Bleacher Report - Articles by Lou Vozza

The Future of College Football (Humor)

Lou Vozza — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 20:25:23 -0500

This article was inspired by an appearance by CBS broadcaster Tim Brando on the Tony Barnhart Show. Brando called for congressional action to create a college football playoff. He also called for the creation of a national commissioner of college football.

Sioux City, Iowa March 24, 2018

Ring, Ring, Ring

"Hello, Charlie Smith residence."

"Mr. Smith? Joseph Stalling here from the National College Football Commissioner's office. How are you today?"

"Just fine, Mr. Stalling. What can I do for you?"

"It about your son, Bob. We have the results of our inaugural draft."

"Hmm. You know we’re not exactly comfortable with this whole draft thing."

"Yes, we understand that this is difficult for a player like Bob, who is the highest-ranked high school quarterback in the country."

"Well, it's not just about football. Bob was also his high school's valedictorian. He has lofty academic goals. You guys aren't allowing him to attend the college of his choice."

"Now, now, Mr. Smith. The College Football Draft Law was an act of Congress. This is the federal government you are dealing with."

"Don't I know it. (mutters under breath) Another area of my life they've crept into..."

"What was that you said?"

"Uh, uh...nothing, Mr. Stalling. Nothing at all. Uh, so what team has drafted Bob?"

"Middle Tennessee State."

"Middle Tennessee State?! Are you kidding me?!”

"Now calm down, Mr. Smith. Middle Tennessee had the worst record in 1-A football last season. We now use a reverse record order draft system, just like the NFL. As the worst team, Middle Tennessee has the right to choose the first player and they have chosen your son, Bob."

"But what kind of education is he going to get at that school? He doesn't want to move to the South, either. He wants to stay in the Midwest. Michigan would be his first choice."

"I understand your concerns, Mr. Smith, but all citizens must make sacrifices for the common good. Are you saying you're in favor of the old elitist system, where the ‘Haves’ like USC oppressed the proletarian ‘Have-Nots’ like Boise State?"

"Uh, uh, no. N..N..Not at all, Mr. Stalling. I don't think any such thing.”

“Are you speaking out against the 'Great Conference Commissioner Purge of 2015,' which allowed us to set up the current 32-team playoff?”

“No. No, Mr. Stalling. Bob and I are fine with all that.”

“I suppose you want to go back to the days when teams could select their own out-of-conference opponents and weren’t allowed to trade players from school to school.”

“No, Sir. The old traditional way of doing things was just terrible.”

“Are you sure you aren’t part of the underground protest movement agitating to have former Big 10 Commissioner Jim Delaney released from the Federal Reeducation Camp?”

“No, Bob and I are loyal citizens of the State, I assure you.”

“Good. Good. Glad to hear that. As far as moving to the South, you don't need to worry about that. Middle Tennessee State is no longer located in Tennessee."

"What!?"

"This year the Commissioner is forcibly relocating the school to Washington D.C. The television ratings in Murfreesboro, or whatever it's called, weren't high enough. It's part of our five-year plan to increase the profits from college football."

"You know what, Mr. Stallings? That’s the last straw. You guys are a bunch of jerks. You can take your draft and shove it. I'm moving my family to Canada. That's where I went the last time you Feds had a draft."

"Feel free to try, Mr. Smith. Feel free to try. Homeland security is much improved since the Sixties. We look forward to meeting you and your son at the border. Heh, heh, heh, heh...”

Top 10 Dumb Reasons for a College Football Playoff

Lou Vozza — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 20:39:51 -0500

10. Playoffs will ruin the importance and excitement of the regular season games

The NFL has a very inclusive playoff system, and its regular season games get much higher television ratings than college games.

The NFL's ratings advantage over college football has nothing to do with its playoff format. College football gets lower ratings because most of its top teams are located in small TV markets like Austin, South Bend, and Columbus. From the beginning, the NFL owners set up their league as a profit-producing enterprise and placed their teams in the largest cities, like New York and Chicago.

I know this may be hard for you to understand, but a long, long time ago, football was played just for the fun of it.

9. College football regular season games are do-or-die

Then how come a two-loss LSU team won the National Championship in 2007?

In 35 of the last 50 years, the National Champion has been undefeated. One-loss champions are the exception and LSU’s championship may end up being a singular event. Regular season college games are do-or-die relative to the NFL, where six and seven-loss teams regularly make the playoffs.

If it makes you happy, from now on I'll call it “do-or–probably die.” Thanks a lot, Word Police.

8. In the BCS, the best teams don't play against each other

In an eight team playoff, there would be a total of seven playoff games between the "best" teams to determine the champion. During the current regular season, we usually have about that many meetings between teams ranked in the Top Eight. After that, the top eight teams meet again in the bowl games.

Actually, playoffs don't always ensure that the best teams play against each other. Cinderellas regularly upset top seeds before they get a chance to meet. Since the NCAA began seeding basketball teams in the playoffs in 1979, only once have all four No. 1 regional seeds reached the Final Four (in 2008).

7. The National Championship should be settled on the field

In most cases, the National Champion is undefeated. When a team incurs a regular season loss, it’s knocked out of the race. That’s when it’s settled on the field.

The BCS only stirs controversy if there aren’t two undefeated teams with credible schedules at the end of the year. Then the system requires a beauty contest to determine which two teams play in the NC game. It’s the sore losers of the beauty contest who agitate the most for a playoff every year.

I understand that many people get frustrated because they want to see four to eight of the top teams play an elimination tournament at the end of the season. They believe that this would crown an undisputed champion. However, a limited four- or eight-team "mini-playoff" will not create an undisputed champion.

6. Why not?

Just like the current two-team mini-playoff, an expanded four- or eight-team mini-playoff will remain fundamentally unfair to the 112 to 116 remaining 1-A programs. This continuing controversy would force the system to expand to include more teams.

Playoffs are like government entitlements. Once you start them, they just keep growing and growing.

Div 1-AA football began its playoff with four teams and expanded to 16 teams within five years. Currently, its playoff includes 20 teams and is due for more expansion soon.

Every other playoff in history has started small and expanded until it can’t expand anymore. Considering all the money and prestige associated with 1-A football, a mini-playoff would inevitably grow to as many as 32 teams in a very short amount of time.

5. How about this: the six BCS conference champs, plus two wild cards. You can even keep your stupid traditional bowl and rivalry games. It won’t interfere with the schools' academic schedules either.

Nice try, my simple minded friend, but your system doesn't have nearly enough wild cards.

Let’s look at an entirely possible scenario for this season. Let’s say TCU and Boise State win their conference titles and are still ranked in the Top Eight. You will have to pick them as your two wild cards.

Look who you are leaving out: Florida or Alabama, and other quality teams like Oklahoma, LSU, Pittsburgh, USC, Cal, Penn State, Ohio State—all teams which are arguably as good as or better than TCU and Boise State.

All of these teams have well-connected and well-funded booster and media support systems. Every season these powerhouse “left-outs” will band together and form organized campaigns to expand the playoffs.

Over time, they will get their way. Once the playoff is established, it’s a simple matter to cave in to pressure and admit more teams.

4. Let's let in 16 teams in, including 10 wild cards. That should shut everybody up.

If only it were so easy, grasshopper.

You forgot about the five non-BCS conferences. They are already steaming that their conference champions don't get automatic BCS bowl berths. Once you create a large playoff, especially with 16 teams including all six BCS conference champions, you will have to include all the non-BCS conference champions as well.

They will sue you if you don’t. A very credible anti-trust lawsuit is already prepared and pointed at the BCS like a loaded rifle. Besides, think about it. Who ever heard of a league where a team can win its conference and still not qualify for the playoffs?

To accommodate them, your 16-team playoff will have to have all 11 conference champions and only five wild cards. Now you have the same wild card problem your eight-team playoff had, only worse.

Every year, the current BCS system will look like a monument to common sense compared to your 16-team playoff, where weak conference champions like Ball State will be taking playoff spots from higher ranked second place conference finishers like USC or Alabama or Penn State.

Bottom line: a playoff won't even come close to passing the absurdity test until there are a minimum of 24 teams, with all 11 conference champions, plus 13 wild cards.

That’s why NCAA basketball, a league with a very similar structure to 1-A football, ended up expanding its tournament all the way out to 65 teams after starting with just eight teams.

3. What’s so bad about a 24-team format? I still enjoy regular season college basketball games, despite their communist playoff system where almost every team in the country participates regardless of ability.

I'm happy you enjoy those games, comrade. As a Florida football fan, I "enjoy" watching the Gators' spring scrimmage game.

But if you can't feel the difference in intensity between a regular season college football game and a regular season college basketball game, you need to get your head examined. You may have deep-seated emotional problems.

Also, to make room in the calendar for a 24 team playoff, you’re going to have to either cut the regular season in half, cancel Christmas, or move the Superbowl to March. Good luck with all of those proposals.

And don't think I didn't notice you trashed my bowl games and rivalry games when you expanded the playoff beyond eight teams. That was easy, wasn’t it?

Oh, and by the way, the NBA regular season started last week. Please don’t pretend you noticed. Nobody else did.

2. The BCS process just drives me crazy. It's rarely logical or linear, and there aren't those symmetrical bracket thing-a-ma-jiggies I love to draw.

For many of us, that's the fun of it. However, if you're the type of person who keeps his desk neat and has to have his sock drawer organized, I can understand your frustration. You're kind of like the fat Microsoft guy in the Apple commercials.

1. College football is the only sport in the entire world that doesn't have a playoff to determine its champion.

Congratulations! You finally got it. American college football is unique.

We love it for its eccentricities: the corny bowl pageantry, the rowdy student section, the silly team names, the wholesome cheerleaders, the marching bands, the color guards, the weird mascots, the inter-state rivalries and yes, the endless arguments about who is "really" the National Champion.

I'm sorry it disturbs you that there's one remaining vestige of organic American culture that hasn't been co-opted by our parasitic corporate mono-world. You're probably happy that no matter where you go, McDonald's and Starbucks are the only two restaurants left.

Now leave our bowl games and rivalry games alone! And stop trying to turn college football's one-of-a-kind, spine tingling, do-or-probably-die regular season into one more mind numbing slog to answer the meaningless question: "Who's number 32?"

2009's Top Five Under The Radar College Football Players From the South

Lou Vozza — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 10:29:43 -0400

This list is South/SEC oriented because those are the teams I watch the most. Please feel free to add your own players in the comments section. They won't let me publish this article unless this introduction is at least 300 characters long. I don't know why the intro has to be this long. You can just skip this part and go right to the slideshow if you want. Hopefully, they will fix this in the future because it is really wasting my time to type this.

