You too can put together a Top 25 CFB preseason poll! February 17, 2013
Posted by intellectualgridiron in Sports.Tags: ACC, Alabama, AP, Auburn, B1G, Big 10, Big 12, Big East, Big Ten, Big XII, Boise State, Braxton Miller, Cal, Charlie Weis, Cincinnati, Clemson, college, conference, Duke, Florida, Florida State, football, Georgia, Georgia Tech, Kansas, Kansas State, Louisville, LSU, MAC, Manti Te'o, Michigan, Michigan State, Mississippi, NCAA, Nebraska, Northern Illinois, Northwestern, Notre Dame, Ohio State, Oklahoma, Ole Miss, Oregon, Pac-12, preseason, Purdue, ranking, San Jose State, SEC, South Carolina, Stanford, Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Tim Tebow, Tommy Tuberville, top 25, UC, Urban Meyer, USC, Utah State, Vanderbilt, West Virginia, Will Muschamp
add a comment
Ever wanted to make a college football Top-25 preseason ranking but just didn’t know how? Well, now you do! Thanks to the hilarious writers at SBNation’s Every Day Should Be Saturday, we now have a guide at our disposal to put such a list together and look like prognostication geniuses in so doing! I have taken the liberty of quoting the guiding text to give you reference while we play along. The quoted text from the actual (and funny) guide page is given in italics.
1. Alabama. Look, maybe you have a perfectly strong case for some other school, but if you go off the reservation right away, the readers are going to suspect something is amiss. Stay with the pack here and, if the Tide stumble, you’ll be one of many mistaken scribes, not a distinct and lonesome idiot.
Alabama looks and sounds like a winner to me!
2. Big 12 or Big Ten team. BOOM! Because you started comfortable, those stupid readers didn’t see this knowledge roundhouse coming. Pick a team that didn’t meet expectations in 2012 and talk about how they’ll be “hungry” and “focused” because of it.
Michigan, perhaps?
3. SEC team. Mention how battle tested playing in the conference will leave this team by the end of the season. Then hedge by saying SEC play could eat them alive. SPORTSNIGMA!
Texas A&M; they’re really hot right now. Seriously, so much for them having to get behind Arkansas like we all predicted last year!
4. Ohio State. Emphasize how good the team looked in the first year of a new system. Ignore that they barely beat Cal, Indiana, and Purdue. Clunky suggestion that Braxton Miller could be the next Tim Tebow. Obliquely suggest Urban Meyer could quit at any week for any reason.
Ohio State, and this is why I didn’t put them at the No. 2 spot like I would have otherwise.
5. Oregon or Stanford. Sh-t, you meant to put one of them higher, but that much backspacing seems like a real pain in the ass. Say something here about how you’re being cautious not to put too much stock into a big bowl performance.
Stanford, for reasons of coaching continuity.
6. Team Coming Off A Big Bowl Performance. Clemson-Louisville national championship game ahoy!
Okay, I’ll bite. What the heck; let’s put Louisville in there for the fun of it!
7. SEC team. Which one? Any one THAT’S JUST HOW DAMN GOOD THEY ARE MAN. (Seriously, though, not Auburn.)
Seriously; definitely not Auburn! Already put Texas A&M in there, so let’s have LSU fill this slot, shall we? Or maybe South Carolina; yeah, definitely the Gamecocks. They’re doing quite well right now.
8. Notre Dame. Yes, Irish fans are going to be super pissed at the perceived disrespect, but that’d be true even if you ranked ND numbers one, two, and three simultaneously. Don’t fight a losing battle. Just slot them here and suggest that they could be better off without Manti Te’o.
Notre Dame; and they might not miss Manti Te’o that much if their highly-ranked recruiting class has any teeth to it, unlike “highly-ranked” recruiting classes under Charlie Weis.
9. Oregon or Stanford (whoever you didn’t put at 5). Say something about how they’ve lost a lot of key pieces. Is it true? Players graduate, don’t they?
Oregon, for reasons of lack of coaching continuity.
10. ACC team. You’ll need to construct a paper fortune teller and write the names of four plausibly successful teams twice each. Be sure you only do it twice, because if you write out “Georgia Tech” three times on the same piece of paper Paul Johnson appears out of nowhere and insists on rearranging your pantry.
Well, we already put Louisville at No. 6, so we might as well put Florida State into this one.
11. Team that will likely have three losses before Halloween. Your obligation in preparing this ranking is not simply to come up with a sensible accounting of the top 25 teams heading into the season. It’s also to provide us with teams destined to leave unreasonable expectations unfulfilled. Who will be this year’s Arkansas? THE POWER IS YOURS!
Ole Miss, because expectations are high due to their half-way decent team from last year and No. 7-ranked recruiting class this year.
12. Team with the highest ranked recruiting class that you have not yet included. I mean, all that talent wouldn’t be going to a bad team, would it? And I bet half of them start right away! (note: I do not know how recruiting works)
I want to put Florida here, because they’ve got the No. 4-ranked recruiting class, and I’ve got to stick ‘em somewhere! But, skip down to No 14, and you’ll find out that cannot be done, according to this system. So, we’ll put in Oklahoma.
13. This is exhausting. You really deserve a lemonade, and maybe even an oatmeal cookie. I mean, people bitch about preseason rankings, but then they lap them right up like hungry dogs. Do they not understand how market forces work? Oh, um, Michigan State. Whatever.
Georgia; gotta stick ‘em somewhere.
14. Florida. “Will Muschamp is driving a truck with a great engine and no brake pads. Will Muschamp is eating a sandwich with meat and no bread. Will Muschamp is developing a model that explains how light behaves like a particle but not as a wave.” Metaphor them to death in this middle section.
Okay, NOW we’re allowed to put Florida in there.
15. School that was good six years ago and has stunk since. Because these things are cyclical, or something.
USC, anybody?
16. Team stocked with seniors that have mostly underachieved up to this point. They just want it more, man. That’s why they’re fighting in spring practice. Out of love.
Michigan State, perhaps?
17. Big 12 team with a miserably weak non conference schedule. Basically, this is between Texas Tech, West Virginia, Kansas, and Kansas State. Kansas is out for reasons of being Kansas, so just pick one of the other three and feel like a genius up to, but not beyond, Week 5.
West Virginia is the safest pick out of the three, at least through Week 5. After Week 5, it might be Texas Tech. Just sayin’.
18. Big East team. Start out by noting that the conference had a better bowl winning percentage last year than the every other AQ conference. Pretend you knew that Memphis was joining this year without looking. Realize that the team you pick could join the ACC before this gets published. Shrug, and continue trying to beat Jetpack Joyride.
Cincinnati, because after U of L, UC is the only Big East team that comes to mind, and goodness knows what could happen with Tommy Tuberville at the helm.
19. Team that was terrible but hired a trendy coach. You’ve already won me over, Cal, in spite of me.
Okay, let’s go with Cal. Let me waste another space on something ridiculous, why don’t you!
20. School from a non AQ conference. Again, this is mostly an exercise in antagonizing fans, so just find a Mountain West or MAC team that could plausibly win eight games and put them here. Then say something snide about the Big Ten.
Ah, so THIS is where you put in Boise State!
21. Scandium. Don’t think it belongs here? Check your atomic numbers, clown.
Okay, now they’re being downright silly. Not funny, just silly. Let’s go with LSU.
22. Team with a coach on the hot seat. If you’re not sure who qualifies, just pick any coach that hasn’t won a conference title in the last two years and say he’s on the hot seat.
Texas, because even though I love Mack Brown as a person, he ought to be on the hot seat after three consecutive seasons of underperformance.
23. Almost there! Pick any team, say this is a make-or-break season for the program, and move forward.
Auburn, because after the horrible year they had last season, we’ll now see how quickly they can bounce back.
24. Duke.
Are you kidding me? Alright, we’ll play along for the funny hell of it.
25. Team that barely made a bowl last year. “Trial by fire has made them stronger” sounds way more optimistic than “holy sh– they needed a punt return touchdown to beat Sweet Valley High.”
Heck, Purdue barely made it to a bowl game last year, but I’m certainly not putting them at No. 25! I’d put somebody like Nebraska in there, but I don’t know if it fits the template. Screw it; I’ll put Nebraska in anyway.
