Livefyre Profile

Activity Stream

I also find it hard to believe AU was as focused as they needed to be this week in practice. Who knows if that's the case or not or how many points its worth.  We'll find out tomorrow.  Should be a good game.

Sorry for the long posts - had to put keys to page somewhere.  Thanks.

7 months, 3 weeks ago on SEC Championship Game Preview – 12/6/13

Reply

Predicting scores is a crap shoot as evidenced by the variance of results against those 5 common opponents.Statistically speaking, I’d say it’s pretty close to a toss-up.Nonetheless, averaging out the score results without weighting would give a prediction of:


Missouri 30

Auburn 28


Doing a more in-depth analysis of what I would expect the running/passing success of each team to be and play selection based on that and their previous patterns, I produced the following estimate of what a box score for this game might look like:


Score:Missouri 30, Auburn 25

Rushing:Auburn 54 for 287, 1 Fumble; Missouri 42 for 203, 0 Fumbles

Passing:Auburn 20 Attempts for 142, 1 Int.; Missouri 33 Attempts for 257, 1 Int.


Of course, there's pretty much zero chance it'd actually come out like that but, for me, it's interesting to look at the numbers.  Anyway, turnovers are probably the most impactful factor.If Auburn keeps the turnovers even, I'd say it’s a toss-up.If Missouri is +1 in turnovers as would be most probable, the +5 is probably closer as turnovers are worth, on average about a touchdown each.

7 months, 3 weeks ago on SEC Championship Game Preview – 12/6/13

Reply

Good analysis.  I appreciate that you concentrate more on SEC games as opposed to comparing statistics from all games.  When one throws in results from non-conference games, most of which are $$ games against inferior opponents, the statistics can get quite skewed.  I independently researched some stats from only the 5 games each with common opponents.  If you'll humor me, I'll offer those here (AU/MU first - opponent second):


Average Rush Yards Per Game:Auburn 346-148; Missouri 241-137

Average Fumbles Lost Per Game:Auburn 1-0.2; Missouri 0.2-0.8

Average Yards Per Rush: Auburn 6.5-4.0; Missouri 5.6-4.3

Average Rush Plays Per Fumble:Auburn 54-185; Missouri 214-40


Average Pass Yards Per Game:Auburn 155-327; Missouri 223-259

Average Interceptions Thrown Per Game:Auburn 0.2-1.2; Missouri 0.2-1.2

Average Yards Per Pass Attempt:Auburn 8.1-7.9; Missouri 7.9-6.1

Average Pass Plays Per Interception:Auburn 95-35; Missouri 142-35


Total Yards Per Game:Auburn 501-475; Missouri 464-396

Turnovers Per Game:Auburn 1.2-1.4; Missouri 0.4-2.0

Average Yard Per Play:Auburn 6.9-6.0; Missouri 6.5-5.3

Average Plays Per Turnover:Auburn 61-56; Missouri 178-37


Plays Per Game:Auburn 73-79; Missouri 71-74

Play Selection, Rushing:Auburn 74%; Missouri 60%

Percent Scoring by Quarter:Auburn 37-18-18-26; Missouri 17-38-21-25


7 months, 3 weeks ago on SEC Championship Game Preview – 12/6/13

Reply

"VU has no track record of high achievement on the gridiron."  Depends on your definition of high achievement, I guess.  They do have more undefeated seasons and conference championships than many SEC teams but it was a 100 years ago and few remember or care.

I'm close enough I wouldn't mind going to their games occasionally but they're too hard to like with all the UT hatred.

11 months, 2 weeks ago on Lack Of “Sidewalk Alums” Hurts Vandy At The Ticket Office

Reply

So, if memory serves me correct, then out of 4 Heisman runner-ups, Tennessee players have lost to the last Ivy Leaguer, a player from a losing team, and a defensive player.  It'll be interesting to see who they come up with next time ;)

12 months ago on SEC Headlines 8/3/2013

Reply

According to another story I read, he also discussed renaming the divisions.  Reportedly, he said "If [the divisions] are not geographic, we are not going to have geographic names."  I just don't see why that would be a problem for a soon-to-be 14 team conference that calls itself the Big Ten.

