Legends and Leaders Revisited

May 24, 2012 by 7 Comments

One of the most contentious aspects of conference expansion is the formation of divisions, and how to properly accommodate the often competing interests of traditional rivalries, competitive balance, and geographic logic.  (Although, in a world where San Diego State will soon be in the same conference as Connecticut, that last one has become kind of laughable.)  With these things (and others) in mind, the Big Ten added Nebraska a year ago and attempted to create divisions that would produce satisfying championship games without trampling too much on tradition (something that few in the college football universe care about anymore) in the process.

The result was the highly controversial and unfortunately named “Legends and Leaders” format.  While most fans and observers (and even Jim Tressel) favored the simple East/West split along the Indiana-Illinois border, the Big Ten brass seemed to specifically desire a separated Ohio State and Michigan, for the obvious benefit of being able to stage The Game as a conference title matchup.  This decision, of course, infuriated fans of these teams, who were suddenly worried that perhaps the single most traditional thing in the conference was about to be seriously messed with.

And yet, in its first season, the success of the Legends/Leaders set-up is undeniable.  The championship game featured the two best teams in the conference in a high-scoring, back-and-forth rematch of the season’s most exciting game.  It’s hard to imagine a better result under any other configuration.

Well…

First, a quick note: to evaluate the potential success of other formats, I’ve assumed that each team would finish with the same conference record as they did in real life.  This is probably not true, but it’s impossible to be accurate here, so let’s just play it safe.

For starters, we’ll set our baseline at the actual results of Legends/Leaders:

Legends Champion: Michigan State

Leaders Champion: Wisconsin

Average conference wins: Legends – 4.5, Leaders – 3.5

Not bad, especially when you consider that Indiana’s goose-egg is the primary reason for the Leaders’ poor showing.

Now, how the people’s choice East/West would have fared:

East Champion: Michigan State

West Champion: Wisconsin

Average conference wins: East – 4.33, West – 3.67

Even with the terrible Hoosiers in the mix, the East benefits from having Michigan, Michigan State and Penn State together.  Note that this would have produced the exact same championship game but with better competitive balance.

Next up, a geographic split the other way (North/South).  This was not really talked about much, but I figured it would be worth a look.  Here, since Iowa and Penn State are essentially even, I went with the choice that kept Ohio State and Penn State together (which would probably have been a concern, especially with Ohio State and Michigan split up):

North Champion: Michigan State

South Champion: Penn State

Average conference wins: North – 4.67, South – 3.33

Easily the worst balance, and even worse with Iowa and Penn State switched.  In that scenario, 5-3 Nebraska wins the South as the only team in the division with a winning record.  Ick.  The only benefit of North/South is that it would have produced a non-rematch championship game and a different champion.  This set-up will probably get better over time as Ohio State returns to form.

The final configuration is one that the Pac-12 tossed around for a while.  Known as the “zipper model,” the basic idea is that teams are grouped into geographic pairs (which makes a lot more sense in the Pac-12) and then split up, apparently to create the opportunity for regionally exciting championship games.  The pairs I used were Nebraska/Iowa, Minnesota/Wisconsin, Northwestern/Illinois, Indiana/Purdue, Michigan/Michigan State, and Ohio State/Penn State.  After toying around with this one for a while, I found an alignment that would have resulted in perfect competitive balance (an average of 4 wins in each division) for this past season:

Legends (because you know we would have still gotten those names): Michigan State, Nebraska, Purdue, Ohio State, Northwestern, Minnesota.

Leaders: Wisconsin, Michigan, Penn State, Iowa, Illinois, Indiana.

Again, the same championship game (here, since Michigan played neither Wisconsin or Penn State for real, I assumed a loss to the Badgers and a win over the Lions, but who knows…) along with perfectly balanced divisions.  The nice thing about this set-up (if you’re like me, anyway) is that the three teams I find it easiest to hate as a Buckeye are all in the other division, enhancing the excitement leading up to a championship game.

While a few more years in the books are necessary before any real conclusions can be reached (and who knows how many teams/divisions the Big Ten will have by then), it seems that the Big Ten was right to go for competitive balance, but may not have properly achieved it.  For now, the fan favorite East/West split is actually better than what we have, so we can at least pat ourselves on the back for that.

Filed Under: College Football

The Future of College Football: Breaking Up For The Kids

May 8, 2012 by 8 Comments

Since the last installment, we’ve been (almost) given the gift of a four-team playoff postseason to begin in a couple of years.  Since that still-not-entirely-final announcement, the discussion has mostly shifted to how the four teams should be chosen, a question that–despite sanctimonious column after sanctimonious column to the contrary–has no right answer.  Everyone has a good point in this argument, and whatever is decided will still result in at least some amount of controversy.  But it will be a slightly better brand of controversy than what we have now, and that’s a good start.

But perhaps doing more to end that controversy would be the long-theorized and even longer-overdue secession of the top conferences from the NCAA.  This move–or at the very least, the creation of a new division within the current structure–would finally acknowledge the obvious: Utah State, Tulane and Buffalo are not on the same level as USC, LSU and Ohio State.