Now, let us see how this ranking plays out, according to the above formula:
- Alabama
- Michigan
- Texas A&M
- Ohio State
- Stanford
- Louisville
- South Carolina
- Notre Dame
- Oregon
- Florida State
- Ole Miss
- Oklahoma
- Georgia
- Florida
- USC
- Michigan State
- West Virginia
- Cincinnati
- Cal
- Boise State
- LSU
- Texas
- Auburn
- Duke (groan!)
- Nebraska
I know, I know; LSU is ranked way too low, and it bothers the heck out of me, too. Just for fun, let us compare this with the current 2013 AP preseason Top 25 poll:
- Alabama (no surprise there!)
- Oregon
- Ohio State
- Notre Dame
- Texas A&M
- Georgia
- Stanford
- South Carolina
- Florida
- Florida State
- Clemson
- Kansas State
- Louisville
- LSU (beats not being ranked at all!)
- Oklahoma (I knew they were overvalued!)
- Utah State (there had better be a darn good reason for this!)
- Northwestern (quite plausible, actually)
- Boise State (are you sure you want them that high, AP?)
- Texas
- Oregon State
- San Jose State (huh?)
- Northern Illinois (I guess they felt compelled to stick a MAC team somewhere)
- Vanderbilt (also plausible; have you seen their recruiting class lately?)
- Michigan
- Nebraska
For starters, I’m really regretting sticking Michigan in that No. 2 slot, but the formula called for a Big Ten team, and Ohio State was already locked in to No. 4; what was I to do? The Florida State ranking, though, seems pretty spot-on, and many others (Alabama, Ohio State, Texas A&M, Stanford, South Carolina, and Nebraska are within one or two rankings). Yes, it’s all in fun and jest, to be sure, but it shows that sometimes these whacky formulas work, other times, not so much. And it still sticks in my craw that it compelled me to under-value the Bayou Bengals, and grossly over-value Michigan.
The potentially existential problem at the University of Texas February 10, 2013
Posted by intellectualgridiron in Politics.Tags: 3M, academia, academic, B1G, Berkeley, Big Ten, brand, Cadillac, Cal, Carrier, Chevrolet, Chevy, critical, culture clash, doctorate, DuPont, education, engineering, equity, Evergreen, Florida, G.E., G.M., GE, General Electric, General Motors, GM, Golden, Great Lakes, Harvard, higher ed, Hoosier, Indiana, institution, Ivy League, leftism, Lockheed-Martin, Magnum, marketable, marketing, Marxism, masters, Michigan, Minnesota, Pac-12, Packard, Penn State, prestige, professor, public, Purdue, R&D, research, school, SEC, secondary, state, Texas, UCLA, undergrad, United Technologies, university, USA Today, UT, vocation, Washington, Wisconsin, world-class
add a comment
On the surface, it seems there has never been a better time to be a part of a major university, particularly the state-funded type. Education remains in high demand, after all, and those working as full-time academics (extra emphasis on “full-time”) make good money. Individual states take pride in their flagship schools as being centers for world-class research, that some of the most cutting-edge, world-changing advances in technology, from electronics to engineering to chemistry to medicine, have come out of these sorts of universities. Note that I said “some” research, for just as many cutting-edge discoveries have come out of R&D departments in General Electric, General Motors, DuPont, 3M, Magnum Research, Lockheed-Martin, and the like (note that they are all for-profit companies in the private sector!).
But that stipulation aside, these flagship schools are often viewed with some degree of prestige. Pennsylvania, for example, rightly takes pride in the academic excellence at Penn State, as it is regarded as a “public Ivy.” Ditto for the University of Michigan in the Great Lakes State, or for both Indiana and Purdue Universities in the neighboring Hoosier State. The Universities of Wisconsin and Minnesota are also known for quality, world-class research and are thus a source of pride for their respective states. Same can be said for Cal-Berkeley and UCLA in the once-Golden State or for the University of Washington in the Evergreen State. Even the SEC, not necessarily known for its academic prowess overall compared to the Big Ten or even the Pac-12, nevertheless has a good example of a big, state flagship school with good academics (though a recent development, to be sure) in the University of Florida. And yes, the adjective “state” also means “public,” with college tuition being more affordable for in-state students than if said students were to attend private schools for their higher education instead.
So what is the problem? Well, the issue has two large, important dimensions. At the heart of said issue is an existential crisis that seems to be gripping the University of Texas, another great example of a state flagship school that has good academics both at the undergrad level as well as the graduate one. This existential, if not outright identity, crisis is the result of something of a culture clash within the vaunted institution. USA Today reports that opposing factions within the school have very different visions for the direction and purpose of the UT. The conflict basically goes this way: do we focus on the prestigious aspects of the school, or do we make it more accessible? It’s basically a Cadillac vs. Chevy argument. Cadillacs are much nicer and classier, but Chevys will still get you where you need to go without breaking the bank in the process. Both arguments have merit, but which way should the university go?
The prestige/class argument certainly has its place, but has severe limitations. Undergrads usually choose their school based on its academic reputation, yet said reputation comes from research done by faculty and doctoral students. Just because a professor is a leading researcher in his field does not necessarily mean he will be effectively imparting that insight to the undergrads. In fact, in all likelihood, he might farm out that teaching to his teacher’s assistants, themselves concentrating on establishing their own reputations in academia. The only way an undergraduate student would have a course taught be one of these hypothetical leading professors is if they take an arcane course that is directly within the narrow scope of the professor’s arcane research, as Dr. Thomas Sowell points out. Such is often the case at Harvard and the other Ivy League schools, but less so at certain places like Purdue.
This leads us even further into the problem with “prestige.” While some research is very useful in the real world, other research, not so much. If the cutting-edge research is within the fields of engineering, medicine, food science, agriculture, chemistry, computers/electronics, or even business management to an extent, then all those things can translate to useful applications to advance our standard of living in the real world. But if a professor is a leading researcher in sociology, communication, “women’s studies,” or “critical theory” (i.e., Marxism), so what? How does a degree in a field of that sort of related study translate into marketable skills, which, now more than ever, are key to getting a job in a tough economy?
Long gone are the days when just having any old degree will get you a decent-paying job. Employers look for specific skills to make specific contributions to their companies’ productivity. Therefore, if major universities wish to remain relevant, the other argument goes, then they must adapt their teaching curricula to meet these more basic student needs so that said students, once they graduate, can be productive elements of society, and thus truly get their money’s worth.
Specifically, employers are looking for – depending on your industry, and yes, I’m generalizing here – nurses, engineers, chemists (to an extent), I.T. professionals/computer engineers/programmers, and accountants, not to mention HVAC technicians, plumbers, the latter two do not even require a four-year degree insomuch as a vocational certification. Getting a degree in sociology will not help fulfill employers’ needs.
I for one lean towards the latter camp, but coming from an academically-oriented family myself, I fully sympathize with the other side’s point of view. Where I part company with the other side is the blind eye they turn to, if not outright abet, all the side-effects that come with the purely theoretical, no-real-world-application side of academia. To put it bluntly, one does not hear a peep of Marxism, or any other permutation of Leftist philosophy from engineering or medical schools. Perhaps many a chemistry professor might vote for all the local, state and national Democrat lefties du jour, but one hardly hears any of their ideology trickle down into the classroom. Ditto for engineering professors, or even math professors, though one is likely to find some conservatives in those camps and others where part of their profession is making sure that the numbers actually, you know, add up.
That can hardly be said for many courses in communications, English, sociology, “critical theory/studies,” any ethnic study one cares to choose, or even many – though thankfully not all – history courses and pretty else everywhere else within the purview of liberal arts, sadly.
The irony in the existential debate surrounding the University of Texas is that it has the resources to do a mix of both. It has the resources to offer trade-oriented education to the majority of its would-be undergrads, while at the same time offer English, History, Foreign Languages, Math and Science courses to the kids who want to teach in those disciplines at the secondary (i.e., high school level). If kids within the latter category want to continue their studies as actual scholars in those fields, UT ought to have the resources to accommodate that to an extent, as well as continue in the world class research in which the former camp takes so much pride.