Begin Slideshow

Why Alabama Will Not Finish The Year In The Top Ten

Lou Vozza — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 15:30:29 -0400

It's been fashionable in the blogosphere to rank Alabama ahead of Florida ever since Week One, when Alabama handily beat the preseason number seven ranked Virginia Tech. I can understand the logic behind that, especially since Florida made the mistake of scheduling their 1-AA cupcake early in the season. Isn't it funny, though, how there won't be any outrage when Alabama plays 1-AA Chattanooga on November 21st?

What no one seems to have noticed is that Alabama has developed a serious problem at the quarterback position, which is not exactly the best place to have a problem in the game of football.

First time starter Greg McElroy got off to a decent start this season against the Hokies, completing 15-30 for 230 yards with one int. He played extremely well against Alabma's patsy schedule of FIU and North Texas, then shined again against an Arkansas defense that at the time was getting very little respect.

I was a believer. In my weekly "Best and Worst" post, I said that if McElroy had replaced Parker Wilson last year, the Tide would have won a national championship. I repeat this because I know many of my Alabama readers see me as a Florida homer. If I was a Florida homer, why would I have written something like that in Week One?

Anyway, back to the present. A funny thing happens to new quarterbacks once their opponents have three or four games of film to study—coaches start creating game plans to stop them. Against Ole Miss, McElroy was 15-34 for 140 yards. Alabama only scored one touchdown against the Rebels, and that was on a 36 yard breakout run by Ingram.

Against South Carolina McElroy was even worse, 10-20 for 90 yards. After three quarters of play, the Tide hadn't scored an offensive touchdown and they somehow still led the Gamecoks 13-6. As good as Alabama's defense is, no coach can expect his defense to hold SEC opposition to under 10 points two games in a row.

With 8:04 to play in the fourth quarter, Saban lost all confidence in McElroy's ability to the lead the team. He took Ingram, the only effective offensive weapon the Tide had had for two straight games, and lined him up in the wildcat for five straight plays. I have never seen an offense do this before and I don't think anyone else has either.

Now I'll tell you something about Nick Saban. He's no dummy. It worked, as he took South Carolina's defense completely by surprise. For only the second time in seven and a half quarters of home field football, the Tide marched 64 yards down the field to the South Carolina four yard line. Finally, he allowed McElroy back under center, but just to hand off to Ingram for a four yard touchdown run that finally iced the game with four minutes remaining.

Saban's tactics were brilliant, but did they come at a strategic cost? Was it worth humiliating his young quarterback on the premier Saturday night ESPN game? We'll have to see how McElroy responds. He's already struggling to counter adjust to the adjustments that SEC coaching staffs are throwing at him. Saban knows how risky it can be to bench a young player who is not performing. Did Nick destroy McElroy's confidence for good?

The schedule isn't easy. They play a solid LSU team and a dangerous Tennessee team at home, as well as two talented teams in the most difficult of road environments, Mississippi State and Auburn.

The coaching staffs of these four teams are going to game plan to stop Ingram and no team can rely on their own defense to put points on the board for them week in and week out. Alabama's season is going to come down to one guy: Greg McElroy.

I predict the Tide will lose two of these four games. If they beat LSU, they will still probably make the SEC Championship game. If they do, I don't see any way they beat Florida unless McElroy improves dramatically between now and then.

And a two loss Alabama team will not be ranked in the final top ten.

Top 10 Silly College Football Team Names, Part Two

Lou Vozza — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 23:53:47 -0400

Last year I wrote a top 10 silly team names list that remains my most widely read post. It was clear from the many comments I received that I had barely scratched the surface of this fascinating topic.

Here's part two.

Please note: I'm not suggesting that all teams be named Lions, and Tigers, and Bears. Quirky team names are a big part of college football's crazy, wonderful subculture. I'm just poking fun while I celebrate and educate.

10. Texas A&M Aggies

A team name should strike fear into the hearts of opponents. When it comes to conflict, farmers are usually defenseless victims. The Idaho Vandals got this right. Name your team after nomadic pillagers, not sedentary pillagees. Historically, the "Huns" never lost a match to the "Sodbusters". Abel slew Cain, remember?

9. Cincinnati Bearcats

I'm assuming that "Bearcats" represents an idiotic compromise between one group pushing for "Bruins" and the other pushing for "Lions".

8. Syracuse Orange

I don't understand having a color as a team name. How can you expect to forge an identity out of an electromagnetic wavelength devoid of form? It may not even be an improvement over their original name, "The Saltine Warriors". A head's up. We're not allowed to say "Orangemen" anymore. Sexist. Sorry about that.

7. North Carolina Tar Heels

The region has been an exporter of pine tar since colonial times. The name Tar Heels salutes the bravery of Carolina Civil War regiments who "stuck" to their positions.

No disrespect intended toward the Civil War fallen, but the modern usage of this name is an insult to students of UC Santa Barbara, who have to keep cans of turpentine outside their apartments to scrub off tar that actually gets stuck to their feet when they walk on the beach near the campus.

If we're going to call anybody Tarheel, it's those poor saps.

6. Kent State Golden Flashes

Football is a macho sport. Do we really need allusions to female menopause? What's next, the "Fighting Menstrual Cramps"? (Sorry, Barbie Girl, I can't insert your Alabama joke here. The moderators might intervene.)

5. TCU Horned Frogs

If there is even a remote possibility that a team name can conjure up the mental image of a sexually aroused amphibian, it should be banned from college football.

4. University of Delaware Fightin' Blue Hens

For every game of his NBA career, Michael Jordan wore his North Carolina shorts underneath his Bulls uniform. I wonder if there is any truth to the rumor that Joe Flacco secretly wears a Fightin' Blue Hens T-Shirt during every Ravens game. (Give me some credit for not using any "lay an egg" jokes here.)

3. Western Kentucky Hilltoppers

Named the "Hilltoppers" because the university is located high on a hill above the Barren River. Do you get the feeling that people in Western Kentucky weren't exactly world travelers? "Yup, we're the folks from that dadgum hill over thar."

2. Akron Zips

In the 1920's the team was named the "Zippers" after some rubber overshoes being sold by B.F. Goodrich. I guess when you're in a company town and the company's got a product it needs to hype, you don't get to choose your own name.

Now who do they blame for picking "Zippy the Kangaroo" as their mascot?

1. Tulsa Golden Hurricanes

I hate to break this to you guys, but your city is located more than 500 miles inland of any hurricane zone. I know "Cyclones" is taken. Use it anyway. USC stole Troy's name, didn't they?*

Why is Tulsa No. 1 on the list? Their name is uncomfortably close to "golden showers."

* Gratuitous attempt to rile up USC fans in order to increase readership

Note: If you are interested, last year I also wrote a Top Ten Best College Football Team Names

How College Football Is Like Golf

Lou Vozza — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 19:59:05 -0400

It's hard to imagine two sports more different in their fundamental nature than college football and golf, yet they share much in common.

From around 1890 until well into the 1950s, college football and golf, along with baseball and boxing, were the most popular sports in America. Of the big four, golf and football shared a very important characteristic: both were primarily amateur sports.

Professional golf developed very slowly and didn't fully marginalize the amateur game until the 1950s. Similarly, for decades the NFL was college football's poor, ugly stepchild. It wasn't until the advent of widespread televised sports in the 1960s that the NFL superseded the popularity of the college game.

Because of their historic amateur roots, both golf and college football are by their very nature less commercialized than professional leagues, which from the outset were set up as symmetrical, rational, money generating enterprises.

For example, most of college football's important "franchises" are located in tiny population centers like Norman, Austin, South Bend, Columbus, and Tuscaloosa. Professional football teams, on the other hand, were placed where they could produce the most profit, i.e. New York, Chicago, Boston, etc.

Similarly in golf, many pf the older golf courses where major championships are held are located in out of the way places like Augusta, Pebble Beach, and Pinehurst.

Bobby Jones' Masters tournament remains a bastion of the amateur golf tradition—the concession stands still sell sandwiches for a buck. More importantly, the organizers of the tournament refuse most television advertising, a principle that costs them millions upon millions of dollars every year.

The idea of an official champion golfer of the year didn't occur to anyone until 1948, when the PGA instituted the "PGA Player of the Year" award (Ben Hogan won three of the first four). The title is still determined at the end of the year by a polite vote by the members of the PGA Tour.

Similarly, college football had a 50-odd year history as a national sport that never bothered to determine a national champion. Like golf, where it was enough to be known as the "Masters Champion" or the "U.S. Open Champion," it was enough in football to be known as the "Rose Bowl Champion" or the "Orange Bowl Champion."

It wasn't until the late 1930s that a few sportswriters got the idea to hold a vote to declare the "best" team in the nation. What was initially a marketing gimmick to promote newspaper sales slowly grew into the national obsession that continues to this day.

In recent years, both college football and golf have made attempts to align their systems with modern professional leagues, but both find it difficult to extricate their sport from its traditions.

Three years ago, the PGA Tour instituted a playoff system that takes place at golf courses very close to Boston, New York, and Chicago. But the Fedex Cup hasn't come close to finding acceptance as a legitimate replacement for the Player of the Year award, which will continue to be based on a vote.

In 1998, college football instituted the BCS system, a two team playoff, in a futile attempt to answer the question: "Who's Really Number One?"

It is clear to anyone who considers the situation carefully that this controversy can only be fully resolved with a college basketball style mega-playoff. This would by necessity include at least 24 teams and require jettisoning a great majority of college football's time honored customs, including bowl games and regional rivalries.

What does the future hold for these two sports? If the past is any guide, they will eventually resemble their private enterprise competitors as closely as as possible.

Traditionalists stand as much chance of protecting them as they do of protecting small town dime stores from WalMart's slashing march to the sea. The remaining unique organic charm of both sports will sooner or later be completely homogenized into our greedy aggrandizing corporate monoculture.

Best and Worst Golf TV Announcers

Lou Vozza — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 06:58:13 -0400

BEST

Johnny Miller

Miller is a man among boys in this business. Always insightful, consistently makes great calls, not afraid to be politically incorrect. Oddly subversive for a straight laced Mormon type. Drives 120 mph in his Ferrari to church.

Full disclosure: one of his from-the-booth golf tips solved an early release problem in my golf swing that dropped my handicap from 12 to eight. I should send the guy a freakin' check.

I know he has an army of detractors, but that's probably a good sign. He's not trying to please everybody

Jim Nantz

Cool and corporate compared to Miller, the hot instigator. Best voice, though, which counts extra for the play by play guy. Likeable for some reason you can't put your finger on. Miller and Nantz together would be a dream team.

