I lamented a couple weeks ago about the erosion of the Heisman trophy, which no longer goes to the most outstanding player in the country, but instead now goes to the best player on the #1 team at the end of October.
Don't believe me?
Take it from this actual Heisman voter, as quoted by Heisman Pundit, the web's leading expert on the Heisman:
"[Troy Smith] had a slight stumble," acknowledged one voter. "But that doesn't take away from the fact that he's still the most electrifying player on the best team in college football."
Not "he's the most electrifying player in college football." No. "the most electrifying player on the best team in college football."
If even the voters are acknowledging that this trophy goes to the best player on the #1 team, then Quinn has already lost.
UNLESS, Troy Smith has a horrible game against Michigan, and Notre Dame beats the tar out of SC.
Then, MAYBE, Brady gets a legitimate shot.
However, the "journalists" on ESPN are still partaking in the premature coronation of Smith. Last night, former Buckeye Kirk Herbstreit was commenting on Brian Brohm's failure to perform in the face of Rutger's defensive pressure. He was searching for a similar example of when a top quarterback struggled against a defense.
You'd think that, after a 100 yard and 1 interception performance by Troy Smith just last week, he would be the obvious choice for comparison.
But, that might hurt Smith's Heisman hype.
Instead, he decided to go to the quarterback that hasn't thrown an interception since September 23, who is coming off of back-to-back 300+ yard 3+ touchdown performances, and whose worst game sill had an even touchdown to interception ratio.
That's right folks, when he was talking about Brian Brohm being uncomfortable in the pocket, he decided to use the one player that has been completely unflappable in the pocket, except for the first quarter against Michigan.
He even went so far as to claim that we'd seen that kind of performance "a couple of times" from Quinn.
Now, Quinn and the Irish deserve some criticism for the egg they laid against Michigan. But Michigan is arguably the best team in the nation.
Smith gets no criticism for laying an egg against Illinois. Southern Cal isn't hurt by losing to Oregon State. SEC losses don't even appear to count anymore.
I don't expect ESPN to be completely unbiased. As a matter of fact, I like it when sportscasters get fired up about their team. When I have a problem is when they systematically attack rival institutions without any rational basis for the attacks.
Friday, November 10, 2006
Sunday, November 05, 2006
Guest Blogging
For a little different perspective, my good friend and classmate Justin wanted to provide his insights on the prospects of the Irish playing in a National Championship game - here is his response:
I don't think we need all of the aforementioned to happen.
1. We need Florida and Louisville to lose.
Although FSU sucks this season, they have a legitimate shot at beating UF. UF
lost their best defensive player this week due to suspension, FSU has replaced
their QB (the replacement just killed UVa), and they are playing in
Tallahassee.
I’m not sold on Louisville. They will lose either to Rutgers, USF, or
Pittsburgh.
2. We need USC to beat Oregon & Cal.
3. We need Michigan to beat OSU.
This leaves Michigan, Texas, Auburn, USC, and ND.
Fantasy Projections:
Michigan: NC game
Texas: UT finishes out pretty weak. Yes, they have A & M and the Big 12
championship game, but it's quite likely that they won't be playing a ranked
team here on out. Hence, they’ll be finishing the season on a low note.
Auburn: Very similar to UT. Auburn isn't playing in the SEC championship game,
as Arkansas has the SEC West pretty much wrapped up. So, similar to UT, they
finish the season w/o playing a ranked team, w/o much fanfare.
USC: See ND.
ND: If Michigan beats OSU, and USC beats Cal and Oregon, it sets up a big
showdown between SC and ND on Nov. 25. If we beat SC soundly – especially
considering that this is THE GAME of a holiday weekend – we finish on a very
high note.
The voters at the end of the season face a dilemma: Texas, Auburn, or ND.
Texas gets love from the USA Today poll. ND gets love from the Computer &
Harris. Auburn, not playing in the SEC championship game, gets little backing
from anyone (or anything). There is no way to project what the Harris and
Computer Poll will look like at the end, so little is gained by discussing
whether Texas or ND gets in over each other. That said, we will have a much
stronger SOS than Texas, have our only loss coming from the team playing in the
NC game, and will be finishing the season on a high note, in front of a large
audience. This could set up a perfect scenario for ND.
I know the abovementioned neglects a scenario where a one loss Arkansas wins the
SEC championship, or Rutgers finishes the season undefeated, but I just can’t
see either jumping ND if the “Fantasy Projections” work out. Maybe I’m naïve.
I don't think we need all of the aforementioned to happen.
