On The Field
Monday, November 29, 2004
  Pressure

Pressure. Pressure has the ability to make you better or to fail miserably. This week's games were no exception to that. A number of teams needed wins in order to make their bowl game more meaningful and a few were able to deal with the pressure and come through with the win they needed.

The pressure cooker that is the Big East was the obvious example this week of not standing up to the challenge. With four teams all vying for the coveted BCS berth, there was a lot riding on the two games which matched the foes. Boston College was the one team that only needed to care about itself. If they went out and took care of business at home, they were in a big bowl game, no matter how undeserved it might be. However, here was that pressure creeping in. Syracuse, who just two weeks earlier lost to Temple on the road should have been an easy win for the Eagles. When the final tally was on the board, the Orange were on top. Boston College just didn't have it. Yes, their quarterback and star player, Paul Peterson was out. Syracuse was also without their top back, Walter Reyes. The Syracuse team was able to step up and win despite their loss. I said last week that BC had a 90% chance of winning the game, factoring in team strength over the year and the home field advantage. Apparently, this game fell within the other 10% for the upset. This win was even more important given that earlier in the weekend, Pittsburgh upset West Virginia and put all 4 teams into a 4-way tie situation. Based on head to head records, the two remaining teams alive in the Big East are Syracuse and Pittsburgh. With the win, Pittsburgh moved into the BCS standings at #23. They will still have to win on Saturday against South Florida to assure them of the bid, but everything looks to point in their direction. This will be an unfortunate turn of events for Utah who looks to face the winner of the Big East should the BCS standings hold. They deserved a better opponent and it is unfortunate a team like Louisville or Texas won't be there to take them on.

With $14 million looking them in the eye, Texas needed to impress in their game against Texas A&M. The hope for the Longhorns would be to move into the #4 spot in the BCS rankings and overtake Cal for the other at-large bid. They were able to respond to the pressure and win their game. The win moved them all but a breath away from being in the BCS game. They still are going to need some help and it will have to come from 6-5 Southern Mississippi. Southern Mississippi was supposed to play Cal back in September. Mother Nature did not believe it was in the best interest of the college football world to have the game played them and assaulted us with hurricanes instead. As a result, the most important game of the year not for the title is this weekend in Hattiesburg, Mississippi. If Cal wins the game they will most likely hold onto their spot in the BCS and Rose bowl. With a loss, the bid is all but guaranteed to Texas based on the movement of other teams in the BCS standings.

Quick Shots for this week:


That is it for the week. Enjoy the rankings when they are published on Tuesday. And don't be surprised when you see where Auburn is ranked.  
Tuesday, November 23, 2004
  Defending the BCS

This article may come as a shock to a lot of people, but I am going to stand up and defend the BCS. Don't take that as selling out to the ads which I am sure are gracing the side of this article. I am still a big proponent of using the BCS standings at the end of the season to run a playoff of 16 teams. The playoff would utilize the bowl games to keep both the tradition of the bowls and increase the chance of finally crowning a champion that includes all teams and is decided on the field. Still, without the playoff, the BCS should be applauded.

Yes, the BCS has been bashed over the past few years, especially as competition in Division 1-A football increases to even greater levels. How many times in years past have their been teams from smaller conferences, such as Utah, Boise State, and Louisville, who could honestly compete with the big teams? There might have been one team a year with this status, but not three. Last year, we had Miami of Ohio, Utah, and Boise State with impressive seasons and several more close behind. This year, we also have teams gaining ground in the MAC, Fresno State, and UTEP. All the increase in competition has done is to increase the argument for inclusion in the final round of big bowls, something that will most definitely happen in a couple years, and looks likely this year with the perfect season from Utah and Boise State knocking on the door.

But let's leave the smaller teams out for a moment, as when the BCS was created, there was little thought that a team from the other conferences could honestly compete with the big teams for a National Championship. And for this whole discussion, let's for a moment assume that Auburn, Oklahoma, and USC all win their final 4 games between them. That would leave us with three undefeated teams and according to the critics, a mess.