A potential problem with this approach is that, yes, it can muddle the brand, and would run the risk trying to make the University of Texas all things to all people, which hardly anybody outside of G.E. and Carrier/United Technologies are capable of doing. Muddying the brand is problematic enough. Packard tried that in the 1930s in order to survive the Great Depression. Rival Cadillac already had the luxury of having the low-priced Chevrolet brand within the larger General Motors conglomerate. As an independent, though, Packard reasoned that it needed to make low-priced models just to survive, but in doing so, it compromised the prestige of the brand. As any marketing professor worth his or her salt will tell you, though, the solution would have been for Packard to come with its own low-priced flanker brand so as to not compromise the brand equity of its famous luxury marque.
Sounds simple in theory, but for higher education, it is not. If UT were to adopt this idea, how could the ‘man on the street’ differentiate the practical vocation-oriented training from the prestigious research that is normally associated with such an institution? Ultimately, it should come down to individual employers’ ability to be able to see how employment candidates from that school can translate the practical knowledge they have learned into applied abilities to benefit the companies, without regard to prestigious research done elsewhere at such a huge school.
This brief exploration of the opposing issues by no means will settle this huge argument in Austin. But approaching market forces might compel the university to adapt some version of this proposed hybrid model, prestige or no prestige. This discussion is surely to be continued.
2012-2013 Bowl Game Awards January 10, 2013
Posted by intellectualgridiron in Sports.Tags: A.J. McCarron, ACC, Alabama, Arizona, Auburn, Bama, Baylor, BCS, Bill Belichick, Bill Blankenship, Bob Stoops, Bowl, Brian Kelly, championship, Charlie Strong, Chick-Fil-A, Clemson, college, conference, Cotton, Crimson Tide, FBS, FIghting Irish, Florida, football, game, Georgia Tech, Heart of Dallas, Idaho Potato, Lane Kiffin, Louisville, Mack Brown, Mark Dantonio, Michigan, Michigan State, Mississippi State, MSU, national, NCAA, ND, Nebraska, Nevada, NFL, Nick Saban, North Carolina, Northwestern, Notre Dame, Ohio State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Outback, Patrick Higgins, Peach, Pittsburgh, Purdue, SEC, South Carolina, Southeastern, Stanford, Sugar, Sun, Texas, Texas A&M, title, Toledo, Tulsa, U of L, UCLA, USC, Utah, Utah State, West Virginia
2 comments
What, you’d think I’d be lying down on the job just because the regular season is over?
COACHES
Wish I were him: Charlie Strong, Louisville
Wouldn’t be bad to be him, either: Nick Saban, Alabama
Glad I’m not him: Bob Stoops, Oklahoma
Lucky guy: Mark Dantonio, Michigan State
Poor guy: Patrick Higgins, Purdue (interim coach)
Desperately seeking a clue (long-term, notwithstanding the win): Mack Brown, Texas
Desperately seeking a P.R. man: Bill Blankenship, Tulsa
Desperately seeking sunglasses and a fake beard: Lane Kiffin, USC
TEAMS
Thought you’d kick butt, you did: Texas A&M (beat No. 11 Oklahoma in the Cotton Bowl on Jan. 4, 41-13)
Thought you’d kick butt, you didn’t: Florida (see below)
(Dec. 15-31)
Thought you’d get your butt kicked, you did: Purdue (see below)
Thought you’d get your butt kicked, you didn’t: Louisville (see below)
(Jan. 1-7)
Thought you wouldn’t kick butt, you did: Alabama
Thought you wouldn’t get your butt kicked, you did: Notre Dame
Dang, they’re good: Alabama (and Texas A&M!)
Dang, they’re bad: Purdue
They can’t be that good: Oklahoma State
Dang, they’re overrated: Notre Dame
Can’t Stand Prosperity: Mississippi State (lost to Northwestern in the Gator Bowl, Jan. 1, 34-20)
Did the season start? USC
Can the season end? West Virginia
Can the season never end? Louisville (or Clemson, though really, Louisville more so!)
GAMES
Play this again (Jan. 1-7): Outback Bowl – No. 10 South Carolina 33, No. 18 Michigan 28
(Dec. 15-31)
Play this again: Peach, I mean, Chick-Fil-A Bowl — No. 14 Clemson 25, No. 8 LSU 24
Also, play this again: New Mexico Bowl – Arizona 49, Nevada 48
(All Bowls)
Never play this again: Heart of Dallas Bowl – Oklahoma State 58, Purdue 14
Don’t bother with this one again, either: Idaho Potato Bowl – No. 22 Utah State 41, Toledo 15
What? Chick-Fil-A Bowl — No. 14 Clemson 25, No. 8 LSU 24
Huh? Holiday Bowl — Baylor 49, No. 17 UCLA 26
Are you kidding me? Sun Bowl — Georgia Tech 21, USC 7
Oh – my – God: Sugar Bowl – No. 21 Louisville 33, No. 3 Florida 23
Wow, dude: BCS National Championship – erstwhile No. 2 Alabama 42, erstwhile No. 1 Notre Dame 14
Cal Sport Media / AP Images
That’s why you line them up and play. My father repeated this mantra to me as I was growing up. Going in to the BCS National Championship game, it seemed as though Notre Dame and Alabama were rather evenly matched on paper. The Fighting Irish had some rather impressive wins on their resume this year, far more impressive than the mediocre schedule they had played in recent years. Beating a tough Stanford squad at home, going on the road to humiliate Oklahoma, and then closing out the regular season on the west coast to beat USC, all in the same year, is no small feat. With such a record, it looked like Notre Dame was back, ready to butt heads with the big boys for national prominence.
Moreover, it was supposed to be a down year for the SEC, remember? Michigan played South Carolina down to the wire (though seriously, the overall outcome was as predicted, if not by a slightly truncated margin of error), and an underachieving Nebraska challenged a, well, underachieving Georgia squad. Mississippi State, for what a great regular season had – by MSU standards, at least – came for naught when they coughed it up to Northwestern in the Gator Bowl. The most striking example of building the case for a SEC down year was the Chick-Fil-A Bowl. No way, under normal circumstances would LSU lose to Clemson, though to be sure, the ACC team has been known to pull one over on the SEC team in that bowl game (remember the 2001 Peach Bowl between Auburn and North Carolina?). No. 3 Florida inexplicably losing to No. 21 Louisville can also add fuel to that fire (not that U of L’s win is something to be rued outside of SEC country!).
Forget that the SEC had three losses going into this game. The conference was 5-3, to be exact; still a winning record. Look at the Bama team itself. They had graduated tons of talent to the NFL. Quarterback A.J. McCarron was not a transcendent player at that position (as one often expects on a team that would be in the running for the national title). The offensive line was young and inexperienced. The Crimson Tide’s defense was not overwhelming, either, especially when compared to the smothering D’s of recent champion squads. When paired up against the other team, one could readily predict some clearly potential mismatches. After all, Notre Dame’s receiving corps was big and talented, and proved to be a game-winning factor throughout the season, as the Irish’s opponents had no answer for that part of their offense.
But there was more. What gave the Irish the strong look of national viability was that Coach Brian Kelly had done an amazing job of massively upgrading the team’s defense. At a school this is much more academically rigid as ND, certain recruiting restrictions tend to put the defensive side of the ball at a disadvantage. One can recruit smart linemen, quarterbacks, tight ends, and receivers, after all, and they are out there. Defense is another issue. Never as well-choreographed as offensive, players on that side of the ball tend to be a bit more reckless, and often have to be to make key stops. Making good grades and doing what defensive players have to do to succeed on the field is oftentimes an incompatibility. Yet Kelly somehow made it work.
So how did things turn out they did? Even yours truly predicted a close game, at least until some time in the 3rd quarter. Turns out, in hindsight, we all made the same mistake we made going into the 2007 BCS game. That year, Ohio State was the undefeated, No.1 team. Florida got in the game almost as an afterthought. Yet despite a touchdown by the Buckeyes on the opening kickoff, the Gators dominated from then on, leaving many viewers in a state of shock and disbelief, and also to ask each other: how did we not see this coming?
The answer comes in two parts. The simplest part is, they are SEC teams. Florida then and Alabama this year played in the most brutal of all college football conferences. Anybody who emerges as the conference champion is battle-hardened, battle tested, and ready and able to go toe-to-toe with anybody else in the country. If one does not believe that the SEC, despite its down year this year, is still not the best conference in the country, you are both blind and detached from reality. For one, SEC teams have won every national title since the 2006-’07 season; that’s seven consecutive years and counting. But even more to the point, the NFL is the ultimate truth serum when it comes to who produces the best players in college football. One NFL team general manager once observed that you could field a competitive team in the pros just by drafting players out of the Southeastern Conference. Lots of money, along with people’s mortgages and livelihoods, rest on making such key decisions – think about that.
