be on one side. Actually, I know that Bronco Mendenhall is a superior coach to Mike Stoops, and frankly so does Mike Stoops and everyone on both teams. Truthfully, both of these teams were not very good when they ventured on the road this year. BYU was shellacked in their game at TCU, and imploded in the 4th quarter at Utah. Arizona, meanwhile, gave up 55 points at Oregon, 36 at New Mexico, 28 @ Wazzou, the most pathetic excuse for a football team we saw all year, and 24 in an embarrassing run D display at Stanford. The two teams are similar in the passing game, both offensively and defensively, with perhaps a slight edge to BYU due to a recent move toward a more conservative running attack for Arizona. But there isn't much of a comparison in the running games. Arizona is giving up more than 5 yards a rush on the road, and Harvey Unga and company can run it for sure, as their 7.0 per rush numbers vs the 14 rush D in the country (Utah) attest. I think BYU will have their way with Arizona's porous D in Vegas, and I think the motivational edge favors BYU as well, as MWC teams generally salivate at the chance to knock off a Pac 10 school, and they have an ownership in this bowl as the one representing their conference. Definite edge at QB, certain edge in coaching, and I also think.the motivational edge favors BYU here. And I get 3 points? OK.
2. TCU -2 v Boise St: It's become clear that in most cases, fading Boise for any reason is generally not a good idea. It's unclear at times how they get it done, but complete dismantlings of pretty decent teams often happen when Boise gets their hands on them. Taking a look at this year's team, they went undefeated again, garnering a lot of positive press(obviously) in the process. They score 45-49 every week against the dregs of the WAC(which was considerably down this year), and their defense is very good. However, they are in a place where few teams should want to find themselves, and that is looking toward a date with the TCU Horned Frogs. TCU's defense is absolutely brutal to play against, and they are frothing at the mouth right now due to some perceived dissing or a general lack of attention from the CFB press. Coach Gary Patterson was livid after his season ended because some talking head said something nice about BYU when the nicety should have been directed at TCU. Patterson is certainly still seething about that game in November when TCU's kicker shit the bed on two short FGs resulting in Utah's eventual theft of a game TCU dominated in Salt Lake. Patterson publicly begged for a shot at Boise. In my opinion, there is no doubt that TCU will have a motivational edge in this one, as even though TCU is certainly a formidable opponent, I think it is difficult for Boise to be as excited to play them in the Poinsettia Bowl as they would have been to play a BCS heavyweight. Boise also has not faced a defense even in the same stratosphere with TCU all season. In fact, only 3 of their opponents are ranked even in the top 75 in total D. TCU has played Oklahoma, Utah and BYU, and pretty much destroyed everyone else on their schedule. Perhaps the Boise pixie dust will prevail once again, but this time they are playing a well coached, pissed off, legitimate top 12 team looking to prove something. If Boise wins this, hats off to them, but I think they are headed into a hornet's nest.
3. Notre Dame -1 @Hawaii: After watching the North Shore Country Day v New England Patriots level shitkicking that ND was subjected to in the LA Coloseum 2 weeks ago, it becomes pretty understandable as to why most people, especially those with a cynical, sarcastic anti-ND bent would think that ND is going to further embarrass themselves on the island against this hopelessly medicore Hawaii squad. Hawaii's MO is to lure some team to the island who is either overmatched or unmotivated so they can ambush them in pleasant weather conditions while their wild Samoan goon squad fanbase does the same to the unsuspecting polite vacationers on the other side. Well, I suspect that ND's team will be neither overmatched nor unmotivated, since they have become the laughingstock of college football over their last 2 games. Let's put those last 2 games aside and look at ND's season as a whole. Before the USC game they had outgained 8 straight opponents, including 3 bowl teams on the road. For the year, they have allowed only 327 yards per game, good for 38th best in the country. There is no doubt that they have a significant talent advantage, since this is a rebuilding Hawaii team, and Weis is facing a first year guy in Greg McMackin. Michael Floyd will be back, so their corners will have to deal with Golden Tate and Michael Floyd on either side, and Hawaii blitzes a lot, so there should be ample opportunities for Jimmy Clausen to beat man coverage if he can keep himself from being steamrolled by the rush.There is no excuse for Fat Charlie if he doesn't bust that bowl losing streak this year. If you can't beat the 4th best team in the WAC when you should have the motivational edge, you need to just forget about catching the plane back home, stay on the island and transition into a new, but well rehearsed role as a beached whale.
Others: I lean to Navy(+3) in the early game Saturday, but it's really hard to call that game because it's a rematch(boo). Navy won the first one on the road outright as a 12 point dog due to Riley Skinner's horrific day at the office. Most people would look at that game and chalk it up as a fluke because of all the turnovers, but Navy actually got the better of Wake in that game statistically as well, as they outgained them by more than a yard per play. Navy also generally matches up well with teams that can't blow them off the field offensively, but Wake, at #103 offensively, is not one of those teams. Kaipo looks good medically, and that makes Navy much more explosive because he does a much better job than the rest of yahoos Navy has suited up at Qb this year at getting the ball to Shun White. You can almost expect a couple of long runs from him in this game. Don't forget that Navy has shut out the last 2 teams they've faced (Army and NIU) and both of those teams are pretty similar to Wake offensively.......The Colorado St/Fresno game is a complete tossup, but since Fresno generally doesn't feel like giving a shit unless they are matched up with a BCS squad, they'll probably give a half assed effort, so I'll take the points with Colorado St, who definitely is capable up putting up 30+ on Fresno even on a good day for the Bulldogs.....No real opinion on Memphis(+12) v USF, but I guess I'll take the points, since Memphis does have a pretty good offense, and USF can't possibly care about this game, and they have turned in some brutal performances this year when they were not interested. The only problem is that Memphis has stunk up the joint in their games against decent defensive squads, which USF generally is(13th in total D).....No opinion on the New Orleans bowl, but for interest purposes, I'll take the points (Southern Miss +4 v Troy). USM has been great in their last 4 games, they have a good QB and some BCS caliber athletes. Troy might too, but they're not the ones getting 4.
That's it for now.....good luck, and I'll have more right around Christmas.
Saturday, December 6, 2008
Week 15 Musings ("Championship Week")
Sorry for the lateness....