1 year, 6 months ago on Big Ten Commissioner Talks Conference Expansion

Reply

One last? point:  Perhaps, Wade and Thomas could share one spot (half a face to each).  The collective back-to-back run of Wade and Thomas was on par with the Bryant era: 5 NCs, 81% (v. 82% for Bryant) wins in 23? (v. 25) years.

1 year, 6 months ago on Time To Add Saban’s Face To The SEC’s Mt. Rushmore

Reply

I'm a fan of history but unfortunately most fans aren't (as you can see by your number of responses).  I appreciate your respect for Neyland.  He is underappreciated even at Tennessee (but then most people just count total wins).  Neylands record matches or exceeds Bryant's in everything except longetivity and density of championships.  As you pointed out, he could've coached many more games but for his service to our country.  As to the density of championships, he was coaching against the likes of McGugin, Wade, Thomas, Bryant, and Vaught.  Still, in addition to having not been beaten by Bryant, he had winning records against every one of those great coaches.

1 year, 6 months ago on Time To Add Saban’s Face To The SEC’s Mt. Rushmore

Reply

 @I4Bama

 I would go all the way back.  I consider the SIAA as SEC v.1 and the Southern as SEC v.2.  The core SEC teams dominated those conferences.  The better teams SECeded from the SIAA to form the Southern and then SECeded again from the Southern to form the SEC.  McGugin and Wade (if you remove the year limit) and Thomas are the other 3 that deserve mention IMO.

1 year, 6 months ago on Time To Add Saban’s Face To The SEC’s Mt. Rushmore

Reply

 @gumborue

 You'll have to hope Oklahoma St. isn't sucked into the SEC by then, lest his OSU record brings his conference percentage down ;)

1 year, 6 months ago on Time To Add Saban’s Face To The SEC’s Mt. Rushmore

Reply

Unless I misundersand your criteria, Frank Thomas should also make the first cut.

1 year, 6 months ago on Time To Add Saban’s Face To The SEC’s Mt. Rushmore

Reply

"As you know by now, the Commodores’ win in the Music City Bowl secured the program its best season since way back in 1915."

 

I'm not sure where this information comes from but it's way off.  The 1922 Southern Conference champs were 8-0-1.  I think we can safely say they had a better season.  Most wins - yes.  Best team - not by a long shot.  17 Vandy teams since 1915 (most in the 20 years or so immediately thereafter) have had a better winning percentage.  30 teams since then had less losses (4 teams undefeated (though 2 were in the war years), 5 with one loss, 9 with 2 losses and 12 with 3 losses). 

1 year, 6 months ago on SEC Bowl Observations: VU, LSU, MSU, USC, And UGA

Reply

"Already, some are saying WKU will win football games but lose its soul by hiring Petrino. (Actually, I think a few ministers out there might point out that the soul in better shape is the one that offers forgiveness to someone else’s.)"

 

Please understand that just because I wouldn't entrust someone with particular responsibilities because of past failures, that doesn't mean I wouldn't forgive them.

1 year, 7 months ago on Nightmare Scenario For UK: Petrino Hired By WKU And Will Open Against New Wildcat Coach

Reply

@TigerinMO Tennessee's played the same 4 as MO. FL also gets FSU. Apparently the author of that article didn't do any schedule checking.

1 year, 8 months ago on SEC Headlines 11/13/2012

Reply

Arkansas (3-5) with Tulsa, at S. Carolina, at Miss. State, LSU is a bowl contender yet Tennessee (3-5) with Troy, Missouri, at Vanderbilt, Kentucky is not?  Extremely poor logic.  They're both bowl contending.  Unless there's something I'm missing, I assume they each would need to get to 6-6 to make a bowl.  With those schedules, it's more likely for TN to go 3-1 or better in their remaining games than Arkansas.  If you want to argue that TN could lose out in the SEC and finish in the "basement", sure they can.  But your standard is stated as "what we believe each squad’s ceiling to be".  I assume that means you believe it's highly unlikely they'll do better than 2-2.  While I could see it happening, I certainly wouldn't consider it highly unlikely and particulary when compared to Arkansas' chances.

1 year, 9 months ago on MrSEC.com Power Rankings - 10/30/12

Reply

Yeah, but being the best of 4 is more satisfying than being the best of 2 and there'll be less squawking.