With the most recent realignment moves, the so-called “Big Six” conferences will house 78 programs by 2015 when Navy begins play in the Big East.  The remaining 42 (not counting a handful of announced FCS upgrades) belong to the mid-majors.  Of those 42, exactly zero are in the top 25 in winning percentage for the past ten years (www.stassen.com).  Every mid-major that would have been in that category has already been snatched up by a Big Sixer (Boise State, TCU, Utah) or opted for independence (BYU), which essentially gives them the same competitive benefits that Notre Dame enjoys.  Just one has appeared in a BCS bowl and that’s Hawai’i, the remaining mid-major with the highest winning percentage in the last decade.

To put it bluntly, they wouldn’t be missed.

Further, I would suggest tossing the Big East into that pool as well.  Of the bottom 15 teams from Big Six leagues on that 10-year list, four are Big East teams (all new additions even).  Each of the other conferences has two, and Army is the lone independent to rank that low.  If the separation were to finally occur, I have no doubt that Boise, Louisville, Cincy, Navy, USF, Houston, UConn and Rutgers could find homes in the Big Five or be successful as independents.  But ultimately, as long as Boise and Navy can, the rest are expendable.

From here we can finally get to a playoff that works, without getting too out of hand for you crybabies that don’t want a two-month 64-team extravaganza of football awesomeness.  With five conferences of sizes that will probably range from 12 to 16 teams and a few independents, a four-team playoff gets a little awkward.  You’re either leaving one conference champ out entirely or subjecting the whole thing to another goofy mishmash of polls and computer formulas.  Neither of those options will be acceptable at this point.  The only realistic answers are either an 8-team playoff (5 champs + 3 at-large) or a 5 team all-champs playoff where some seeding system (even if it’s just W/L record) is used so that #4 and #5 play a sort-of play-in game to the four team field.  (This second method is still a little clunky, as there would need to be some sort of accommodation for independents, perhaps an optional second “play-in” if an independent team meets inclusion criteria.)

And let’s not forget the advantages the separation would give to those mid-major conferences left behind.  I imagine there would be further expansion within that level by elevating even more successful FCS programs.  Undoubtedly there would be a new playoff created for whatever this level is eventually called (FCS-A?).  Finally these teams will be able to start working toward actually winning national championships instead of being satisfied with shameless early-season cash-in beatdown road trips and appearances in no-respect joke bowls with marginal-at-best benefits.

Filed Under: BCS, College Football

The Rebranding of the Buckeyes

April 18, 2012 by Leave a Comment

What a great weekend for Buckeye Nation!  Although I didn’t have the privilege of being in attendance, all signs point to the fact that Saturday’s open practice with the students was a tremendous success!!  This is one of many great ideas Coach Meyer and his staff have put together in the process of giving the look of Ohio State football a facelift.  This “rebranding” is something I would like to talk about.

Being in marketing, I sometimes get caught up in commercials and magazine articles as I dissect the target audience and the intention behind the messaging.  Although the refurbishing of the Ohio State image is not a commercial, nor a magazine article, I have taken notice to several things this new coaching staff has put into place…and for good reason.  After everything that’s happened to this program over the past year or so, the most important thing any new coach could do is demonstrate that OSU is still the best place to get your education, develop as a young man and play on a perennial powerhouse football team.  Head Coach Urban Meyer and his staff have meticulously done that since day one.

Take, for example, the official Ohio State website.  Even though they had created this new look prior to Coach Meyer taking over the helm, the new way in which they highlight news, add photos and video and portray the “champions” of Ohio State is straight from the Urban Meyer playbook.  The way that all of the coaches seemingly use the media in terms of interviews, social media, videos and news reporters is completely different than we’ve seen before and portrays the transparency Coach Meyer promised to have on the day he was hired.  Ohio State has also approved the $7 million purchase of a new scoreboard and high definition video monitor, sound system and video ribbons that will circle part of the stadium.  If you’ve been to a game in the last decade, you’ll know that this was sorely needed and will benefit everyone that attends future games as well as be impressive to future recruits.  That was followed up by this past weekend’s open practice where the students at OSU were given full access to the team as well as a tour of the beloved Ohio Stadium.  Word is also out that Coach Meyer is bringing his wildly successful “Friday Night Lights” up from Gainesville to Columbus.  Anyone who has followed football recruiting knows how successful Meyer was in attracting the top high school talent each summer to the bright lights of the Swamp.  And I’m sure this is just the beginning of big things we will be seeing out of the “Mecca” of college football.

Now, I realize that some stories have come out recently that portray Coach Meyer in very poor light.  I refuse to give those articles any more publicity than they have already gotten.  Personally, I think it’s a combination of a sore Florida fan base and the ever-present media hatred for Ohio State that continues to cause these things.  Sometimes I wish these reporters and “snitches” would look themselves in the mirror and think about their own faults and mistakes before trying to irresponsibly destroy the lives of others…but that’s just me.  Regardless of the reasoning behind the stories and whether there is any truth to them or not, the bottom line is:  People are people.  EVERYONE makes mistakes…me, you, Matt Hayes, George Dorhmann, Urban Meyer and Jim Tressell.  We’ve seen it before, we’ll see it again.  I have no doubt that the perfect coach for Ohio State University’s football team is Urban Meyer.  He has my full support and Buckeye love and as Buckeye fans, I’m sure he has yours, too.