Let's step back in time for a moment to 1997. There was no BCS, but there was the Bowl Alliance. Under that system, the Fiesta, Sugar, and Orange Bowls worked together to provide us with the match-up which would appeal most to the voters and fans for a National Champion. Remember that year, #2 Nebraska won the Orange Bowl over #3 Tennessee while #1 Michigan won the Rose bowl and they split the National Title. Things under that system wouldn't have been much different last year. Because the PAC-10 and Big 10 did not participate in the Bowl Alliance, USC would still have played Michigan in the Rose Bowl last year. Oklahoma and LSU would have played just as they did and we would have had the split champion. This year, we are looking at the same circumstances under the old system. USC would again have gone on to face Michigan in the Rose Bowl (On a side note, do I detect a rivalry?). Oklahoma and Auburn would have met, most likely in the Fiesta Bowl, as Oklahoma would have been rated higher. So, again, we are left in the situation where most likely, assuming USC wins, we would have a possible split champion.

The split championship only occurs because the coaches are forced to vote for the winner of the BCS game as their champion. Last year, it was clear that USC deserved both titles, especially since they led the coaches poll going into the Bowls. This year, things wouldn't be any different in the BCS. Under the Bowl Alliance, there was always the possibility of the split champion. As we saw in 1997, with Michigan as the leader going into the final game, anytime that a Big 10 or PAC-10 team competed for the title, we were in for trouble. This year would have been the same with USC most likely having to share a title should they win against Michigan with the Oklahoma-Auburn winner.

The BCS guarantees us one thing. We will see two teams competing for the title play in the final game. According to the BCS Media guide, prior to the Bowl Coalition formed in 1991, it had only happened 8 times in 56 years. That is not exactly a great track record. While the BCS leaves open the possibility that there may be a third deserving team, such as last year, we are guaranteed that among the top conferences, all of the champions are considered for a shot at the title. Never before have we been guaranteed that much. Under the Bowl Alliance, the PAC-10 and the Big 10 were left out. Before that, under the Bowl Coalition, the PAC-10 and Big 10 were still left out of the picture. With the BCS, at least those two conferences are considered.

A number of people have trouble with the way the two teams are selected. In the past, the blame has always fallen to the computers. People who favored a certain team would say that the computers were against them. I may be biased here as I run a computer poll myself. However, I believe that by having a computer help with the decision, you take some of the subjectivity out of the final selection. If you relied only on the national polls, you would have voters who are obviously biased voting based on their preferences. In addition, it is impossible for all of the voters to see every game. I watch these games every week to the best of my ability and I still can't see more than 4 or 5 games in full, and maybe pieces of 3 or 4 others. You have to imagine that the coaches who vote in the polls can't see more than 2 or 3. These voters are biased toward what they see while, if you bear with me, the computers are not. The computers "see" every game. They, based on the algorithms developed by their creators, take into account a number of factors which help them to be more objective in evaluating all teams equally. The BCS does put some restrictions on what they take into account(They can't use margin of victory, for example, which is a big piece of the MRI and Jeff Sagarin's total rankings), which I disagree with. However, adding in the objectivity of the computers in the final decision is the right move. They also have chosen a computer average which in the past years has included as many as 8 computer rankings. This is a big step up from the first year when only three were used. They have made a case where one rating would not skew the ratings unfairly. The computers are not the problem.

Imagine the debate we would still be having under the old system. Three teams, and no way that USC, the #1 team all season, would be able to play either of the other two. We wouldn't even be having a discussion about Utah. They would be stuck playing in the Liberty Bowl. Even so, there wouldn't be the lure of 14 million dollars for them to complain about. This year, the only debate will be which team was the deserving #2, and I am more apt to believe that the added discussion will only add to the popularity of college football, not subtract from it. It helped make all holiday season last year a discussion of the merits of Oklahoma, USC, and LSU. This year, the only differences are a different team from the SEC and all of the contenders are perfect.

What changes would I make to the BCS? I would take away the automatic vote from the coaches. While the reasoning may be close to correct, the automatic vote takes away the one thing that makes the vote important, and that is a choice. Like last year, it stops the voters from choosing who they want as the champion. The fact that a certain bowl game paired the #1 and #2 teams in the system should not matter. If in the voters' eyes someone else is deserving, they should be able to vote for them. After all, the trophy is for the winner of the poll, not the winner of the one game.