1. We need Florida and Louisville to lose.
Although FSU sucks this season, they have a legitimate shot at beating UF. UF
lost their best defensive player this week due to suspension, FSU has replaced
their QB (the replacement just killed UVa), and they are playing in
Tallahassee.
I’m not sold on Louisville. They will lose either to Rutgers, USF, or
Pittsburgh.
2. We need USC to beat Oregon & Cal.
3. We need Michigan to beat OSU.
This leaves Michigan, Texas, Auburn, USC, and ND.
Fantasy Projections:
Michigan: NC game
Texas: UT finishes out pretty weak. Yes, they have A & M and the Big 12
championship game, but it's quite likely that they won't be playing a ranked
team here on out. Hence, they’ll be finishing the season on a low note.
Auburn: Very similar to UT. Auburn isn't playing in the SEC championship game,
as Arkansas has the SEC West pretty much wrapped up. So, similar to UT, they
finish the season w/o playing a ranked team, w/o much fanfare.
USC: See ND.
ND: If Michigan beats OSU, and USC beats Cal and Oregon, it sets up a big
showdown between SC and ND on Nov. 25. If we beat SC soundly – especially
considering that this is THE GAME of a holiday weekend – we finish on a very
high note.
The voters at the end of the season face a dilemma: Texas, Auburn, or ND.
Texas gets love from the USA Today poll. ND gets love from the Computer &
Harris. Auburn, not playing in the SEC championship game, gets little backing
from anyone (or anything). There is no way to project what the Harris and
Computer Poll will look like at the end, so little is gained by discussing
whether Texas or ND gets in over each other. That said, we will have a much
stronger SOS than Texas, have our only loss coming from the team playing in the
NC game, and will be finishing the season on a high note, in front of a large
audience. This could set up a perfect scenario for ND.
I know the abovementioned neglects a scenario where a one loss Arkansas wins the
SEC championship, or Rutgers finishes the season undefeated, but I just can’t
see either jumping ND if the “Fantasy Projections” work out. Maybe I’m naïve.
National title hopes
Last week, I conceded the national title chances due to pollster bias, and I stick to that, but for those of you that want to know what needs to happen for the Irish to have a shot, here it is, by BCS ranking:
1. Ohio State
Remaining games of note: vs. #2 Michigan
We need: Loss to Michigan
2. Michigan
Remaining games of note: @ #1 Ohio State
We need: Michigan to win - the bigger the better.
3. Louisville
Remaining games of note: @ #13 Rutgers, @ Pitt
We need: Loss to Rutgers
4. Florida
Remaining games of note: vs. South Carolina, @ Florida State, SEC Championship
We need: Loss in the SEC Championship; The 'Noles are down, and Spurrier can't seem to finish games this year.
5. Texas
Remaining games of note: Texas A&M, Big 12 Championship
We need: Loss to Texas A&M - the Championship game won't challenge them.
6. Auburn
Remaining games of note: Georgia, Alabama
We need: Loss to Alabama - Georgia is bad, but Alabama has a shot because it is a rivalry game.
7. Southern California
Remaining games of note: vs. #20 Oregon, vs. #8 Cal, vs. #9 Notre Dame
We need: Wins over Oregon and Cal, then a loss to ND.
8. California
Remaining games of note: @ #7 Southern Cal
We need: Cal to lose to SC. They won't be challenged by Arizona or Stanford, and don't have to play in a championship game. And a loss by SC dampens our game with them.
9. Notre Dame
Remaining games of note: @ #7 Southern Cal
We need: Just win, baby.
10. West Virginia
Remaining games of note: @ Pitt, vs. #13 Rutgers
We need: Win over Rutgers. We might be able to get by an undefeated Rutgers squad, but better safe than sorry. I don't see WVU catching us from behind.
11. Arkansas
Remaining games of note: vs. Tennessee, vs. LSU, possible SEC Championship
We need: 1 loss (to either Tenn. or LSU), then a win over the Gators in the SEC Championship
12. LSU
Remaining games of note: @ Arkansas, vs. Alabama
We need: Nothing - they have two losses. A win over Arkansas would be helpful.
13. Rutgers
Remaining games of note: vs. #3 Louisville, @ #10 West Virginia
We need: A win over Louisville on Thursday, then a loss to either Pitt or West Virginia.
Now, as you look at that long list of things we need to happen, consider that if just one of those things doesn't happen, we will need a tremendous boost in the polls to overcome it.
Now, I would expect a bit of a jump in the polls in the final balloting of the ESPN Coaches Poll, as the ND haters (like Spurrier) will have to move ND up into a reasonable ranking spot before their ballots go public, negating some of the bias.