The present and future is very bright at Ohio State.  We have arguably the best coach in college football, one of the best assistant coaching staffs, the best and largest fan base of any football team, a renovated ‘Shoe on the way and promise of continued football dominance in the days ahead.   I can’t wait to see this team play in the fall, but for now, I’ll take the Spring Game this Saturday!  Go Bucks!!

Recent Ohio State Football Coaching Stories

Filed Under: College Football, Ohio State Football

The Ohio State Football Scoop: Latest Team News

April 10, 2012 by Leave a Comment

Times are getting exciting for Ohio State fans leading up to the 2012 Spring Game.  Newly minted head coach Urban Meyer has finally gotten a chance to get his players out on the field to evaluate talent and figure out his depth chart.  Although Coach Meyer is still not finding his “playmakers” on offense, the defense already looks poised to return to dominating fashion this coming year.  Several photo galleries and video clips also confirm the effect new Strength and Conditioning staff has had on this team, as nearly all the players look to be in far better shape, faster and stronger than last season.  After this team went a dismal 6-7 last year, I think all OSU fans want to see our Buckeyes return to the glory we’ve been spoiled with over the past decade.  They have a ways to go and we may not fully see what this team is capable of for another year or so, but all signs seem to point in a positive direction.  I know I’ve got my ticket for the Spring Game and can’t wait to see what we look like!  Go Bucks!

Some of the interesting things I’ve found recently are some fascinating discussions on the offensive play-calling that we can expect to see with our Buckeyes.  Although we may be a year or two away from these plays being perfected, it’s pretty cool to see the creativity this new coaching staff will bring to the table in the coming months and seasons.  Below, I have linked to several stories about practices, how players are handling and adapting to the new coaching staff, as well as the spread blog posts I mentioned above.  Enjoy!

Ohio State Football Team News

Posts on the Spread and Other Play-calling

Filed Under: College Football, Ohio State Football

The Future of College Football: Expansion & Realignment

March 5, 2012 by Leave a Comment

Before we get into the next phase of the college football’s new era, I wanted to add a quick update on the post-season proceedings.  Pac-12 commissioner Larry Scott and current Big 12 commissioner Chuck Neinas have publicly supported the Big Ten’s four-team non-bowl playoff system and also expressed interest in a conference-champions-only rule.  Opponents of that rule argue that it would keep the four “best” teams from playing in the playoff, but I happen to like it.  I have said a number of times that I don’t believe in the concept of “best” in college football, especially when the idea is to use that concept to place teams in the post-season.  Conferences and schedules are too widely varied to be able to accurately determine the strength of a team.  Champions-only guarantees that perceptions of conference quality won’t have undue influence on playoff participants the way they do now.  That said, I do think there should be at-large berths available, but that’s not really an option in a four-team system.

Okay, moving on…

Expansion and realignment is easily the most complex and volatile element of the New Era.  It’s impossible to guess what attributes make schools appealing to some conferences and not to others (the Big Ten seemed to have no real interest in Pitt, but the ACC couldn’t wait to snatch them up).  There have already been several major shifts and even more are in the works.  I believe that within five years, each of the current major conferences will either have at least 14 members or no longer exist.  What will be fascinating to see is how the pieces are moved around and specifically whether or not Notre Dame can reasonably maintain their beloved independence.

Here then is a look at each of the six major conferences, what they’ve done so far in expansion and what they may do in the near future.

SEC – 14 teams

Added: Texas A&M, Missouri     Lost: No one

Eventually I think the SEC will want to go to 16 teams, but they probably aren’t going to start that ball rolling unless they can entice Texas or Oklahoma to join.  Texas has rejected the idea once, and A&M probably wouldn’t be too keen on the Longhorns hanging around again.  Oklahoma is a possibility, but for now I think both of those schools want to focus on stabilizing the Big 12.

If someone else moves to 16, the SEC will almost certainly follow.  At that point, you can add pretty much anybody from the ACC that’s had some success in the past five years to the target list.  There is supposedly an agreement to not add anyone from a current SEC state, but I think the push to 16 (and beyond?) will be about consolidation, with a conference or two folding along the way.  Such agreements will need to go out the window when that happens.

ACC – 14 teams

Added: Pittsburgh, Syracuse    Lost: No one

The ACC is likely to be the first out of the gate in the race to 16, and I think that will come sooner than later.  It’s no secret that UConn would like to join Pitt and ‘Cuse and would be a comparable add to a conference that seems to be the only expanding with basketball in mind.  The ACC will take a shot at Notre Dame before settling on someone like Rutgers or even Cincinnati.

Should the SEC (or someone else) snatch an ACC team or two, expect the Big East to continue to absorb the shock.  Yeah, they’ve taken steps to ensure less ship-jumping, but if enough teams are targeted, there won’t be anyone left to answer to.  Things are probably going to get ugly for the Big East pretty soon.

Big Ten – 12 teams

Added: Nebraska     Lost: No one

Currently, the Big Ten is not looking to add more teams but like the SEC, they will make a move if others do or if the right program is in play.  That program in this case is–no surprise–Notre Dame, still desperately clinging to independence in a landscape that is actively trying to make that a relative impossibility.  What else does it mean when a four-team, conference-champions-only playoff is picking up steam?