Last week was another one of those weeks...4-7 overall, highlighted by some miserable handicapping, most notably with South Carolina and UTEP(though I heard that the Miners had a flu epidemic that week, so they can be partially excused.) South Carolina just stunk, and I really should have seen that coming, since the Ball Coach is beyond overrated at this point.Why do people still give this guy props. The visor flings and gnashing of teeth has outnumbered the smarmy grins by about a 10 to 1 ratio in recent years. How many medieval beatdowns is it going to take until we all figure out that he's no better than the next guy when it comes to offensive schemes? Also, you might have heard that UCLA gave up a total of 120 yards in their game vs Arizona St, yet still failed to cover a double digit spread, thanks to their handing ASU 4, count em 4 defensive scores and a 60 yard punt return that set up another FG. What are the chances that a team could give up 4 defensive TDs and not be counted on for a cover by Pete LaVette? 5%? Whatever...the 4-7 week gets us to 84-66 for the year on the numbereds (56%). We need a good week this week. I also think I am going to keep close track of the bowls this year, so we won't close out the numbers until the end of the bowl season. Still hoping for at least 57%.
Lots of coaching casualties this week, and wouldn't you know it, good old dickface got tossed out at Auburn. So did Sly Croom!! Two of my favorite coaches to either intensely dislike(Tuberville) or pity(Sly) are now gone. I'll have to take inventory, because I'm not even sure who I like and dislike anymore. On to the week...you are not going to believe this, but I am on all favorites this week. I'm borderline ashamed of myself, but these are the right sides.
1. Ball St -14 1/2 v Buffalo: I would consider buying this down to 14, but that might be expensive because this spread may have climbed to 15. I'll be doing it, though to be safe. Ball St comes into this game under some criticism in some quarters because they refused a chance to play Boise in the Humanitarian Bowl on the Blue turf. Count me among those who don't fault them for that. I'm pretty excited about a potential Boise/TCU matchup in the Poinsettia Bowl anyway, so I'm not too disappointed about it. Anyway, Ball St needs this game to put the finishing touches on an undefeated regular season, and only Buffalo remains in the way. The Bulls are a much improved squad in recent years, but I just don't see them competing in this one. Buffalo has a nice offense, especially at the skill positions as QB Willy, RB Starks and WR Roosevelt all are solid players. But as a whole, Buffalo isn't much better than a middle of the pack squad, as they won 2 OT games in the MAC and a third on a Hail Mary as time expired, so 7-5 could easily be 4-8. Ball St, meanwhile hasn't really been stopped by anyone all season, and Buffalo, with it's 94th ranked overall defense will be no departure from that. These two teams, with just about all of the same players, matched up last year and it wasn't even a ballgame, as Ball was up 28-0 early in the second quarter. I just don't see Buffalo getting many stops in this game, and their offense, while competent, isn't explosive enough to keep up on the scoreboard. I can see a 45-17 type game rather easily.
2. Florida -9 1/2 v Alabama: First of all, let me say that this pains me greatly to write. I had every intention of being on Bama in this game, and I will be rooting hard for them, but after closer inspection and reflection, they are probably going to lose this game handily, and I like money, so I'll be on Florida. If you spend time trying to make a case for Alabama, you have to point to their ability to "control the clock" to keep the Florida offense off the field. Whenever your hear that as a strategy for a team, how does that work out? Every once in awhile, you'll see a game like Nebraska v Texas Tech this year, but for the most part, the explosive team blows the grinders out. Another supposed arrow in the Bama quiver is their defense, but I would submit to you that Florida's is just about as good, ranking 7th nationally in yards per play, while Bama is ranked 3rd. If Bama is going to hang in this game, they have to be able to get off to a good start, get ahead, get some breaks and wear Florida down. I just don't see that happening. While Bama can run the ball, the fact still remains that they struggle to throw the ball. JP Wilson has not hurt them this year, but in this environment, we're talking about a different set of circumstances. We all know that the omniscient Urban Meyer is going to control all the breaks to go Florida's way, so when they get a twice tipped pass for a 65 yard TD to open the game, what will Bama do then? If Florida stacks the line and stops the run, the game is esentially over, because as good as Alabama's defense is, the difference in speed is still too much to overcome. They are going to give up points in this game, and unless JP Wilson turns into some latter day version of Norm Van Brocklin, Bama won't be able to keep up. It's true that I can conjure up a scenario where Saban and company go in and get the job done through hard work, physicality and dirty tricks, but how much more likely is it that Florida dominates the Tide on defense and has it's normal game on offense, leading to a rout? I'd say 3 or 4 times more likely. Also, don't get excited about that spread. When a team scores like Florida does, and can put up 30-40 points on anyone, 9 1/2 isn't a lot. Bama could play a great game and still not cover that, especially if Florida gets the breaks they are accustomed to. And since I will be rooting hard emotionally for Bama, you can bet the farm that they'll get 'em.
3. Oklahoma -16 1/2 v Missouri: The fact remains that Oklahoma basically cannot be stopped at this point. It's child's play for them, and has been in every game since the second half vs Texas when the inexplicably went through a 4 drive span without scoring, leading to their loss. The more I see them, the more I think that was a fluke. Nobody in the Big 12 can stop them... certainly not Missouri, who ranks 117th in the country in passing yards against. Think Sam Bradford might have a chance to be successful this week? Remember that when Missouri teed it up with good teams this year, they lost. Oklahoma St beat them rather soundly, and Mizzou clearly demonstrated that they did not belong on the same field with Texas. If you remember, here's how that game went: Mizzou: 3 and out. Texas TD. Mizzou 3 and out. Texas TD. Mizzou 3 and out Texas TD. Mizzou three and out. Texas TD. Commence garbage time. In order to hang in this game, they will have to have their best game of the year by far on offense and figure out some way to revamp their pass defense to keep OU under 50. I really see no evidence that they are any different from any of the other defenses that have given up 60+ to OU recently, and they are not coming in with any positive momentum, having blown their rivalry game with KU. Oklahoma will not be taking their foot off the gas either. Even if Sam Bradford gets him arm caught in a thresher or something, I think OU covers this. Beatdown.
4. @Arizona -10 1/2 v Arizona St: The Sun Devils won't have Kevin Craft to bail them out this week. Arizona is very good at home, on both sides of the ball. Arizona St's offense is a borderline embarrassment, and Arizona will be jacked up to rub it in their faces. I'm not impressed with the intestinal fortitude of ASU, so if they get behind early, don't expect much of a fight. I know it's another favorite, but it's another game where the dog finds itself in a tough matchup. Expect a lot of Rudy Carpenter writhing on the turf, then dramatically limping off to the sideline, only to come back and get pummeled again. He might actually openly weep. Look for that.