Overall, however, I think we are on a collision course with the Sugar Bowl and a matchup with either Florida or Auburn.
1. Ohio State
Remaining games of note: vs. #2 Michigan
We need: Loss to Michigan
2. Michigan
Remaining games of note: @ #1 Ohio State
We need: Michigan to win - the bigger the better.
3. Louisville
Remaining games of note: @ #13 Rutgers, @ Pitt
We need: Loss to Rutgers
4. Florida
Remaining games of note: vs. South Carolina, @ Florida State, SEC Championship
We need: Loss in the SEC Championship; The 'Noles are down, and Spurrier can't seem to finish games this year.
5. Texas
Remaining games of note: Texas A&M, Big 12 Championship
We need: Loss to Texas A&M - the Championship game won't challenge them.
6. Auburn
Remaining games of note: Georgia, Alabama
We need: Loss to Alabama - Georgia is bad, but Alabama has a shot because it is a rivalry game.
7. Southern California
Remaining games of note: vs. #20 Oregon, vs. #8 Cal, vs. #9 Notre Dame
We need: Wins over Oregon and Cal, then a loss to ND.
8. California
Remaining games of note: @ #7 Southern Cal
We need: Cal to lose to SC. They won't be challenged by Arizona or Stanford, and don't have to play in a championship game. And a loss by SC dampens our game with them.
9. Notre Dame
Remaining games of note: @ #7 Southern Cal
We need: Just win, baby.
10. West Virginia
Remaining games of note: @ Pitt, vs. #13 Rutgers
We need: Win over Rutgers. We might be able to get by an undefeated Rutgers squad, but better safe than sorry. I don't see WVU catching us from behind.
11. Arkansas
Remaining games of note: vs. Tennessee, vs. LSU, possible SEC Championship
We need: 1 loss (to either Tenn. or LSU), then a win over the Gators in the SEC Championship
12. LSU
Remaining games of note: @ Arkansas, vs. Alabama
We need: Nothing - they have two losses. A win over Arkansas would be helpful.
13. Rutgers
Remaining games of note: vs. #3 Louisville, @ #10 West Virginia
We need: A win over Louisville on Thursday, then a loss to either Pitt or West Virginia.
Now, as you look at that long list of things we need to happen, consider that if just one of those things doesn't happen, we will need a tremendous boost in the polls to overcome it.
Now, I would expect a bit of a jump in the polls in the final balloting of the ESPN Coaches Poll, as the ND haters (like Spurrier) will have to move ND up into a reasonable ranking spot before their ballots go public, negating some of the bias.
Overall, however, I think we are on a collision course with the Sugar Bowl and a matchup with either Florida or Auburn.
Tuesday, October 31, 2006
Monday, October 30, 2006
Train Wreck .com
I know, I know. My life would be far less stressful if I stopped watching/reading ESPN. But, much like a horrific train wreck, I can't pry my eyes away from the computer screen.
Far another little glimpse into the bias of ESPN (which is even worse, believe it or not, than the bias at Fox News...), check out this little nugget from Ivan Maisel:
"...only No. 11 Notre Dame resembled a candidate for a national championship. The Irish did so because they played Navy, a team long on guts and precision and short and light in categories like height and weight."
Fill in the blank: __________ has 4 wins in Div. I-A, a win over a Div. I-AA opponent, and only one of their three losses was to an unranked team.
Choices: Navy, Oregon State
Actually, its a trick question. Either team could fill in that blank. However, Navy's lone loss was to 7-1 Tulsa, who is just barely unranked, clocking in as the highest vote getter outside the top 25 in both polls. Oregon State's unranked loss was to Washington State, who got no votes in the AP poll, and has only half the votes that Tulsa does in the ESPN poll.
But somehow, a loss to Oregon State looked better to the pollsters this week than a 24-point win over the Midshipmen.
Now, the media is also painting the Irish into a corner that they can't get out of, and it has nothing to do with their play on the field:
"Given that the Irish's three opponents in the interim -- North Carolina, Air Force and Army -- are a combined 7-17, a potential USC victory is all Notre Dame had going for it."
Now, I understand that strength of schedule is a great way to separate the wheat from the chaff among 1-loss teams, but the strength of schedule manipulation that is going on in the media is ridiculous. A loss to #11 Michigan is somehow bad because it is early in the season, but people are saying now that the Buckeyes could lose to the Wolverines and still be in the championship. Last week, the Irish were contenders to get into the championship with a big win over Southern Cal, but this week, through no fault of Notre Dame, beating the hell out of Southern Cal isn't going to be good enough. Forget that the pollsters still have them ranked #9. Also, strength of schedule wasn't even mentioned during the first half of the season, when the Irish played the toughest schedule in the country. But now, when the Irish are playing the weaker part of their schedule, it becomes a big issue.
