Texas and ESPN announced their 20 year $300 million dollar joint venture. Good luck, Oklahoma.
http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9KRKJC00.htm
Wednesday, January 19, 2011
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
Question of the Week: Would you rather be Oregon or TCU?
 |
| The Oregon Duck uses the shakeweight. The Auburn Tiger is a P90X Man. The proof is in the results. |
At that moment, I wished that I had one of my many Ohio State friends present. Because no one team understands both sides of that question better than Ohio State. OSU has lost more BCS Championship Games (2) than any other team, although this is semantics as Oklahoma has lost 3 National Championship bowls (the BCS Championship Game started following the 2006 season). The flip side is that Ohio State has the most wins in BCS bowl games since the Big10/Pac10 joined the bowl alliance in 1998.
 |
| Andy Dalton and Tank Carder are either giants or those trophies are smaller than my t-ball trophies |
The answer to my friends question is unclear. Does the benefit of the increased exposure and theoretical recruiting boost that comes from playing in the big game but losing offset the positive inertia and favorable preseason ranking for the following year that results from a bowl victory?
To try to answer this, a number of short term and longer term outcomes were assessed. We compared the team that lost the national title game and the team that won a non-championship BCS bowl game and as a result finished second or third in the final polls. The national title game winner was included for comparison purposes. For example, the analysis for the 2010 season would include Auburn (winner), Oregon (loser), TCU(highest ranked non-champ BCS winner). Results were analyzed starting with the 2002 season. This year was arbitrarily selected. Although to be completely honest, I view the 2001 season as the end of an era for Nebraska football (ie the beginning of the end). That being said the 2000 though 2002 seasons represented a shift in balance of power from Florida State, Miami, Michigan, Nebraska, and Tennessee to Oklahoma, Ohio State, USC, Florida, Texas, and LSU. It should also be noted that USA today poll was used to select the highest ranking non-BCS championship game team. Also USC results were calculated using the actual result of the games as they were played on the field (the NCAA forced USC to forfeit the result of a number of games for being LA's finest professional football team)
Here we go:
Record the following year: Which teams continued the success from the previous year and who failed to return to the mountaintop.
National Champion: 82-22
National Championship game loser 76-26
Highest Ranked Bowl winner 83-22
Pretty similar result with the exception of the loser of the national title game, although it should be noted that this result was skewed heavily by Texas' 5-7 record this year (apparently losing a 4 year starter at QB and a large percentage of your defense negatively effects your performance). There's one point for the non-title game BCS bowl winners. Of note Texas is the only team in any of these groups to fail to make a bowl the following year.
Return to a BCS bowl game the following year:
National Champion: 3
National Championship game loser: 5
Highest Ranked Bowl winner: 3
Score one for the championship game losers as 5 of the 8 returned to a BCS game the following year.
Return to the National Title Game/National Championship Winner the following year
National Champion: 1/0 (USC 2005)
National Championship game loser: 2/0 (Oklahoma 2004, Ohio State 2007)
Highest Ranked Bowl winner: 2/2 (USC 2004, LSU 2007)
As the name of this blog would indicate, you play to win the game. So with 2 National Championships in the following year for the non-title BCS bowl winner, they regain the lead.
In terms of instant gratification, the non-title BCS bowl winners have the greatest success the following year. These teams may be teams that were on the rise while the National Championship losers represent teams that were peaking.
What are the greater implications? Which teams develop into dynasties? Is there an appreciable difference that can be seen over the 4 years after a National Championship appearance or high level BCS victory? Over four years, the recruits that joined the team following their successful campaign will be seniors or redshirt juniors and as a result should be providing their maximum level of contribution to the success of the program.
Record in the four following years (average number of wins per year):
National Champion: 10.667
National Championship game loser: 10.1
Highest Ranked Bowl winner: 9.92
BCS bowl games in the four following years:
National Champion: 13
National Championship game loser: 12
Highest Ranked Bowl winner: 8
Return to the National Title Game/National Championship Winners in the following 4 years
National Champion: 5/2 [USC 2005, Ohio State 2006, Ohio State 2007, LSU 2007(W), Florida 2008(W)]
National Championship game loser: 3/0 (Oklahoma 2004/2008, Ohio State 2007)
Highest Ranked Bowl winner: 3/2 [USC 2004(W)/2005, LSU 2007(W)]
The final answer: The highest ranked non-championship BCS bowl winning teams have been more likely than the National Championship game losers to go on and win the National Championship game in the following year. They also have better records in the following year. The National Championship loser appears to have more sustained success with more BCS game appearance over a four year period but similar records.