1 year, 9 months ago on SEC Still Has Five Teams In BCS Top Eight; No League At More Risk With Move To Playoff

Reply

I'm not sure I get the logic of the Georgia, Florida, SC order.  FL beat SC by a lot.  SC beat GA by a lot.  GA beat FL by a little.  Seems to me that should favor Florida.  Coincidentally, that's the way the computers have Florida on top despite not factoring point spread.  The humans have Georgia highest.

1 year, 9 months ago on SEC Still Has Five Teams In BCS Top Eight; No League At More Risk With Move To Playoff

Reply

 @John at MrSEC  @CowbellCruiser

 I actually think people are undervaluing Ole Miss.  They are still seen largely as a basement team that has risen only because of others' descendancy.  I may be wrong but I think Miss will give Georgia all they want.  I believe Arkansas has been playing better as of late but that was masked by an Ole Miss team that is better than they are giiven credit for by most.  Time will tell.

1 year, 9 months ago on SEC Game Roundup: Hot Seat Coaches Lose, Richt Wins A Big One, Bama Rolls On

Reply

Petrino as the cure for the worst defense in Tennessee history?  Yeah, right.  I don't think even his offense could keep up with the yards TN's defense is giving up..  Not to mention a little baggage.  If Hart's that stupid, he should've been fired yesterday.

1 year, 9 months ago on What We're Hearing About Those SEC Coaching Jobs

Reply

Here's another way to look at turnovers.  If you look at only games where teams have an equal number of turnovers, you can calculate the average number of yards per point (14.5 in SEC v. SEC games so far this year).  Then, you compare games with unequal turnovers and look at the difference in average yards/point.  From that, you can calculate what the average turnover costs in yards (82) or points (6).

 

When offenses are credited for yards or defenses for yards not allowed, turnovers are not normally considered though they should be.  Consider Tennessee's pass game v. Alabama's in SEC on SEC games:

SEC #7) AL 218 ypg, 0 interceptions/game

#8) TN 213 ypg, 2 interceptions/game

If you deduct the average yards per turnover:

#2) AL: 218 ypg

#12) TN: 49 ypg

 

Contrast rush yards:

#1) AL 236, 1 fumbles*/game (*not sure if these are all fumbles on rushing plays)

#2) TN 206, 0.5 fumbles*/game

If you deduct the average yards per turnover:

#1) TN 165 yds/game

#2) AL 155

 

BTW, did you know that Tennessee leads the SEC in yards/rush in SEC v. SEC games:

#1) TN: 5.7

#2) AL: 5.5

 

 

1 year, 9 months ago on MrSEC.com Stat Analysis: Butterfingers And Bandits 10/25/12

Reply

I was just listening to Billy Joel. I wonder if Coach Dooley has a pair of "pair of pink sidewinders"?

1 year, 9 months ago on UT's Dooley To Coach From Press Box After Hip Surgery

Reply

The general started with a pretty good team and lost only 2 ( Vandy and Alabama) in his first seven years. How many undefeated teams has Spurrier had?

1 year, 9 months ago on Bama’s Bryant Still The Best, But Carolina’s Spurrier Pulling Away From Other SEC Great Coaches

Reply

By the way, no offense but Dooley is not near top 4. Total wins isn't the only metric for greatness.

1 year, 9 months ago on Bama’s Bryant Still The Best, But Carolina’s Spurrier Pulling Away From Other SEC Great Coaches

Reply

Neyland not only has the best winning percentage, but had a winning record against each of Bryant, Thomas, Wade, Mcgugin, and Vaught who make up the best of the rest in career winning percentage save Meyer. I think you disrespect Neyland a bit. I'll grant that you can at least make the argument for Bryant on longetivity of success - not the others. Also, Bryant's rate of success (winning pct. & champs) at Alabama is similar to that of Wallace and Thomas (81 pct. & 5 champs in 23 years), Stallings (if you don't count the sanctions) and Saban). Who matches Neyland's success at TN?

1 year, 9 months ago on Bama’s Bryant Still The Best, But Carolina’s Spurrier Pulling Away From Other SEC Great Coaches

Reply

 "so what" - If she was forced to retire, then it should have come with rationale - not a lie (even granting that she corraborated it).  That is what.  There is no shame in the truth.  Certainly, there is a point beyond which she would be unable to continue but from my perspective that would have nothing to do with wins and losses.  Win you have ~40 years of success at the level she's had, you've earned a lot of leeway.  You could average in a couple of 0-fer years and still come out way ahead of most programs.  The issue would be if she were negatively affecting lives and beyond the point of being able to mentally comprehend it. 