So Ohio State then, and Notre Dame this year, were frankly NOT consistently playing the same level of competition that SEC teams face week in and week out. It’s fine for Notre Dame to beat Oklahoma on the road, but to turn right around the struggle at home to Pittsburgh the next game should have raised a few more eyebrows than it did.
The other part to explain how Bama ended up dominating Notre Dame is that Nick Saban is the best college coach in the business. He learned his grinder’s work ethic from his father growing up in West Virginia, and learned how to be detail-oriented as an NFL assistant under Bill Belichick. Being detail-oriented is a transferrable skill that works well at either the college or the pro level. Saban knows how to prepare. Alabama might have seemed relatively weak (compared to recent teams) having to go from one tough game to another (LSU then Texas A&M, for example). But give Saban a full month to prepare, and the team’s true potential shines through. Pay no attention to the Tide getting humiliated to Utah in the 2008 Sugar Bowl; pay attention to Saban’s, and the team’s, more recent body of work, that being three national titles out of the past four years. They say that hindsight is 20-20, and in this case, it most certainly is: Bama played better competition throughout the year, had even better overall athletes, and are guided by the best coach in the business. Sometimes, you have to line them up and play just to be able to see those things with sufficient clarity.
2012-2013 Bowl Games of Some Interest December 15, 2012
Posted by intellectualgridiron in Sports.Tags: Alamo, Arizona, Arizona State, Arkansas State, Auburn, Baylor, Belk, Big East, Big XII, Boilermakers, Boise State, Bowl, Bronx, Buffalo Wild Wings, Chris Ault, Colin Kaepernick, college, Commodores, Copper, Cotton, Cowboys, Darrell Hazell, Dave Doeren, Earl Scheib, East Carolina, FBS, Fight Hunger, football, GoDaddy, Gus Malzahn, Heart of Dallas, Horned Frogs, Huskies, Insight, Ka'Deem Carey, Ken Niumatalolo, Kent State, Kraft, Land of Enchantment, Las Vegas, Louisiana-Lafayette, Louisville, MAACO, Michigan State, Mountain West, Mountaineers, MSU, Music City, N.C. State, Navy, NCAA, Nevada, New Mexico, New Orleans, North Carolina State, Oklahoma State, Orange, Pac-12, Pinstripe, Purdue, Silver, Spartans, Stefphon Jefferson, Steve Sarkesian, Syracuse, TCU, Texas Tech, Todd Graham, Tom O'Brien, Vanderbilt, Vandy, Washington, West Virginia, Wildcats, Wolfpack, Yankee Stadium
add a comment
As mentioned in the previous installment, I have ranked the bowl games by category, with the major criterion being level of desirability to view, partly on my end, partly on the end of the average viewer who is NOT a certifiable college football addict like yours truly!
To find a complete bowl game schedule where each game is found in order of date and time each game is to be played, go here.
This second installment is of bowl games about which I am rather interested, which is, to me, higher than “moderately interested:”
New Mexico Bowl (Albuquerque, N.M.), Sat., Dec. 15, 1:00 PM EST
Arizona (7-5) vs. Nevada (7-5)
Chris Ault leads the now-Colin Kaepernick-less Wolfpack back to a bowl game to take on the rejuvenated Arizona Wildcats in a fairly evenly-matched game in the Land of Enchantment. Speaking of which, Enchantment Bowl has a nicer ring to it than New Mexico Bowl, doesn’t it? But I digress. What makes this game truly interesting is that there will be lots and lots of yards gained on the ground by both sides. How do I know? Both teams each have some of the leading rushers in the FBS this season, in Ka’Deem Carey (is the apostrophe really necessary? Then again, the name is already made up, so might as well be stylin’ while we’re at it!) for Arizona and Stefphon (sic) Jefferson for Nevada (one too many consonants in that first name, don’t you think?). Moreover, both teams also sport mediocre run defenses. It all adds up to lots of rushing yardage gained on both sides of the ball, with an inability to stop each other on the other side. Think: the equivalence of Baylor-Texas Tech, ground game edition! The fact that the hilarious writers at EDSBS referred to both of these two teams as the plague monkeys of their respective conferences is the icing on the cake!
New Orleans Bowl, Saturday, Dec. 22, 12:00 PM EST
East Carolina (8-4) vs. Louisiana-Lafayette (8-4)
If I miss this game, it won’t be the end of the world. It used to be that we CFB fans would look forward to this game because it kicked off bowl season. Now, it’s just another bowl. Still, it pits two solid teams within their respective conferences against each other, which was my rationale for designating this game the “Best Non-Big Six Matchup” for this set of bowl games.
MAACO Bowl (Las Vegas, Nev.) Saturday, Dec. 22, 3:30 PM EST
Washington (7-5) vs. No. 19 Boise State (10-2)
This used to be called the Silver Bowl, but that was before sponsorship took over bowls big time. Soon, they renamed this game after a slightly classed-up version of Earl Scheib. That notwithstanding, this could be a decent match-up. On one hand, Steve Sarkesian has worked diligently to bring the Huskies back to respectability. On the other hand, Boise State has had a slightly down year compared to their last several. Could be interesting.
Pinstripe Bowl (Bronx, N.Y.), Sat., Dec. 29, 3:15 PM
West Virginia (7-5) vs. Syracuse (7-5)
Old conference rivals reunite in this bowl game, between a squad that hit the wall when they reached the real meat of their schedule, and a team that gradually improved throughout the year. On paper, the Mountaineers are more talented than the Orange, but will the former have time to regain their energy? Plus, the game is in [new] Yankee Stadium: how cool is that?
Fight Hunger Bowl (San Francisco), Sat., Dec. 29, 3:15 PM
Navy (8-4) vs. Arizona State (7-5)
So which is it going to be, the Pinstripe Bowl or this one? I choose this one, my “intriguing coaching matchup” bowl game pick, and for multiple reasons. For one, you have one coaching philosophy of pounding the rock vs. the opposing one that amounts to a watered-down “west coast” offense. But that’s not all: on one side is Ken Niumatalolo and his apparent philosophy of family, loyalty, dedication, etc., and in the opposing corner is the notoriously mercenary, leave-in-the-dead-of-night Todd Graham. Very intriguing indeed!
Buffalo Wild Wings Bowl (Tempe, Ariz.), Sat., Dec. 29, 10:15 PM
TCU (7-5) vs. Michigan State (6-6)
(What used to be the Insight Bowl, and before that, the Copper Bowl) Okay, so the Spartans have been no team to write home about this year, given their inability to, you know, score touchdowns. Meanwhile, on TCU’s side, their performance this year has been one of peaks and valleys. Where the Horned Frogs are with respect to their highs and lows will determine whether they mop the field with MSU, or the game remains a defensive struggle. What could really set things off, though, is if the two teams show up in their chrome purple and green helmets, respectively (oh boy, oh boy!)!
Music City Bowl (Nashville, Tenn.) Mon., Dec. 31, 12:00 PM
North Carolina State (7-5) vs. Vanderbilt (8-4)
Last year, the Wolfpack was in the Belk Bowl, and defeated a young Louisville team. It looked like they were really up-and-coming. They return to a bowl game this year, and fire Tom O’Brien. It makes no sense. Will head coach-in-waiting Dave Doeren lead the team, or will Tom O’Brien play out the string? Or will the assistant coaches be left to watch over this mess before Doeren comes in to right the ship? All this will be moot anyhow, since this is a glorified home game for Vandy, who by all rights should kick N.C. State’s butt. And that’s what’s really enticing; would it not be grand to see the Commodores win a bowl game? Goodness knows they have earned it!
GoDaddy.Com Bowl (Mobile, Ala.), Sun., Jan. 6, 9:00 PM
No. 25 Kent State (11-2) vs. Arkansas State (9-3)
College football on a Sunday night instead of pro football? Yes, please! Plus, this game is my “intriguing no-coaching matchup,” given that Kent State’s erstwhile coach Darrell Hazell took the Purdue job and Arkansas State’s erstwhile coach Guz Malzahn bolted for Auburn.