Dan Hicks

Solid play by play.

Nick Faldo

Nothing brilliant going on between the ears here, but pleasant enough personality. He's slightly clever without being annoying. Not being annoying counts for a lot. If you sit down and watch an entire tournament, these guys are on air for as much as 16 hours.

David Feherty

Legitimately amusing.

WORST

Gary McCord

Not funny. Not cool. Aging wanna-be frat boy. Pathetic case of arrested development.

Paul Azinger

Fortunately, lost his job. Still shows up occasionally on the Golf Channel and the odd ABC telecast. He has all the negative qualities of Dennis Miller without the redemptive wit.

Can't stand him personally. He's a Rush Limbaugh conservative, which wouldn't bother me if he could keep his opinions to himself. After a Ryder Cup victory, he turned down an invitation to the Clinton White House in 1993 because he "refused to meet with a draft dodger". I don't care what your politics are, that's disrespecting the Commander-in-Chief. Should have been permanently banned from Ryder Cup play.

In an interview with Tiger at Tiger's annual charity tournament in California, he praised Tiger's learning centers for 'turning tax burdens into tax payers". What an idiot. Rich guys like Azinger are the biggest tax freeloaders of all. What about the fact that he's allowed to write off the interest on his million dollar mortgage? More tax dollars get siphoned off into that rich man's boondoggle than all the welfare payments combined.

Limbaugh once praised Azinger because golf professionals are "entrepeneurs". What a load! "Lucky guys with freaky hand-eye coordination who probably had parents with at least moderate financial resources" is more like it.

I'm not tuning into a golf tournament to listen to Azinger turn the broadcast into a moronic right wing radio show.

Mike Tirico

Lost his job wiith Azinger when the PGA cancelled ABC's contract. He's now being gradually drummed out of TV football broadcasting into radio. Smart enough guy with a slick delivery, but unlikeable. Way too nerdy.

Chris Berman

I know he only gets an hour or so every year, and even then only when ABC/ESPN gets the U.S. Open. But even a couple of hours a year of Chris Berman calling golf is a crime against broadcasting.

Kelly Tilghman

She's not awful, but in over her head. It's a tougher job than you think. Would be fine walking the fairways and doing the side commentary. If they need a token woman, put Dottie Pepper or Judy Rankis in there.

Why Tiger Woods Hates The President's Cup

Lou Vozza — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 21:26:01 -0400

Tiger Woods was asked yesterday how the President's Cup is different from the Ryder Cup. He said it was different because the fans are very familiar with all the non U.S. players, who all play on the PGA Tour. By contrast, almost half of the players on the European Ryder Cup teams play exclusively on the European Tour.

Tiger uttered these words in a distinctly unexcited monotone.

What he did not say and was probably thinking was this: "Why on earth did you guys haul my butt out here? Not only do we play against these same guys every week, we practice with them every day because they all live at either Lake Nona or Isleworth in Orlando."

I couldn't agree more with the Tiger's imagined thoughts. The Tavistock Cup has more juice than this thing.

Ihe 1920s and 1930s was the only time that international team golf really mattered. At the time, Britain was the center of the golfing universe. Upstarts like Bobby Jones and Walter Hagen were challenging its dominance, just as the United States was challenging Britain's global economic and military supremacy during the same period. Fans on both sides of the pond looked forward to finally seeing in person the golfers they had heard so much about in the newspapers and newsreels.

That all faded away with the collapse of British golf in the aftermath of World War II. Guys like Nicklaus and Palmer were fascinated by the old Ryder Cup matches, as children and gamely kept the Ryder Cup spirit alive during the 60s and 70s.

Today, American and international players are all multi-millionaire buddies twittering each other all day in their gated Orlando enclaves.

How mad can you get at a guy when you married his nanny?

They can mouth the politically correct answers as much as they want to, but it's obvious they don't care. Then why should we?

Why Preseason Polls Are The Most Accurate Polls

Lou Vozza — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 17:29:35 -0400

Every time there is an upset of a top ten team in September, a chorus of complaints arise about the preseason rankings. The argument goes something like this: how can anyone possibly know how good these teams are when they haven't played yet? And since many teams front load their schedule with cupcake games, we really don't know how good anyone is until the season is at least five weeks old. By that time, just about everybody has faced some decent competition.

This argument is pretty much conventional wisdom and is why the BCS doesn't publish their first rankings until week six.

The accusations against the preseason and early season polls are a serious matter. A team's starting point in the BCS process is critical to its success in the final rankings. A solid team that starts out unranked has very little chance to rise up to the top of the polls unless it has at least two top five teams on its schedule. Cincinnati is a good example of a team facing that problem this year (be honest, nobody can spell Cincinnati without looking it up, right?).

If the preseason polls are indeed biased toward popular traditional programs like USC and Ohio State, then the BCS process is at least partly rigged. Frustration at this perceived lack of fairness is one of the reasons fans clamor for a playoff every year.

Personally, I've never agreed with these arguments and I don't think the preseason polls are a significant problem. I have always found them very reasonable assessments of which teams have the best potential to succeed in the upcoming season. A multitude of experts use a diverse set of quantitative evidence to handicap/seed/rank (whatever you want to call it) teams during the offseason. This evidence includes:

1) How a team finished the second half of the previous season.
2) How many starting seniors are returning, with an emphasis on key players from the previous team.
3) How a team has finished in the recruiting rankings in the last two years.
4) A position by position evaluation of individual talent.
5) The quality and track record of the coaching staff.

Of course, few—if any—coaches and AP writers perform this analysis in detail themselves. This is left to back room specialists who write for websites and magazines. Their conclusions are published over the summer and this is the data that influences the writers and coaches in their initial preseason polls.

I've also never noticed that polls later in the year are any more reliable or accurate than the early season polls. There always seem to be plenty of upsets in college football no matter what time of year.

I decided to take a look at some hard numbers to determine if more upsets occur in the first five weeks of the season than in the last eight weeks of the season. Less upsets later in the year would seem to indicate that the polls in weeks six through thirteen are more reliable because of the knowledge gained from the results of the first five weeks.

I went back through the weekly results for the last five seasons and added up how many times a top ten team has been upset by a team that is either unranked or at least 10 rankings behind it in the polls. For example, I didn't count it if No. 10 was beaten by No. 11, only if No. 10 was beaten by No. 20 or worse, or if No. five was beaten by No. 15 or worse etc. (Source: http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/scoreboard There is a drop down box that will take you to previous seasons).

Here are the number of top ten team upsets by teams at least ten rankings beneath them over the last five years:

Year...............Wks 1-5..........Wks 6-13
2004..................1...................8
2005..................5....................8
2006..................2...................10
2007..................3...................14 (crazy year, with eight upsets of # 1 and 2 during wks 6-13!)
2008..................4....................4

Total..................15..................44

We have to make an adjustment to these totals, because obviously more games are played in weeks six through 13 and there are naturally more upsets. You can adjust for this by dividing the totals by the number of weeks, which tells us how many upsets there were per week on average:

Weeks 1-5.......0.6 upsets per week average over five years (15 upsets/25 total weeks)
Weeks 6-13......1.1 upsets per week average over five years (44 upsets/40 total weeks)

Therefore, on an adjusted basis, there were still almost twice as many upsets in weeks six through 13 as in weeks one through five.

To be sure, some—if not most or all—of this discrepancy can be attributed to the fact that top ten teams face less competition in the first five weeks of the season. Call this the cupcake factor. I don't think it's going to be possible to prove the exact influence of this factor one way or the other. However, I personally consider the difference much too big to be accounted for by the cupcake issue alone. If you look closely at these teams' schedules, there are plenty of cupcakes late in the season too.

So, have I proven that preseason polls are the most accurate polls? Not really. The cupcake factor definitely undermines that argument. I admit that I wrote my headline to attract readers and stir up the pot a bit. However, I think I did prove that the preseason polls are no less accurate than later season polls. There doesn't seem to be any knowledge gained as the season progresses that allows us to more accurately assess who is "really" number one.

That's a good thing. If we had the "correct" rankings at all times, there would really be no reason to play the games, right?

Memo to the also ran teams. Stop whining about the preseason polls. If you want a higher preseason ranking, then win more games, keep more seniors, hire a better coaching staff and recruit better.

Final note: it was an interesting exercise eyeballing these games over the last five years. Two things stood out to me:

1) Texas is really underrated. They almost always took care of business with room to spare.

2) USC, on the other hand, had a lot of close calls in addition to the many well known upsets.

My conclusion: Mack Brown is an underrated coach and Pete Carroll an overrated coach. Even though it may be true that USC faced tougher competition than Texas, most of the squeakers I noticed were against inferior programs. The more I go back and do these statistical analyses over this decade, the better Texas looks.

Though the Fedex Cup Is Half Full, PGA Tour Playoffs Concept Feels Empty

Lou Vozza — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 16:57:00 -0400

It's been three years now since the PGA Tour revamped its season end with the "PGA Playoffs for the Fedex Cup".

Most commentators focus on how the points are distributed and how to best tweak the requirements for winning the Cup during the last tournament. While that's always an interesting discussion, in this article, I'll try to assess the bigger picture.

Here's a look at the good and the bad, along with some conclusions.

Good

1) It provides a much better structure and more satisfying conclusion to the season. Previously, there was a long void between the PGA Championship in early August and the Tour Championship in November.

It's much better to "end" the season and package the non-marquee Fall tournaments as the "Fall Finish".

2) The placement of the three initial playoff tournaments on a permanent basis in the Boston, New York and Chicago areas will do much in the long term to popularize the sport in these major population centers.

In terms of national popularity, golf at times struggles with the same problems as college football, in that many of its marquee events occur in out of the way places like Augusta.

3) It was a good idea to keep the Tour Championship at East Lake for the finale. The Tour Championship has only been around for the last twenty years, but it's good they continued its budding tradition.

Maintaining the Bobby Jones connection with East Lake was also a good decision. (Of, course having a solid sponsor like Coca-Cola, which is headquartered in Atlanta, probably made the choice pretty easy.)

4) Moving the Tour Championship/finale to the middle of September is perfect. Everyone is back from summer vacation and accustomed to getting in front of their TV sets on the weekend to watch football.

At the same time, the football season is still young and golf has a better chance of drawing a few more eyeballs, especially with marquee events where all the big stars are guaranteed to show up.

Bad

1) I am really against the use of the term "playoffs" to describe the final four tournaments. The tournaments don't feel anything like the kinds of playoffs we are used to in other sports. Even worse, they don't produce what playoffs are meant to produce: an undisputed season champion.