5. Navy -10 1/2 v Army: I'm sure everyone is stunned on this one. 5 favorites in a row, and I'm almost always on Army in this game. Actually, I had to rewrite my paragraph on this one, since I originally liked Army, due to their relatively solid season and their previous nice performance against Air Force. However, there are too many obstacles for Army in this one. First, it appears that Kaipo is going to play in this game for Navy, and Army's QB Chip Bowden sprained his ankle in practice this week. That changes everything. For Army to have a chance in this one, they need to have all hands on deck at 100%. A sprained ankle is a big deal. Even if he plays, it's still going to hamper him. Navy is weak against the pass, but they are 40th in the country against the run, which is all Army can do. Army is unquestionably the worst passing offense in America (4 yards per attempt). In addition, their special teams are a nightmare, and you can pretty much chalk up a turnover disadvantage for them, since Navy has been very good all year at forcing turnovers. If Army gets behind, or has to make up for a turnover or two, it's sayonnara. I will destroy my TV if I see Jarrod Bryant trotting out there at QB, but even if Kaipo wimps out again, they'll probably go with Ricky Dobbs at QB. Again. I will probably be emotionally rooting for the other side, but my head is telling me that there are too many factors going against Army here, and the line continues to trend down.
6. @Troy -11 v Arky St: I generally like Arkansas St because they always seem to outgain their opponents, but Troy has some sort of voodoo curse over them. I remember last year, when a dominant at home Arky St team welcomed a struggling Troy bunch and troy somehow thumped them 27-0 in Jonesboro. This year, it's kind of more of the same, as Arky St has been solid at home, but a different team on the road. Troy meanwhile is outgaining opponents 504-235 at home and outscoring them by an average of 40-8. Combine the jedi mind tricks with a clear advantage on paper, and you have yourself a recipe for a rout.
Others: Love the fact that Pete Carroll is directing the Trojans to wear red in their game at UCLA. That's sweet. Both teams home uniforms are miles better than their roadies..love it. USC is laying 32, the same number they did to ND. It's a road game, but not really, as UCLA is selling out the Rose Bowl so plenty of Trojan fans will be there. USC certainly can shut out UCLA if they feel like it, and would probably win the game even if the only offensive player they suited up was the punter. What are the chances Kevin Craft suffers a couple turnovers in this one? Right, pretty good. 32 is ton, though, and the good feelings with the whole uniform situation might lead PC to keep it down. Also, I don't trust Neuheisel. It would surprise me to see USC players dropping like flies because he snuck into their locker room and spiked their Gatorade. USC really should hammer them though.....I'm leaning toward BC in their pick 'em game with VT that nobody cares to watch. They played once, and VT got two defensive scores and still lost. If you take away Tyrod Taylor's scrambling in that game, VT totaled about 100 yards of offense. They won't be able to run it on BC. BC has their backup going in this one, but that might be a good thing considering how turnover prone starter Chris Crane has been. BC has also shown an ability to come up with big picks, and VT's Qbs have a 5/10 ratio. I also think BC is a little better in the skill positions, so I'll give them the edge to play in an Orange Bowl that will be appealing to about 10 people in the entire country. Since there will be a line on that game, count me among the ten.....The C-USA game is a really interesting game. If it was on a neutral site I would be all over East Carolina +DD vs Tulsa, but for some reason, it's at Tulsa. Since Tulsa's lowest output at home this year is 49 points, it would take a heck of a lot more than 12 1/2 points to go against the Golden Hurricane..... I also lean to UCONN(-2 1/2) over Pitt as a fade on Wanny. There isn't much to play for in Pitt's case, so coaching and motivation will come into play a bit more here. Not a good sign if you're a Pitt backer and you're on the road against a well coached team.
Last week was another one of those weeks...4-7 overall, highlighted by some miserable handicapping, most notably with South Carolina and UTEP(though I heard that the Miners had a flu epidemic that week, so they can be partially excused.) South Carolina just stunk, and I really should have seen that coming, since the Ball Coach is beyond overrated at this point.Why do people still give this guy props. The visor flings and gnashing of teeth has outnumbered the smarmy grins by about a 10 to 1 ratio in recent years. How many medieval beatdowns is it going to take until we all figure out that he's no better than the next guy when it comes to offensive schemes? Also, you might have heard that UCLA gave up a total of 120 yards in their game vs Arizona St, yet still failed to cover a double digit spread, thanks to their handing ASU 4, count em 4 defensive scores and a 60 yard punt return that set up another FG. What are the chances that a team could give up 4 defensive TDs and not be counted on for a cover by Pete LaVette? 5%? Whatever...the 4-7 week gets us to 84-66 for the year on the numbereds (56%). We need a good week this week. I also think I am going to keep close track of the bowls this year, so we won't close out the numbers until the end of the bowl season. Still hoping for at least 57%.
Lots of coaching casualties this week, and wouldn't you know it, good old dickface got tossed out at Auburn. So did Sly Croom!! Two of my favorite coaches to either intensely dislike(Tuberville) or pity(Sly) are now gone. I'll have to take inventory, because I'm not even sure who I like and dislike anymore. On to the week...you are not going to believe this, but I am on all favorites this week. I'm borderline ashamed of myself, but these are the right sides.
1. Ball St -14 1/2 v Buffalo: I would consider buying this down to 14, but that might be expensive because this spread may have climbed to 15. I'll be doing it, though to be safe. Ball St comes into this game under some criticism in some quarters because they refused a chance to play Boise in the Humanitarian Bowl on the Blue turf. Count me among those who don't fault them for that. I'm pretty excited about a potential Boise/TCU matchup in the Poinsettia Bowl anyway, so I'm not too disappointed about it. Anyway, Ball St needs this game to put the finishing touches on an undefeated regular season, and only Buffalo remains in the way. The Bulls are a much improved squad in recent years, but I just don't see them competing in this one. Buffalo has a nice offense, especially at the skill positions as QB Willy, RB Starks and WR Roosevelt all are solid players. But as a whole, Buffalo isn't much better than a middle of the pack squad, as they won 2 OT games in the MAC and a third on a Hail Mary as time expired, so 7-5 could easily be 4-8. Ball St, meanwhile hasn't really been stopped by anyone all season, and Buffalo, with it's 94th ranked overall defense will be no departure from that. These two teams, with just about all of the same players, matched up last year and it wasn't even a ballgame, as Ball was up 28-0 early in the second quarter. I just don't see Buffalo getting many stops in this game, and their offense, while competent, isn't explosive enough to keep up on the scoreboard. I can see a 45-17 type game rather easily.
