The next round of picks:
Independence Bowl: Missouri vs. North Carolina
Winne: Missouri
Little Caesars Bowl: Purdue vs. Western Michigan
Winner: Purdue
Belk Bowl: North Carolina State vs. Louisville
Winner: North Carolina State
Military Bowl: Toledo vs. Air Force
Winner: Toledo
Holiday Bowl: Cal vs. Texas
Winner: Texas
Champs Sports Bowl: Florida St vs. Notre Dame
Winner Florida: State
Alamo Bowl: Baylor vs. Washington
Winner: Baylor
Armed Forces Bowl: BYU vs. Tulsa
Winner: Tulsa
Pinstripe Bowl: Rutgers vs. Iowa State
Winner: Rutgers
Music City Bowl: Mississippi State vs. Wake Forest
Winner: Mississippi State
Insight Bowl: Iowa vs. Oklahoma
Winner: Oklahoma
Meineke Car Care Bowl: Texas A&M vs.Northwestern
Winner: Texas A&M
Sun Bowl: Georgia Tech vs. Utah
Winner: Georgia Tech
Kraft Fight Hunger Bowl: Illinois vs. UCLA
Winner: Illinois
Liberty Bowl: Cincinnati vs. Vanderbilt
Winner: Vanderbilt
Chick-fil-A Bowl: Auburn vs. Virginia
Winner: Auburn
Monday, December 26, 2011
Friday, December 16, 2011
Bowl Predictions Pre-Christmas Bowls
Last year I rather disastrously picked against the spread. Also, there was the fact that I ended up someplace where I couldn't blog to post predictions for a lot of games. So this year I hope to alleviate both those things. I'm not picking against the spread. It's more challenging, but it also is friggin impossible*. I'll also make sure to have all my prediction posts written and scheduled to go up in case a similar incident happens**. So, here are my picks for the pre-Christmas bowls:
New Mexico Bowl: Temple vs. Wyoming
Winner: Temple
Famous Idaho Potato Bowl: Ohio vs. Utah State
Winner: Utah State
New Orleans Bowl: San Diego State vs. UL Lafayette
Winner: San Diego State
Beef O' Brady's Bowl: Florida International vs. Marshall
Winner: Marshall
Poinsettia Bowl: TCU vs. Louisiana Tech
Winner: TCU
Las Vegas Bowl: Boise State vs. Arizona State
Winner: Boise State
Hawaii Bowl: Southern Miss vs. Nevada
Winner: Southern Miss
-Michael
*It's also the reason I have to hide from my bookie
**I don't expect it to
New Mexico Bowl: Temple vs. Wyoming
Winner: Temple
Famous Idaho Potato Bowl: Ohio vs. Utah State
Winner: Utah State
New Orleans Bowl: San Diego State vs. UL Lafayette
Winner: San Diego State
Beef O' Brady's Bowl: Florida International vs. Marshall
Winner: Marshall
Poinsettia Bowl: TCU vs. Louisiana Tech
Winner: TCU
Las Vegas Bowl: Boise State vs. Arizona State
Winner: Boise State
Hawaii Bowl: Southern Miss vs. Nevada
Winner: Southern Miss
-Michael
*It's also the reason I have to hide from my bookie
**I don't expect it to
Sunday, December 4, 2011
BCS Rambles
I'm not one who is terribly opposed to the LSU vs. Alabama rematch. It's impossible for anyone to know for certain whether Alabama is better that Oklahoma State or Stanford. I personally think they are. The resume is probably actually better for Oklahoma State, but the so-called 'eye test' makes me think Alabama is better.
I don't really have that much sympathy for Oklahoma State. Yes, it is unfortunate that this system isn't going to give the opportunity to disprove my theory about them vs. Alabama. However, they had an opportunity, in this system, to derive us of the usual controversy. All they had to do was beat Iowa State* and none of this would be an issue.
What I will concede to the Oklahoma State case is they were punished for losing later than Alabama. It's really simple with the way the polls work: lose early. Oklahoma State lost after Alabama, which allowed reactionary pollsters to jump them ahead of the Cowboys and that just doesn't change. I don't know exactly how to describe that dichotomy. Once a team is at a place in the polls they just don't get jumped unless they lose regardless of outside factors. It's using the rankings to justify the rankings; it has little to do with on the field performance or 'body of work'.
I'm definitely in favor of a playoff system. I have come to the conclusion that it is unlikely to be created anytime soon. I don't know why the powers-at-be are so opposed to its creation, but they are. I believe that it will take one of the smaller schools (i.e. Boise St.) finally making it into that game and possibly winning for there to be any movement towards change. I believe once the big conferences see their big financial pie being cut into by the smaller ones they'll want a change.
If the BCS is going to be used to determine who is going to be the National Champion for the foreseeable future, I'd like for it's influence on the Rose, Fiesta, Sugar and Orange bowl removed. Those bowls' committees ought to be able to determine the teams they want to play without having to follow the BCS rules. I think the match-ups this year would be improved. Here's how what I think would be the differences.