Again, golf is at times analogous to college football in that golf's national champion is also "mythical". By default, the title belongs to the golfer who wins the Player of the Year award, which is voted on by the players.

They will continue to vote for whomever wins the most majors, no matter who wins the Fedex Cup. That's never going to change.

In their attempt to compete with the NFL, the PGA Tour has tried to make itself seem more like football. But golf is not football and never will be. Quite to the contrary, golf is completely non-violent and gentlemanly - the opposite of football.

2) The nomenclature itself is awkward and confusing. What's happening the final week, "The Fedex Cup", "The Tour Championship", or "The PGA Tour Playoffs"? They would improve the whole system if they stopped hyping the events as "playoffs". Then it would mirror the NASCAR setup, which people at least understand.

3) The Tour Championship has always pitted the top thirty from the money list against each other. Under the current format, the money list becomes irrelevant. Every year a number of players from the top of the money list get left out of East Lake. I don't like this.

In exchange for very little benefit i.e. the "playoff drama" of whether Anthony Kim finishes 70th or not at the Barclays, the Tour Championship is no longer contested between the thirty players who really had the most consistent seasons.

This year they kicked out a lot of really good players who were inside or near the top thirty in the money list—Camillo Villegas, Anthony Kim and Paul Casey for example—and replaced them with players who just got hot for a couple of tournaments—guys like Mark Leishman and Kevin Na, who ended up +13 and +14 at East Lake.

I think they should expand the final tournament to include anyone who made the top 30 of the money list.

Conclusion:

Overall, I consider the Fedex cup a modest success. They've cleaned up the end of the season and created a series of high profile events in key markets. However, by marketing the tournaments as "playoffs", they've hyped and degraded the sport a little bit.

Considering the money involved and the exemptions given, the Cup probably ranks in terms of importance and prestige with the Players Championship.

This is quite an accomplishment, even more so because over time, it has a better chance than the Players of ascending to the status of legitimate fifth major.

College Football Guide To the Best TV Games Week 4

Lou Vozza — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 13:25:16 -0400

THURSDAY NIGHT

No. 4 Ole Miss (-3) at South Carolina

Thursday night broadcasts are the best thing that's happened to college football since the invention of the forward pass. Untested Reb's getting no respect from oddsmakers.

SATURDAY

NOON SLOT

Georgia Tech (-3) at North Carolina

How much mojo did Tech have at halftime of the Clemson game? In four quarters of football they went from a team looking to crash the top five to an unranked also ran. Could only happen in college football.

South Florida (+14) at No. 18 Florida State

Lot of juice taken out of this one with the Grothe injury. Still an interesting matchup. Kudos to Bowden for giving Bulls a chance to enter the "Top-Three" club in Florida. Another nice inter-conference matchup on top of that.

Fresno State (+16) at No. 14 Cincinnati

Always interesting to watch these non-BCSer's play against a ranked BCS conference team.

3:30 SLOT

No. 9 Miami (-3) at No. 11 Virginia Tech

Hokies would have been favored by 10 if this was the preseason. Game of the week here. Top half of ACC providing most of the entertainment so far this season.

No. 6 Cal (-6) at Oregon

USC loss gives this a game a ton of juice. Race for Rose Bowl should be a roller-coaster ride. Cal wins big here, then gets clobbered by USC at home.

No. 16 TCU (+3) at Clemson

Looks like oddsmakers don't want to touch another Mountain West team. Gonna be hard to watch much of this with the Miami and Cal games going on at the same time.

Arkansas (+15) at No. 2 Alabama

Give me Arkansas with the points. Alabama may be dazed with sugar after feasting on cupcakes for two weeks. Did you know Ryan Mallet is taller than Shaquille O'Neal? Great matchup of the two new young guns in the SEC. Alabama would have won the national championship last year if they had benched John Parker Wilson and played Greg McElroy.

EVENING SLOT

Iowa (+10) at No. 5 Penn State

No blockbusters Saturday night. I guess Brent Musberger and Kirk Herbstreit take this one. Only a Big Ten fan could enjoy this. Why is Penn State ranked fifth?

Arizona State (+12) at No. 21 Georgia

Try this one. Unexpectedly, this year's Georgia team has been a lot more entertaining than last year's.

Texas Tech (+1) at Houston

Should be a good one. Third solid BCS, non-BCS matchup on TV this weekend. Been hearing a lot about Houston. Will be nice to get a look.

Enjoy everybody!!!!

College Football: Best And Worst Of Week Three

Lou Vozza — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 11:34:37 -0400

Best:

Jacory Harris

This is the second big week in a row for Harris. It looks like new Miami offensive coordinator Whipple learned a lot in his five years in the NFL. It won't be easy, but if they can stay hot and beat VTech and Oklahoma the next two weeks, 'Canes should rocket into the top five.

Florida State

We may be looking at a wholesale resurgence of Big Three Florida football dominance. Ponder has one more year and Harris two. With all of the Gator's success the last few years, you would think Miami and FSU would have had trouble recruiting. How much talent is in that state? South Florida's not bad either.

BYU

By best, I mean best white team in the country. 'Noles fly from sea level to 4,500 feet and maul the Cougars so bad it seemed like they beat both Brigham Young and Joseph Smith. The Coug's gave up over 500 yards and 30 first downs at home to an offense that barely squeezed out 19 points against Jacksonville State last week. I guess it will be a relief for them to get back to Mountain West conference play.

Tennessee

Thirty point spread? Was Vegas nuts? This is a rivalry game, dummies. Traditional power Southern programs like Tennessee, Auburn, FSU and Clemson may have their down years, but they are always chock full of talent and are dangerous, especially against rivals. Kiffin will be trouble for the Gators down the road. He called the perfect plays for Crompton that made this game close. Watch out when he gets a quarterback.

Ryan Mallet

The Gator's schedule is still as easy as it gets, but it's definitely looking more difficult every week. They have to beat both Ponder and Mallet, two guys who were mostly unproven at the beginning of the year, but are playing like giant killers. At least we get both Arkansas and Florida State at home and it doesn't look like either team has a defense.

Worst

USC

How many national championships has Carroll blown now by not putting away bad teams? These types of losses are adding up and are undermining his legacy. I'm pissed. Who didn't want to see USC play the SEC teams in the NC game these last few years? Potentially, this widens the opening for Boise State as the next NC pinata.

Utah

Oregon's QB Masoli was 4-16 for 95 yards, zero TD's, one pick, one fumble...and the Utes lost?

Georgia's defense

They don't put up with that in Athens. Change is gonna come.

Gary Danielson

Where do I start? Let's see, his voice is too high pitched and whiny. He's grossly repetitious. No doubt he knows the game and makes some good calls, but he also consistently points out the obvious, then repeats it interminably. He talks way too much.

I loved Florida's new Sooner style, no-huddle, hurry-up offense because it was the only thing that could make Danielson stop talking. Listen to how Todd Blackledge does color and you'll see what I'm talking about.

In Defense of Florida's Schedule

Lou Vozza — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 10:36:00 -0400

Outrage at Florida's No. 1 ranking is spreading among the uninformed and envious. Many fans of lower ranked teams feel that Florida should be penalized for starting their season against two relatively uncompetitive teams, 1-AA Charleston Southern and Troy.

This is in contrast to a handful of ranked teams who have gone out of conference early against BCS teams with a national reputation, including Alabama, Virginia Tech, Georgia, Oklahoma State, USC, and Ohio State.

Consternation mounts as opposing fans take a look at rest of Florida's schedule. Top 10 ranked Alabama fell out of Florida's SEC East/West rotation this year. The only other noteworthy opponents, Georgia, LSU, and Florida State, have all looked shaky against suspect competition.

I agree that Florida's schedule this year looks as easy as I have ever seen it. I also don't approve of the scheduling of 1-AA Charleston Southern.

But what about the big picture? Is Florida guilty of setting up a patsy schedule, cheating their way to the top of the BCS? Did they steal two national championships in three years from more noble programs who are not afraid to challenge those their own size?

Hardly.

The fact is that for the last three years, Florida's final average Sagarin Strength of Schedule ranking has been fifth out of 145 teams. That's a higher average ranking than Alabama (30th), Virginia Tech (40th), Georgia (19th), Oklahoma State (35th), and Ohio State (54th).

Even the vaunted Pac 10 round robin, go anywhere, play anybody USC Trojans have a lower SOS at 16th.
* reference below

Florida's regular SEC schedule is plenty difficult enough to establish a credible SOS ranking almost every season.

On top of that, they play Florida State every year in an intense season ending intra-state rivalry game.

They have also reintroduced a home and home with Miami most years. This is another bitter OOC intra-state rivalry game against another program with multiple national championships in recent history.

Moreover, if the Gators win their division, they must play the winner of the SEC West in the SEC Championship game.

That's how you end up with a top 10 SOS most years.

Also consider the real reason teams like Georgia and Ohio State fly across the country to play nationally known teams on Saturday night at the beginning of the season. It's not because they want to play fair and test themselves against the best no matter what the cost.

They have to schedule these high profile games because their states are recruiting poor and they are forced to recruit out of state.

The state of Florida is so talent rich that the Gators can afford to stay at home and play a couple of tune up games.

The only exception to this is USC, which dominates recruiting-rich California. They schedule top teams out of conference because they lack high quality in conference opponents. It was their inability to gain important wins in conference that hurt them in the BCS end of year beauty contest the last two years.

Florida got in the NC game in '06 and '08 by beating top 10 teams in the SEC Championship game at the end of the season when the wins count the most.

Finally, ask LSU what kind of pushover Troy is. Last year, they had to rally from 28 points down in the fourth quarter to beat Troy in Baton Rouge. I'm sure Oklahoma State thought Houston was going to be an easy win before the Cougars ruined their season.

And look at all the upsets by 1-AA teams over BCS conference teams this year already. A couple more and we'll have to call 2009 "The Revenge of the Cupcakes".

*Reference

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/fbc06.htm

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/fbc07.htm

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/fbc08.htm

Which Team Has the Hardest Out-of-Conference Schedule?

Lou Vozza — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 17:06:36 -0400

At the heart of the controversy over using a polling system to choose a champion is the fact that strength of schedule considerations often trump outright W-L records. Since most games are played in conference, each year's endless debates about relative conference strength are justifiably contentious.

As passionate as those discussions are, opinions become especially inflamed over out of conference schedules. This is because in college football, teams have the freedom to select their own OOC opponents.

It is a particular sore point that many elite programs regularly choose to dodge quality opponents and instead play one or two "cupcake" games with 1-AA division teams.