So as a result of this analysis, I guess that I would say that I would rather be TCU (and I am making that assessment independant of the Oregon Ducks day-glo yellow socks).
However when you survey the altered landscape of college football in 2011 (ie lack of depth in Pac-10 and major question marks in the Big 12 combined with loss of the Big 12 championship game hurdle), my BCS Championship game projection is the Oregon Ducks vs the Oklahoma Sooners. Personally, I am looking forward to it already. These teams represent two of the fastest hurry-up offenses, so we can look forward to a game featuring almost 200 offensive plays.
Monday, January 10, 2011
McNabb at fault for another Eagles playoff defeat
AP Philadelphia- As the seconds ticked away and put an end to the Green Bay Packers' upset victory over the Philadelphia Eagles in the wild card round of the NFL playoffs Sunday, Philadelphia sports fans blamed a familiar figure for the Eagles' failure: quarterback Donovan McNabb. Although fans disagreed in how directly McNabb was responsible for the defeat the directness of McNabb's responsibility for the defeat, they were uniformly in agreement that he was to blame.
Some fans, apparently confused by the on-field presence of a quarterback other than Kevin Kolb, accused McNabb of quarterbacking the Eagles to the defeat. "McNabb played horribly yesterday," said Frank Lawton, 39, a pipe-fitter from Bala Cynwyd, PA. "That interception at the end was classic McNabb. I think we all knew what was coming. He may have changed his number on the field, but he hasn't changed his losing attitude."
Some fans, while acknowledging that McNabb was nominally not a member of the Eagles, still found a way to blame McNabb for the defeat.
"Listen, when they traded McNabb, they got back a 2nd round pick. If McNabb had been any good, we could have gotten a real player in return, not just Nate Allen. Just imagine -- if McNabb had been any good, we could have drafted Eric Berry or even Tim Tebow," said Gary Logan, an HVAC salesman from West Chester, PA. "With a guy like that, we'd be in the Super Bowl."
Still others blamed McNabb's effect on the locker room as the reason for another disappointing season.
"McNabb's attitude was what brought down the team. They got used to his attitude of losing and that's what keeps them failing in the playoffs year after year. No matter who's actually playing quarterback, every time they lose, you can see that McNabb look in their eyes," said Richard Graham, a talk show host on local sports radio station WPH.
Not even Michael Vick, the Eagles' quarterback who actually threw the game-sealing interception with 33 seconds left in the game, was immune to the contempt for the six-time Pro Bowler.
"Listen, I've always loved Donovan, he's a great guy and has been a good friend. But, man, I hate Donovan McNabb. That guy has let this team down so many times. And worst of all, I can't believe he killed all those dogs," Vick added.
While many Eagles fans blame McNabb, he is not without his supporters.
"McNabb? Who's that?" said Joseph Harris, a retiree from Pennsauken, New Jersey. "All I have to say is that Randall Cunningham was awful yesterday. They should get rid of that no-good bum."
TSK
Some fans, apparently confused by the on-field presence of a quarterback other than Kevin Kolb, accused McNabb of quarterbacking the Eagles to the defeat. "McNabb played horribly yesterday," said Frank Lawton, 39, a pipe-fitter from Bala Cynwyd, PA. "That interception at the end was classic McNabb. I think we all knew what was coming. He may have changed his number on the field, but he hasn't changed his losing attitude."
Some fans, while acknowledging that McNabb was nominally not a member of the Eagles, still found a way to blame McNabb for the defeat.
"Listen, when they traded McNabb, they got back a 2nd round pick. If McNabb had been any good, we could have gotten a real player in return, not just Nate Allen. Just imagine -- if McNabb had been any good, we could have drafted Eric Berry or even Tim Tebow," said Gary Logan, an HVAC salesman from West Chester, PA. "With a guy like that, we'd be in the Super Bowl."
Still others blamed McNabb's effect on the locker room as the reason for another disappointing season.
"McNabb's attitude was what brought down the team. They got used to his attitude of losing and that's what keeps them failing in the playoffs year after year. No matter who's actually playing quarterback, every time they lose, you can see that McNabb look in their eyes," said Richard Graham, a talk show host on local sports radio station WPH.
Not even Michael Vick, the Eagles' quarterback who actually threw the game-sealing interception with 33 seconds left in the game, was immune to the contempt for the six-time Pro Bowler.
"Listen, I've always loved Donovan, he's a great guy and has been a good friend. But, man, I hate Donovan McNabb. That guy has let this team down so many times. And worst of all, I can't believe he killed all those dogs," Vick added.