Also, when the Irish put together this schedule, it looked like a tough schedule. Michigan, Penn State, Southern Cal, Georgia Tech, Michigan State, Purdue, and Stanford were all BCS teams that are often ranked - indeed, Michigan and Southern Cal are perennially expected to be top 10 teams. And in many ways, the schedule has lived up to its billing. Michigan is #2. USC is #9. Georgia Tech is currently #20, and had been ranked as high as #13. Penn State is hovering just outside the top 25, and had been ranked as high as #19. By the end of the year, we will have played 8 bowl teams, and probably 3 BCS participants. But because the next three weeks we play Army, North Carolina, and Air Force, our schedule is considered "weak." Forget that North Carolina is a BCS conference team, and that Air Force is leading the Mountain West conference. Only Army is clearly a weak team, but with three wins, they are doing better this year than many BCS conference teams, including Duke, Northwestern, Mississippi, and Mississipi State.
Here is another thing that bugs me. Somehow, conference games are considered to be tough, even against the lowly teams in the conference (see: Auburn - Ole Miss). But because Notre Dame doesn't have a conference per se, their annual opponents (Navy, Purdue, Michigan State, Southern Cal, Michigan, Stanford) aren't considered the same way that "tough" conference games are in the Big 12. When Southern Cal plays Stanford, that will be a tough conference game, but when we do, we are scheduling weak opponents. We play Stanford just as often, the familiarity is the same. And the pundits speak as if Notre Dame schedules them each year so they play a patsy. That just isn't true. For example, Notre Dame schedules Navy each year because Navy saved the University during World War II, and at the time the series was made permanent, the service academies were THE powers in college football. But in this day and age of "what have you done for me lately," the integrity displayed by both schools in the continuance of the tradition, Notre Dame takes a hit for "dumbing down" its schedule.
So, I'm conceding (reluctantly) our chance of playing in the Championship game. We could stomp all over Southern Cal, be the one-loss team with the toughest schedule in the country, having lost only to the top-ranked team, and some pansy from the SEC will get in because they had a "tough" conference schedule.
Horseshit.
Far another little glimpse into the bias of ESPN (which is even worse, believe it or not, than the bias at Fox News...), check out this little nugget from Ivan Maisel:
"...only No. 11 Notre Dame resembled a candidate for a national championship. The Irish did so because they played Navy, a team long on guts and precision and short and light in categories like height and weight."
Fill in the blank: __________ has 4 wins in Div. I-A, a win over a Div. I-AA opponent, and only one of their three losses was to an unranked team.
Choices: Navy, Oregon State
Actually, its a trick question. Either team could fill in that blank. However, Navy's lone loss was to 7-1 Tulsa, who is just barely unranked, clocking in as the highest vote getter outside the top 25 in both polls. Oregon State's unranked loss was to Washington State, who got no votes in the AP poll, and has only half the votes that Tulsa does in the ESPN poll.
But somehow, a loss to Oregon State looked better to the pollsters this week than a 24-point win over the Midshipmen.
Now, the media is also painting the Irish into a corner that they can't get out of, and it has nothing to do with their play on the field:
"Given that the Irish's three opponents in the interim -- North Carolina, Air Force and Army -- are a combined 7-17, a potential USC victory is all Notre Dame had going for it."
Now, I understand that strength of schedule is a great way to separate the wheat from the chaff among 1-loss teams, but the strength of schedule manipulation that is going on in the media is ridiculous. A loss to #11 Michigan is somehow bad because it is early in the season, but people are saying now that the Buckeyes could lose to the Wolverines and still be in the championship. Last week, the Irish were contenders to get into the championship with a big win over Southern Cal, but this week, through no fault of Notre Dame, beating the hell out of Southern Cal isn't going to be good enough. Forget that the pollsters still have them ranked #9. Also, strength of schedule wasn't even mentioned during the first half of the season, when the Irish played the toughest schedule in the country. But now, when the Irish are playing the weaker part of their schedule, it becomes a big issue.