Remember, this isn't the NFL, where six losses still gets you in the playoffs. A single loss in college usually means the end of a team's national championship dreams. It's a big deal to replace a competitive team on your schedule with a patsy.

Who are the biggest offenders in this regard? Or to ask it another way, which teams intentionally schedule the weakest opponents?

I decided to set up a point system that provides an objective measurement. The system awards points for scheduling strong teams and subtracts points for scheduling weak teams. The team with the most net points has the toughest out of conference schedule.

Here are the results. (Individual team calculations are detailed later in the post. Teams that tied are listed in alphabetical order.):

1. USC +4
2. Georgia +3
2. Georgia Tech +3
4. Virginia Tech +0.5
5. Cal 0
6. Ohio State -0.5
7. Oklahoma -2.5
8. LSU -4
9. Alabama -4.5
10. Florida -5
10. Oklahoma St. -5
12. Boise State -6
12. Penn State -6
14. Texas -7
15. Ole Miss -9

A reminder. This does not evaluate a team's overall strength of schedule. That must take into account the strength of their conference rivals. This system is meant to indicate which teams have scheduled more or less difficult opponents in the part of their schedule that they control.

Another note: I have only included the top 15 teams as ranked preseason by Rivals.com.

How the Points Are Awarded

If you have scheduled A:

1-AA school subtract three points
1-A non BCS conference school subtract two points
1-A "premier" non-BCS conference school subtract one point
1-A BCS conference school add one point
1-A "premier" BCS conference school add two points

Note: A "premier" school is defined as a team that has played in a BCS bowl within the last five years. Also, an extra point is awarded for any scheduled OOC road game.

Another note:

I would appreciate it if readers double check my numbers for accuracy. This was a little tedious and my research assistant is on vacation this week (ha, ha).

Comments on Results

I would normally expect teams from the supposedly weaker conferences—Big 10, ACC, non-BCS'ers, Pac 10, and Big East—to be at the top of this list i.e. trying to increase their SOS by playing quality teams outside their conference.

I would expect the opposite from teams belonging to the two supposedly stronger conferences, the SEC and the Big 12.

The results mostly confirm this view. The sole positive exception is Georgia, which alone among Big 12 and SEC teams put together a more challenging OOC schedule. Props to the Bulldogs for manning up.

On the negative side, I was surprised to find Boise State and Penn State at the bottom of the pack. One would expect both of these teams to schedule higher quality OOC opponents.

Penn State's numbers are worse than they appear, because they received undeserved credit for scheduling Syracuse. On paper, Syracuse is a BCS 1-A school, for which Penn State earned a full point.

In terms of real competition, however, the Orange are more equivalent to a 1-AA school. If I were to allow the use of reasonable discretion to adjust point totals, Penn State would be last at -10, not -6.

I don't see how Nittany Lion fans can (expletive) and moan at the end of the year that no one respects their undefeated record. Couldn't they choose a more worthy opponent than Syracuse? Don't they already have enough patsies in the Big 10 to beat up on?

Ohio State had a respectable number, mostly because they scheduled no 1-AA's this season. Nice to see. Still, with Michigan's program in remission, the Buckeyes must achieve more out of conference than just beating USC.

If I was OSU, I would schedule two premier BCS conference teams every year until the Wolverines start to show some signs of life again.

I know Ole Miss is in a tough conference, but please. The Rebels are the only top 15 team playing against two 1-AA teams this season.

Georgia +3

at Oklahoma State +3 (includes road game point)
Ariz. State +1
Tennessee Tech -3
at Georgia Tech +2 (includes road game point)

Georgia Tech +3

Jacksonville State -3
at Miss State +2 (includes road game point)
at Vanderbilt +2 (includes road game point)
Georgia +2

USC +4

San Jose State -2
at Ohio State +3 (includes road game point)
at Notre Dame +3 (includes road game point)

VTech +0.5

Alabama +2.5 (half point added for scheduling at a neutral site)
Marshall -2
Nebraska +1
at East Carolina -1 (point added for road game)

Cal 0

Maryland +1
Eastern Washington -3
Minnesota +2 (includes point for road game)

Ohio State 0

Navy +1
USC +2
at Toledo -1.5 (included half point for game at neutral site)
New Mexico State -2

Oklahoma -2.5 points

BYU -0.5 (includes half a point for game at neutral site)
Idaho State -3
Miami (Fl) +3 (includes road game point)
Tulsa -2

LSU -4

Washington +2 (includes point for road game)
Louis-Lafayette -2
Tulane -2
Louisiana Tech -2

Alabama -4.5

VTech +2.5 (includes half a point for game at neutral site)
FIU -2
North Texas -2
Chattanooga -3

Florida -5 points

Charleston Southern -3
Troy -2
Florida International -2
Florida State +2

Oklahoma State -5

Georgia +2
Houston -2
Rice -2
Grambling St. -3

Boise State -6

Oregon +1
Miami (Oh) -2
Bowling Green -1 (includes point for road game)
UC Davis -3
Tulsa -1 (includes point for road game)

Penn State -6

Akron -2
Syracuse +1
Temple -2
Eastern Illinois -3

Texas -7

Louisiana Monroe -2
Wyoming -1 (point added for road game)
UTEP -2
UCF -2

Ole Miss -9

Memphis -1 (includes point for road game)
SE Louisiana -3
UAB -2
Northern Ariz. -3

Was Tiger Woods Too Conservative at the PGA Championship?

Lou Vozza — Sat, 22 Aug 2009 18:23:27 -0400

On the radio this morning I heard Brandon Chamblee and Tim Rosaforte conduct yet another post mortem on Tiger Wood's failure to win the PGA Championship last Sunday. Over and over they beat the same drum that has become the conventional wisdom:

Tiger Woods is a poor strategist.

He's become too conservative in his old age.

He's hitting irons and five woods off the tee and not firing at enough pins.

He's going to have to play more aggressively if he wants to win more majors.

Yadda, yadda, yadda.

In a post a couple of days ago, I disagreed strongly with this thesis. See here:

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/239403-is-2009-tiger-woods-best-year-ever?ref=other-stories-list#comments

Interestingly, Rosaforte says he conducted an interview this week with someone who shares my opinion. That person is Jack Nicklaus. (Rosaforte's interview with Jack is scheduled to air on the Golf Channel next week) According to Rosaforte, Jack said that Tiger's only strategic mistake occurred on Sunday when he reached the Par 3 17th trailing by a shot. Trying to make something happen, Tiger aggressively fired at the back left pin. His ball went over the green and buried itself in the deep rough.

This led to bogey and let Yang, who had himself bogied 17, off the hook. Yang was able to walk to the 18th tee still up by one shot, not tied as he should have been. Clearly Jack thinks the odds are that the pressure would have finally got to Yang on 18.

In others words, there was a good chance Yang would not have had the nerve to pull of his remarkable hybrid shot to the 18th flag under those circumstances. Even he he held his own and parred 18, Tiger likely would have parred out as well.

And let's be honest, Yang probably would have had as much chance in a playoff as Watson did against Cink a few weeks ago.

So, the Master has spoken. The strategic mistake Tiger made was being too aggressive, not being too conservative. Sunday's results weren't the work of a tentative old fogey, but the poor judgment of a still callow youth.

I'm pretty sure Tiger won't panic next time and repeat the same mistake. That means we can expect ten more years of Tiger hitting irons and five woods off the tee and shooting toward the center of the green on Sunday. That's how Jack won 18 majors and that's how Tiger will break his record.

Oh, we also can expect a few more second place finishes in majors for Tiger. It happens. It happened to Jack 19 times and now Tiger has six of his own.

Back to Chamblee and Rosaforte on the radio. Not once did these two geniuses mention the fact that Tiger was trying to win for the 3rd successive week. Do they realize that virtually no one in the history of golf has done this? In fact, it's possible that it's never been done.

The record for consecutive wins, of course, is 11 straight by Bryon Nelson, but I can find no mention of whether he won three successive weeks during the streak. He probably did, but he might not have.

For 50 years, Hogan was second place on this list with six consecutive wins. But again, I can't find any record of him winning in three successive weeks during that stretch.

Incredibly, Woods tied Hogan's second place record in 2000 by winning six straight. Then, even more incredibly, Tiger broke it with seven consecutive PGA wins in 2007. (And by the way, he also won five straight in 2006, something no one else has done either).

Again, it has been impossible for me to find this record online, but I'm pretty sure in neither streak did Tiger win in three successive weeks. If someone can clarify this for me, I would appreciate it.

The fact is that Tiger was trying to accomplish something that may have never been done in the history of the sport. And if it was, it was only achieved by Byron Nelson and maybe Hogan. It boggles my mind that nobody is even remotely acknowledging the challenge Woods was facing.

And of course, if you are trying to become perhaps the only golfer to win PGA tournaments in three successive weeks, isn't it that much more difficult if the third is a major?

That's why despite all the accolades heaped upon him, Tiger Woods remains the most underrated athlete in sports.

Is 2009 Tiger Woods Best Year Ever?

Lou Vozza — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 22:18:01 -0400

Tiger Woods surprising defeat at the hands of Y.E. Yang last Sunday has caused me to once again reflect on the career of this great golfer. I have been a keen watcher of Tiger since his 1997 Masters victory. I can't say I've watched every tournament he's played, but I've come close.

There is no doubt that 2009 will not be Tiger's best statistical year. That remains 2000, when he won three majors and nine total tournaments. His second best is probably 2006, when he won two majors and eight total tournaments.

Superficially, this year looks weak by comparison. So far he only has five wins and no majors. And since he has set major wins as his own personal measurement of achievement, I doubt he considers 2009 a very successful campaign.

But I beg to differ. I have never been more impressed with Tiger Woods than I have been this season. Why? I can't believe everyone has forgotten that a year ago, he underwent constructive anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) surgery on his left knee.

Ernie Els had the same operation in 2005. In the three years before the surgery, Els won eight tournaments, including one major and one WGC event. In the three years since returning to competition, he has won only once, the Honda Classic last year.

Yet in less than a full season since coming back, Tiger has already won five tournaments, including a WGC event—a semi-major.

How many times has Phil Mickelson won five tournaments in a year? Never. His biggest season win total is four. Fred Couples and Greg Norman? Never won more than three in one year. Tiger may still end up with six or seven in 2009.

True, Y.E. Yang broke what was perhaps Tiger's biggest record: 14-for-14 when leading a major after 54 holes. Why did it happen? People seem to be forgetting that Tiger was trying to win his third consecutive tournament. Who was the last person (besides Tiger) to accomplish that? Probably Hogan.