While many Eagles fans blame McNabb, he is not without his supporters.
"McNabb? Who's that?" said Joseph Harris, a retiree from Pennsauken, New Jersey. "All I have to say is that Randall Cunningham was awful yesterday. They should get rid of that no-good bum."
TSK
Friday, January 7, 2011
Goodell offers compromise: 16-game, 8-quarter per game schedule
Goodell offered a compromise today, stating ""I listened to the players' concerns that the 18 game schedule will increase the likelihood of injuries and shorten careers. I have come to accept that they are unwilling to compromise on adding games to the schedule. For that reason, I propose a 16 game schedule, with each game having eight 15-minute periods instead of four quarters."
Goodell added, "I know the excitement that can come from games going to extra periods and I know our fans love overtime football. For that reason, I know they'll love mandatory overtime football."
Because each game is likely to be more than 6 hours long, the NFL expects to experience a huge increase in advertising revenue, particularly because each game will now feature three extended halftimes.
Goodell suggested that the new schedule resolved both players' concerns about extending the schedule and Panthers owner Jerry Richardson's complaint that the NFLPA was seeking more money for less work.
"In response to our prior proposal, the NFLPA's doctors performed a study analyzing the number of serious injuries we would expect to see during the course of an 18 game season, relative to a 16 game season. We have taken that study to hear. And, as you can see, there are 16 games on this chart. See? 16. So there won't be any more injuries, but we'll have twice as much bone-crunching, ligament-tearing, brain-bruising action." Goodell said.
"It's entirely safe," Goodell repeated.
Carolina Panthers owner Jerry Richardson agreed that the proposal improved the outlook for team owners.
"Since we can only sell tickets to a limited number of games, it's in the owners' best interest to ensure that our fans endure hour after hour of football, to maximize the opportunity for beer and concession sales," Richardson said.
"And let me assure you, when Panthers fans see what we have in store for 2012, they'll be drinking plenty." Richardson added.
NFLPA Director DeMaurice Smith believed the proposal could pass muster.
"Considering over half the players in the league are already suffering from concussions, I'm pretty sure they'll vote for anything, so long as it's printed on shiny paper," Smith said, adding "And come on, we're the NFLPA. Our members sign anything that gets put in front of them, knowing that every term of our contracts is entirely fictional anyway."
TSK
Tuesday, January 4, 2011
"Michigan Man" surpasses "fail" and "viral" as the #1 phrase that needs to go away in 2011.
U of Michigan Coach Rich Rodriguez was fired 15 minutes ago and I have already heard the phrase "Michigan Man" 23 times. My favorite thing about the phrase "Michigan Man" is that it is so mythical in nature that any person associated with the name is expected to throw logic, reason, money, time, and space out of the window to return to the mothership. The thought that Jim Harbaugh or Les Miles would abandon their current situations which are both financially and professionally rewarding for a job that offers to be neither for some time is laughable.
My thanks to athletic director Dave Brandon for delaying the inevitable and waiting until after the bowl game to fire Rich Rod in a futile attempt to get one of these "Michigan Men". This will give the actual Michigan coach-to-be and "Michigan Man" Brady Hoke, currently head coach at San Diego State, 2 whole weeks instead of 8 to piece together a recruiting class. Regardless, the Rich Rod experiment illustrates the truth in the credo that you win with defense and any overhaul at Michigan is going to require a significant upgrade of the defense to be successful.
As a sidenote, if you are not a Michigan supporter, and given my Nebraska and Ohio State pedigree I would number amongst that group, it is entertaining to watch the video from the College Gameday crew on ESPN.com. The usually insufferable Mark May stares directly in the camera and effectivel tells Michigan fans that they can't be big talking cheap bastards if they want things to get better.
MTK
My thanks to athletic director Dave Brandon for delaying the inevitable and waiting until after the bowl game to fire Rich Rod in a futile attempt to get one of these "Michigan Men". This will give the actual Michigan coach-to-be and "Michigan Man" Brady Hoke, currently head coach at San Diego State, 2 whole weeks instead of 8 to piece together a recruiting class. Regardless, the Rich Rod experiment illustrates the truth in the credo that you win with defense and any overhaul at Michigan is going to require a significant upgrade of the defense to be successful.
As a sidenote, if you are not a Michigan supporter, and given my Nebraska and Ohio State pedigree I would number amongst that group, it is entertaining to watch the video from the College Gameday crew on ESPN.com. The usually insufferable Mark May stares directly in the camera and effectivel tells Michigan fans that they can't be big talking cheap bastards if they want things to get better.