Also, when the Irish put together this schedule, it looked like a tough schedule. Michigan, Penn State, Southern Cal, Georgia Tech, Michigan State, Purdue, and Stanford were all BCS teams that are often ranked - indeed, Michigan and Southern Cal are perennially expected to be top 10 teams. And in many ways, the schedule has lived up to its billing. Michigan is #2. USC is #9. Georgia Tech is currently #20, and had been ranked as high as #13. Penn State is hovering just outside the top 25, and had been ranked as high as #19. By the end of the year, we will have played 8 bowl teams, and probably 3 BCS participants. But because the next three weeks we play Army, North Carolina, and Air Force, our schedule is considered "weak." Forget that North Carolina is a BCS conference team, and that Air Force is leading the Mountain West conference. Only Army is clearly a weak team, but with three wins, they are doing better this year than many BCS conference teams, including Duke, Northwestern, Mississippi, and Mississipi State.
Here is another thing that bugs me. Somehow, conference games are considered to be tough, even against the lowly teams in the conference (see: Auburn - Ole Miss). But because Notre Dame doesn't have a conference per se, their annual opponents (Navy, Purdue, Michigan State, Southern Cal, Michigan, Stanford) aren't considered the same way that "tough" conference games are in the Big 12. When Southern Cal plays Stanford, that will be a tough conference game, but when we do, we are scheduling weak opponents. We play Stanford just as often, the familiarity is the same. And the pundits speak as if Notre Dame schedules them each year so they play a patsy. That just isn't true. For example, Notre Dame schedules Navy each year because Navy saved the University during World War II, and at the time the series was made permanent, the service academies were THE powers in college football. But in this day and age of "what have you done for me lately," the integrity displayed by both schools in the continuance of the tradition, Notre Dame takes a hit for "dumbing down" its schedule.
So, I'm conceding (reluctantly) our chance of playing in the Championship game. We could stomp all over Southern Cal, be the one-loss team with the toughest schedule in the country, having lost only to the top-ranked team, and some pansy from the SEC will get in because they had a "tough" conference schedule.
Horseshit.
Sunday, October 29, 2006
Poll Hypocrisy
Last night, I was at C.J.'s pub hanging out with some law school friends (and a couple of players), and the conversation turned to the polls. Auburn barely adged out a BAD 2-7 Ole Miss team, Texas needed last minute heroics by the refs to keep 5-3 Texas Tech from winning, and Tennessee was trailing going into the 4th quarter, and only a Spurrier implosion allowed them to survive the week.
Several of my friends pointed at the close calls by one loss teams against crappy teams, and prognosticated that Notre Dame would move up in the polls after a big win, dropping other teams under the same logic that allowed pollsters to drop Notre Dame after close wins. They all agreed, nearly unanimously, that USC's loss to a crappy Oregon State team would drop them out of the top 10, allowing us to move up at least one spot.
I knew better. I told them that every other 1-loss team would move up a spot, Notre Dame would stay the same, and USC would drop down to the spot in front of Notre Dame.
I was too optimistic.
Notre Dame, the only 1-loss team this week to cover their spread, actually dropped a spot in the AP poll, being passed by Cal (who had a bye week), and USC dropped only six spots after losing to an unranked team, staying ahead of the Irish in both polls.
Here's what the media had to say about yesterday's games:
Auburn "slipped out of another SEC road trap" against "gritty Mississippi" and the Auburn "BCS title hopes [are] still alive."
Volunteers "hold strong against Gamecocks, stay in BCS title hunt," as they avoid "Spurrier's hex" and intercepted a "desperation heave," which they only had to do because "Ainge was out with a bad ankle on the [previous] series."
Texas "overcame four turnovers and erased the bad deficit" to win through "confidence and perseverance," and were only trailing because "Texas Tech played as well as [Mack Brown has] ever seen them play," and Texas Tech QB Harrell "had been nearly perfect in the first half" and even the big lead they overcame was "helped along by a fumble recovery."
Notice that nowhere in there does the media say that the 5-3 Red Raiders "struggled in the second half" or that 2-7 Ole Miss "made too many mistakes when it counted," or even that in their win over 5-2 South Carolina, Tennessee "didn't play well until the end." All of these things were said about Notre Dame's close wins over 3-0 Michigan State and 4-2 UCLA.
Even worse, the Irish dropped from #2 in the AP poll to #12 (10 spots) after losing to then #11, and currently undefeated #2 Michigan. However, after losing to unranked 4-3 Oregon State, USC drops only 6 spots, from #3 to #9. So, apparently, losing to the second best team in the country is somehow worse than losing to a Pac-10 also-ran.
This kind of blatant hypocrisy and bias is why college football needs a playoff. And at this point, the rankings are no longer defensible with vague "body of work" justifications.