Judging from their last two expansion adds (Nebraska and Penn State), I don’t think the Big Ten is going to be happy with Big East teams.  While it sounds crazy, I think they may take a shot at the SEC’s Tennessee.  The Volunteers would be a good cultural and geographical fit for the conference.  Expect Nebraska’s old rival Oklahoma to be on the short list if the Irish don’t budge or if the move is to 16.  That last spot could be filled by Kentucky, Maryland or Oklahoma State (if that turns out to be a condition for the Sooners).

All of that said, I’d be surprised if the Big Ten went to 16 unless the Big 12 collapses entirely.

Pac-12 – 12 teams

Added: Utah, Colorado     Lost: No one

As I’m sure you remember, the Pac tried to jump-start the whole 16-team thing a couple of years ago with the attempted annexation of the Big 12’s Oklahoma teams and most of the Texas teams along with Colorado.  Ultimately, politics and an Austin-sized ego kept that deal from going through, but don’t think the league isn’t open to further growth.

Logically, the Big 12 will continue to be a target for Pac-12 expansion, which could possibly lead to some battles with the Big Ten over target programs.  The Pac-12 would love to have Oklahoma, but probably only if they brought Texas with them.  Notre Dame is an attractive option as well with some built-in rivalries.  I was a little surprised that the conference didn’t make a play for Boise State and/or BYU, both natural geographical fits and more relevant football-wise than either Utah or Colorado.

Big 12 – 10 teams

Added: West Virginia, TCU     Lost: Nebraska, Texas A&M, Missouri, Colorado

The Big 12 definitely took a hit during the last two rounds of expansion, first losing Nebraska (the only thing the North division had going for them) and Colorado–and therefore the conference championship game; then watching Texas A&M and Missouri immediately start peddling themselves, both ultimately landing in the SEC.  Replacements West Virginia and TCU are decent, but the conference is quickly becoming the new Big East.

Although they deny it, there’s no way the Big 12 doesn’t want to get back to 12 teams (at least) and regain their conference championship game.  One could argue that their lack of such a high-profile contest cost Oklahoma State a shot at the national title last season.  Current rumored targets include the Big East’s Louisville and newly-independent BYU.  Notre Dame would be a welcome addition of course, but I don’t see that happening.  Cincinnati is a name that is tossed around as a candidate, but that move reeks of so much last-ditchness.

There’s a reason the SEC, ACC, Big Ten and Pac-12 were covered first here and that’s because if the shift is truly going to be toward four superconferences, those are the four.  Texas and Oklahoma will survive the Big 12’s collapse while Texas Tech and Oklahoma State will do their best to hang tight to their coattails.  The other six teams are in danger of being left out, with Iowa State and Baylor especially endangered.  Kansas can try to leverage their hoops dominance into an invite while West Virginia can probably get into the ACC if the timing is right.  TCU probably deserves a look, but it’s far from a done deal.

Big East – any number of teams at any given time

Added: Boise State, San Diego State, Houston, SMU, UCF, Memphis, Navy, Temple (?)     Lost: West Virginia, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, TCU before they even joined

If you believe you have a firm grasp on the state of the Big East, then you are probably a crazy person.  For example, all the talk recently has been about the probable return of Temple, who left the Big East in 2004.  Here’s what I do know: they’ve lost every member who was any good at football in the past decade and added Boise State.  Even if the Big East continues to exist, they will not be considered alongside the likes of the SEC and the Big Ten as a “top” conference.

The aforementioned Boise and maybe San Diego State could eventually be targets for the Pac-12.  The ACC will probably go after UConn and maybe Louisville (who could be in the Big 12 by then), Rutgers, Cincy or South Florida.  Everyone else is getting tossed aside unless the Big Four start cannibalizing each other and need to patch holes.

The role of the Big East in the future (if it has one) will likely be similar to that of the new Mountain West/Conference USA merged behemoth–a giant 24-team mid-major frat house whose champion will be looking for a spot in an expanded National Championship Tourney.  Either that or as a power conference in the FCS, where most of these teams belong.

 

Filed Under: BCS, College Football

The Future of College Football: The Post-Season

February 22, 2012 by 13 Comments

As you read this, a dozen men (the 11 FBS conference commissioners and Notre Dame AD Jack Swarbrick) are meeting to determine the next way we will argue about who doesn’t deserve to be the national champion.  With the current BCS contract with ESPN expiring following the 2013 season and dissatisfaction with the post-season arrangement at an all-time high thanks to an abomination of a title game that found a way to create brand new controversies (is losing a conference championship game really worse than not even making it to one?) when we were so sure we had finally seen it all.

Early word out of this meeting (just the second of what will likely be four or five such gatherings before the July deadline) is that there is major support for a Plus-One format, which isn’t really all that informative except to shoot down the possibility of full-blown 8- or 16-team playoff models.  “Plus-One” means different things to different people, and it’s hard to say which version (if it is indeed just one) is gaining steam.  One thing that does seem clear, however, is that the 2014 season will end with more than two teams vying in some way for the ultimate prize, and that’s at least progress.  Here, then, are the most popular public proposals for a multi-team post-season format that are not large scale playoffs:

The Original Plus-One

This would be the version of “Plus-One” that is actually correctly named and also my least favorite of the three outlined here.  The idea is that the BCS selection process would be scrapped and the four top bowls would revert to original conference tie-ins.  The BCS system would be churned one more time following the bowls and the top two teams would play for the title.