Tiger just ran out of gas at the PGA last Sunday. Let's not forget that Tiger used to be an obsessive jogger. His long runs in the hot, humid Orlando summer afternoons were his primary way of staying in shape the last 10 years. That's how he ruined his knee, not by golfing.

I'm not sure how he's doing his cardio these days, but with the rehab there's no way he's been able to keep himself in the same physical condition he's been in for the last 10 years.

As far as I'm concerned, to come back from ACL reconstruction and win five tournaments, while contending in three of the four majors on Sunday is the most impressive performance of Tiger Woods storied career.

Which Sport Has the Most Exclusive Playoff System?

Lou Vozza — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 08:50:06 -0500

The answer, of course, is Division 1-A college football, where only two out of 119 teams are eligible for the two team end of year playoff.

Here is the list of all the major sports and some minor college sports:

Percentage of League Eligible for Playoffs:

2% NCAA 1-A Division Football (2 teams out of 119)

18% NCAA Division 1 Baseball (64 teams out of 342)

19% NCAA Division 1 Basketball (65 teams out of 342) ( 33% if you include the NIT and CBI post season tournaments)

22% NCAA 1-AA Division Football (20 teams out of 90)

27% Major League Baseball (8 teams out of 30)

38% National Football League (12 teams out of 32)

53% National Basketball Association (16 teams out of 30)

53% National Hockey League (16 teams out of 30)

Every single one of these sports started with much more exclusive playoff systems, but expanded the percentage over the years for one of two reasons:

1) To be more "fair" to the fans of the left outs

2) To generate more revenue for the sport

Most playoff advocates in college football want a four, eight or 16 team playoff. Yet there is no example in the sporting world of a playoff system that excludes such a large percentage of the league from participation.

This is why the minimum number of teams in college football playoff must be 24, with all 11 conference champions and 13 at-large bids. This would represent 20 percent of the league.

The BCS conferences know this and that's why they won't allow an expanded playoff, which would force them to distribute the current postseason revenue more equitably across the league.

How the Arizona Cardinals' Success Devalues the NFL's Regular Season

Lou Vozza — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 16:59:49 -0500

If the Arizona Cardinals win the Super Bowl, it will be a well-earned and well-deserved victory. They will also be the undisputed champions of the NFL.

But what does their appearance in this year's Super Bowl tell us about the NFL's regular season product?

First, it tells NFL fans not to get too worried if their team loses a game prior to the month of January. They also can't be too upset if they lose another, or another, or another, or another after that. The Cardinals lost seven games this season, including four of their last six.

Second, it tells them not to be concerned if they lose by big margins late in the regular season. In December Arizona lost three games by the following margins: 48-20, 35-14 and 47-7.

Third, it tells Philadelphia fans not to get too excited in November and December if their team wins four out of five, including blowing out Dallas in the season finale. If they come out flat in January against the same team they crushed 48-20 the previous month, your championship dreams will end suddenly.

In other words, the results of the games in the regular season barely count, as long as your team can play .500 ball. All that matters in the NFL is the playoffs. That's why the NFL season really begins in January.

No wonder their fans get lost in fantasy leagues for 16 weeks every fall. That's the only way they can keep the games interesting.

College football fans don't need fantasy football. Our real league holds our full attention for 14 straight weeks, with dozens of playoff atmosphere games that rival the excitement of any of the NFL's 11 post-season games.

Sure, the season's climax isn't as definitive as the NFL's, but at least we get to keep arguing after the season's over. Isn't that what we guys like most about sports anyway?

Would a playoff solve the problem of the disputed championship in college football? Sure it would, but we would be throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

Let's not trade 14 weeks of playoff atmosphere football for three weeks of real playoffs.

Why Florida Won the BCS Championship Game

Lou Vozza — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 09:15:28 -0500

For a Gator fan, this was almost a perfect game. Although a blowout would have been more satisfying, consider this: Tebow played well enough to win, but cost himself so much money in the NFL draft with his poor passing that he probably has to come back to Florida for another year.

As Marv Albert would say: Yesssss!!

Oklahoma won the toss and elected to receive. On the second play from scrimmage, the reason was clear. Sam Bradford dropped back and lofted a perfect 40 yard spiral down the left sideline, right on the hands of his streaking wide receiver, Manuel Johnson.

In the Big 12, that's an easy touchdown and the beginning of a 54 to 24 rout. But here's what happens to plays like that when Major Wright's patrolling the deep zone:

OK, so he got there a little bit before the ball. Nobody's perfect (how good is the Florida defense going to be next year, by the way?).

From that play on, the game went according to script, at least when Oklahoma had the ball. This was a close game for two reasons:

1) Oklahoma's defense SHOWED UP with an absolutely awesome performance that is being almost completely overlooked in all the post game analysis. They held one of the top scoring offenses in the country to 20 points under their season average. Also, they gave up seven points less than their own season scored upon average.

TWO Tim Tebow interceptions? Sunspots occur more frequently.

2) Flawless special teams play. Yes, they gave up a blocked field goal, but in a much bigger play, they forced a roughing the kicker penalty. They also completely shut down Brandon James.

Can you believe Florida's defense stopped Oklahoma from scoring when they had a first down inside the Florida five yard line...TWICE?!!

There's your ball game.

TV coverage: Oh, the agony. Did Fox pay so much for the rights to this thing that they didn't have any money left over to pay real announcers? What'd they do, pick these guys out of a day laborer crowd on Alvarodo Street by the Pioneer Chicken stand?

And I know Florida's not a primo traditional college program like Oklahoma, but we could we have a little respect in the studio? Barry Switzer AND Jimmy Johnson? Why not play the Oklahoma fight song in the background?

And after the game, Switzer was as baffled as Porky Pig: "...ahdeee, ahdee, ahdee there's no way to stop these guys, they option this way, then that way,then shovel pass this way, ahdee, ahdee, ahdee..."

Hey, Barry, THEY STOPPED THEM!! YOUR OFFENSE WAS SUPPOSED TO SCORE MORE THAN 24 POINTS!

Attorney General of Utah to sue BCS?

Lou Vozza — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 12:40:29 -0500

See article Utah to sue BCS

This is what I'm talking about when I say a poll based eight or 16 team playoff won't work. Once you start a playoff, even a plus one, you have to let all 11 conference champions in. The BCS conference's legal position is already shaky enough. If they were to create a real tournament, they would have absolutely no justification in keeping the mid-major conference champions out.

They don't want to include the mid-majors because they don't want to distribute the post-season money equitably to them. Right now the BCS conferences keep most of the money.

Of course, once you let the Troys and Buffalos in, you are going to have to have a lot of wild cards, otherwise the playoffs will be a joke. The power imbalances among the conferences are so severe, just about every year there are two conferences where the teams that finish second, third and fourth in the conference are much much better football teams than most of the other conference champions.

Bump Georgia and Texas Tech so Troy and Buffalo can play for the title? Heck, LSU will want in too. And why not? That's how the NCAA basketball tournament grew from 8 teams to 64 teams.

That's why the minimum number of teams in a playoff is 24 and it will probably be 32 before they're done.

Every year journalists and bloggers cry out for a four, eight, or 16 team playoff as the only reasonable solution to the frustration fans feel over the BCS.

BUT IT IS A SEDUCTIVE LIE!

Most fans don't want a 24 or 32 team playoff.

You know what they say: Be careful what you ask for. You just might get it.

Why Utah Should Not Be National Champion

Lou Vozza — Sat, 03 Jan 2009 11:57:57 -0500

The sixth ranked Utah Utes just completed a dominating victory over the fourth ranked Alabama Crimson Tide, a team that spent ten weeks of the season ranked either first or second in the country.

Utah is the only team in the top ten that is undefeated. In total they have beaten three ranked teams and three teams from BCS conferences (yes, we have to count Michigan). To their credit, though, several years ago when the Utes scheduled Michigan, they expected the Wolverines to be a highly ranked team. I'm willing to give them some "anybody, anywhere, anytime" points for that, even though it didn't work out too well. All in all, theirs is a very impressive record.

So, should they be number one in the country? Unfortunately for Utah, the answer is pretty simple: No.

According to the BCS rules agreed to by all eleven Div 1-A conferences, including the Mountain West, the national champion is determined by a playoff between the number one and number two teams in the country as of the end of the first week of December.

Technically, their game against Alabama was a consolation/exhibition game that doesn't count in terms of who is or who is not national champion. Anyone who tries to declare Utah the national champion is trying to change the rules of the game after they have lost. That's called bad sportsmanship.

Utah should be proud of their great season. Unfortunately, because they lack a national reputation, they didn't draw the kind of high preseason ranking that teams need to get to the top of the polls. Their fantastic win over Alabama and their undefeated season will go a long way toward establishing a national reputation. Therefore, their victory is very important and will be very valuable to them in the future.

Even more importantly, if the other two teams in the division, TCU and BYU, can continue to build their programs, they will have strong teams inside their conference to compete against every year. As we all know, this is another requirement for success in the BCS.

Why the AP Poll Can't Declare a Legitimate National Champion

Lou Vozza — Fri, 02 Jan 2009 04:10:19 -0500

I am a traditionalist in that I do not approve of the two team playoff that was created in 1998. I am in favor returning to the way things were prior to 1966, when the final polls were published in early December before the bowls.

While I am against the two team playoff, I approve of the reform the BCS made to the polling system. It represented an honest attempt to resolve the problem of the split championship and it was constructed in an entirely fair and reasonable manner.

Also, while the the NCAA doesn't officially sanction a champion in Division 1-A football, the BCS system is one agreed to in writing by all eleven Division 1-A conferences. Ever since 1984, when the Supreme Court ruled against the NCAA in an anti-trust lawsuit, the power in 1-A football has resided with the conferences, not the NCAA. Therefore, any championship formula to which the eleven conferences agree is legitimate.

It may need some tweaking here and there, but the concept behind the BCS polling formula is solid. A composite poll that computes an average of more than one human poll and more than one computer ranking is clearly a superior polling method to a single poll of writers or coaches or any other one group of people.

The BCS also had a legitimate reason to create this poll. College football had been plagued for a generation by discrepancies between the two major polls, the AP Writer's Poll and the UPI/ESPN Coach's Poll. The BCS polling system was put in place to ensure an undisputed national champion and end the problem of the "split" championship.

However, the AP writers arrogantly rejected this excellent solution. They refused to allow themselves to be blended into a composite poll, because this would undermine their status and power as kingmakers.

In doing so, they relinquished their status as a venerable traditional poll and became a rogue poll intent on preserving the split championship institution for the sake of their own glory.

Therefore, I view any team that accepts the number one AP ranking as a legitimate national champion as a rogue champion.