Somebody please defend this for me, 'cause I just don't get it:
Notre Dame (7-1)
GAME: Close Win over 0-0 Georgia Tech 14-10 (currently leading ACC, ranked #20)
RESULT: Notre Dame drops in both polls
GAME: Big Win over 1-0 #19 (AP and ESPN) Penn State (currently 4th in Big Ten) 41-17
RESULT: Notre Dame moves back up to #2 in AP, up to #3 in ESPN
GAME: Big Loss to #11 AP/#13 ESPN Michigan (currently leading Big Ten, unanimous #2) 47-21
RESULT: Notre Dame drops 10 spots in both polls
GAME: Close Win over 3-0 Michigan State (has tanked since this game)
RESULT: Dropped one spot in ESPN poll, stayed same in AP poll
GAME: Big Win over 4-0 Purdue (has tanked since this game)
RESULT: Moved up two spots in ESPN poll, stayed same in AP poll
GAME: Big Win over 0-5 Stanford 31-10
RESULT: Moved up 3 spots in AP, 4 in ESPN
GAME: BYE
RESULT: Dropped one spot in AP poll
GAME: Close Win over 4-2 UCLA (top 10 defense) 20-17
RESULT: Dropped 2 spots in ESPN poll (passed by Florida, who had a bye, and Tennessee, who also had a close win)
GAME: Big Win over 5-2 Navy 38-14
RESULT: Dropped one spot in AP poll (passed by Cal, who had a bye)
Averaged drop after losses for the top 1-loss teams (week of the loss, and overall change in ranking since the loss):
Notre Dame by 26 to #11 Michigan: week of: -10 change since: -1
Auburn by 17 to unranked Arkansas: week of: -8 change since: +1
Texas by 17 to #1 Ohio State: week of: -6 change since: +4
USC by 2 to unranked Oregon State: week of: -6 change since: N/A
Tennessee by 1 to #7 Florida: week of: -2 change since: +11
California by 17 to #23 Tennessee: week of: -12 change since: +12
At this point, I'm willing to begin entertaining conspiracy theories, as Notre Dame is held to a double standard. Winning big over a bowl team in an away game drops us in the polls. But winning close games against bad teams allow other teams to move up. Taking a bye week makes us drop in the rankings compared to teams who win games that week. However, other teams' bye weeks allow them to pass us, even though we win a game that week.
Notre Dame should lead the charge to do away with the BCS and institute a playoff. And don't tell me it can't be done - Division I-AA, II, and III already do it.
Several of my friends pointed at the close calls by one loss teams against crappy teams, and prognosticated that Notre Dame would move up in the polls after a big win, dropping other teams under the same logic that allowed pollsters to drop Notre Dame after close wins. They all agreed, nearly unanimously, that USC's loss to a crappy Oregon State team would drop them out of the top 10, allowing us to move up at least one spot.
I knew better. I told them that every other 1-loss team would move up a spot, Notre Dame would stay the same, and USC would drop down to the spot in front of Notre Dame.
I was too optimistic.
Notre Dame, the only 1-loss team this week to cover their spread, actually dropped a spot in the AP poll, being passed by Cal (who had a bye week), and USC dropped only six spots after losing to an unranked team, staying ahead of the Irish in both polls.
Here's what the media had to say about yesterday's games:
Auburn "slipped out of another SEC road trap" against "gritty Mississippi" and the Auburn "BCS title hopes [are] still alive."
Volunteers "hold strong against Gamecocks, stay in BCS title hunt," as they avoid "Spurrier's hex" and intercepted a "desperation heave," which they only had to do because "Ainge was out with a bad ankle on the [previous] series."
Texas "overcame four turnovers and erased the bad deficit" to win through "confidence and perseverance," and were only trailing because "Texas Tech played as well as [Mack Brown has] ever seen them play," and Texas Tech QB Harrell "had been nearly perfect in the first half" and even the big lead they overcame was "helped along by a fumble recovery."
Notice that nowhere in there does the media say that the 5-3 Red Raiders "struggled in the second half" or that 2-7 Ole Miss "made too many mistakes when it counted," or even that in their win over 5-2 South Carolina, Tennessee "didn't play well until the end." All of these things were said about Notre Dame's close wins over 3-0 Michigan State and 4-2 UCLA.
Even worse, the Irish dropped from #2 in the AP poll to #12 (10 spots) after losing to then #11, and currently undefeated #2 Michigan. However, after losing to unranked 4-3 Oregon State, USC drops only 6 spots, from #3 to #9. So, apparently, losing to the second best team in the country is somehow worse than losing to a Pac-10 also-ran.
This kind of blatant hypocrisy and bias is why college football needs a playoff. And at this point, the rankings are no longer defensible with vague "body of work" justifications.