The primary benefit of this system is that it opens the title chase to the most teams without being an actual playoff.  Technically, eight teams will be in the running and four of them will be eliminated on the field.  Two of them will then be eliminated in the same way we hate now, which is the primary drawback and a pretty big one in my opinion.  I don’t see how this will curb controversy in a real way.  It does guarantee a traditional Rose Bowl matchup every year, if you’re willing to accept that Nebraska vs. Utah is “traditional.”

I highly doubt that this is the Plus-One model that’s gaining traction, since most of the decision-makers involved are wary of the dreaded “bracket creep,” and this is basically a playoff that skips from quarter-finals to finals.  It would be too easy to add in that missing middle round in a couple of years and there’s no way the playoff opponents in the room don’t see that.  It also opens the door back up for accusations of hindering access, since it would reduce the number of “BCS” teams from 10 to 8 unless another bowl (Cotton?) is brought on board, a move that would itself then create three potential “screwed” teams rather than two.

The Four Team Bowl Playoff

The “Modern Plus-One” is really just a small playoff that’s afraid of itself.  If you don’t call it a playoff, then it isn’t, I guess.  Whatever.  This is the model that ESPN talks about the most, so immediately I am suspicious of it.  The idea here is that teams 1 and 4 and teams 2 and 3 would meet in two of the BCS bowls with the winners playing for the title a week later.

Proponents of this system love to congratulate themselves for creating a playoff and preserving the importance of the bowls, and I suppose it does that.  But I’m not really sure how many fans can travel to two bowl games in close succession or how many schools are going to want to foot the bill for two long trips.  Being that it is an actual playoff, it isn’t the worst idea, but the logistics seem to make it needlessly cumbersome.

This setup also reduces the number of BCS teams by two and doesn’t allow for an easy fix the way Original Plus-One does.  This is probably the format that is leading the pack right now, but I think that if it is implemented, its downsides will become quickly apparent and further modification will be in order.

The Four Team Non-Bowl Playoff

This is the system recently offered up by the Big Ten, and I think it is the best I’ve seen (again, since we’re ruling out the 16-teamer I actually want).  It would still employ the 1-4, 2-3 matchups, but these games would be held at the home stadiums of the top two teams.  The winners would then meet in a new national title game, the location of which would be up for bid each year, similar to the Super Bowl.

I’m honestly having a hard time finding something to dislike about this concept.  Home playoff games make achieving one of those top two spots worth fighting for, although it may also necessitate finding a new way to rank teams so as to avoid accusations of impropriety (at the very least, make the current system transparent).  No one is going to have trouble selling out a home game for a championship berth and contingency travel packages to the title game can be sold throughout December.  Also, moving the title game around the country would be beyond amazing.  I can honestly say I would consider going to any title game at Lucas Oil, whether the Buckeyes were in it or not.

This model benefits the bowl side of things as well.  With four teams out of the picture, top-tier bowl spots would be open for even more teams.  The Rose Bowl can have its Big Ten/Pac-12 matchup every year and get at least one of the champs most seasons.  In fact, there’s no reason the two semi-final losers can’t be eligible for bowls as well, making it even more likely to get a traditional Rose Bowl and offering more attractive options to help the bowls sell tickets.

But the most significant advantage to this format is that it comes prepared for eventual expansion.  There are no existing logistical barriers to keep it from, well, creeping to 8 or 16 teams.  I doubt that’s what the Big Ten has in mind right now, but I’d also be surprised if they hadn’t thought of it.

What are your thoughts?  Do you prefer one of the other two systems?  Is there a drawback to the Big Ten plan that I’m missing?

Filed Under: BCS, College Football

RIP, Joe Paterno

January 22, 2012 by 2 Comments

I had this post ready to go when it was first announced that Joe Paterno had passed but then had read that this hadn’t been confirmed by the family.

Unfortunately the inevitable has come to pass, and so we join with college football fans around the country in honoring Joe Paterno.

Filed Under: College Football

FraudWatch Finale

January 12, 2012 by Leave a Comment

There comes a point in every college football season when you have to sit back, take a look at all the undefeated teams and ask yourself which ones are faking it, coasting through their early season on a wave of bad opponents and lucky wins.  For me, that point comes exactly at Week 5, when the field of unbeatens is usually whittled down to just over a handful.

In 2011, college football’s Year of Stupid, it should come as no surprise that with a third of the season already in the books, fifteen teams had still yet to lose, and that of those fifteen, exactly zero would finish the year unblemished.  It’s time now to take a final look at this year’s FraudWatch, an experiment in separating the contenders from the pretenders.

A quick refresher: I have defined a “fraud team” as one who makes it to Week 5 undefeated (and with at least four wins), yet ends the season with five or more losses (including all post-season games).  I look mostly at the two things mentioned above: opponents’ overall record and margin of victory.  Lots of bad opponents or close games usually indicates a fraud team.