2. Florida -9 1/2 v Alabama: First of all, let me say that this pains me greatly to write. I had every intention of being on Bama in this game, and I will be rooting hard for them, but after closer inspection and reflection, they are probably going to lose this game handily, and I like money, so I'll be on Florida. If you spend time trying to make a case for Alabama, you have to point to their ability to "control the clock" to keep the Florida offense off the field. Whenever your hear that as a strategy for a team, how does that work out? Every once in awhile, you'll see a game like Nebraska v Texas Tech this year, but for the most part, the explosive team blows the grinders out. Another supposed arrow in the Bama quiver is their defense, but I would submit to you that Florida's is just about as good, ranking 7th nationally in yards per play, while Bama is ranked 3rd. If Bama is going to hang in this game, they have to be able to get off to a good start, get ahead, get some breaks and wear Florida down. I just don't see that happening. While Bama can run the ball, the fact still remains that they struggle to throw the ball. JP Wilson has not hurt them this year, but in this environment, we're talking about a different set of circumstances. We all know that the omniscient Urban Meyer is going to control all the breaks to go Florida's way, so when they get a twice tipped pass for a 65 yard TD to open the game, what will Bama do then? If Florida stacks the line and stops the run, the game is esentially over, because as good as Alabama's defense is, the difference in speed is still too much to overcome. They are going to give up points in this game, and unless JP Wilson turns into some latter day version of Norm Van Brocklin, Bama won't be able to keep up. It's true that I can conjure up a scenario where Saban and company go in and get the job done through hard work, physicality and dirty tricks, but how much more likely is it that Florida dominates the Tide on defense and has it's normal game on offense, leading to a rout? I'd say 3 or 4 times more likely. Also, don't get excited about that spread. When a team scores like Florida does, and can put up 30-40 points on anyone, 9 1/2 isn't a lot. Bama could play a great game and still not cover that, especially if Florida gets the breaks they are accustomed to. And since I will be rooting hard emotionally for Bama, you can bet the farm that they'll get 'em.
3. Oklahoma -16 1/2 v Missouri: The fact remains that Oklahoma basically cannot be stopped at this point. It's child's play for them, and has been in every game since the second half vs Texas when the inexplicably went through a 4 drive span without scoring, leading to their loss. The more I see them, the more I think that was a fluke. Nobody in the Big 12 can stop them... certainly not Missouri, who ranks 117th in the country in passing yards against. Think Sam Bradford might have a chance to be successful this week? Remember that when Missouri teed it up with good teams this year, they lost. Oklahoma St beat them rather soundly, and Mizzou clearly demonstrated that they did not belong on the same field with Texas. If you remember, here's how that game went: Mizzou: 3 and out. Texas TD. Mizzou 3 and out. Texas TD. Mizzou 3 and out Texas TD. Mizzou three and out. Texas TD. Commence garbage time. In order to hang in this game, they will have to have their best game of the year by far on offense and figure out some way to revamp their pass defense to keep OU under 50. I really see no evidence that they are any different from any of the other defenses that have given up 60+ to OU recently, and they are not coming in with any positive momentum, having blown their rivalry game with KU. Oklahoma will not be taking their foot off the gas either. Even if Sam Bradford gets him arm caught in a thresher or something, I think OU covers this. Beatdown.
4. @Arizona -10 1/2 v Arizona St: The Sun Devils won't have Kevin Craft to bail them out this week. Arizona is very good at home, on both sides of the ball. Arizona St's offense is a borderline embarrassment, and Arizona will be jacked up to rub it in their faces. I'm not impressed with the intestinal fortitude of ASU, so if they get behind early, don't expect much of a fight. I know it's another favorite, but it's another game where the dog finds itself in a tough matchup. Expect a lot of Rudy Carpenter writhing on the turf, then dramatically limping off to the sideline, only to come back and get pummeled again. He might actually openly weep. Look for that.
5. Navy -10 1/2 v Army: I'm sure everyone is stunned on this one. 5 favorites in a row, and I'm almost always on Army in this game. Actually, I had to rewrite my paragraph on this one, since I originally liked Army, due to their relatively solid season and their previous nice performance against Air Force. However, there are too many obstacles for Army in this one. First, it appears that Kaipo is going to play in this game for Navy, and Army's QB Chip Bowden sprained his ankle in practice this week. That changes everything. For Army to have a chance in this one, they need to have all hands on deck at 100%. A sprained ankle is a big deal. Even if he plays, it's still going to hamper him. Navy is weak against the pass, but they are 40th in the country against the run, which is all Army can do. Army is unquestionably the worst passing offense in America (4 yards per attempt). In addition, their special teams are a nightmare, and you can pretty much chalk up a turnover disadvantage for them, since Navy has been very good all year at forcing turnovers. If Army gets behind, or has to make up for a turnover or two, it's sayonnara. I will destroy my TV if I see Jarrod Bryant trotting out there at QB, but even if Kaipo wimps out again, they'll probably go with Ricky Dobbs at QB. Again. I will probably be emotionally rooting for the other side, but my head is telling me that there are too many factors going against Army here, and the line continues to trend down.
6. @Troy -11 v Arky St: I generally like Arkansas St because they always seem to outgain their opponents, but Troy has some sort of voodoo curse over them. I remember last year, when a dominant at home Arky St team welcomed a struggling Troy bunch and troy somehow thumped them 27-0 in Jonesboro. This year, it's kind of more of the same, as Arky St has been solid at home, but a different team on the road. Troy meanwhile is outgaining opponents 504-235 at home and outscoring them by an average of 40-8. Combine the jedi mind tricks with a clear advantage on paper, and you have yourself a recipe for a rout.
Others: Love the fact that Pete Carroll is directing the Trojans to wear red in their game at UCLA. That's sweet. Both teams home uniforms are miles better than their roadies..love it. USC is laying 32, the same number they did to ND. It's a road game, but not really, as UCLA is selling out the Rose Bowl so plenty of Trojan fans will be there. USC certainly can shut out UCLA if they feel like it, and would probably win the game even if the only offensive player they suited up was the punter. What are the chances Kevin Craft suffers a couple turnovers in this one? Right, pretty good. 32 is ton, though, and the good feelings with the whole uniform situation might lead PC to keep it down. Also, I don't trust Neuheisel. It would surprise me to see USC players dropping like flies because he snuck into their locker room and spiked their Gatorade. USC really should hammer them though.....I'm leaning toward BC in their pick 'em game with VT that nobody cares to watch. They played once, and VT got two defensive scores and still lost. If you take away Tyrod Taylor's scrambling in that game, VT totaled about 100 yards of offense. They won't be able to run it on BC. BC has their backup going in this one, but that might be a good thing considering how turnover prone starter Chris Crane has been. BC has also shown an ability to come up with big picks, and VT's Qbs have a 5/10 ratio. I also think BC is a little better in the skill positions, so I'll give them the edge to play in an Orange Bowl that will be appealing to about 10 people in the entire country. Since there will be a line on that game, count me among the ten.....The C-USA game is a really interesting game. If it was on a neutral site I would be all over East Carolina +DD vs Tulsa, but for some reason, it's at Tulsa. Since Tulsa's lowest output at home this year is 49 points, it would take a heck of a lot more than 12 1/2 points to go against the Golden Hurricane..... I also lean to UCONN(-2 1/2) over Pitt as a fade on Wanny. There isn't much to play for in Pitt's case, so coaching and motivation will come into play a bit more here. Not a good sign if you're a Pitt backer and you're on the road against a well coached team.