Heart of Dallas Bowl (Dallas), Tues., Jan. 1, 12:00 PM
Purdue (6-6) vs. Oklahoma State (7-5)
Okay, how on Earth did this become a New Year’s Day bowl game? I know that the Cotton Bowl is no longer played in the Cotton Bowl (stadium, that is), but that does not mean that this manufactured bowl game deserves to be on the same day as the Capital One, Outback, Rose, and other bowls that have earned being on this date. That aside, this game is a rematch of the 1997 Alamo Bowl. Just don’t expect the Boilermakers to beat the Cowboys 33-20 like they did 15 years ago. In fact, expecting the score to be reversed in the Pokes favor might be an overestimation. Still, Purdue is playing in it, so one has to watch it.
The End of the Danny Hope Era at Purdue: a postmortem and a forward look November 30, 2012
Posted by intellectualgridiron in Sports.Tags: Adam Rittenberg, athletics, B1G, Bear Bryant, Big 10, Big Ten, Boiler, Boilermakers, CEO, Coach Hope, Coach Tiller, Colin Cowherd, college, Danny Hope, department, dept., Drew Brees, ESPN, football, Gary Nord, Howard Schnellenberger, Illinois, Indiana, Joe Tiller, Kevin Wilson, Matt Light, Michigan, Morgan Burke, NCAA, NFL, Purdue, Tim Beckman, Tom Brady, Wisconsin
add a comment
Over the past few days, the word about Coach Danny Hope’s firing has spread like wildfire. In four seasons as Purdue’s head football coach, Hope was 22-27, with no appreciable signs of improvement from when he took over from Coach Joe Tiller at the helm. This particular development had been, according to rumors, that Athletics Director Morgan J. Burke had actually been planned since Purdue’s blowout loss at home to Wisconsin. Be that as it may, the development having been brought to fruition has opened a floodgate of after-the-fact criticism against the man, something I flat-out refuse to join.
Say what you want about Coach Hope: he treated those who played under him as well as those who worked under him more than equitably. He cared for every one of his players as if they were all his sons. Coach Hope and I go back about 15 years, when I first met him at Coach Tiller’s summer football camp for high school players. Starting a year later, I was an aide to him while a student manager on the Purdue team, helping him out on the sidelines during games while he was the offensive line coach under Joe Tiller. In the subsequent years that followed, he went out of his way to make me feel like part of the football family, be it at Eastern Kentucky University – a long story! – or at Purdue as well. I have awesome articles of athletic-themed attire that I shall forever treasure wearing – stuff that he personally gave me.
But I am not the only one ever grateful, ever true to the man now stepping down as head man of the Purdue football team. None other than Drew Brees and Matt Light consider Coach Hope “their coach.” Drew has been quoted as saying that he would run through a brick wall for Hope. Matt Light, former all-pro offensive tackle, not to mention the man who protected Tom Brady’s blind side for a solid decade, has credited Coach Hope with molding him into an NFL lineman.
Bear Bryant was known to say “[i]f anything goes bad, I did it. If anything goes semi-good, we did it.
If anything goes real good, you did it. That’s all it takes to get people to win football games.” With every big win – few as there were – Hope always passed the credit along to his players. When Purdue won in Michigan Stadium for the first time in over four decades, Coach Hope was almost in tears on account of how proud he was of his boys and how well they played.
Moreover, when Hope’s tenure began, on paper, it was a good hire. He was the perfect organizational/cultural fit, having served under Coach Tiller all those years. Moreover, anybody who has met the man could not help but love him, what with his high-energy, high-enthusiasm personality that could brighten up any room. Better yet, he brought in Gary Nord as offensive coordinator. Both learned the coaching ropes together under the legendary Howard Schnellenberger, so obviously they had the pedigree. Between Hope’s high-energy approach towards motivating players and Nord’s abilities with the X’s and O’s, it seemed to be an awesome match. Sadly, things did not turn out that way, as the results clearly show.
The question becomes, why? One plausible explanation is that Hope’s under-performance is the symptom of a bigger issue within Purdue’s athletics dept. One of Purdue’s dirty little secrets is, historically they under-compensate their personnel compared to other Big Ten athletics programs. Anybody with any ambition at all puts in their time, enhances their resumes, then leave for, er, greener pastures, leaving behind good people that stay out of a combination of loyalty (commendable though that may be) and lack of options.
To put things even more bluntly, Purdue is notoriously cheap when it comes to paying its coaches. That could explain Coach Hope’s woes, to an extent. A cursory survey will reveal that Purdue has the lowest football coaches’ salaries of any staff in the B1G. Not good. Hope himself was the lowest-paid head coach in the conference, making only $950,000 this year. Yes, I know, to the vast majority of people, that is a tidy sum. But when you consider that even Tim Beckman of Illinois makes $1.6 million, or even Kevin Wilson of lowly Indiana makes $1.2 million annually, something is dreadfully wrong in Boilerland.
The same problem applies to underpaying assistant coaches. Therefore, the head coach does what he can to bring in assistants, but once they build up their resume, they then go somewhere else where they can make more money. Successful football programs depend in part with coaching continuity. Don’t believe me? Look at what happened to mighty Texas when the bulk of their assistants left, or the slump Florida found itself in for a while. Now imagine the havoc that is wrought on a program like Purdue from lack of such continuity. To quote ESPN’s Colin Cowherd, coaches do not care about your school’s fight song: pay them!
That brings us to the another major point. Morgan Burke right now faces the awesome task of finding a new CEO of the football program to take it in a new, better direction. Certain names have been tossed around here and there, but no matter whom they hire, if Burke does not take a crowbar to the department’s wallet, Purdue will be in the same situation it is in now in three or four years’ time.
Adam Rittenberg, a blogger of espn.com has reported that Burke is putting together a $4.5 million fund for the next coach. If that is true, then maybe, after all these years, it has sunk in that he needs to pay his football coaches substantially more than in the past, distant and recent. Yes, Burke deserves credit for ably managing the athletics department’s bottom line, but that bottom line itself is in jeopardy if the team keeps losing games and the fans vote with their feet in the form of lost ticket revenue. As the saying goes, you have to spend money to make money. Winning games makes money, and to win games, Purdue needs to raise football coaches’ pay (both head coach and assistants) if they want to get anywhere. Let us hope that the rumored $4.5 million is made available soon for the best coaching talent out there. But by that same token, assembling those funds should be a sign that Burke et al. have finally figured out that winning in the Big Ten (or any other “Big Six” conference these days) costs money, and they do deserve some credit for figuring that out, even if belatedly.
Another problem for the program was the offensive strategy combined with a stale culture. Concerning the latter, let us face it: bringing in Coach Hope to replace Coach Tiller was, in some regards, more of the same. The head coach is CEO of the football program. Like a chief executive, his job is to not only set the strategy, but also the culture and tone of the organization. Bringing in Hope was more of the same in that the Tiller influence was able to linger longer than it should. Coach Tiller did a wonderful job of bringing Purdue out of the wretched Jim Colletto era doldrums, but after a while, things became stale. Furthermore, his one-sided “basketball on grass” was becoming less and less effective. Frankly, Drew Brees and his ability to work the on-field magic that he did made Tiller’s offense look far more effective than it really was. The best season Purdue had post-Drew was the 2003 season, where we had a tough, veteran defense combined with Coach Tiller “discovering” something called the running game. Sadly, Coach Tiller never learned from his successes that season, and engaged in a very lengthy panic to where Purdue’s offense continued to dwindle as it became ever-more reliant on the passing game. The more-of-the-same approach, that which worked before but became less effective as the conference overall changed, in turn caused the organizational culture to go stale as well.
Ultimately, Coach Hope’s on-field woes could most likely be attributed to the ongoing quarterback merry-go-round, combined with a poor choice of offensive strategy that was, again, too reliant on the pass. In so many games, I observed too many over-engineered plays that were attempted to be executed by under-skilled personnel. The nature of these plays tended to put the offensive players in too many precarious situations, which could account for why injuries perpetually plagued Hope and his team.