I also added a couple of extra categories for teams that only showed some of the signs of fraudulence and predicted those teams to finish with anywhere from 1-4 losses.  I also declared all other teams “safe,” and guessed that none of them would lose more than 2 games.

The overall results were pretty good.  Of the two teams I identified as most fraudy, one (Texas Tech) achieved just that, somehow managing to lose 7 games.  The other, Kansas State, had a little better of a year than expected, losing only 3 games.

The next group (pegged at 3 or 4 losses) was the real eye-opener.  Both Illinois and Georgia Tech (my #3 and #4 teams) finished with 5 or more losses.  The other team in this group, Oklahoma State, became the only fraud-ranked team that should have been left off the list, losing just once all year.  Had these teams been included with the top two, I would have gotten 3 out of 5 correct, which isn’t too shabby.  Next year, I will not be so generous.

Of the three teams in the 1-3 losses group (‘Texas, Oklahoma, Wisconsin), two (OU, Wisky) were properly placed with 3 losses on the year, while Texas overunderachieved, dropping five games, meaning that 4 of my top 6 ended up being actual frauds.

Only one of the seven “safe” teams, Clemson, turned in a season with more than two losses.  And this points to the primary success of FraudWatch, accurately separating the contenders and pretenders with only a couple of missteps.

Changes to the system next year will most likely be merely aesthetic.  I’ll drop one of the categories and split teams into Frauds (5+ losses), Pretenders (2-4 losses), and Contenders (0-2 losses).  These groups will be divided relatively evenly based on how many total unbeatens there are.  If there is any unbalance, the Frauds and Contenders groups will be the heaviest, because that’s more fun.

Filed Under: College Football

Penn Shtate Preview

November 17, 2011 by 6 Comments

(This was post was supposed to be posted tomorrow, but thanks to the site’s EIC fat fingering, it went live early. Either way, enjoy. – ed)

The season is almost over and it can’t end any faster for our beloved Ohio State Buckeyes.  Off the field issues, poor performances by the coaching staff and players, and inconsistent play on the field by the “rotating” team leaders have left us where we are today.  Where are we?  Sitting pretty with a smooth 6-4 record and a more than realistic chance of losing the final two games of the season to finish 6-6.  Thanks poor decision-making of college students (tattoos…smh) and adults (covering up tattoo bartering exercise with lame excuses).

Speaking of poor decision-making…get a load of Penn State.  Someone should put together a case study on how to “not” run a school or athletic department in times of legal duress.  This should be written up after someone puts together a case study on how to “not” run a school or athletic department in times of NCAA duress.

I have a special place in my heart for a few schools.  They exist in this special place for various reasons.  Michigan is a no-brainer and this isn’t a Michigan preview, so we will just save that vitriol for another time thank you very much.  You would think that Wisconsin would be here, but really Wisconsin…they are the semi-attractive girl in high school that you know could look really good if she would just stop chewing on tree bark, smoking marlboro reds like a chimney, and eating the cafeteria pizza everyday (like a boss) in her spare time.  I’ve got no time for her right now and it really doesnt matter.  You already know how her story is going to end.  She will remain ugly (ie be Wisconsin) and pop out a bunch of large ugly kids (ie. Wisconsin recruiting) before the marvels of modern dentistry, exercise, and nicorette are bestowed upon her.

Penn State is the school that encounters most of my disdain.  Why Penn State?  Talk to any living alumni or current student and they will all tell you the same thing.  “Penn State does it the right way.”  Ya know…with honor and stuff.  We have all heard this for years no matter which team you supported.  Even the media has jumped on it in the past that JoePa and mighty Penn State can do no wrong.  While high profile schools like OSU and even Michigan have been in the crosshairs of the media and the NCAA for misdeeds (extra practice yielding no better on-field results for Michigan and tattoos yielding no better on-field results for Ohio State),  Penn State and everyone that associates with the school has been “white-towering” all of us.  They have been for years.  I have always held the belief that State College has protected the Penn State name from a lot of things that we will never hear about.  The only reason we have recently heard about the increasing number of incidents is because of Al Gore’s fantastic invention of the internet.  Players can’t escape the scrutiny of social media with message boards and twitter.  State College is the Ohio college geographical equivalent of Ada (Home base for Ohio Northern).  If Ohio Northern packed up its bags and left Ada, there would be no more Ada (Yes, the Hardees would close down fo realz).  Plain and simple, the lifeblood of State College (just like Ada on a larger scale) is Penn State University.  We have the same thing out here with Washington State in Pullman.  All of these schools are geographically located in areas of their respective states that no one wants to visit unless they are required (or maybe if you are on the run from the law).  I know that this may be a reach to someone that supports Penn State, but bear with me and hear me out.  Maybe, just maybe, it benefits State College to never place the school or its athletic department (aka the football team) in harm’s way if the town can avoid it.  I am not saying that everyone that lives there is a liar and wouldn’t do the honorable thing (that distinction goes to the coaching staff for the PSU football team), but let’s just say that it is not out of the realm of possibility that the people in authority turned their heads upon seeing some poor player behavior.  I know…it is a foreign concept that would never happen in Ann Arbor or Columbus.  I may be kidding a little bit only for the simple reason that it does happen in these places, but the sheer population does not allow for these things to swept under the rug as easily as it is in a place like State College.  I have often had (scary, scary) visions of Joe Paterno going all Coach Kilmer (Try and tell me you didn’t just pull a “I don’t want your life” and have visions of Vandermemes past.) on the State College PD for late night extra-curricular activities starring the players of the PSU football team.   The fight club mantra of “On a long enough timeline. The survival rate for everyone drops to zero.”  can also be fairly equated to major football programs.  There is absolutely no way that Penn State could be that clean.  It isn’t possible.  It is like saying that graduates of SEC schools outside of Vandy and Florida can read beyond an 8th grade level.  Sorry, it isn’t believable…not to me and not to anyone.  I actually hope that Mike McQueary is telling the truth, because if he did go to the police…well…it will make this cover-up (Another Penn State dirty little secret) look even worse.