 

Summitt's earned our trust over many, many years.  I'll take her word over Hart's any day until I hear from someone close to her that her mental state has been affected to the point that it is no longer so.

1 year, 9 months ago on Summitt’s Son Could Provide A Way Out For Tennessee

Reply

Article is spot on.  I would also add that if Saban has a newfound desire for humility and respecting his opponent then perhaps he might consider removing the sign over WKU's locker room ("Fail Room") and he might want to ask those ever gracious Bama fans to cease with the singing of "we just beat the hell out of you" after the game.

1 year, 10 months ago on Saban Doubles Down That Media’s Disrespect For WKU Is Hurting His Team

Reply

 @John at MrSEC

 

I respect that you're willing to engage in conversation with the readers.  You also provide good information and I appreciate that.

 

As to this thread, don't worry - I didn't get anything "on me".  Of course, you're welcome to your opinion (and it's wrongness).  You're logic is flawed.  You ascribe an oversimplification to the opposing viewpoints in order to cast it as "drivel".  I simply submit that you would do well to argue for/against the asserted merits of each proposal lest you appear as one who either lacks confidence in his position or is indeed ignorant of the details.  I respect that there would be differences of opinion.  I don't respect someone calling my position drivel.

 

BTW, I wasn't aware that someone has to be singled out to be insulted.  I would think membership in a group that is insulted would qualify as being insulted.

 

As for calling you closed-minded, I did.  I hope, however, that you didn't take great offense to my using a play on your words to call you close-minded in regard to a very specific subject where you absolutely refuse to even discuss specific merits of opposing viewpoints.  As to the irony, sure, but I don't shy away from the arguments.  I'm not hurling insults to skirt any argument.

 

Regards.

2 years, 1 month ago on What The SEC Needs As Playoff Talks Commence

Reply

"The argument against using rankings is such mind-numbing drivel that it annoys the pants off anyone who can actually use logic to step all of one step down the road.  “We don’t like rankings.  Now, let’s rank the conference champions.”  You’re… still… using… rankings!"

 

Nobody should like being dependent on the rankings.  We've got 75 years of evidence to support that.  Limiting it to 4 teams is what all but forces the use of rankings regardless of which model is used.

 

Being anti-rankings isn't the sole motivation for people supporting other plans.  I hope you know that and that you're rationale isn't as shallow as that statement makes it seem.  Many valid points have been made about the pros and cons of the various proposals.  Those who have a strong argument usually aren't afraid to argue the points and counterpoints on merit.  Those with a weak argument often resort to name calling and baseless insults.  If your mind is numb, it's because it isn't open.

2 years, 1 month ago on What The SEC Needs As Playoff Talks Commence

Reply

 @John at MrSEC

That does indeed happen often and is one factor in the percentage being as it is.  To me, #3 falling to #6 after losing to #2 would be just another reason to question the quality of the poll.  #3 would be expected to lose to #2 more than 50% of the time so why would they drop so far in the poll (unless it was a non-competitive game)?

 

With few exceptions (usually for teams from lesser conferences), the polls tend to line teams up by record, regardless of level of competition.

2 years, 1 month ago on After Big Ten's Twin Stances, What's It All Mean For A Playoff And For The SEC?

Reply

I remain in favor of a hybrid sytem, though not the 4 in 6 model.  The 3+1 is better but not perfect.  I dispute the notion that the BCS top 4 are the best 4.  Only 6 times in 45 years has the AP post-bowl final four featured the same teams as the AP pre-bowl final 4.  This tells me that 87% of the time, the AP hasn't beilieved that the pre-bowl top 4 were the top 4.  Human polls are flawed.  Yes, I know you could also go back and show where many conference champions have fallen from the top 4 in the final poll.  The BCS top 4 does not indisputably represent the best 4 teams.   As I have listed before there are plenty of games like #8 Tennessee 35, #2 Miami 7 to show otherwise. 

2 years, 1 month ago on After Big Ten's Twin Stances, What's It All Mean For A Playoff And For The SEC?

Reply

I'll save you the trouble.  Here are the seasons in which the AP had the best 4 teams pre-bowl as judged by the AP post-bowl:

1978, 1982, 1987, 1996, 1999, 2005

That's out of a possible 45 seasons (1965, 1968-2011)

FWIW, in 1999 the top 4 were in the correct order as well.