Second, I would let the computer polls take into account what they will. While removing scoring margin was in theory a smart move as it avoided coaches running up the score, the situation hasn't changed this year. By making the polls and votes more important, you have led teams to believe that they need to have "impressive" wins to get votes, and they still run up the score. I would let them consider margin of victory, but install a hard cap (The MRI does employ a hard cap).

Other than that, short of a playoff system, I would leave it be. Let it run for a few years with the same rules. Don't change anything for 4 years. See what the results are. We haven't seen more than two years in a row out of 7 with the same rules. You need consistency for a system to be accepted. When the four year have run out, let's see if there are a majority of champions that we can't agree with. Only then should we make changes, but I doubt that we would have to. Until Division 1-A can develop a playoff, we need something. The BCS may not be perfect, but it is the best system that has been developed in the last 20 years. Let's stop complaining and give it a chance.

We might be surprised at how much we like it.
 
Monday, November 22, 2004
  Rivalries

Utah players and fans will be putting out a few more bowls of chips and salsa on Thursday when they get together for Thanksgiving. And then at the meal, they will be giving Thanks for being #6. #6, as it turns out for the Utes is a good place to be as that will guarantee them a trip to one of the four big bowls. With the win over BYU on Saturday in their big rivalry game and final game of the regular season, Utah has all but guaranteed themselves that they will remain at least #6 in the BCS standings. They are not quite off the bubble yet, with 2 weeks of football still remaining, but they are the closest that any non-BCS conference school has ever been in the 7 years of the system.

If the MRI was included in the BCS, Utah might be drinking more orange juice than eating chips and salsa. That's right, the MRI has Utah as #2 in this week's standings. As it stands, they will most likely not remain there in the final two weeks with the most likely finish for them being in the top 5. They have been impressive all season and this week, it paid off with the #2 ranking. They have won every game this season by at least 14 points, something that has only been done four times since 1950. In their 11 games this season, they have won by an average of 28.2 points. How is that for domination? While their schedule is among the middle of the pack in terms of toughness, they never once played down to the level of their opponents and made sure to close out every win. Congrats to the Utes who will most likely be playing the Big East champion in the Fiesta Bowl.

Quick Shots for this week:


That's it for me this week. Have a great Turkey Day everyone.

Sunday, November 14, 2004
  And Then There Were Five...

Wisconsin went to East Lansing with hopes still clinging for a shot at the National Championship. They left East Lansing Saturday night, without that hope, and possibly without a birth in a BCS bowl. Michigan State dominated the Badgers, making the much heralded Wisconsin Defense look like Swiss cheese. Wisconsin gave up 551 yards, 430 of which were gained on the ground. The result means that the Badgers have to hope for Ohio State to come back from their loss at Purdue this week, and beat Michigan. At the same time, Wisconsin must take care of their own business against Iowa, a team on a six game winning streak. Things aren't looking good for the Badgers who had put together a good season, one with flaws, but still a good season. I was pretty sure two weeks ago that they would lose a game before the season ended. After Saturday, I am not sure they won't lose two.

The other teams looking at the National Championship all fared quite a bit better this weekend. USC, Oklahoma, and Auburn were never in trouble during their games this weekend. All three team won by double digits and only made the title picture a little more muddied. With the release of the national polls on Sunday, Auburn was tied with Oklahoma for #2 in the AP, and trail by 2 points in coaches poll. It doesn't get much closer and the deciding factor right now looks to be the computers. It is highly probably that over the next few weeks, Auburn may pass Oklahoma in the human polls. With games against Alabama and Tennessee, assuming that they will win, they will look a lot more impressive than Oklahoma's games against Baylor and then the Big 12 North Champion (right now, Iowa State leads). So, the computers will decide it. Auburn leads Oklahoma in the MRI, and on Monday we will see if they have taken the lead in any of the ones in the BCS. With two weeks to go, did anyone imagine that we would have anything more exciting and thought provoking than last year?

Quick Hits for this week:

Ok, I am going to call it there. Have a good week. I know I can't wait to see what happens. Be sure to check out the MRI rankings this week.