A run-oriented, option-based attack could have rectified this problem. So many fans argue that the passing game is what puts butts in the seats, but I counter in turn that winning is what truly generates enthusiasm for a program, and thus stimulates greater attendance. Three yards and a cloud of dust will sell just as well as the passing game, if you win. The new coach, whoever he may be, will be well-served to heed this advice. Given our current personnel, we could credibly execute a flexbone option attack much like Georgia Tech and Navy currently use. It could buy us time until we bring in personnel that could give us more options in a balanced, pro-style attack that is a proven winning approach with teams throughout the country.
But in the meantime, do not pile on Coach Hope. I will always admire him as a loyal, gracious man. He stood for everything a place like Purdue should support — values, character, sincerity, and integrity. The Boiler Nation would be well-served to never forget that.
Teams that could beat Notre Dame November 22, 2012
Posted by intellectualgridiron in Sports.Tags: 2012, A&M, Aaron Murray, Aggies, Alabama, Bama, Bayou Bengals, BCS, Bowl, Brian Kelly, Buckeye, Bulldogs, Capital One, Cardinal, college, Cotton, Crimson Tide, defense, Fighting, Florida, football, Gamecocks, Gators, Georgia, Glendale, Independence, Iowa, Irish, Jadeveon Clowney, Jeff Driskel, Johnny Manziel, Kevin Sumlin, LSU, miracle, Mississippi State, NCAA, ND, Nick Saban, Notre Dame, offense, Ohio State, Our Lady, Pasadena, Penn State, Purdue, SEC, South Bend, South Carolina, Stanford, Steve Spurrier, Sugar, Tennessee, Texas, Tigers, UAB, Urban Meyer, Wisconsin
add a comment
From the latest edition of Sports Illustrated. The Latin phrase at the top translates to “The Miracle of Our Lady 2012”
In case some dear readers have been hanging out in a cave for an extended period of time, Notre Dame is now the no. 1 college football team in the nation for the first time in 19 years to the month. Given the national following the Fighting Irish have, there has been more than a bit of hoopla over this development. Without going into obscene details, I can see Regis Philbin and other ND-loving celebrities losing control of themselves right about now. But just because the Irish are no. 1 by default, does not mean they are invincible? Of course not. Yes, they are undefeated; yes, they have beaten some decent teams. To be fair, Notre Dame is formidable. Brian Kelly has done an incredible job of bringing in a talented receiving corps for the offense while massively upgrading the team’s talent defensively. Their front five and front seven are both sufficiently physical to compete with anybody. But there are teams out there that would give ND fits, if not ruin their season outright if the two played each other. I therefore submit this list of teams to a candid world:
Practically sure things:
LSU: Without a doubt, LSU would give Notre Dame all it would want and then some. Over the past decade, there is no team that has been known to show up in big games and win them like LSU. Yes, they lost at home to Alabama this year. Yes, they lost the national championship game to Alabama at the end of last season. Yet ought these not to be a strong commentary on the Crimson Tide’s prowess rather then to the Bayou Bengals’ detriment? The Tigers have won two national titles within a decade. Aside from the BCS game this past season, they have won almost all of their bowl games*. Stretch the scale of time back to 15 years, and every time the Irish have played the Tigers in a bowl game (the 1997 Independence Bowl, the 2006-’07 Sugar Bowl), LSU has won both games handily. The odds, talent, and the mindset are all in LSU’s favor. Notre Dame ought to pray that the two teams do not meet anytime soon.
*LSU’s only bowl losses were to a tough Texas team in the 2003 Cotton Bowl, and inexplicable losses in the Capital One Bowl to both Iowa (30-20 on Jan. 1, 2005), and Penn State (19-17 on Jan. 1, 2010).
Stanford: Don’t laugh. Yes, they already lost to Notre Dame this year, but by that same token, let us put things into perspective. A), the game was in South Bend, B) the weather was horrible, C) what did the Cardinal in was two consecutive horrible play calls on the goal line in overtime. Now imagine the two teams playing each other again, this time on a neutral field, and reasonable weather. Stanford has the personnel to fight the Irish effectively on the line on both sides of the ball. They sport a very physical front seven, and their offense is ground-and-pound. This approach was two horribly-called plays shy of working under very adverse circumstances on the road. Imagine how well it would work in, say, Glendale, Ariz., or Pasadena.
Texas A&M: The Aggies have proven that they can move the ball on tough defenses. Quarterback Johnny Manziel has gotten better and better as the season has progressed. They moved the ball effectively on Alabama, after all. Moreover, Coach Kevin Sumlin has proven to be an excellent motivator in getting his men ready for big games. Some of their margins of victory are impressive. For example, they beat a respected Mississippi State squad 38-13, and then turned around the following week and beat then-no. 1 Alabama. What this tells me is that you can count on consistent play from A&M at this stage of the season. That, plus quick defense and superior quarterback play add up to being too much for the Irish to handle.
Ohio State: Yes, Brian Kelly has proven to be one of the best coaches in the college game. But so has Urban Meyer, and his resume of winning big games with more teams, one could argue, trumps Kelly’s. Never count out Meyer in big games. Moreover, once he brings in more of his own style of players, they will execute his spread offense all the more effectively. True, the Buckeyes were playing some teams too closely for comfort earlier in the year. After all, they only scored 29 points on abysmal UAB, of all teams! But lately the offense runs like a well-oiled machine. During their last games, they have averaged scoring 49 points each. Their lower scores during that span were 29 points (where Purdue’s defense actually showed up) and 21 points against Wisconsin’s traditionally stout ‘D.’ Notre Dame has not encountered anything like Ohio State’s offense throughout this memorable season of theirs.
Questionable teams:
Florida: Yes, their defense is practically impregnable. Good luck moving the ball on the Gators. The problem is on the offensive side of the ball. Jeff Driskel is a mediocre quarterback at best, and Notre Dame’s defense will not play dead simply because they are facing such a vaunted program. The game would be very low-scoring, with the outcome depending on how well Driskell executes, which is a crap-shoot.
South Carolina: On paper, this team should be a very formidable foe for the Irish. A strong running game, one of the best QB’s in college football in Connor Shaw, and defense with potential NFL talent, anchored by Jadeveon Clowney. The problem lies in consistency. The Gamecocks blew out a tough Georgia team earlier in the year, only to embarrass themselves at Florida a few weeks later. After that, they played an awful Tennessee much more closely than the game should have been, again, on paper (they won that game only 38-35). The Ol’ Ball Coach triumphing over the hot-headed Irish Coach will depend on the team that gave Georgia its only loss of the year to show up.
Georgia: The Bulldogs have an incredibly talented offense led by experienced, highly-rated quarterback Aaron Murray. On paper, the offense would give Notre Dame’s talented defense all they could handle. Defensively, Georgia sports a typical talented, ultra-quick SEC defense. The problem, like that of South Carolina, is consistency. Yes, they could theoretically take Notre Dame, but it all comes down to which team shows up against them: the team that beat Florida handily on an ostensibly neutral field, or the team that lost badly earlier on to South Carolina?
Alabama: Easily the least-questionable team within this category. The only reason they are in said category as opposed to the above one is that Texas A&M exposed a chink or two in their impressive armor. Their defense is talented, but young, and their offense is not the most imaginative of teams at their level. But let us say that the two – Bama and ND – end up playing each other in the BCS national championship game. Give Nick Saban a month to prepare – a luxury no team has had thus far, to be sure – and he is practically unstoppable. Advantage, Crimson Tide.
If any dear readers think other teams merit being added to the list, I would be more than happy to entertain suggestions! (P.S.: Happy Thanksgiving to one and all!)
Kansas State: Shades of 1998 November 18, 2012
Posted by intellectualgridiron in Sports.Tags: 1998, Alabama, Alamo Bowl, AP Poll, Austin, B1G, BCS, Big 12, Big Ten, Big XII, Bill Snyder, Boilermakers, Boilers, Bowl, bowl game, championship, Chicago, Chris Daniels, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Coaches Poll, Columbus, Dallas, Drew Brees, Fiesta Bowl, football, Houston, Jayhawks, K-State, Kansas, Kansas City, Kansas State, Manhattan, Marriott, Missouri, national championship, NCAA, Nebraska, New York, Notre Dame, Ohio State, Orange, Pittsburgh, Purdue, Rose, San Antonio, Sugar, Texas, Texas A&M, Tigers, West Virginia, Wildcats
add a comment
We’ve seen this before. This is not the first time that Kansas State’s national championship run was ruined late in the season. The Wildcats made a similar run in 1998, defeating powerful Nebraska for the first time in 30 years, among other things. But come the Big XII championship game of that year, K-State overlooked a hungry Texas A&M, who snuck up on them and overtook them towards the end of the game. Although that bumped the Wildcats down to only no. 4 in the rankings, it was too late to get a decent consolation prize.