Monday, December 1, 2008
My argument against a college football playoff
Here is my argument against a College football playoff.
First, let me first say that I am an absolute college football junkie. I love College football. It is by far my favorite sport. I live for college football Saturdays in the fall, and the holiday bowl season in December/January. I would surmise that those reading this would probably say the same thing about themselves. I don't think I need to go into my reasons for this. Those that don't count themselves in this group, I would hope would not try to push their half-hearted opinions on the sport and instead go get excited about the Pistons/Spurs tilt on TNT that means so much this early December.
A couple points that you will NOT see in this argument: 1. The inane and logically bankrupt argument that a playoff would make the season "too long" for the "student atheletes." Can we all agree that this view is an embarrassment to anyone who makes this argument? It angers me when I hear it, because it just discredits the entire anti-playoff agrument. This is not a reason to avoid a playoff. Let me make that clear. 2. Chaos is fun. Don't count me in with that nonsense either.
I realize that I am in the minority in this argument. Just about anyone who has any opinion about the BCS undoubtedly will throw up their hands at the "mess" or "disgrace" that we currently see and call for the need for a playoff to cure all that ails college football. And I guess we would need to establish that college football is indeed ailing, wouldn't we? College Football fans are routinely painted as the most passionate in all of sports, as they always have been. The games are exhilarating. Stadiums are packed, 80,000 or more at scores of campuses around the country, today and always. I dare say that there is very little that is "wrong" with college football at this point. It seems to be pretty healthy to me, and continues to grow in popularity.
My initial question is this: Why do we need a College football playoff system? The answer: Because over the years, the emphasis in college football has gone from the journey of the season to an absolute obsession with who is crowned the National Champion, or what used to be referred to as the "Mythical National Champion". It used to be referred to as that because over the years in college football, the national championship was not the end all be all. It wasn't the only conceivable thing that a team would strive to accomplish when it started fall practice. For example, if you were a team from the Big Ten, your goal was to win the league, go to the Rose Bowl and win it. If someone felt you deserved to be called the National Champion, great, but teams and fans didn't need some bullcrap institution to tell them that they had a championship year. Same for the Pac 10, same for the Big 8(Orange Bowl), the SWC(Cotton Bowl), SEC(Sugar Bowl) and so on. There wasn't even a trophy. Can you believe that? No Waterford crystal football sponsored by At&T or whoever? How can that be? However, the expansion of conferences helped to change things, and as a result, the national championship is now of the utmost importance to everyone, to the point that conference titles are merely secondary, and often forgotten. Here's a good example: Consider the Auburn team of 2004, the one that did not play for the National Championship in deference to unbeaten USC and Oklahoma and instead beat a very good Virginia Tech team in the Sugar Bowl. If you asked an Auburn fan to recall that season, would you get a positive or a negative reaction? Certainly, it would depend on the person, but undoubtedly, due to an insatiable desire to be validated by the establishment as NATIONAL CHAMPIONS, there would be some, maybe a sizable amount that would look back on that season negatively. To me, that is lunacy. You were the UNDEFEATED SEC and SUGAR BOWL CHAMPS! Hang a banner! Order the rings! Get the T-shirts!. Who cares that you didn't lead Sportscenter on January 6th? Look back at that season with pride. Historicaly, it will always be remembered. I'm a freakin' Illinois alum and fan, and I remember it and consider that team on the same level as USC that year, and so does everyone else that follows college football. Ask any CFB journalist about the '04 Auburn team, and you'll undoubtedly get glowing reviews and a healthy level of respect. Now conversely, how do people remember the OU squad from that year that USC blew the doors off of? Pretender. Poseur. Fraud. Certainly they're remembered less favorably than the Auburn squad is. And isn't that part of what this whole process is about? Being able to command respect, and get your props as a team and as a fan base? But what if there was a playoff that year, and Auburn got matched up with USC in a semi-final? Maybe they would have beaten them, and they'd be seen in the same light as they are today, and they'd have an entry in the CFB encyclopedia saying they were the official National Champs. But what if they took it on the chin just like OU did? Then what? If you asked that same Auburn fan to recall the '04 season, you'd probably get a negative response, much like Ohio St has experienced the last two years. He'd probably say something like, "Yeah, we were 11-0 but we got our asses kicked in the playoff and got exposed as a fraud." So maybe there's another side to this, and "getting screwed" out of a chance of having the establishment call you the national champs isn't such a bad thing. Just a thought.
So, why would a playoff be good for college football? Proponents would say that a playoff system would give all deserving teams a fair shot at earning a national championship on the field, much like "every other conceivable organization decides it's champion".
I look at this scenario in a macro view. Would the college football season as a whole be a more enjoyable experience with a playoff or without? Is this a fair question to ask, or is it only important that the end of the season is satisfying and fair to everyone? If you choose the latter, then friend, we will never agree, because the argument has a fundamental chasm right from the get go. So I will look at it by considering the effects a playoff would have on the entire season. I really feel that those wishing for a playoff have not fully considered the effects a playoff system would have. If we are going to screw with what is for me, by a mile, the most enjoyable sport in America, then we better damn well make sure that the changes we make don't result in more problems than we have currently, effectively making it a less enjoyable sport. Because, after all, we will be changing the entire landscape of the sport so that we feel a little better that we MIGHT not be treating some teams unfairly.
We also should consider if a change to a playoff would accomplish anything at all. For example, the most popular playoff proposal is for an 8 team playoff. If that were the case, how would we determine the 8 teams? 6 BCS conference champs and 2 at large teams? In that case, how would you pick the at large teams? Someone would certainly be left out of the process as they are now. Suppose Oregon St had beaten Oregon, as they were favored to do last Saturday. Only 3 of Texas, Oklahoma, Florida, Alabama, Texas Tech, USC and Utah would have been included in an 8 teamer.. To me, it would appear that in that scenario, Utah, Texas Tech and USC would probably be excluded. No USC in a playoff? That accomplishes nothing above what we have now, because half the country would be calling USC the "hottest" team in America, like they do almost every year. It also doesn't even address the cases of Utah and Boise St, who represent the loudest calls for some sort of playoff, and the most vitriolic anger against the BCS process. Perhaps, then, the top 8 in the BCS standings? What sense would that make? Take the process that everyone rails against, and make it the 100% basis for the structure? And risk killing the bowl structure as we know it in the process? (I'll get into that later). A 16 team playoff would be an even more severe and marginalizing concept. It would also completely reinvent college football as we know it, so I'll not even get into that concept, instead focusing on the less severe model we're discussing now.