Correction: Temple was home this weekend, not Syracuse. This is what happens when I write my article at 11:30 at night. There is still no excuse for Syracuse to lose that game, even on the road. 
Friday, November 12, 2004
  State of the Game, Part 1

Tuesday night was Round 9 of Dream Job on ESPN. The assignment for each of the potential anchors was to put together a two minute piece assessing the state of college football. To go along with the piece they developed, they each got to interview Kirk Herbstreit. In the end, only one of the three contestants truly assessed the total state of the game in the eyes of the judges. The other two each focused on too narrow a topic and shot themselves in the foot.

The voting was tragic for me because Anish, the man I had as the front runner in the competition was voted off, but given his performance, he deserved it. He incorrectly named which game led to the firing of Ron Zook (He said Zook was fired after the team's loss to Georgia), and he totally neglected the whole Spurrier angle. In addition, he only focused on the three teams from Florida which had their terrible week, two weeks ago. Stephen A. Smith (who I am not a fan of, and can't believe that he would be one of the those deciding on future talent for ESPN), called this the most terrible piece since Dream Job started. Woody Paige said that any fact as wrong as the Zook firing leaves Anish's credibility in the toilet.

I feel bad for Anish, but this was his worst performance and it came at a time where there was no room for error. Unfortunately for him, America liked the other contestant's piece better and cut Anish. But, Woody is correct. I check and then double check every fact that I put into my columns on this site and on the main site back when the commentary was listed with the rankings. Sometimes, if I can't find something that I want to put in, I have to rewrite entire sections of the story, but I won't guess on something that I am going to put out there.

Good luck to Anish in the future. I know based on what he did on the show, he will find a job in sports broadcasting somewhere. He was too good not too. Let's just hope he learned his lesson.

Stay tuned for Part 2, when I will take on the task of the Dreamjobbers and report on the State of College Football.
 
Sunday, November 07, 2004
  Scary Week at the Top

There is an old saying that says that in order to win a Championship, you need to have a scare game. We all saw the Boston Red Sox have a few of them in this year's playoffs. USC, Oklahoma, Texas, and Cal all had one on Saturday. Everyone of those four teams trailed at one point in the game, many late, and yet managed to pull out the victory to keep hopes for a championship alive. The most disappointed team on Saturday was the Auburn Tigers, who sat out the week and saw time and time again, a chance to move up in the BCS rankings slip away.

Quick Thoughts:


Ok, time to let my brain decompress from the weekend now. Enjoy the rankings this week. 
Wednesday, November 03, 2004
  Remember Two Things

With the close, but dull, rain soaked game between UAB and South Florida not giving me much to write about, I wanted to bring up two things from the past.

#1: A couple of weeks ago, I wrote about how Penn State only scored 4 points in their loss to Iowa. I had remarked that this was the topic of conversation at the bar one night a few years ago. I guess we didn't look hard enough when searching if 4 points were ever scored. It turns out that the very first college football game ever ended with the score 6-4, just as in the Iowa-Penn State matchup. The game was between Princeton and Rutgers back in 1869. The rules were a little different back in those days, and each score only counted for one point, so scoring 4 was not exactly the same as it is today. I still haven't found a score of 4 with the modern college football rules, but I will keep looking.

#2: Toledo lost to Miami(Ohio) last night 20-13. Normally, I wouldn't point this out, but the MRI got this one right while ESPN.com had this one very wrong. On ESPN.com, Toledo, now 6-3, was ranked as the #5 Mid-Major team in college football this past week. Before the game, the MRI only had Toledo as the #5 team in the MAC, a conference rated 10 out of 11 by the MRI. Why the big discrepancy? I can't be sure, but it might have something to do with Toledo playing the 100th ranked schedule in Division 1-A football. They are even doing that without playing anyone from Division 1-AA, which makes it even tougher to have that easy a walk so far. Their wins have come against all of the Directional Michigan teams, Ohio, Temple, and Ball State. The combined wins of those schools: 12. And some of those 12 wins have come against 1-AA teams. Toledo should have never been ranked that high, especially not by ESPN. They found on on Tuesday night why.

Enjoy

Monday, November 01, 2004
  Weekly Thoughts

What Mother Nature failed to do a month ago, Georgia, North Carolina, and Maryland, managed to do on Saturday, wiping the state of Florida off the map. Miami, Florida State, and Florida, all lost on Saturday, marking the first time in 26 years this occurred. While that is a testament to the strength of these three programs over that time, it also shows how big a disappoint this was for all fans of the Sunshine State in their quest for a National Champion.