MTK
Could the BCS Be Any Worse?
Solution: All conferences are associated with a post-season championship game. The Big 10 adds their championship next year with the addition of Nebraska making the conference 12 teams. Conferences lacking a championship game will include the Big 12, Mountain West, and Big East. Since the Big East has not provided a national champion in football since the year I was born, the Big East champion and the Mountain West champion would play for the BCS berth. This means that we can look forward to many TCU-Boise State match-ups in the future. The Big 12 would use its regular season champion as the automatic qualifier until it expands.
Problem #4: Teams not ranked in the BCS rankings playing in a BCS game. Due to the automatic qualifiers from the "major conferences" teams like UConn are in a BCS bowl and teams like Boise State and Michigan State get left out. You will then tell me that Michigan State wasn't that good look what happened in their bowl game. While I agree with that end result and suspected all year long that MSU were more lucky than good, you have to remember that if Boise State's kicker could kick the equivalent of an extra point it could have been Ohio State on the outside looking in.
Solution: Only teams in the top 10 of the BCS rankings are eligible for a BCS bowl game. There are monetary issues that would have to be worked out amongst the conferences but there will be more TV money to split amongst the conferences if you can guarantee more games that are competitive. The only game that I have watched with my full attention was the Rose Bowl because it was a good game. I watched the Fiesta Bowl just to see if Oklahoma was going to get Boise State'd again. Finally, I watched the Orange Bowl because the only alternative was to try and keep track of the 30 different women on the first episode of the Bachelor.
Using the improved system your bowl games could have been: Rose: Oregon-Wisconsin, Fiesta: Oklahoma-Arkansas, Sugar: Auburn-Stanford, Orange: TCU-Ohio State
Problem #5: The championship is 5 to 6 weeks after the end of the season. Some teams can handle this others can't, just ask themembers of the 2006 Ohio State Buckeyes that were rolled by Florida. People want college football to be done on the 1st or 2nd of January. By the 10th of January, most of us have gone on with our lives.
Solution: Keep the BCS championship game but utilize it to matchup the top 2 teams from the previous weeks bowls. With the addition of the BCS championship game in 2006, it seemed natural that they could utilize this format for the "plus one" that I am advocating. It offers a pseudo-playoff that would decrease the likelihood of ending the season with two undefeated teams (ie this years game would feature TCU vs the winner of Oregon-Auburn), maintain the current bowl structure, and should ensure a game between two teams that are playing their best football at that point.
Please use the comment buttons below to present your ideas, rebuttals, etc.
While sleeping through the Orange Bowl beatdown by Stanford over Virginia Tech, I had a dream. A dream that for one day I could be the omnipotent commissioner of the NCAA and fix this horrible mess.
 |
| Tim Tebow working on his release point with the BCS trophy |
First rule: You can't just say that the answer is a playoff. Because that isn't going to happen, despite what Marc Cuban tells you (http://sports.espn.go.com/dallas/ncf/news/story?id=5927151) and frankly I don't want to see a 16 team playoff.
Problem #1- There is minimal reward but significant risk for playing big games early in the year.
Problem #2- Games are scheduled up to 10-12 years in advance (for example Ohio State has scheduled Georgia for 2020 and 2021) so there is no way to predict the quality of the matchup when it actually occurs. Ohio State has been aggressive in its scheduling of quality nonconference opponents this decade which led to great games against Texas and USC. The same could have been said for its matchup against Miami in 2010 and 2011 when these games were originally scheduled. Miami, however, has fallen on hard times and this matchup did not live up to its original billing.
Solution: Conference head to head challenges. One of the things that makes college football great is the regional pride that is associated. Find me a football fan in Big 10 country that wanted to see Penn State lose to Alabama early this season. The bowl games offer the only opportunity to compare teams from different conferences but there are too many variables that make that less than reliable (at least thats what Big 10 fans have to say after the 0-5 record on New Years Day.
Teams from each conference would be ranked by their records from the previous two seasons. They would play the corresponding team from an opposing conference for a home and away series over two years. This creates "a playoff" in the regular season where the best of the Big 10 plays the best of the SEC, ACC vs Pac 12, Big 12 vs Big East. This year this would have given us matchups like OSU vs Florida, Penn State vs Alabama (bad example as this happened) and Georgia vs Iowa. While there is still year to year variability it should ensure more interesting games. It also would force schools like Georgia to play outside of their comfort zone (Georgia had played no regular season games outside of a state that was on the wrong side of the civil war from 1965 until 2008)
 |
| Kyle Brotzman faking a Percy Harvin-esque migraine after missing field goal against Nevada |
Problem #3: Weak conferences- This year presented a significant issue for the BCS when both TCU and Boise State were poised to go undefeated. Thankfully Nevada and Kyle Brotzman's two missed field goals prevented this from happening. But think about the excitement that a Mountain West-WAC championship game during the conference championship week would have generated. To a degree this becomes a moot point with Boise State joining the Mountain West next year where they will face TCU but becomes an issue the following year when TCU leaves for the Big East.