2 years, 1 month ago on SEC Headlines 6/2/2012

Reply

"best 4 teams" -  So, why don't you run the numbers from the mid-60s, when the AP started voting again after the bowls up through 1997 before the BCS was implemented (locking down the top two).  Use the AP as a surrogate for the BCS to see just how many times the best 4 teams (as indicated by the final poll - the more accurate of the two polls) would have been selected (as indicated by the pre-bowl poll - which would have been used to select the teams for a playoff).  I bet the results would show that the "best 4 teams" would have been selected very few times.

2 years, 1 month ago on SEC Headlines 6/2/2012

Reply

Perhaps my last sentence confused the issue.  I meant "no big loss" in respect to the standings, not that the games themselves were no big loss.  If the cross-divisional games didn't count in the standings, teams could choose their own cross-divisional games and thus maintain or terminate any rivalry they so choose.

2 years, 1 month ago on SEC Meeting Recap: Slive’s League Dangerously Close To Doing Some Very Stupid Things

Reply

 @AllTideUp

Thanks.  I agree with most of your points but not your conclusion.  I agree that equitability is not the sole measure of a proposed change.  In the case of the standings, we'll just have to agree to disagree.  I think 6 games against common opponents is a better measure of teams than 8 games where 2 games are against uncommon opponents (even though in particular cases such as last year, a pair of teams may have another common opponent).

 

The Troy example was not meant to consider them as an SEC team.  It was meant as an analogy:  NCAA FBS games are to SEC games as SEC games are to division games.  (If the goal is to have more data with which to evaluate teams, why not include all FBS games in the SEC standings?)

 

And I would also submit that freeing the standings of the cross-divisional games could give you more latitude in how to schedule those games alleviating the problem with lost traditional rivalries.  Fact is that the way the standings are calculated would only have changed 5 participants out of 40 since 1992.

2 years, 1 month ago on SEC Meetings Recap: The Spurrier Proposal

Reply

If you're all that concerned about tradition and rivalries, adopt Spurrier's proposal.  Then, teams could schedule their cross-divsional games anyway they darn well please with no impact to the rest of the conference.  Cross-divisional games have really only affected the standings 5 out of 40 times, anyway - no big loss.

 

And I'll take the bait.  I agree with HungaryGator.  Your Nazi comments were out of line.  I guess your happy if you get a rise out of a few people, though.

2 years, 1 month ago on SEC Meeting Recap: Slive’s League Dangerously Close To Doing Some Very Stupid Things

Reply

This is part of the brave new world the author champions where conferences play 9 games and play isolationist schedules for their other big boy game (PAC v. B1G and SEC v. ACC) but where there is no room for other meaningful interconference games such as B1G v. SEC, etc.  This and the Tennessee cancellation shouldn't surprise anyone.

2 years, 1 month ago on Ohio State Cancels Series With Georgia

Reply

 @AllTideUp

 To expound regarding "fairness":  Every year (except 2003), the divisional represenative has been decided by rules set forth at the beginning of the season.  In this sense, it has (almost) always been "fair".  This is not the context in which Spurrier is making his point.  It is in the context of equitability.  That is, that every team has an equitable chance at winning the division based on the metric chosen to determine the division rep. 

2 years, 1 month ago on SEC Meetings Recap: The Spurrier Proposal

Reply

 @AllTideUp

 Conversely, I could argue that Alabama vs. Troy would have more value if it counted in the SEC standings, though.

2 years, 1 month ago on SEC Meetings Recap: The Spurrier Proposal

Reply

 @AllTideUp

These are good points.  My main argument with Saban and with the article, though, is the equation of meaningless in conference with absolute meaningless in general.  The use of hyperbole is overdone.  I will agree that there is less value for the reasons you state.  I will disagree with your last statement about fairness, however.

2 years, 1 month ago on SEC Meetings Recap: The Spurrier Proposal

Reply

 @TheN8tureBoy

 Florida would have won the division in one more year under his proposed plan, so it would have been good for Florida, too.

2 years, 2 months ago on SEC Meetings Recap: The Spurrier Proposal

Reply

I support the 6-x plan.  Play your divisional foes in games that count in the divisional standings. Schedule cross-divisional games that will not count in the standings ala carte.