Somebody please defend this for me, 'cause I just don't get it:
Notre Dame (7-1)
GAME: Close Win over 0-0 Georgia Tech 14-10 (currently leading ACC, ranked #20)
RESULT: Notre Dame drops in both polls
GAME: Big Win over 1-0 #19 (AP and ESPN) Penn State (currently 4th in Big Ten) 41-17
RESULT: Notre Dame moves back up to #2 in AP, up to #3 in ESPN
GAME: Big Loss to #11 AP/#13 ESPN Michigan (currently leading Big Ten, unanimous #2) 47-21
RESULT: Notre Dame drops 10 spots in both polls
GAME: Close Win over 3-0 Michigan State (has tanked since this game)
RESULT: Dropped one spot in ESPN poll, stayed same in AP poll
GAME: Big Win over 4-0 Purdue (has tanked since this game)
RESULT: Moved up two spots in ESPN poll, stayed same in AP poll
GAME: Big Win over 0-5 Stanford 31-10
RESULT: Moved up 3 spots in AP, 4 in ESPN
GAME: BYE
RESULT: Dropped one spot in AP poll
GAME: Close Win over 4-2 UCLA (top 10 defense) 20-17
RESULT: Dropped 2 spots in ESPN poll (passed by Florida, who had a bye, and Tennessee, who also had a close win)
GAME: Big Win over 5-2 Navy 38-14
RESULT: Dropped one spot in AP poll (passed by Cal, who had a bye)
Averaged drop after losses for the top 1-loss teams (week of the loss, and overall change in ranking since the loss):
Notre Dame by 26 to #11 Michigan: week of: -10 change since: -1
Auburn by 17 to unranked Arkansas: week of: -8 change since: +1
Texas by 17 to #1 Ohio State: week of: -6 change since: +4
USC by 2 to unranked Oregon State: week of: -6 change since: N/A
Tennessee by 1 to #7 Florida: week of: -2 change since: +11
California by 17 to #23 Tennessee: week of: -12 change since: +12
At this point, I'm willing to begin entertaining conspiracy theories, as Notre Dame is held to a double standard. Winning big over a bowl team in an away game drops us in the polls. But winning close games against bad teams allow other teams to move up. Taking a bye week makes us drop in the rankings compared to teams who win games that week. However, other teams' bye weeks allow them to pass us, even though we win a game that week.
Notre Dame should lead the charge to do away with the BCS and institute a playoff. And don't tell me it can't be done - Division I-AA, II, and III already do it.
Friday, October 27, 2006
United States Naval Academy v. University of Notre Dame
[Because I don't have time to draft a new post on the Naval Academy this week, I'm reposting last year's comments on the history of the game - enjoy.]
This game has always been my favorite game to attend. Notre Dame is all but guaranteed to win, but the game is always hard-fought for 60 minutes and no matter the outcome, game day is imbued with a higher level of respect between opponents than any other games the Irish play.
The service academies always demand a certain level of respect, considering that the men that take that field are first soldiers, then students, and finally athletes.
But Notre Dame - Navy is more. For Notre Dame and Navy, this game has a much deeper historic meaning than other games.
From Navy's game notes for this week:
"Notre Dame and Navy first met on the football field in 1927, while Knute Rockne was the Irish head coach. But to truly understand the Notre Dame-Navy series requires a trip back to the 1940s, when Frank Leahy had the Irish on top of the football world.
"Leahy coached the Irish to a national championship in 1943, his third year as head coach, just before enlisting with the Navy to serve in World War II. Following the war, Leahy and the Irish picked up right where they had left off, going four entire seasons without a loss and claiming national championships in 1946, 1947 and 1949.
"But World War II cost Notre Dame a lot more than its talented head coach and a slew of players (including 1943 Heisman Trophy winner Angelo Bertelli). It virtually wiped out the small, all-male school. The University was having terrible financial problems, and as an all-male school with so many young men being drafted and going off to war, there was almost nobody left to attend the University.
"As part of the war effort, the Navy needed more officers than the Naval Academy was able to produce in a short period of time. So a decision was made to utilize a number of institutions across the nation in which young men would attend college and receive training to become officers. Notre Dame became the site for one such program. Not only did Notre Dame now have a much-needed influx of students preparing to become Naval officers, but the Navy also built a number of facilities on campus that served Notre Dame for years. It's safe to say that if it wasn't for the Navy and the Naval Academy, Notre Dame may not exist today."
Legend has it that, pursuant to the Naval Academy's assistance during World War II, Coach Frank Leahy and President John Cavanaugh agreed to play Navy in football any time they wanted, and sealed the deal with a handshake.
