Week 1 Musings

Ok....not a good start on So Miss. Utah should have won their game by double digits if not for turnovers and blocked punts, and USC....588 yards to Hawaii with a pedestrian QB and then an unknown backup. Should have saw that one coming I guess.

You can add Butch Davis to the Honorary Jackie Sherrill "We ain't molding Boy Scouts down here" list. First, he has professional swindler/"recruiting guru" John Blake on his staff, which raises eyebrows. Now it appears as though he has managed to positively influence almost nobody on his team. How much lack of control has to be evident when you actually have to ask for "rolling suspensions" in order to be able to field a team? Kudos to Butch...that's a stunning lack of ability to be policing his players. Every single guy on his team is running wild, having grades changed, making it rain in strip clubs, attending Chrystal parties in South Beach, etc. Way to go Butch!! At least you aren't trying to fool people into thinking you're actually making some semblance of an attempt at a clean football program. The end result of this UNC fiasco might end up being 16 guys get suspended v LSU, which is too bad because it would have been fun watching Less Miles trying to figure out a way to get anywhere on that defense. I liked UNC before, but it's an unbettable game now.

Also, the Big Ten made some news by announcing the new divisions to begin play next year. First of all, I'm not even going to get into the whole argument of whether expanding and moving to divisional play with a championship is a good idea, because that's an entirely different discussion. But in this case, given the circumstances, there was a logical way to align the divisions, and shockingly, it wasn't done correctly. Why am I never consulted on these things? Actually, based on Jim Delany's track record, and the fact that there are what I considered to be somewhat sane people in AD positions throughout the Big Ten, I was hopeful that it would not be botched. I was bitterly disappointed. In fact, there are so many things wrong with how they aligned the divisions, I don't have enough time or space to list them. I'll go with the obvious: First, the fact that Michigan and Ohio St were split up has caused way too much discussion. Michigan sucks so much donkey cock right now that even mentioning them as a possible contender in any Big Ten division is side splitting hilarity. But let's suspend logic for a minute and consider if they ever get good again. By splitting OSU and UM up but yet triumphantly announcing that they will continue to play the last week of the season, you are opening up the possibility of making irrelevant the very game you are trying to restore. What if both teams win their division? They'll play twice in a row and the game is rendered meaningless. What if both lock up their divisions the week prior? Should they even play the game? The Big Ten has gone out of it's way to completely destroy the game, not keep it relevant. (as an aside, I don't give a flying fuck about this game...just playing along.)

As for the alignment of the divisions, the Big Ten had two choices: Go by geography, or don't go by geography. They have several examples to look at for reference, but let's consider the three big conferences that currently employ divisions: The SEC, Big 12 and ACC. Two of them go by geography, one does not. The SEC has the East and the West, the Big 12 the North and the South. Everyone knows who is in what division. The rivalries are mostly geographical, and even the ones that aren't in the SEC's case, they set them up to play every year(LSU/Florida, Georgia/Auburn, Alabama/Tennessee). In the Big 12's case, it even has led to a weak division and a strong one. No matter, it works anyway. Now, let's look at the ACC. The do not use geography. They are the least respected conference. Nobody, and I mean NOBODY knows who is in what division in the ACC. I follow college football very close, and I have no idea. There are no strong rivalries in the ACC. ZERO.

So which model did the Big Ten follow? Naturally, the ACC. Why? Probably because there is some conception that the power in the Big Ten is concentrated in the eastern part of the footprint. First of all, any conception about where the programs stand right now is irrelevant, since teams go through peaks and valleys through time. Having said that, though, that conception is false, especially with the addition of Nebraska. The Big Ten should have been split up into the East and West with the split coming at the Indiana/ Illinois state line. East: Penn State, Michigan, Ohio St, Michigan St, Purdue, Indiana. West: Illinois, Northwestern, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa and Nebraska. Believe it or not, if you look at 10 year records and bowl appearances and compare the divisions, you could actually make a case that the West is stronger of you rank each program 1-6 and compare them. This would have been the right way to do it. Geographic rivalries are intact, and the ones that aren't (only Illinois/Indiana in my opinion, and who really gives a shit anyway) could play each other every year. Also, you still have the bus ride road trips, making it easier for fans to travel. With the logic devoid divisions they came up with, Wisconsin has neither Iowa nor Minnesota in their division, so they will go years without playing one of those two despite having good rivalries with them. The whole thing is a complete joke. I don't even want to talk about it anymore.



4. @Clemson -26 1/2 v North Texas: I kind of liked North Texas coming into lat year because they had the coach's son Riley Dodge, a highly ranked recruit, coming in to play QB. However, injuries have derailed his career, so it's back to normal schlub QBs who nobody else wanted for North Texas. Here are the scores of North Texas's non-conference games vs BCS opponents(and some non-BCS) since 2005: 54-2, 54-7, 56-3, 56-7, 79-10, 66-7, 45-6, 41-3, 77-20, 53-7. None of these come even close to covering 26.5. Here are Clemson's NC games against Sun Belt/MAC, etc type teams since '05: 37-7, 54-6, 51-0, 63-9, 49-26, 70-14, 37-14. Not many games in either of those bunches that were even remotely close. So the question must be, what is different about either of these team to expect a somewhat closer game? Clemson looks to be a pretty solid outfit this year, at least as good as they've been in recent years, as they have most of their defense, 4 starting OL and QB Kyle Parker back. North Texas looks like a middle of the pack Sun Belt team, though not quite as good as they looked to me last year. I'm really struggling to find a reason as to why this spread isn't in the 30's, so I'm pulling the trigger at 26.5.