*rant fin

Now onto the game?

Oh yeah…I guess there is a game this week between the Buckeyes and Nittany Lions.  I guess there was also some type of email that was sent out telling OSU fans and students to keep it on the level this weekend and not be John Q. Wisconsin fan, John Q. Penn State fan, or even John Q. Michigan fan tailgating on the golf course.  I appreciate the sentiment, but if the roles were reversed and OSU was playing at any of these schools (maybe an exception of UM), we would not get the type of “quarter” that is being asked of us by our own university.  From urine bags to beer cans, Penn State fans have earned every bit of the upcoming vitriol this weekend and every weekend going forward.

One of the biggest surprises of the year (outside Denard’s annual post-September Heisman collapse), has been Penn State’s ability to put together a solid season rolling off to an 8-1 start prior to an almost expected loss to Nebraska.  Granted, this has been thanks to the B1G scheduling gods for putting Minnesota on the schedule 6 times before having to play anyone with a pulse until Nebraska rolled into town.

On offense, PSU has a solid ground game with Silas Redd who is averaging over 100 yards per game and basically is the PSU offense.  Penn State has been winning in spite of the terrible QB play (imo) of the walk-on Matt “Moxie” McGloin.  He is more of a blue-collar QB that will make plays through sheer will where a lack of talent may be exposed.  McGloin has at least eliminated the amount of interceptions this season with only three for the season.  It is going to be a lunchpail game for Penn State.  They are going to run the ball…A LOT.  This should help OSU’s defense, if they are ready to start tackling people on Senior day.  If Silas has 60+ yards in the 1st half, I would just start punching yourself in the balls over and over again instead of watching the second half.  This would be a perfect game to get Christian Bryant into the star position and have him run around and try to make something happen against the run game, because that guy is feast or famine against the pass (mostly famine).

Penn State has never had any issues with playing defense in the past and it wont be the case in this meeting either.  They are currently 3rd in the FBS in scoring defense, which is around the area where we normally find the OSU defense in this statistic…but not this year my friend.  OSU is 16th in this category, so the expectation will probably have this game in the low 20’s on either side.  As is always the case, there will be a defensive lineman that plays the game of his life against OSU and that one will most likely be Devon Still.  Still has had a very good season and should show favorably in this game if Shugarts isn’t available.  This terrifies all OSU fans…or at least it should, as OSU is craptastic at protecting the QB this season (dead last in the B1G in sacks allowed).  Did you know that Ohio State is 27th in the country in rushing offense without a single player in the top 14 rushers in the B1G?  I am not sure if they will hit their 200 yard rushing average in this game, but let’s hope for everyone’s sanity in Columbus that they get close.

Game Prediction:  PAIN and lots of ugliness.  This game will be won on the ground unless Moxie has another first half like he had  last season in Columbus.  Most of us on the OSU side would prefer the second half Moxie show up in Columbus again where he was a walking “pick 6” machine. Obviously, the game will be won on the ground, which is the way Old Testament God intended in the B1G.

So that leaves us with the weekly questions……

1.) Will OSU slow down Silas Redd and hold him under 100 yards?
2.) Will OSU score any TDs?
3.) Over/Under passing attempts for Braxton set at 8.  What do you got?
4.) Who has more rushing yards Boom or Braxton?
5.) How many times will Braxton be sacked in this game?
6.) Greater number of media mentions?  OSU NCAA Issues or Penn State Issues
7.)What is the final score?

YNBA Score Prediction: 20-17 Ohio State

Filed Under: College Football, Ohio State Football

Failures of Courage

November 10, 2011 by 7 Comments

“Hey, Paterno’s been fired.”

The salacious and horrific nature of the allegations were notable enough, but their presence in the context of the PSU program was what elevated the story to stratospheric-levels. Paterno and PSU had built a “brand” of integrity and honor unrivaled anywhere else in major college sports. To see such a well-perceived institution involved in the most heinous of acts drew attention beyond that which would normally occur.

Humans notice when an ivory tower crumbles. In other words, we’re suckers for when the self-righteously high and mighty are humbled.

Buckeye fans had a small taste of this when our goody-two-shoes Senator Sweatervest was forced to resign, and the blue-and-white disciples of all things JoePa were first in line to serve up a dish of crow.