2 years, 2 months ago on SEC Meetings Recap: League To Announce 6-1-1 Plan For 12 Years By Friday (Maybe)

Reply

Alabama’s Nick Saban:  “You’re going to minimize the importance of these cross-division games if you say they don’t count toward the championship.  Then we’re really not an SEC.  We’re really just an East and a West, so why would we even play the games?”

 

Author:  "We continue to point to one practical reason Spurrier’s proposal is likely doomed — it won’t be easy for the SEC to sell CBS and ESPN on carrying meaningless games while simultaneously asking them for more money"

 

[Sarcasm] Then, I guess there's no need to play or televise the Alabama v. Michigan game - right?  I assume you will fall in to support the idea of counting all NCAA FBS games in conference standings, too.  After all, we want to protect the integrity of the regular season and have those games mean something - right?

2 years, 2 months ago on SEC Meetings Recap: The Spurrier Proposal

Reply

This whole argument is based on the statistically ignorant assumption that you can make a good assessment to determine the 4 best teams.  Both statistics and history strongly say otherwise.  Usually, there are very few meaningful pre-bowl games with which to gage the relative strength of conferences.  You will know absolutely who is the champion of each conference.  Because of this, you have a much more reasonable chance to determine the top 3 or 4 conference champions than top 3 or 4 teams.

2 years, 2 months ago on SEC Meetings Recap: League Coaches Want Top 4 Teams In Playoff, But A Playoff May Not Even Come

Reply

AP Top 20 Reasons to Doubt the Top 4

 

Team rankings in the following list are from what I believe to be* the final regular season Associated Press (AP( poll for that year.  Even though the overall ranking order of these games is mine and not from the AP, feel free to disagree on the order.

 

I recognize that no ranking system is perfect and no ranking system can be expected to predict 100% of future results correctly.  The best team doesn't always win.  This list is for those of you that have supreme confidence in the BCS producing the best 4 teams (or at least the best 3 while asserting that number 5 doesn't have much of a basis on which to quibble).  I know the AP is not the BCS and is no longer even in the BCS but I think most would agree that the results are very similar.  Furthermore, the BCS, by definition, precludes it's #1 and #2 from playing lower ranked teams in the bowl, so that doesn't allow any further opportunity to evaluate those teams against lower ranked teams, such as may be done for bowl games of the pre-BCS era.  Also, the AP gives you ranking data covering 77 years of college football.

 

1) #4 Illinois lost to unranked (of 20) UCLA 45-9  in the Rose Bowl (1/2/1984)

2) #2* Texas A&M lost to unranked (of 20) USC 20-0 in the Liberty Bowl (12/22/1975)

3) #4 Georgia Tech lost to unranked (of 25) Fresno State 40-28 in the Humanitarian Bowl (12/31/2007)

4) #4 Kansas State lost to unranked (of 25) Purdue 37-34 in the Alamo Bowl (12/29/1998)

5) #1 Texas lost to #5 Notre Dame 38-10 in the Cotton Bowl (1/2/1978)

6) #2 Miami (Fla.) lost to #8 Tennessee 35-7 in the Sugar Bowl (1/1/1986)

7) #3 West Virginia lost to #8 Florida 41-7 in the Sugar Bowl (1/1/1994)

8) #2 Oklahoma lost to #6 Arkansas 31-0 in the Orange Bowl (1/2/1978)

9) #4 UCLA lost to #5 Illinois 45-14 in the Rose Bowl (1/1/1947)

10) #4 Cincinnati lost to #5 Florida 51-24 in the Sugar Bowl (1/1/2010)

11) #4 Texas A&M lost to #5 Notre Dame 28-3 in the Cotton Bowl (1/1/1993)

12) #3 Iowa lost to #5 USC 38-17 in the Orange Bowl (1/2/2003)

13) #4 California lost to #23 Texas Tech 45-31 in the Holiday Bowl (12/30/2004)

14) #3 Northwestern lost to #18 USC 41-32 in the Rose Bowl (1/1/1996)

15) #1 Ohio State lost to #11 UCLA 23-10 in the Rose Bowl (1/1/1976)

16) #2 Arkansas lost to unranked (of 10) LSU 14-7 in the Cotton Bowl (1/1/1966)

17) #3 Iowa lost to # 14 UCLA 45-28 in the Rose Bowl (1/1/1986)