5. @Florida -36 1/2 v Miami (OH): More is expected of Miami(OH) this year, but that's mostly because they were so terrible last year. Their offensive line is coming back pretty much intact, but it was undoubtedly the worst OL in the country last year, and 2 of the starters apparently just got injured late in fall camp. They were 119th in ypc last year and 119th in sacks allowed. That's a bad combination. It's a new era for Florida, so there will be a lot of excitement, and there will be a need to get some work in. New QB John Brantley appears to be the real deal, and I would not be surprised if he is one of the top 2 QBs in the SEC immediately. He only played in garbage time last year, but he threw 7TDs in 48 attempts, so he knows what he's doing. Florida will probably have that spread covered by half, and I see very little chance that it doesn't end up being a 56-7 type game. It might be worse than that if Urban shows a lack of decorum.

6. @Nebraska -37 1/2 v Western Kentucky: I hate to keep harping on these huge favorites, but Western Kentucky is probably going to be the worst team in D1 this year, and that might be the case on both sides of the ball. The chances are probably better than 75% that they get shut out, and Nebraska will almost certainly be in the 50's. It's a ton of points, but the value is on Nebraska here.

7. Tulsa -7 1/2 @ East Carolina: Skip Holtz left ECU for South Florida, and he's left the cupboard pretty bare, especially on defense, which has been ECU's calling card for the most part. Only 1 of ECU's top 8 tacklers return on defense and they will have to deal with a Tulsa offense which looks to be loaded again for Todd Graham, who I consider to be one of the better offensive minded coaches around. They return QB GJ Kinne as well as all their leading rushers and all but one of the guys who caught a pass for them last year, including their top 2. 4 of the 5 linemen are back...they look like a solid unit. On the other side of the ball, ECu has a new QB, all but one skill guy are gone, and their line is missing 3 starters. Throw in that they have to learn a whole new system under Ruffin McNeil, the former Texas Tech behemoth DC who the Red Raiders had no interest in promoting, and I think ECU might be in for a long day. I generally don't like backing these western teams from CUSA when they come east, but I think there's a big edge for Tulsa here. This game is on Sunday, by the way.

8. UCONN +3 @ Miss shit can: I just can't resist. This went under 3, so I was on the fence, but now that it's back to a field goal, I want a piece of Dick Rod. Last year, UCONN lost 5 games, but all of them were by 4 or less. I think I've been clear about what I think about randy Edsall, and it looks like this might be the best team he's had. The QB is back, one of their 2 1,000 yard rushers from last year is back along with 4 of the 5 starting linemen. Michigan looks to be bad again on defense, as they lost by far their best player off last year's terrible defensive unit. They'll probably be ok on offense, but again not explosive, and UCONN has plenty of defensive talent back. The pressure on Dick Rod is suffocating, and the players know that it will create an absolute firestorm if they lose. I think UCONN expects to come in and win, and with how snakebitten Michigan has been and will probably continue to be under Dick Rod, I think it's likely that they will.

9. Missouri -12 1/2 v Illinois: Although I think the Illini have made a major upgrade in coaching with their coordinators, and I think they'll be a little better than mos think, this is naturally a very bad matchup for them in week one. Blaine Gabbert torched them last year, and they've had two huge injuries to a secondary that was thin to begin with. It's true that RB Derrick Washington was suspended for some sort of psychopathic behavior resulting in a restraining order against him by his tutor, and that only one significant WR returns from a year ago, but I'm sure Mizzou will get someone to step up at those spots. Offensively, the Illini are starting a redshirt freshman who has never taken a snap, and he'll have to go against a secondary with 4 returning senior starters. Like I said, I like the new coordinators, and I think Illinois might do ok this year. hell, they might even pile up some yardage in this game. But they won't be able to score enough to keep this one close, even with some good performances.

10. Boise St-1 1/2 v Virginia Tech: Boise is returning by far the most experienced team in the country, and they are returning guys who have had all kinds of success. Every conceivable player from last year is back. We all know the implications of this game for Boise, so I won't even elaborate. VT also appears to be a pretty solid outfit, but they have all kinds of patching to do on the defensive side of the ball. They'll have to face Kellen Moore, who sported a 39/3 ratio last year and completed 64% of his throws. Offensively, they look like they will be ok,with RB Ryan Williams being one of my favorite players in the country but Boise is extremely well coached on both sides of the ball. The market overwhelmingly likes VT, as the line has dropped from 4 all the way to 1 1/2, but I think Boise is for real(how many times do they have to prove that?) I learned in the bowl game last year that I'll never fade Boise again.

Others: Northwestern is a terrible favorite, and they will probably need some time to marinate before they are ready to perform like they did at the end of last year. They're playing Vandy, who everyone is down on due to coach Williams sudden retirement late in the spring. But they have some returners on both sides of the ball, so it should be a good battle. NW should probably always be faded when they're favored......the public loves Purdue getting 11 from Notre Dame, and I think that number might be a bit stiff based on the uncertainty of Dayne Crist for ND, and the new systems, but I'm still inclined to back Brian Kelly. His schemes are proven, and he's got the likes of Michael Floyd and Kyle Rudolph to exploit. part of the love for Purdue, most of it actually, is some sort of infatuation with Robert Marve, who transferred from Miami. Apparently, those who are excited about him consider only that he looks pretty cool walking around campus and never saw tapes of him actually playing because he sucks at playing quarterback....I lean to Kentucky -3 at Louisville because the talent level looks to be pretty skewed toward Kentucky, and I'll probably play them because I thoroughly dislike Louisville's skill people and the prospect of their having to learn a new system. But there's something that tells me to stay away from UK as a favorite here, so not a musing....

That's it for week one. I have to say that my confidence level is not sky high for what is normally a strong week for me. We'll see what happens though. Just glad to get started.