Moreover, logistically, how would a playoff be staged? The popular models I've seen suggested call for the 4 BCS bowls to host a game apiece, 1 v 8, 2 v 7, etc. The winners would play the following week, presumably at neutral sites, and then a championship game with the survivors held thereafter. This model does not consider some major obstacles. First, as I think everyone knows, these bowls are huge events. After the 2-4 week layoff after the season ends, teams get to the destinations about a week prior, hold practices and attend community events all week leading up to the game. If there was a 3 week playoff, the winning teams would not have that luxury the following week. They need to prepare, practice, etc, so a week long sojourn the following week would not be feasible. In addition, consider the fans of say, Penn St. Suppose Penn St plays USC in the Rose Bowl and wins. Their fans have already traveled across country. Now are they expected to travel again, the following week to another city, make travel arrangements and accommodations at a moment's notice, then potentially do it again the following week? Football isn't like basketball, where the whole shooting match can be handled in a weekend. If you propose using home fields, then the bowl system as we know it is dead, and if I need to justify why there is a problem with that, then again, there's no sense continuing, because as I mentioned before, the chasm between the arguments is so wide, it would never be bridged. The great thing about college football is that tons of teams have something to play for every week as the season comes down to the wire: bowl eligibility, or an improvement i their bowl stature. Many times, it's in games against other teams in the same boat. It's a chance to put a positive mark on your season, and a chance for your athletic department to prosper so that your swimmers don't have to pay their own way to the national championships in California, or the women's field hockey team can have more than a $5 per Diem on the road. It makes for meaningful games all year long. Bowls are freakin' cool, not to mention a load of fun to handicap. I am NOT willing to sacrifice them for a playoff system that has the potential to present new problems for the sport that might be worse than the issues we have now. Additionally, I have a problem with taking away the neutrality of these games. If you are trying to determine who the best is, why play the game in a snowstorm, or give another team an advantage if their fans can't traavel as easily two weeks in a row? That's why they play the Super Bowl in a warm weather neutral site, to make it as much a "control" environment as possible. (This by the way will be the last time I point to the NFL as any positive example for college football. You can keep your 2 yard out routes on 4th and 12, 13-24 QB performances for 87 yards and countless commercial breaks. NOTE: In the Bucs/Saints game this weekend, we had this sequence: With under a minute left in the 1st quarter, Tampa drives into FG range. On 3rd down, Garcia throws an incompletion. Someone gets injured. Cut to commercial. Come back. FG attempt is good. Cut to another commercial. Come back. TB kicks off, NO returns it to the 20. Commercial. Come back. Running play. 1st quarter ends. Double block of commercials. Ballgame. I flipped on Stooges re-runs, never to return.)
Let's also consider the effects on the regular season. Teams like USC want a playoff so that they can have the luxury of "having an off week" and not having their MNC(whoops, I mean NC) dreams dashed as a result. Do we want this? Don't we love the madcap comebacks teams embark on out of fear their season might be lost, like USC's effort to get back into the game at Oregon St this year after falling behind 21-0 at the half? Would they have exerted such effort if a playoff existed? We don't know the answer to that. Do we want a college football version of week 16 and 17 in the NFL, where teams are mailing in games because their playoff lot has already been cast? Would Alabama give a rat's ass about the SEC championship game this weekend? Maybe they would, and it would be a credit to their competitive fire if they did, but we almost certainly would be subject to Sportscenter and talk radio discussions on whether or not they should risk injury to their top players since they would have a playoff spot basically locked up. And if you say they would run the risk of falling out of favor with voters if they lost for not showing up, then we are still not immune to the concept of "style points" that is so loathed by the talking heads currently. As it stands right now, we have a perfect "semifinal" type scenario in the SEC title game, about as meaningful and big as a game can be, where one of these teams will earn a trip to the NC game. That would not be the case if a playoff was employed...we would be making a very clean and simple scenario much more complicated. Take it a step further. If a "Top 8 in the BCS" model was used, would there even be a need for conference championship games at all?
Let's also disspel the all the criticisms of ADs and college presidents, and the self righteous ramblings that "it's all about the money". You're damn right it's about the money. As I mentioned, football is the vehicle by which 95% of D-1 schools fund their athletic departments. Where do you think all the money made via the bowls goes? To some AD's trust fund? In the Presidents' pockets? No, they go to fund the athletic departments of the schools, so they can pay for the women's and men's non-revenue sports to make road trips on something other than rickety school buses. So they can eat dinner at places other than McDonald's. So schools can fund athletic facilities and locker rooms for these sports without cutting in other areas. So there's a scholarship available for your daughter who's really good at soccer. Schools striving to collect as much money as possible to help ALL of their student atheletes, or to position themselves to be more equipped to do so is not a bad thing, ok?
Lastly, let me say that, yes, every other sport has some sort of playoff system to determine it's champion. I get that. Can I be more clear that I do NOT want college football to be just like the NBA, or NFL, or even NCAA basketball? The NBA is fine. Playoffs are pretty cool. I get into it somewhere around May 1st. The NCAA tourney is pretty damn sweet. 8 days of games plus the final Monday nighter over a 2 week period. It's great. But most sports fans would tell you that they don't even pay attention to college hoops until after the Super Bowl is over. That's 3 months into the season. I'm not interested in any pining for a parallel to that in college football. I for one, enjoy bowl season just as much, if not more than I do the Tourney, and I still get to have a regular season in college football that is 20 times superior to that of college hoops. It's kind of like an analogy: I'm a big fan of two kinds of candy: Chocolate covered pretzels and Smarties. Love 'em both. If you would ask me if I'd rather have two of the same as an after dinner treat or one of both, I'd take one of both. Variety is the spice of life. I don't want a tourney style playoff in college football just like I wouldn't want a bunch of satellite games that might be cool matchups at the end of the college basketball season. Again, variety!
Is the BCS system perfect? Of course not. Especially when the Big 12 uses it to determine their division winners. But I hope I have illustrated that any playoff system would absolutely radically change college football, from the beginning of the season to the end, and very likely for the worse. It would certainly bring new problems and issues into the game that we currently don't have, which ultimately, could render college football a less enjoyable product as a whole. As I stated at the beginning of this diatribe, I LOVE COLLEGE FOOTBALL. Why sacrifice something we love, just so we can feel a little bit better about how we decide the champion in a process that might not work anyway?
First, let me first say that I am an absolute college football junkie. I love College football. It is by far my favorite sport. I live for college football Saturdays in the fall, and the holiday bowl season in December/January. I would surmise that those reading this would probably say the same thing about themselves. I don't think I need to go into my reasons for this. Those that don't count themselves in this group, I would hope would not try to push their half-hearted opinions on the sport and instead go get excited about the Pistons/Spurs tilt on TNT that means so much this early December.