OSU supporters were subjected to the faux righteous indignation of a school and its fans that boasted ethical integrity while ignoring their own shortcomings: brutal physical assaults on guest fans, “urine bomb” attacks on opposing schools’ marching bands, 46 players racking up 163 criminal charges from 2002-2008 alone, and even murder, just to name a few.

That the players and fans were engaging in all these activities at the same time their coaches and administrators were allegedly engaging in and covering up pedophilia is all you need to know about the real Penn State culture versus the false, idealized Penn State brand.

But reality rarely matters. Humans like to see high-profile figures fall because that allows us to assuage our own internal resentment towards social hierarchies. Yes, the same cognitive process at the heart of the Occupy Wall Street movement is what causes human beings to crave seeing their mighty opposers fall.

That tendency also causes a rational blindness that makes humans tend to support their own ivory tower inhabitants, regardless of whether support is actually deserved. What’s more inappropriate than large crowds rioting in support of Joe Paterno?

Now, perhaps one can argue that Joe does deserve support; perhaps he does deserve acknowledgement of his legendary status and of his role in college football history.

But the difference is that those of us disconnected from the fanatical fervor are rational enough to know that there is a time for such things, and that time is NOT NOW. Those mobbing acolytes are doing nothing but disrespecting Sandusky’s victims. They should be ashamed.

Years from now, when the anger wears off and the maturity of adulthood has deepened, will those rioters realize that they were knocking down lampposts and turning over news vans in defense of the right to cover up pedophilia?

The same shame should be felt by the thousands of anonymous Internet supporters of Penn State and Joe Paterno. Posting in forums, you can tell who they are as they White-Knight their Grand Leader with reasonings like: “hey let’s all remember these are only allegations;” “Paterno didn’t do anything illegal, here, he’s just a scapegoat;” “We’re protected from NCAA violations, not like Tressel;” and the absolute worst, “obviously I feel bad for the victims BUT…”

It’s sickening.

In fact, one can argue that this type of devotion reveals an even-more-damning question: do these supporters share a certain level of responsibility here? The primary motivation for the alleged coverup was the protection of the Paterno and Penn State brand. That brand has now been exposed as a toxic illusion. But was Penn State nation (as a generalism) playing the role of “enabler” to some extent?

The JoePa Tower can’t be built without the mortar of abject irrational support.

He had to go. Not only for the moral aspects of it, but he gave the PSU Board of Trustees no choice. They are chartered with protecting the university, and Paterno had become a terrible liability to them. They did everything they could to keep him from speaking: they canceled his press conference, they surrounded him with protection, they ushered him into cars and chauffeured him to practice. They bent over backwards to keep him quiet.

But it was more important for Paterno to be heard than to protect his university. He was visibly upset that his press conference was canceled. He opened his windows at night and chatted with the crowd. And finally, after the Board was initially willing to discuss his retirement at the end of the season, he issues a statement saying “I wish I had done more.” Six words that will cost the university millions when they are (rightfully) used by the victims’ lawyers in the years to come. But just like in 2002, Paterno thought of no one but himself.

And it’s only just beginning for the PSU Board. Yesterday’s news that the Federal Government was initiating an investigation, on the basis of potential violations of the Clery Act, was likely the straw that broke the camel’s back.

For those suggesting that six decades earns the right not to be fired by phone call, consider that a simple phone call ten years ago might have ended all this before it began.

So while we rack our brains trying to figure out how this all will end, perhaps remembering the bigger picture can be a useful exercise:

It’s just a game, folks.

It’s a game. Played, coached, and watched by human beings. And as human beings, we all share responsibility for one other.

We all have the responsibility to protect innocence. We all have the responsibility to control our level of support for the leaders of any institution we patronize. We all have the responsibility to act courageously, even in the face of awkwardness, danger, or self preservation; because it’s the human thing to do.

Jerry Sandusky fails at humanity, for obvious reasons. But Mike Mcqueary, Paterno, Tim Curley, Gary Shultz, and many others failed as well. They failed to courageously defend the innocent.

In contrast, the victims that came forward (and the loved ones that supported them) have real courage. Courage to willingly suffer through the indignity and pain of reliving the most scarring event in one’s life, over and over again in front of strangers, grand jury members, and other authorities. To voluntarily subject yourself to that indignity, all in order to prevent other people from encountering the same suffering as what you endured, takes authentic human courage.

Against that, Paterno & Co. and their rationally-blind supporters are nothing more than cowards. These same hypocrites recite the stanza from the PSU alma mater: “May no act of ours bring shame/to one heart that loves thy name.” (Unless someone’s legacy and agenda gets in the way, apparently.)

At its core, this misery is due to greed and a failure of courage. Greed in one form or another: for personal satisfaction, for power, for money, for status, for 409 wins, for legacy. And cowardice: for being more afraid for oneself than for the innocent, for being more afraid of losing friendships and influence than doing what was right, for fear of being found out that your brand was a sham all along.

So go home, Paterno & Co. And go home, you irrational mob of Paterno acolytes who think a game is more important than anything else. Just go home, sit, and quietly ponder what it means to be human.

Maybe that’s good advice for all of us.

Filed Under: College Football
« Previous Page
Next Page »