Solution: All conferences are associated with a post-season championship game. The Big 10 adds their championship next year with the addition of Nebraska making the conference 12 teams. Conferences lacking a championship game will include the Big 12, Mountain West, and Big East. Since the Big East has not provided a national champion in football since the year I was born, the Big East champion and the Mountain West champion would play for the BCS berth. This means that we can look forward to many TCU-Boise State match-ups in the future. The Big 12 would use its regular season champion as the automatic qualifier until it expands.
Problem #4: Teams not ranked in the BCS rankings playing in a BCS game. Due to the automatic qualifiers from the "major conferences" teams like UConn are in a BCS bowl and teams like Boise State and Michigan State get left out. You will then tell me that Michigan State wasn't that good look what happened in their bowl game. While I agree with that end result and suspected all year long that MSU were more lucky than good, you have to remember that if Boise State's kicker could kick the equivalent of an extra point it could have been Ohio State on the outside looking in.
Solution: Only teams in the top 10 of the BCS rankings are eligible for a BCS bowl game. There are monetary issues that would have to be worked out amongst the conferences but there will be more TV money to split amongst the conferences if you can guarantee more games that are competitive. The only game that I have watched with my full attention was the Rose Bowl because it was a good game. I watched the Fiesta Bowl just to see if Oklahoma was going to get Boise State'd again. Finally, I watched the Orange Bowl because the only alternative was to try and keep track of the 30 different women on the first episode of the Bachelor.
Using the improved system your bowl games could have been: Rose: Oregon-Wisconsin, Fiesta: Oklahoma-Arkansas, Sugar: Auburn-Stanford, Orange: TCU-Ohio State
Problem #5: The championship is 5 to 6 weeks after the end of the season. Some teams can handle this others can't, just ask themembers of the 2006 Ohio State Buckeyes that were rolled by Florida. People want college football to be done on the 1st or 2nd of January. By the 10th of January, most of us have gone on with our lives.
Solution: Keep the BCS championship game but utilize it to matchup the top 2 teams from the previous weeks bowls. With the addition of the BCS championship game in 2006, it seemed natural that they could utilize this format for the "plus one" that I am advocating. It offers a pseudo-playoff that would decrease the likelihood of ending the season with two undefeated teams (ie this years game would feature TCU vs the winner of Oregon-Auburn), maintain the current bowl structure, and should ensure a game between two teams that are playing their best football at that point.
Please use the comment buttons below to present your ideas, rebuttals, etc.
Thanks to Bill Janssen for his contributions to this proposal.
Saturday, January 1, 2011
Random Thoughts: New Year Edition
Happy New Year! It has been an awe-inspiring 2011 for the Big 10 so far with 4 bowl losses in 4 games today (things look really good if you include Nebraska's no show in the Holiday Bowl).
-Ohio State has received some good news in the wake of Tattoo-gate in which five Buckeye starters sold memorabilia or traded autographs for cash and/or tattoos. The NCAA ruled that Jim Tressell's sale of sweater vests to Ellen Degeneres has been ruled to be in compliance with NCAA regulations.-How many Tennessee fans are left standing after their most recent controversial loss? Even on a good day 1/3 of the state is a heart attack waiting to happen and then you add another game in which apparent victory turned into defeat. Earlier this year against LSU, Tennessee appeared to defeat LSU when LSU coach Les Miles mismanaged the clock and time expired on their failed last second play. However, Tennessee was flagged for 12 men on the field allowing LSU to run an additional play to secure the victory. On thursday, time apparently ran out on North Carolina when they attempted to spike the ball to stop the clock. Officials reviewed the play and added an additional second allowing North Carolina to kick a last second field goal pushing the game to overtime. It would be a lot more entertaining if Lane Kiffin was still there.
-The Rose Bowl has been the game of the bowl season to date. Great performance by both teams although there is a small part of me that will always be a bit wary of a small religious private school in Texas that becomes a football powerhouse.
-With the outstanding Big 10 bowl performance this week, I would like to propose new division names
"Lovable" and "Losers."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)