A couple points that you will NOT see in this argument: 1. The inane and logically bankrupt argument that a playoff would make the season "too long" for the "student atheletes." Can we all agree that this view is an embarrassment to anyone who makes this argument? It angers me when I hear it, because it just discredits the entire anti-playoff agrument. This is not a reason to avoid a playoff. Let me make that clear. 2. Chaos is fun. Don't count me in with that nonsense either.
I realize that I am in the minority in this argument. Just about anyone who has any opinion about the BCS undoubtedly will throw up their hands at the "mess" or "disgrace" that we currently see and call for the need for a playoff to cure all that ails college football. And I guess we would need to establish that college football is indeed ailing, wouldn't we? College Football fans are routinely painted as the most passionate in all of sports, as they always have been. The games are exhilarating. Stadiums are packed, 80,000 or more at scores of campuses around the country, today and always. I dare say that there is very little that is "wrong" with college football at this point. It seems to be pretty healthy to me, and continues to grow in popularity.
My initial question is this: Why do we need a College football playoff system? The answer: Because over the years, the emphasis in college football has gone from the journey of the season to an absolute obsession with who is crowned the National Champion, or what used to be referred to as the "Mythical National Champion". It used to be referred to as that because over the years in college football, the national championship was not the end all be all. It wasn't the only conceivable thing that a team would strive to accomplish when it started fall practice. For example, if you were a team from the Big Ten, your goal was to win the league, go to the Rose Bowl and win it. If someone felt you deserved to be called the National Champion, great, but teams and fans didn't need some bullcrap institution to tell them that they had a championship year. Same for the Pac 10, same for the Big 8(Orange Bowl), the SWC(Cotton Bowl), SEC(Sugar Bowl) and so on. There wasn't even a trophy. Can you believe that? No Waterford crystal football sponsored by At&T or whoever? How can that be? However, the expansion of conferences helped to change things, and as a result, the national championship is now of the utmost importance to everyone, to the point that conference titles are merely secondary, and often forgotten. Here's a good example: Consider the Auburn team of 2004, the one that did not play for the National Championship in deference to unbeaten USC and Oklahoma and instead beat a very good Virginia Tech team in the Sugar Bowl. If you asked an Auburn fan to recall that season, would you get a positive or a negative reaction? Certainly, it would depend on the person, but undoubtedly, due to an insatiable desire to be validated by the establishment as NATIONAL CHAMPIONS, there would be some, maybe a sizable amount that would look back on that season negatively. To me, that is lunacy. You were the UNDEFEATED SEC and SUGAR BOWL CHAMPS! Hang a banner! Order the rings! Get the T-shirts!. Who cares that you didn't lead Sportscenter on January 6th? Look back at that season with pride. Historicaly, it will always be remembered. I'm a freakin' Illinois alum and fan, and I remember it and consider that team on the same level as USC that year, and so does everyone else that follows college football. Ask any CFB journalist about the '04 Auburn team, and you'll undoubtedly get glowing reviews and a healthy level of respect. Now conversely, how do people remember the OU squad from that year that USC blew the doors off of? Pretender. Poseur. Fraud. Certainly they're remembered less favorably than the Auburn squad is. And isn't that part of what this whole process is about? Being able to command respect, and get your props as a team and as a fan base? But what if there was a playoff that year, and Auburn got matched up with USC in a semi-final? Maybe they would have beaten them, and they'd be seen in the same light as they are today, and they'd have an entry in the CFB encyclopedia saying they were the official National Champs. But what if they took it on the chin just like OU did? Then what? If you asked that same Auburn fan to recall the '04 season, you'd probably get a negative response, much like Ohio St has experienced the last two years. He'd probably say something like, "Yeah, we were 11-0 but we got our asses kicked in the playoff and got exposed as a fraud." So maybe there's another side to this, and "getting screwed" out of a chance of having the establishment call you the national champs isn't such a bad thing. Just a thought.
So, why would a playoff be good for college football? Proponents would say that a playoff system would give all deserving teams a fair shot at earning a national championship on the field, much like "every other conceivable organization decides it's champion".
I look at this scenario in a macro view. Would the college football season as a whole be a more enjoyable experience with a playoff or without? Is this a fair question to ask, or is it only important that the end of the season is satisfying and fair to everyone? If you choose the latter, then friend, we will never agree, because the argument has a fundamental chasm right from the get go. So I will look at it by considering the effects a playoff would have on the entire season. I really feel that those wishing for a playoff have not fully considered the effects a playoff system would have. If we are going to screw with what is for me, by a mile, the most enjoyable sport in America, then we better damn well make sure that the changes we make don't result in more problems than we have currently, effectively making it a less enjoyable sport. Because, after all, we will be changing the entire landscape of the sport so that we feel a little better that we MIGHT not be treating some teams unfairly.
We also should consider if a change to a playoff would accomplish anything at all. For example, the most popular playoff proposal is for an 8 team playoff. If that were the case, how would we determine the 8 teams? 6 BCS conference champs and 2 at large teams? In that case, how would you pick the at large teams? Someone would certainly be left out of the process as they are now. Suppose Oregon St had beaten Oregon, as they were favored to do last Saturday. Only 3 of Texas, Oklahoma, Florida, Alabama, Texas Tech, USC and Utah would have been included in an 8 teamer.. To me, it would appear that in that scenario, Utah, Texas Tech and USC would probably be excluded. No USC in a playoff? That accomplishes nothing above what we have now, because half the country would be calling USC the "hottest" team in America, like they do almost every year. It also doesn't even address the cases of Utah and Boise St, who represent the loudest calls for some sort of playoff, and the most vitriolic anger against the BCS process. Perhaps, then, the top 8 in the BCS standings? What sense would that make? Take the process that everyone rails against, and make it the 100% basis for the structure? And risk killing the bowl structure as we know it in the process? (I'll get into that later). A 16 team playoff would be an even more severe and marginalizing concept. It would also completely reinvent college football as we know it, so I'll not even get into that concept, instead focusing on the less severe model we're discussing now.