To prove that I am not a whiny sore loser like many college football fans, consider that I am a Florida fan. I would be perfectly happy to end the season right now and declare Oklahoma the National Champion based on Oklahoma's number one ranking in the BCS poll. This is despite the fact that the AP poll has Florida ranked first and that I agree with the AP writers that Florida is a better team than Oklahoma.

OK, I wouldn't exactly be happy, but as an adult I don't try to change the rules of the game after I've lost.

I discussed this in a post on my blog a couple of weeks ago when the final polls were published.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/90356-congratulations-to-the-oklahoma-sooners-2008-national-champions

A Modest Proposal to Improve the BCS

Lou Vozza — Tue, 30 Dec 2008 09:14:00 -0500

Like it or not, the BCS system is going to be around for a long time. All playoff proposals are doomed to failure because they pressure the BCS conferences to relinquish their power and distribute revenue more equitably to the non-BCS conferences.

Rather than agitating for the abolition of a system we are stuck with, wouldn't it be more productive for the college football commenting blogosphere to apply its collective intelligence to improving the BCS in ways that don't threaten the income of the BCS conferences?

Here's an example. What if Division 1-A created a one round mini-tournament in the middle of the season that includes the top 24 ranked teams? It would not be a playoff, or a substitute for a playoff, just a unique one round tournament with no subsequent rounds.

The week following the tournament, all teams would resume their normal schedules. All that changes is the BCS rankings, based on the results of the games just like any other week.

To do this, all 119 teams would have to permanently schedule their bye week for week eight, the week after the first BCS standings are released. The top 24 teams in the BCS rankings would at that time be divided into four six team brackets:

Bracket 1 Teams ranked 1-6
Bracket 2 Teams ranked 7-12
Bracket 3 Teams ranked 12-18
Bracket 4 Teams ranked 19-24

The six teams in each bracket would play three football games, seeded by ranking. The higher ranked team would get home field. Bracket 4 would play on Thursday night, Bracket 3 would play on Friday night and Brackets 1 and 2 would play on Saturday, with the starting times of the games staggered from Noon until 8 PM.

Here's what the tournament brackets would have looked like this year based on the first BCS rankings released after week seven:

Bracket 4 Thursday night

24. Cal at 19. South Florida
23. Ball State at 20. North Carolina
22. Vanderbilt at 21. Wake Forest

Bracket 3 Friday night

18. Michigan State at 13. Ohio State
17. VTech at 14. Utah
16. Kansas at 15. Boise State

Bracket 2 Saturday

10. Oklahoma State at 9. Georgia 1PM
11. Missouri at 8. BYU 1PM
12. LSU at 7. Texas Tech 4PM

Bracket 1 Saturday

4. Oklahoma at 3. Penn State 4PM
5. USC at 2. Alabama 8PM
6. Florida at 1. Texas 8PM

This top 24 interconference tournament would great for fans and would give the sport a big event to market.

While it would not resolve the fundamental issue of the undisputed championship, it would correct some basic flaws in the BCS system in the following ways:

1) Gives the fans and pollsters an opportunity to see all the top ranked teams play against each other when, unlike the bowl games, the results still have a meaningful impact of the race for the top two spots in the BCS rankings.

2) Also, compared to the bowl season, the matchups would be strictly logical and not skewed by conference bowl tie-ins. This is one of the biggest complaints about the BCS and the bowl system.

3) Ensures that all ranked teams play another ranked team at least once during the regular season, or if they already play ranked teams, it adds one more ranked team to their schedule.

4) Allows BCS conference teams with unintentionally weak schedules a chance to move up in the polls and improve their strength of schedule for the computers.

5) Forces BCS teams who intentionally schedule a lot of cupcakes to face stronger competition.

6) From a non-BCS conference point of view, it gives ranked non-BCS teams a chance to prove themselves against better competition, thus greatly improving their chances for BCS busting bowl bids.

7) From a BCS conference point of view, it would potentially weed out the non-BCS conference "pretenders." Teams like last year's undefeated Hawaii and this year's undefeated Boise State are always one of the main sources of anti-BCS whining at the end of every year. This would alleviate that.

8) Provides 12 high quality inter-conference games. Many people want to see these games played on a regular basis (with all the wonderful bragging rights and arguments that would ensue).

9) Would improve the quality of the polling in two ways: first, most voting coaches would actually be able to watch the ranked teams play for the first time and second, it would be helpful to the other pollsters to see all the top teams play against each other consecutively. This might mitigate the "lose early, win late" factor in the end of year beauty contests by setting a mid-season reference point.

Looking at the 2008 season in hindsight, the tournament would have provided the following specific benefits:

1) Would have given USC an opportunity to get back in the NC race by playing Alabama.

2) Would have probably made it so we didn't have to depend on Iowa to keep Penn State from staking a claim on the NC game when their strength of schedule was really too light to justify it. Of course, PSU might have beaten Oklahoma, thus removing any doubts and argument as to their legitimacy.

3) Might have given Texas the extra quality win they needed to get into the NC game.

4) Would have provided four non-BCS teams, Utah, BYU, Boise State and Ball State, an opportunity to prove themselves against better competition, greatly increasing their opportunity to move up to a more meaningful spot in the final rankings.

5) Most importantly, it would probably have answered one of the big questions of the 2008 season: "Are Big 12 offenses really that good or are Big 12 defenses just lousy?" The cumulative interconference results and statistics from the tournament in this regard would have had a big impact on voting at the end of the season.

Matt Grothe: The Most Underrated Player in College Football

Lou Vozza — Mon, 29 Dec 2008 09:08:35 -0500

The most underrated player is...drumroll please...South Florida's Matt Grothe.

Is Grothe better than Pat White?

I'm a big Pat White fan and think he deserves to be included in arguments about which college QB is the greatest ever. Here are White's career statistics:

Passing yards: 6,049
Rushing yards: 4,480 (new career record for QB)

Total yards:10,529

Now here are Grothe's stats:

Passing yards: 8,157
Rushing yards: 2,085

Total yards: 10,242

Grothe's career numbers are close to White's, but hold on a second—Grothe compiled these statistics in three seasons vs. White's four seasons. If Grothe played in as many games as White and produced his three year average stats, he would have 13,600 total yards!

It's rare that you get a chance to compare two quarterbacks in college football so fairly. They played in the same conference during the same seasons. That means they didn't just play against similar competition, they played against identical competition.

And Grothe's playing on a team that is clearly worse, which partly explains why he has more interceptions (42 to White's 23) and more sacks (80 to White's 41).

Just to throw in a reference point from another conference, Graham Harrell has about 15,000 passing yards in three years. That's close to an NCAA record.

As a final reference point, here are Vince Young's career stats in three years.

Passing yards: 6,040
Rushing yards: 3,127

Total yards: 9,167

I'm not trying to say Matt Grothe is the greatest, just that he's clearly not getting enough love. Why?

1. Not flashy
2. Plays for a team with no reputation and a small fan base.
3. Might have overcome these two if his teams had been more successful.

Top Five Second Half of the Season Meltdowns

Lou Vozza — Sun, 28 Dec 2008 23:41:26 -0500

1. Vanderbilt

The Commodores started 5-0, beating two Top 25 teams, and rising to a national ranking of No. 13. An all too predictable 1-6 finish brought home the meltdown trophy.

2. South Florida

On Oct. 4, the Bulls were 5-0 and ranked ranked 13th in the country. Hmm, right where Vanderbilt was ranked before they melted down. Must be an unlucky number, because South Florida went 2-5 over its last seven games and ended up sixth in the Big East standings.

3. LSU

Last year's national champs drew a No. 7 preseason ranking. Things weren't looking too bad on Oct. 26, when the Tigers were 5-1 and ranked...you guessed it, 13th. LSU went 2-4 from that point. Without a miracle 30-point fourth quarter against Troy, they would have gone 1-5.

4. Minnesota

Minnesota was ranked 20th after beating Purdue on Oct, 24, but the Gophers lost their last five games, including a 55-0 beatdown by Iowa in the season finale.

5. Missouri

The Tigers were ranked sixth in preseason polls and sitting very pretty on Oct. 11 with a 5-0 record and No. 3 ranking. Mizzou went 4-4 the rest of the way, looking helpless in the Big 12 Championship against Oklahoma.

Honorable Mention

Virginia—beat Georgia Tech on Oct. 25, then lost last four.
Duke—beat Virgina during 3-1 start, then lost seven of last eight.
Louisville—lost last five games.

Five Reasons Why College Football Bowl Games Matter

Lou Vozza — Sat, 27 Dec 2008 01:22:49 -0500

Except for the National Championship game, all the bowl games are technically exhibition matches in the sense that they have no bearing on conference standings or the national championship.

However, these exhibition games do have significant importance outside of bragging rights, boondoggle vacations for fat cat boosters and increased revenue for local bars, escort services and strip clubs.

Here are five reasons the bowl games really matter:

1. The national television exposure is crucial for recruiting.

The success of a college program is largely dependent on how well it recruits. Few things help recruiting more than the national exposure gained by participating in, and winning, a holiday bowl game.

2. The results help determine next year's pre-season ranking

This is the one time of year you can be assured that most of the people who vote in the polls are actually watching the games. This is an especially good time to impress the coaches, who in most cases are for the first time really watching the teams they have been voting for all year.

Two of the main elements that go into determining a preseason ranking are how many returning seniors a team has and how they finished the previous season. A team's bowl game is their best chance to make a statement to pollsters about how they finished their season.

3. The games give fans an opportunity to watch teams that normally get left out of the regular season Saturday television rotation.

Because of regional TV coverage, it's even difficult to watch some of the top teams if you aren't close to their local market. Even if you have ESPN game plan and two televisions next two each other like Parkov, there are only so many games you can watch at once on regular season Saturdays.

I would like to stop here and give a round of applause for ESPN's Thursday night football, which gives us a similar opportunity throughout the regular season. It's the biggest improvement in college football broadcasting since 1984, when the Supreme Court ruled against the NCAA in an anti-trust lawsuit, thereby liberating fans from the longtime straitjacket of just two regional games every Saturday afternoon on ABC. As great as that regime was for Keith Jackson's career, it sucked for the rest of us.

4. Provides an excellent indicator of relative conference strength

As we know, inter-conference games between ranked teams are hard to come by. And credit to Ark_Razor to pointing this out in a comment.

5. What the heck else are you going to do on New Year's Day?

Enjoy everybody!!! It's going to be a long wait until Labor Day.