Everyone seemed to assume that K-State was a lock on the Fiesta Bowl (where the BCS national championship was to be held), so other teams got “locked-in” to other BCS bowl games (Orange, Sugar and Rose). With the Wildcats’ unexpected loss, they were left out in the proverbial cold, having to settle for the Alamo Bowl, then given the no. 4 pick for both the Big XII and the Big Ten. One would imagine that they would not be too happy with having to settle for that lesser prize. Purdue, their opponent for the 1998 Alamo Bowl, was, conversely, quite happy to make a return appearance in San Antonio (a fun town for a bowl game, fyi.), having won that bowl game the previous year. Though the Boilers were unranked and Kansas State was still the fourth-highest ranked team in the land, Purdue came in, what made the difference was that Purdue was happy to be there for the Dec. 29 game, K-State not so much.
Despite Coach Bill Snyder’s moderately happy-sounding speech at the kickoff luncheon the day before the game (Dec. 28, 1998) in a convention room of the Marriott Hotel in downtown San Antonio, where he assured both the Wildcat and Boilermaker fans in attendance that “we’re very much looking forward to playing the University of Purdue,” they sure did not give that impression on the field of play in the Alamodome the next evening. After a scoreless first quarter, Purdue drew (if you’ll pardon the expression) first blood in the second with a Drew Brees touchdown pass to Chris Daniels, and we never let up for the rest of the game. Only in the last few minutes did K-State manage to inch ahead of us with a touchdown of their own, but Purdue answered on the very next possession, marching right down the field and put it away for good. The Wildcats did have the last possession of the game, but with only less than a minute or so left in the game, they were unable to muster the necessary score. We triumphed in the end, 37-34. It was our biggest win in probably 20 years.
I say “we” because I was but a freshman student manager on the Purdue team during that game, witnessing all of this first-hand. The point in all of this, given recent developments, is that we’ve seen this scenario with K-State play out before. The Wildcats seem to be on the same path today. The only saving grace for K-State today is that this sudden, season-derailing loss from last night came earlier than when the Big XII championship game would be (there is no such game for this season, given the recent changes in conference membership). Hence, there is still time to salvage things with earning a more prestigious bowl berth than the booby prize of the Alamo Bowl from 14 years ago.
Yet another reason for K-State getting, well, hosed that year is a manifestation of certain perpetual handicaps against the program. Unlike traditional powers including, say, Alabama, Ohio State, Texas, or even Notre Dame, all of whom have strong, national fan bases, Kansas State, although a strong program, lacks that advantage. Strong fan bases equal strong money and clout, something the Wildcats continue to lack. Kansas State University is located in Manhattan, Kan., nicknamed “The Little Apple.” It is in the middle of nowhere, in a state that has the same reputation. It has no major market to tie itself to, unlike the Longhorns, who can not only claim Austin, but also Dallas and Houston. The Buckeyes claim Columbus, as well as Cincinnati and Cleveland. Even Notre Dame can claim Chicago, and to an extent, New York itself. K-State lacks that major market anchor, and that goes a long way towards its overall lack of relative clout. Even a team like West Virginia can claim Pittsburgh as its anchor market. Claiming Kansas City is a stretch for KSU, who must also share the area with the Kansas Jayhawks, along with the Missouri Tigers. Does that leave KSU Wichita? Geography has conspired to make the lack of clout an unsolvable problem for the Wildcats, as far as one can foresee.
But another key difference in scenarios today is that, in the wake of K-State being kicked down to the no. 4 bowl pick for the Big XII Conference in 1998 — much less the overall rankings — shortly thereafter the BCS implemented a rule that a team ranked that highly* would get an automatic berth into one of the BCS “big four,” instead of being relegated to a second or third-tier postseason game. Perhaps the Fiesta Bowl is not out of the question, boys, but you still must pass through the eye of the needle that is Texas in two weeks’ time.
*Although Kansas State was ranked no. 4 in both the AP and Coaches’ Polls, they were actually ranked no. 3 in the BCS.
My Open Letter to Coach Danny Hope November 9, 2012
Posted by intellectualgridiron in Sports.Tags: Big 10, Big Ten, Danny Hope, flexbone, Florida, Gary Nord, Georgia Tech, Kirk Ferentz, Navy, Ohio State, Purdue, Rob Henry, strategy, Texas Tech, triple option, veer, wishbone
add a comment
Purdue Quarterback Rob Henry (photo by Patrick “Sarge” Murray)
Dear Coach Hope:
Sir: As a friend and former aide, I have readily come to your defense over the past couple of years as fellow Purdue alums have grumbled at me about Purdue’s lack of progress. This past week’s result, I imagine, has done nothing to assuage the proverbial natives from becoming even more restless. You and I both know that whatever is going on right now offensively is not working. Might I humbly and amicably suggest that the best way to salvage the season is to make a sudden about-face in terms of offensive strategy?
Think about it from a potential opponent’s point of view. Iowa, Illinois and especially Indiana must be licking their chops right now, drooling over how they are going to shut you guys down. Surprising them would be a sure ticket to making them eat crow. The main current problem, I have concluded, is that you have under-skilled personnel trying to execute over-engineered plays. My idea is to simplify. Draw up some simpler plays, have your guys attack the defense, and you could potentially win by sheer surprise if nothing else.
Moreover, let us look at it another way. Mack Brown at Texas just announced that the Longhorns will run some of their plays out of the wishbone in tribute to the late, great Darrell K. Royal. Could we not do something similar as a fitting tribute to the late, innovative coach? You wouldn’t necessarily have to run out of the wishbone (thought it would be nice!), but you could keep Rob Henry under center and run out of the veer.
What if it does not work, you ask? I answer with a rhetorical question in turn: so what? The current offensive approach is clearly not working. What have we to lose? I can see Kirk Ferentz and company completely baffled if you were to come out with a different, simplified scheme. It will be the talk of the Conference!
Ultimately, though, the long-term solution is a totally new, original, offensive game plan. You and I both love Purdue, but both of us would acknowledge that this fine school is tougher to recruit than Ohio State, Florida or even Texas Tech. The relative difficulty in recruiting stems from its spotty-at-best Fall weather and its relatively rigid academic standards. What you need is a niche offense that nobody else does; a quirky offense that nobody encounters, nor has time to prepare for. It also has to be a ground-based attack so that you can, as mentioned before, take and maintain control of the game. My solution, therefore, is to install a triple-option wishbone/flexbone-style attack, not unlike that which they use at Navy or at Georgia Tech. Such a niche offense would attract niche players who would be overlooked by schools with more conventional offensive packages.
This suggested shift in offensive strategy could be just the key to turnaround and long-term viability for which the Purdue faithful have hungered. With your unswerving ability to motivate and Coach Nord’s mastery of the X’s and O’s, I have no doubt that the two of you will succeed in implementing this idea not only for a turnaround in the short-run, but better yet for an investment in long-term viability for the program. You can do it — Boiler Up!
your friend,
Sarge
College Football Week 9 Awards October 29, 2012
Posted by intellectualgridiron in Sports.Tags: Air Force, Arizona, Arkansas, Army, Auburn, Big 10, Big Ten, Bob Stoops, Brian Kelly, Bryant-Denny Stadium, Buffalo, Bulldogs, Butch Jones, Central Florida, Charlie Strong, Cincinnati, Clemson, cocktail party, college, Colorado, Crimson Tide, Dan Mullen, Danny Hope, Darrell Hazell, Duke, East Carolina, Fighting Illini, Florida, Florida State, football, Gators, Georgia, Hoosiers, Horned Frogs, Huskies, Illinois, Indiana, Joker Phillips, Kansas, Kansas State, Kent State, Kentucky, Kevin Sumlin, Kyle Flood, Louisville, LSU, Miami, Milan Puskar Stadium, Mississippi State, Missouri, N.C. State, Navy, NCAA, North Carolina, Northern Illinois, Notre Dame, Ohio, Ohio State, Ohio U, Oklahoma, Oregon, Oregon State, Purdue, Rutgers, SEC, SMU, Southern Miss, spread offense, Stanford, Steve Sarkesian, Tarheels, TCU, Temple, Tennessee, Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, toilet bowl, Troy, Tulsa, UAB, UMass, USC< Alabama, Washington, West Virginia
add a comment
(Note: All rankings are current AP [post-week 9, pre-week 10] unless otherwise noted.)