18) #3 Oklahoma lost to #11 West Virginia 48-28 in the Fiesta Bowl (1/2/2008)

19) #4 Michigan lost to #16 Stanford 13-12 in the Rose Bowl (1/1/1972)

20) #2 Ohio State lost to #12 Stanford 27-17 in the Rose Bowl (1/1/1971 )

 

*In 1975, the last regular season AP poll I could find was for 12/1/1975.  On 12/6/1975, Arkansas beat Texas A&M 31-6 which I suppose is why A&M was in the Liberty Bowl instead of the Cotton Bowl.  If there was a 12/8/1975 poll, then the USC v. Texas A&M game should be remove from this list.  Regardless, the confidence in the rankings should still be regarded as low since a single game demonstrated the ranking was unwarranted.

2 years, 2 months ago on Expansion And SEC Headlines - 5/25/12

Reply

 @MJW

 I agree.  There is very little meaningful regular season data already to compare conferences.  Often, the games are not evenly matched (a bottom feeder or middle tier team against a contender, for example).  I am more in favor of using predominantly conference champs with allowance for an at large to cover unusual circumstances.  Look for a post on todays headlines entry along the same lines I'm going to post regarding pre-bowl rankings vs. results.

2 years, 2 months ago on Did The SEC-Big 12 Bowl Announcement Backfire?

Reply

BCS era scorecard of current BCS and various 4 team models:

 

Top 2 (current BCS):

SEC - 9

B12 - 7

ACC/B10/BE/PAC - 3

MW - 0

 

Top 4 of BCS:

B12/SEC -14

PAC - 9

B10 - 8

BE - 5

ACC - 4

MW - 2

 

Top 4 conference champs:

SEC - 12

PAC - 11

B10/B12 - 9

BE - 6

ACC - 5

MW - 4

 

Top 3 conference champs + wild card

B12 - 14

SEC - 12

PAC - 11

B10 - 8

BE - 6

ACC/MWC - 4

 

Top 4 conference champs within top 6 plus remainder as best available wild cards

SEC - 12

B12/PAC - 11

B10 - 8

BE - 6

ACC/MWC - 4

 

Graduated/Georgia system (Wildcard trumps conference champ if ranked + 4 or better.  This would be to remedy perceived deficiencies in 4 of 6 and 3+1 systems when 1st or 1st and 2nd ranked teams are non-champs.  Georgia (#7) would have been the sole beneficiary of this system vs. the 4 of 6 system, replacing Ohio State (#4) in 2005).

 

SEC - 13

B12/PAC - 11

B10 - 7

BE - 6

ACC/MWC - 4

 

Granted, results going forward could look different from BCS era results, especially considering conference realignment.

2 years, 2 months ago on Did The SEC-Big 12 Bowl Announcement Backfire?

Reply

 @RussH

 You could be right but it is very hard to know true motives, particularly when it comes to the presidents and ADs of so many schools.  One reality, if you look at how the different plans would have fared over the previous 14 years (BCS era) is that the SEC and Big 12 are the two leagues that would have benefited from the top 4 approach.  Other leagues would have benefitted more from one of the conference champ approaches.  The SEC also seem to benefit the most from there being a playoff if you believe the teams can indeed keep proving it on the field.  The SEC and Big 12 are outnumbered and I question if they're really willing to go as fare as blowing up the playoff completely if they don't get their way.  We can only guess.  I do know that individuals (commissioners) are willing to make bolder/riskier plays than large groups of people (presidents).  That is what is playing out now but it may be a different dynamic when the presidents get involved.

2 years, 2 months ago on Did The SEC-Big 12 Bowl Announcement Backfire?

Reply

The 4 in 6  model could use a little tweaking.  A particular vulnerability to the 4 in 6 model is the opportunity to have the #1 and #2 teams to not be conference champs and be left out in favor of 3,4,5, and 6.  I don't have a huge problem with this but I suspect it would get a lot of negative reaction should it actually happen.  You could use a graduated system (good graduation rates are important, right?).  A #1 at large would trump a #5 conference champ but not a #4.  A #2 at large would trump a #6 champ.  A #3 at large would trump a #7 champ.  The results would be very similar to the 4 in 6 except in the particular case of a #1 or #2 at large possibility

2 years, 2 months ago on Did The SEC-Big 12 Bowl Announcement Backfire?

Reply