Of the three games, the one that you could see coming was interestingly enough, Miami. The resurgence of the Hurricanes offense over the past two weeks has masked the fact that their defense has suddenly become rife with holes. This is the same Miami team that held their first few opponents to an average of 215 yards, including only 165 yards to Florida State in their battle early in the season. Over the past two weeks, the defense gave up an average of 477 yards, and the trend continued this week against North Carolina. The Tarheels were able to roll up 545 yards against Miami and keep the game close throughout to give themselves a chance to win.

I have been asked how Miami was ranked 9th in the MRI going into the weekend, especially since I had them ranked behind the Florida State team that they beat early in the season. This is a good question, especially since Miami was leading many of the computer polls that are used in the BCS last week. As I wrote then, the MRI is much different from the BCS polls and takes into account a greater number of factors than those polls.

It was easy to see how they led there. Miami had the 10th best schedule in the league according to the MRI before playing the game. Being undefeated against that kind of schedule does win you points in the BCS. However, the MRI takes into account performance in those games, not just whose team has the most points when the clock runs out. Miami has dropped over the past few weeks because of their defense, losing ground against the average defense in the league, something that they had dominated early in the season. While their offense has improved, when you become a one-sided team, you are going to lose games. Your offense at some point will fail to score enough to overcome the failures of your defense, or your defense will fail at some point to hold the other team low enough to win with your lacking offense. This is the main reason I believe that Wisconsin will lose sometime before the end of the season. Their defense is impressive, but the offense continually leaves something to be desired. A prime example of that was their game against Purdue a few weeks ago, when a strong defensive play won them the game. Close games like this will happen to these one-sided teams and give them many scares over the course of the season. Miami's scares turned into a nightmare this week dropping them to 13th in this week's MRI.

I have to admit that I was worried about my prediction in the Georgia-Florida game after the firing of Ron Zook. As the week went on, not only did his players stand behind their coach, but the talking heads on television all believed that the firing of Zook was all it would take for his players to actually perform better. I still felt that I was right, but it took until the game on Saturday to be sure. Looking at the game, yes, Florida's players did perform better, but what was sure on this day was that Georgia was the better team and David Greene was the better leader in taking his team to victory. In the process, Greene tied Peyton Manning for most wins by a quarterback in college football over his career, not an easy feat. The fact that most of the time, no one knew Greene's name, while his team did get some press, makes this even more impressive. On Saturday, Greene finally beat Florida, a perfect addition to his resume. Now his team must concentrate on winning their division in the SEC and maybe an SEC title.

Of all the losses by the state of Florida this weekend, the most shocking was definitely Florida State's. The Seminoles seemed to be rolling. With Wyatt Sexton at quarterback, the team seemed to have new life. It looked to all like his lack of performance in the game at Syracuse was due to the hostile environment of the dome. Saturday changed all that. Florida State was once again unable to perform on the road and it cost them, not only in the game, but also in the championship picture. The Seminoles would have moved into the lead in the ACC with a win. That didn't happen. The Seminoles could have moved up at least one spot in the BCS rankings, even holding that loss from earlier in the season. Now that won't happen either. All this against a Maryland team which had been struggling, and which hadn't won against a ranked team in almost 15 years. This was not the game you expected that streak to end, and yet it did.

My apologies to the state of Florida. Now the only National picture that you have influence on will be Tuesday.

Quick Shots for the week:

That's all. Be sure to check out this week's MRI standings.

B

 
On The Field is a series of articles and observations based on the world of college football. On The Field will appear regularly on MRISports.com.

My Photo
Name:Ben Miraski
Location:Chicago, Illinois, United States
Previous Posts
Bowl Final
How the MRI beat Trev Alberts...
Bowl Predictions, Orange Bowl
Bowl Predictions, Sugar Bowl
Bowl Predictions, Fiesta Bowl
Bowl Predictions, Rose Bowl
Bowl Predictions, Part 4
Bowl Predictions, Part 3b
Bowl Predictions, Part 3a
Bowl Predictions, Part 2

Archives
September 2004 / October 2004 / November 2004 / December 2004 / January 2005 /


Links

Powered by Blogger

Subscribe with Bloglines