COACHES
Wish I were him: Brian Kelly, Notre Dame
Glad I’m not him: Kyle Flood, Rutgers
Lucky guy: Charlie Strong, Louisville
Poor guy: Butch Jones, Cincinnati
Desperately seeking a clue: Joker Phillips, Kentucky
Desperately seeking a P.R. man: Darrell Hazell, Kent State
Desperately seeking sunglasses and a fake beard: Bob Stoops, Oklahoma
Desperately seeking … anything: Danny Hope, Purdue
TEAMS
Thought you’d kick butt, you did: Oregon (beat Colorado 70-14)
Thought you’d kick butt, you didn’t: Texas (beat Kansas 21-17)
Thought you’d get your butt kicked, you did: Auburn (lost to No. 16 Texas A&M 63-21)
Thought you’d get your butt kicked, you didn’t: Kansas (lost to Texas 21-17)
Thought you wouldn’t kick butt, you did: Navy (beat East Carolina 56-28)
Thought you wouldn’t get your butt kicked, you did: Texas Tech (lost to No. 3 Kansas State 55-24)
Dang, they’re good: Kansas State
Dang, they’re bad: Temple
Can’t stand prosperity: Ohio U. (lost to Miami [Ohio] 23-20)
Did the season start? Texas
Can the season end? Purdue
Can the season never end? Notre Dame
GAMES
Play this again: No. 7 Georgia 17, No. 8 Florida 9
Never play this again: No. 3 Oregon 70, Colorado 14
What? Michigan State 16, Wisconsin 13, OT
Huh? No. 10 Georgia 7, No. 8 Florida 9
Double Huh? Washington 20, No. 13 Oregon State 17
Are you kidding me? Kent State 35, Rutgers 23
Oh – my – God: Arizona 39, No 18 USC 36
Told you so: No. 12 Louisville 34, Cincinnati 30, OT
NEXT WEEK
Ticket to die for: No. 1 Alabama @ No. 6 LSU (notwithstanding No. 2 Oregon @ No. 9 USC)
Best non-Big Six vs. Big Six matchup: Tulsa @ Arkansas
Best non-Big Six matchup: SMU @ Central Florida
Upset alert: No. 10 Clemson @ Duke
Must win: Texas @ No. 20 Texas Tech
Offensive explosion: Arizona @ UCLA
Defensive struggle: Miami (Ohio) @ Buffalo
Great game no one is talking about: No. 16 Texas A&M @ No. 17 Mississippi State
Intriguing coaching matchup: Kevin Sumlin of Texas A&M vs. Dan Mullen of Mississippi State
Who’s bringing the body bags? Colorado @ No. 15 Stanford
Why are they playing? Troy @ Tennessee
Plenty of good seats remaining: UAB @ Southern Miss
They shoot horses, don’t they? UMass @ Northern Illinois
Week 9 in Review: Upsets and Conference Toilet Bowls Abound
The whole purpose of a given “Toilet Bowl” is to pit the two worst teams against each other to find which is, in fact, the worst of the worst. Such was determined twice yesterday. In the Big 10 Toilet Bowl, Indiana trounced Illinois 31-17, in the Fighting Illini’s home stadium, no less. Illinois, now 2-6, is now the undisputed – though clearly not undefeated – bottom-feeder of the conference for this season. They are winless in the Big 10, and have no time to lick this very revealing wound, as next week they venture into Columbus, Ohio to take on Ohio State.
Meanwhile, in the Toilet Bowl, SEC Edition, Missouri defeated Kentucky in CoMo (which is what the locals refer to as Columbia, Mo.) by a similar score, 33-10. Kentucky is in a sadly familiar spot in the most brutal of conferences in college football. What is even more revealing, though, is UK’s response in the wake of the loss.
“It’s tough, because we knew we were better than those guys,” so said Kentucky tailback Raymond Sanders. Better than them, even when losing by 23 points? Such denial of reality is why head coach Joker Phillips has merited the above award for the week (see: Desperately seeking a clue).
Undefeateds going down: Fewer teams remain undefeated today than when they woke up to play games yesterday. Rutgers was the highest-ranked team in the Big East before going down to one-loss Kent State. Inexplicably, the Golden Flashes’ sole defeat came at the hands of Kentucky.
Mississippi State’s first defeat of the season was the most understandable of all first losses of the year, given that they were going up against No. 1 Alabama, in Bryant-Denny Stadium, no less. The Bulldogs’ head coach, Dan Mullen, said it best going into the weekend when he pointed out that, “[Y]ou’ve got to try to run the ball (on Alabama) whether you’re having success or not.” Despite Mississippi State’s best efforts, they were very slowly and methodically ground down by the Crimson Tide, 38-7.
On the West Coast, undefeated Oregon State lost that distinction in their loss to Washington. Steve Sarkesian’s Huskies have earned the reputation of being a “giant killer” of sorts this year, as they handed previously-undefeated Stanford its first loss of the year as well. Keep an eye on the program on the rebound in Seattle.
Finally, Florida was another team to bite the proverbial dust and suffer its first loss to Georgia in the World’s Largest Outdoor Cocktail Party in Jacksonville, Fla. Though scoring was relatively low (17-9 in favor of the UGA Bulldogs), there were plenty of plays to keep the crowd enthused. In the end, the old adage of “the team that makes the fewest mistakes wins” rang true yet again, which explains how the Bulldogs reigned victorious.
More chrome: North Carolina – of all bloody teams! – has jumped on the chrome dome bandwagon, as they sported chrome-silver helmets during their last-minute upset over rival N.C. State. Moreover, the main decal was an oversized Tarheel logo (the Carolina blue-colored foot with the tar on the heel), in breaking with the traditional “NC” decal they usually display. On all-dark blue jersey and pants ensemble complimented a very different look for a team normally known for its “Carolina blue” helmets and jerseys. Oh well: it beats the trendy “matte” look!
Choke-lahoma: That moniker was earned/demonstrated yet again last night, as Oklahoma squandered a golden (if you’ll pardon the expression) opportunity to hand Notre Dame its first loss of the year. Stoops and company have nobody to blame but themselves for deliberately holding themselves back. They had an offensive line capable of controlling the line of scrimmage, and yet they repeatedly passed up on the opportunity to establish a ground attack. On the passing side of things, they also held themselves back by concentrating on short-yardage increments that are the bread-and-butter of the one-sided spread offense. They did this while being thoroughly capable of throwing the ball further down the field, and by not doing this, never forced the Irish secondary to respect either the deep threat or the short yardage attempts. Head Coach Bob Stoops has proven once again to be something of a schoolyard bully of the coaching ranks; arrogant and blunt with reporters, lots of bluster, but having little to, er, “bring,” when genuinely challenged.
Looking ahead: some other games to keep an eye on, aside from the upcoming games listed above includes Air Force @ Army in an all-service academies showdown. Another intriguing matchup is TCU venturing into Morgantown, W.V. to play the Mountaineers. The big question going in to that game will be, how will West Virginia respond to two consecutive drubbings after being ranked so high in the polls? Moreover, how the Horned Frogs will handle the Milan Puskar Stadium crowd is a question no doubt in the back of the minds of many a fan and observer. In the wake of the SEC “Toilet Bowl” 2012, Missouri takes on Florida and Kentucky takes on Vanderbilt, meaning that the respective cellar-dweller status of either team is unlikely to change anytime soon. After Oklahoma was embarrassed at home to Notre Dame, how will they respond at Iowa State, a team that has shown surprising formidability this year? Can Duke show that it has staying power by bouncing back after a tough though understandable loss to Florida State in time to put up a good fight against inconsistent Clemson? More importantly, can USC bounce back from being upset in the desert by Arizona in time for a primetime showdown against Oregon at home?