By the way, anybody notice the hype going into the NFL's "big game" Sunday night between the Chargers and Broncos? One team is sub-500, the other is one game over .500 and they are fighting for the last playoff spot. At long last, some real regular season drama for the NFL!

In college football, that game is barely the equivalent of a regular season meeting between two teams ranked in the 10-20 range. That's why we have the best regular season in sports!

College Football's Best and Worst Bowl Matchups

Lou Vozza — Thu, 25 Dec 2008 23:39:21 -0500

Best

1. Florida vs. Oklahoma

This contest has drawn praise from even the most ardent BCS critics and highlights an advantage the BCS two-team playoff has over an expanded playoff: It directly matches up the top two seeds, thus avoiding a Cinderella upset.

2. Texas Tech vs. Ole Miss

Texas Tech is a great team that should be playing in a BCS bowl.

Not only is Ole Miss the sole team to beat Florida, but the 8-4 Rebels were actually just a few plays away from being 11-1:

- lost to Wake Forest on a 41-yard field goal as time expired.

- lost to Vanderbilt when Rebels running back Dexter McCluster seemingly scored the go-ahead touchdown with 2:40 left but fumbled the ball away in the end zone.

- lost to Alabama on the road by four points when a late fourth quarter drive fell short.

3. Oklahoma State vs. Oregon

These might be the two most underrated teams in the country. The six combined losses between them were to Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, USC, Boise State, and Cal.

On the other hand, Oregon almost lost to three really bad teams, in Purdue, Stanford, and UCLA, while the Cowboys didn't even show up against Texas Tech and Oklahoma.

I guess they're in the Holiday Bowl for a reason.

4. Georgia Tech vs. LSU

Last year's Auburn/Clemson Chick-fil-A Bowl was my favorite bowl game. At the time, who knew how disastrous 2008 was going to be for those two programs?

I'm hoping this year's game will be as good as last year's. Georgia Tech finished the season looking like a very dangerous team, while LSU floundered at the end. Surely the Tigers can't be that bad. They took Alabama to overtime, didn't they?

Should be a good atmosphere again, with Georgia Tech at home and LSU a well-known team to knowledgeable and enthusiastic local SEC fans.

5. South Carolina vs. Iowa

If Illinois hadn't beaten them on a last second field goal, the Hawkeyes would have won their last six games. They knocked Penn State out of the NC game and obliterated Insight Bowl-bound Minnesota 55-0 in their final game of season.

South Carolina has one of the best defensive units in the country, and the Ole Ball Coach still has a little glamour left. Steve Garcia gets the start...might as well let Sergio Garcia take charge.

Worst

1. Alabama vs. Utah

This is ridiculous. The Tide should be playing Texas, USC, or Texas Tech

2. USC vs. Penn State

Almost as silly. Trojans should be playing Texas, Alabama, or Texas Tech

3. Texas vs. Ohio State

As bad as the other two games, really. Ohio State or Penn State should be playing Utah, or each other. Texas deserves better.

4. Cincinnati vs. Virginia Tech

Do these two teams have one exciting or interesting player between them?

5. Maryland vs. Nevada

Why are they playing? If I had posted this before Christmas, Notre Dame vs. Hawaii would have won this spot.

Biggest Second Half of Season Comebacks in College Football

Lou Vozza — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 03:16:45 -0500

1. Clemson

Ranked ninth preseason, Clemson was sent into a tailspin by Alabama in week one. The beleaguered Tigers were 3-4 on November 1st as they traveled to Boston with their new coach. They went 4-1 the rest of the way, thumping arch rival South Carolina 31-14 the last day of the season in front of the home crowd. Playing on January 1st in the Gator bowl.

2. Rutgers

Didn't handle the departure of Ray Rice very well, starting the season a disastrous 1-6, including a loss to Navy. Finished the season with six straight victories, blowing out no. 17 Pittsburgh, South Florida and Louisville. Made Papa John's bowl against NC State.

3. Ole Miss

Despite their win over Florida, the Rebels were 4-4 after their loss to Alabama on October 18th. They won their next five straight to go 9-4 and draw Texas Tech in the Cotton Bowl on January 2nd. Their game against Texas Tech is the best bowl matchup except for Florida vs. Oklahoma.

4. Iowa

Only 3-3 on October 4th, the Hawkeyes won five of their next six, including a dramatic win at home over number 3 Penn State. Blew out Minnesota 55-0 in the season finale and are playing on New Year's Day against South Carolina in the Outback Bowl. Third best bowl matchup.

5. Nebraska

Were 3-3 on October 18th, playing in the toughest division in football. Went 5-1 the rest of the way, losing only to Oklahoma. Good bowl matchup against Clemson.

Honorable Mention

Miami: went 5-2 in last seven games, but lost last two
Rice: won last six games
Oregon State: won seven of last eight, but got blown out in finale against Oregon

North Carolina State: won last four to make bowl

Southern Mississippi: won last four after losing five in a row.

The Five Most Important College Football Plays of 2008

Lou Vozza — Sun, 21 Dec 2008 14:08:49 -0500

1. Graham Harrell's 28-yard TD pass to Michael Crabtree as time expired to beat Texas. This play cost the Longhorns the Big 12 South Division title and probably a spot in the NC game.

2. Brandon Spikes' face plant of Knowshon Moreno on the second play of the game at the Florida vs. Georgia Cocktail Party. This play set the tone for the game and sparked the Gators to a five game rampage that led to the NC game.

In the 2007 Cocktail Party, Georgia humiliated the Gators behind 188 rushing yards by Moreno. During summer weight training, Urban Meyer made the Gator defensive players do 188 reps at each weight station, one for each yard they gave up to Moreno. This video below is a testament to the success of Meyer's motivational ploy.

3. Dan Murray of Iowa's 31-yard field goal with one second left to beat Penn State 24-23. This spared us from watching Florida or Oklahoma blow out Penn State in the NC game.

4. Oregon State's Greg Laybourn intercepts Mark Sanchez and returns it to the USC two-yard line, icing the game for the Beavers with 2:58 remaining.

That play kept the Trojans out of the National Championship game. Not a knock on Sanchez. He had to try to force the ball into the spot given the situation.

Jacquizz Rodgers understandably got all the publicity, but the Beaver's defense was the real star. Watching the game, I was sure USC would come back to win, but the OSU D shut the door.

5. On October 11, Georgia starting offensive tackle Vince Vance suffers a season-ending knee injury. This fully decimates the Dawg offensive line, which was already crippled by the loss of its other starting tackle, Trinton Sturdivant. Sturdivant is a sophomore who was named a first-team freshman All-SEC and All-American in 2007.

If Georgia's offensive line had been healthy in 2008, I believe that no SEC team would have survived their gauntlet, and the NC game would have been played between Oklahoma and Texas or Oklahoma and USC. Both Moreno and Stafford also would have probably been Heisman finalists.

I've been a little tough on Georgia and Stafford in my last couple of posts, so I thought I would throw that in.

The Most Valuable Quarterbacks in College Football

Lou Vozza — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 18:33:26 -0500

1. Tim Tebow

A QB who can stand up a linebacker in the open field - and love every second of it - is unique in the history of the sport, college or pro. Without exception, non-skill position players see QBs as prima donnas, who don't want to hit or get hit. By contrast, Tebow's enthusiasm for taking and delivering crunching blows gains him the full respect of all his teammates.

He takes advantage of this with his emotional sideline cheerleading. For example, after scoring the go ahead touchdown against Alabama, he ran onto the field and head butted the Gator kickoff team. I repeat, he ran across the field and head butted the guys on the kickoff team.

That's why Bobby Bowden called him the best team leader he's ever seeen.

I've even forgiven him for crying when he loses. Part of that whole emotion thing, I guess.

2. Pat White

I know he had an off-year, but after Tebow, he's my first pick to build a team around.

3. Colt McCoy

Always take the college QBs who can make plays with their legs. Strong accurate arm. Smart. Good field leader. May end up better than White before he's done. Those 18 interceptions last year still bother me, though.

4. Chase Daniel

Threw for over 4,000 yards, 27 TD's. Had a higher completion rate than Harrell and Bradford while playing for a worse team. As a runner, he's not going to juke anybody out of their shoes, but he's fast and has a quick first step. 250 yards rushing.

5. Graham Harrell

Better numbers than Bradford on a worse team.

6. Sam Bradford

Honestly, I'm not trying to knock Bradford by putting him sixth. He's very talented and seems like a really good kid. Probably a better NFL prospect than the others.

I understand why he got the Heisman. However, like Harrell, I'd like to see him get it done under a pass rush with somebody actually covering his receivers. He admitted as much on national TV during the Heisman show.

"This award should go to my offensive line. My job's easy. I have all the time in the world to pass and none of my receivers are ever covered." Right after he said that they cut to Urban Meyer, who was in the theater. Meyer looked like his head was about to explode.

We'll see if the Gator's defense is good enough to get to him. If they don't, it's going to be a close game. If they do, it'll be a repeat of the 2006 Ohio State game. (Hint. The Gators are going to empty the secondary. I hope Bradford has a good health insurance plan).

7. Todd Reesing

Reesing ranked No. 8 in 1-A passing yards despite getting sacked 28 times. Ouch. Love watching this guy play ever since I caught him in the Orange Bowl against VTech last year. A real leader. At 5"11" I guess he gets no shot at the next level.

8. Jevon Snead

I was sold on Snead the second week of the season when I watched the Ole Miss/Wake Forest game. I started to get a little nervous before the Rebels played Florida when I heard he had originally committed to Florida and got dumped by Urban Meyer after Tebow signed.

But then I relaxed. We're 28 point favorites, right? There's no way a sophomore comes into the Swamp and shows up the mighty Gators on national TV, right? Wrong. This guy's a gamer. He'll be in the top five next year.

9. Mark Sanchez

Lost in the shuffle, I guess. I don't think he ever got into a good rhythm after injuring his ankle early in the season. Should be near the top next season.

10. Matthew Stafford

I've been watching this guy closely for 3 years. Big arm, small heart. Heard him on the radio this week talking about what a successful year he had. Right. Absolutely shredded Central Michigan's secondary, then went MIA during the games that mattered. Stafford will cash his NFL bonus and that will be the end of him. He'll be out of the league faster than Leaf.

I don't have to worry about Dawg fans getting on me for trashing him. They stopped blogging in October.

Honorable mentions

The other Big 12 QB's: Zac Robinson, Josh Freeman, Joe Ganz even Robert Griffin.

Juice Williams at Illinois quietly put up good numbers.

Terelle Pryor looked good.

David Johnson of Tulsa had a huge year, as did Mike Teel of Rutgers.

If I left anybody out, feel free to leave a comment.