Prior to that agreement, Notre Dame had played Navy every year since 1927, and have continued ever since. The agreement is not legally binding, but the integrity of both schools is in many ways a more enduring bond than any contract.
The stark reality on the football field, however, is that Navy cannot compete with Notre Dame in the current college football landscape. The last time Navy beat the Irish was also the last time Navy fielded a Heisman trophy winner in Roger Staubach. The Naval Academy is simply not equipped to compete with the upper level competition in Division I-A, especially with the height/weight limits placed on the service academies. [END of last year's posting]
The ND-Navy game last year also was one of the most moving experiences I've experienced at Notre Dame stadium. After the game, Coach Weis directed the team to walk over and stand behind the Navy team at the end of the game - the entire stadium fell absolutely silent as the Naval band played "Navy Blue and Gold," the alma mater of the Naval Academy. The level of respect that this team has for the service academies is apparent not just during this kind of outward display, but also in the way the players treat each other on the field. Tom Zbikowski confirmed earlier this week that there is no trash-talking on the field when they play Navy. They play to win, but the understanding that these young men will not be playing football or taking cushy jobs, but will instead be laying their lives down for our protection, is displayed in things like a helping hand after the play, or a quick tap on the helmet congratulating the opponent after a good play.
Go Irish
Beat Navy
This game has always been my favorite game to attend. Notre Dame is all but guaranteed to win, but the game is always hard-fought for 60 minutes and no matter the outcome, game day is imbued with a higher level of respect between opponents than any other games the Irish play.
The service academies always demand a certain level of respect, considering that the men that take that field are first soldiers, then students, and finally athletes.
But Notre Dame - Navy is more. For Notre Dame and Navy, this game has a much deeper historic meaning than other games.
From Navy's game notes for this week:
"Notre Dame and Navy first met on the football field in 1927, while Knute Rockne was the Irish head coach. But to truly understand the Notre Dame-Navy series requires a trip back to the 1940s, when Frank Leahy had the Irish on top of the football world.
"Leahy coached the Irish to a national championship in 1943, his third year as head coach, just before enlisting with the Navy to serve in World War II. Following the war, Leahy and the Irish picked up right where they had left off, going four entire seasons without a loss and claiming national championships in 1946, 1947 and 1949.
"But World War II cost Notre Dame a lot more than its talented head coach and a slew of players (including 1943 Heisman Trophy winner Angelo Bertelli). It virtually wiped out the small, all-male school. The University was having terrible financial problems, and as an all-male school with so many young men being drafted and going off to war, there was almost nobody left to attend the University.
"As part of the war effort, the Navy needed more officers than the Naval Academy was able to produce in a short period of time. So a decision was made to utilize a number of institutions across the nation in which young men would attend college and receive training to become officers. Notre Dame became the site for one such program. Not only did Notre Dame now have a much-needed influx of students preparing to become Naval officers, but the Navy also built a number of facilities on campus that served Notre Dame for years. It's safe to say that if it wasn't for the Navy and the Naval Academy, Notre Dame may not exist today."
Legend has it that, pursuant to the Naval Academy's assistance during World War II, Coach Frank Leahy and President John Cavanaugh agreed to play Navy in football any time they wanted, and sealed the deal with a handshake.
Prior to that agreement, Notre Dame had played Navy every year since 1927, and have continued ever since. The agreement is not legally binding, but the integrity of both schools is in many ways a more enduring bond than any contract.
The stark reality on the football field, however, is that Navy cannot compete with Notre Dame in the current college football landscape. The last time Navy beat the Irish was also the last time Navy fielded a Heisman trophy winner in Roger Staubach. The Naval Academy is simply not equipped to compete with the upper level competition in Division I-A, especially with the height/weight limits placed on the service academies. [END of last year's posting]
The ND-Navy game last year also was one of the most moving experiences I've experienced at Notre Dame stadium. After the game, Coach Weis directed the team to walk over and stand behind the Navy team at the end of the game - the entire stadium fell absolutely silent as the Naval band played "Navy Blue and Gold," the alma mater of the Naval Academy. The level of respect that this team has for the service academies is apparent not just during this kind of outward display, but also in the way the players treat each other on the field. Tom Zbikowski confirmed earlier this week that there is no trash-talking on the field when they play Navy. They play to win, but the understanding that these young men will not be playing football or taking cushy jobs, but will instead be laying their lives down for our protection, is displayed in things like a helping hand after the play, or a quick tap on the helmet congratulating the opponent after a good play.
Go Irish
Beat Navy
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)