Moreover, logistically, how would a playoff be staged? The popular models I've seen suggested call for the 4 BCS bowls to host a game apiece, 1 v 8, 2 v 7, etc. The winners would play the following week, presumably at neutral sites, and then a championship game with the survivors held thereafter. This model does not consider some major obstacles. First, as I think everyone knows, these bowls are huge events. After the 2-4 week layoff after the season ends, teams get to the destinations about a week prior, hold practices and attend community events all week leading up to the game. If there was a 3 week playoff, the winning teams would not have that luxury the following week. They need to prepare, practice, etc, so a week long sojourn the following week would not be feasible. In addition, consider the fans of say, Penn St. Suppose Penn St plays USC in the Rose Bowl and wins. Their fans have already traveled across country. Now are they expected to travel again, the following week to another city, make travel arrangements and accommodations at a moment's notice, then potentially do it again the following week? Football isn't like basketball, where the whole shooting match can be handled in a weekend. If you propose using home fields, then the bowl system as we know it is dead, and if I need to justify why there is a problem with that, then again, there's no sense continuing, because as I mentioned before, the chasm between the arguments is so wide, it would never be bridged. The great thing about college football is that tons of teams have something to play for every week as the season comes down to the wire: bowl eligibility, or an improvement i their bowl stature. Many times, it's in games against other teams in the same boat. It's a chance to put a positive mark on your season, and a chance for your athletic department to prosper so that your swimmers don't have to pay their own way to the national championships in California, or the women's field hockey team can have more than a $5 per Diem on the road. It makes for meaningful games all year long. Bowls are freakin' cool, not to mention a load of fun to handicap. I am NOT willing to sacrifice them for a playoff system that has the potential to present new problems for the sport that might be worse than the issues we have now. Additionally, I have a problem with taking away the neutrality of these games. If you are trying to determine who the best is, why play the game in a snowstorm, or give another team an advantage if their fans can't traavel as easily two weeks in a row? That's why they play the Super Bowl in a warm weather neutral site, to make it as much a "control" environment as possible. (This by the way will be the last time I point to the NFL as any positive example for college football. You can keep your 2 yard out routes on 4th and 12, 13-24 QB performances for 87 yards and countless commercial breaks. NOTE: In the Bucs/Saints game this weekend, we had this sequence: With under a minute left in the 1st quarter, Tampa drives into FG range. On 3rd down, Garcia throws an incompletion. Someone gets injured. Cut to commercial. Come back. FG attempt is good. Cut to another commercial. Come back. TB kicks off, NO returns it to the 20. Commercial. Come back. Running play. 1st quarter ends. Double block of commercials. Ballgame. I flipped on Stooges re-runs, never to return.)
Let's also consider the effects on the regular season. Teams like USC want a playoff so that they can have the luxury of "having an off week" and not having their MNC(whoops, I mean NC) dreams dashed as a result. Do we want this? Don't we love the madcap comebacks teams embark on out of fear their season might be lost, like USC's effort to get back into the game at Oregon St this year after falling behind 21-0 at the half? Would they have exerted such effort if a playoff existed? We don't know the answer to that. Do we want a college football version of week 16 and 17 in the NFL, where teams are mailing in games because their playoff lot has already been cast? Would Alabama give a rat's ass about the SEC championship game this weekend? Maybe they would, and it would be a credit to their competitive fire if they did, but we almost certainly would be subject to Sportscenter and talk radio discussions on whether or not they should risk injury to their top players since they would have a playoff spot basically locked up. And if you say they would run the risk of falling out of favor with voters if they lost for not showing up, then we are still not immune to the concept of "style points" that is so loathed by the talking heads currently. As it stands right now, we have a perfect "semifinal" type scenario in the SEC title game, about as meaningful and big as a game can be, where one of these teams will earn a trip to the NC game. That would not be the case if a playoff was employed...we would be making a very clean and simple scenario much more complicated. Take it a step further. If a "Top 8 in the BCS" model was used, would there even be a need for conference championship games at all?
Let's also disspel the all the criticisms of ADs and college presidents, and the self righteous ramblings that "it's all about the money". You're damn right it's about the money. As I mentioned, football is the vehicle by which 95% of D-1 schools fund their athletic departments. Where do you think all the money made via the bowls goes? To some AD's trust fund? In the Presidents' pockets? No, they go to fund the athletic departments of the schools, so they can pay for the women's and men's non-revenue sports to make road trips on something other than rickety school buses. So they can eat dinner at places other than McDonald's. So schools can fund athletic facilities and locker rooms for these sports without cutting in other areas. So there's a scholarship available for your daughter who's really good at soccer. Schools striving to collect as much money as possible to help ALL of their student atheletes, or to position themselves to be more equipped to do so is not a bad thing, ok?
Lastly, let me say that, yes, every other sport has some sort of playoff system to determine it's champion. I get that. Can I be more clear that I do NOT want college football to be just like the NBA, or NFL, or even NCAA basketball? The NBA is fine. Playoffs are pretty cool. I get into it somewhere around May 1st. The NCAA tourney is pretty damn sweet. 8 days of games plus the final Monday nighter over a 2 week period. It's great. But most sports fans would tell you that they don't even pay attention to college hoops until after the Super Bowl is over. That's 3 months into the season. I'm not interested in any pining for a parallel to that in college football. I for one, enjoy bowl season just as much, if not more than I do the Tourney, and I still get to have a regular season in college football that is 20 times superior to that of college hoops. It's kind of like an analogy: I'm a big fan of two kinds of candy: Chocolate covered pretzels and Smarties. Love 'em both. If you would ask me if I'd rather have two of the same as an after dinner treat or one of both, I'd take one of both. Variety is the spice of life. I don't want a tourney style playoff in college football just like I wouldn't want a bunch of satellite games that might be cool matchups at the end of the college basketball season. Again, variety!
Is the BCS system perfect? Of course not. Especially when the Big 12 uses it to determine their division winners. But I hope I have illustrated that any playoff system would absolutely radically change college football, from the beginning of the season to the end, and very likely for the worse. It would certainly bring new problems and issues into the game that we currently don't have, which ultimately, could render college football a less enjoyable product as a whole. As I stated at the beginning of this diatribe, I LOVE COLLEGE FOOTBALL. Why sacrifice something we love, just so we can feel a little bit better about how we decide the champion in a process that might not work anyway?
Recap: Week 14
Holy shit what a pathetic excuse for handicapping this collection of crap was. (Week 14). Traditionally, Thanksgiving week has been terrible for me....the lack of capping time probably hs an effect. I might just skip this week next year.
Fundamentally, the UTEP pick was horrid, and so was South Carolina. Banking on Auburn and ND(though even though they only gained 91 total yards, they still only failed to cover by a FG..a good indication the line was off) at this point was not a sound move. I believe I have learned valuable lessons going forward. You'd think several years of positive results would indicate no need to learn these lessons, but you'd be wrong.
Postseason will bring some good success, I believe.
Fundamentally, the UTEP pick was horrid, and so was South Carolina. Banking on Auburn and ND(though even though they only gained 91 total yards, they still only failed to cover by a FG..a good indication the line was off) at this point was not a sound move. I believe I have learned valuable lessons going forward. You'd think several years of positive results would indicate no need to learn these lessons, but you'd be wrong.
Postseason will bring some good success, I believe.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)