BCS
Rose: Oregon vs. Wisconsin
Fiesta: Oklahoma State vs. Stanford
Sugar: Virginia Tech vs. Michigan
Orange: Clemson vs. West Virginia
Without BCS
Rose: Same
Fiesta: Same
Sugar: Arkansas vs. Michigan
Orange: Kansas State vs. Clemson
As it is I'm not particularly excited about watching the Sugar or Orange bowl, but I would be if those were the match-ups. I know it would hurt the Boise State's and Utah's of the world, but if they were really deserving of a bid they would get an invite to a big game without the BCS mandate. It also means the Big East won't be reward for mediocrity and a highly ranked team that is third in its conference is forced aside.
I think it is pretty clear that the system to decide the champion in college football's Division 1 "FBS" is broken. I actually think the decision to change the names for the two subdivisions of Division 1 from 1-a and 1-aa to FBS and FCS is pretty funny. It basically the NCAA saying Division 1 with a legitimate champion and Division with who the fuck knows. I really have no understanding why there hasn't been a playoff instituted in what was Division 1-a. It would be such a huge money maker; just look at how huge the contract for the Basketball tournament is. On top of that the bowl system could still exist as the NIT and CIT still can exist in Basketball. The Bowls may be a big money generator in themselves, but I think a playoff would make that figure seem tiny if they gave it a chance.
I do think that there will be an evolution to the heavily suggested Plus-1 model eventually. I welcome that change. It's not what I think is a perfect playoff would look like, but it's a start. More importantly, once they start with four teams, I guarantee that it will expand. Things like that just can't help themselves. Playoffs get bigger; just look at NCAA Basketball Tournament or what the MLB did this offseason. It would expand to eight teams, then twelve and down the line to sixteen.
People who are opposed to a playoff system often will say that a playoff doesn't get rid of controversy. That a playoff will have a controversy about 16 vs. 17 and such. That's true, but a playoff would push that where it's non-consequential for the National Championship. Look at the Basketball Tournament. There's controversy about bubble teams that Sunday night, but by noon on Thursday no one gives a damn anymore.
I don't think the scenario that we saw with the BCS this season is all that unusual. It was unique, but it seems to be just a variation on the discussion that goes on after most seasons. Teams get excluded from a chance at the Crystal Ball unfairly. The unfairness of the system is a problem that predates the BCS, but it is made very clear by the nature of the BCS.
My final thought on this issue as it pertains to this year is that LSU should win the A.P. National Championship unless they are absolutely embarrassed by Alabama in the National Championship game. I think Alabama has a very good chance at winning the game, but LSU did what they needed to do in the regular season and beat Alabama away from home. They don't deserve to be punished by this rematch. Also a split National Championship is a nice jab at the flawed nature of the BCS.
Thanks for reading and please comment
-Michael
I don't really have that much sympathy for Oklahoma State. Yes, it is unfortunate that this system isn't going to give the opportunity to disprove my theory about them vs. Alabama. However, they had an opportunity, in this system, to derive us of the usual controversy. All they had to do was beat Iowa State* and none of this would be an issue.
What I will concede to the Oklahoma State case is they were punished for losing later than Alabama. It's really simple with the way the polls work: lose early. Oklahoma State lost after Alabama, which allowed reactionary pollsters to jump them ahead of the Cowboys and that just doesn't change. I don't know exactly how to describe that dichotomy. Once a team is at a place in the polls they just don't get jumped unless they lose regardless of outside factors. It's using the rankings to justify the rankings; it has little to do with on the field performance or 'body of work'.
I'm definitely in favor of a playoff system. I have come to the conclusion that it is unlikely to be created anytime soon. I don't know why the powers-at-be are so opposed to its creation, but they are. I believe that it will take one of the smaller schools (i.e. Boise St.) finally making it into that game and possibly winning for there to be any movement towards change. I believe once the big conferences see their big financial pie being cut into by the smaller ones they'll want a change.
If the BCS is going to be used to determine who is going to be the National Champion for the foreseeable future, I'd like for it's influence on the Rose, Fiesta, Sugar and Orange bowl removed. Those bowls' committees ought to be able to determine the teams they want to play without having to follow the BCS rules. I think the match-ups this year would be improved. Here's how what I think would be the differences.
BCS
Rose: Oregon vs. Wisconsin
Fiesta: Oklahoma State vs. Stanford
Sugar: Virginia Tech vs. Michigan
Orange: Clemson vs. West Virginia
Without BCS
Rose: Same
Fiesta: Same
Sugar: Arkansas vs. Michigan
Orange: Kansas State vs. Clemson
As it is I'm not particularly excited about watching the Sugar or Orange bowl, but I would be if those were the match-ups. I know it would hurt the Boise State's and Utah's of the world, but if they were really deserving of a bid they would get an invite to a big game without the BCS mandate. It also means the Big East won't be reward for mediocrity and a highly ranked team that is third in its conference is forced aside.
I think it is pretty clear that the system to decide the champion in college football's Division 1 "FBS" is broken. I actually think the decision to change the names for the two subdivisions of Division 1 from 1-a and 1-aa to FBS and FCS is pretty funny. It basically the NCAA saying Division 1 with a legitimate champion and Division with who the fuck knows. I really have no understanding why there hasn't been a playoff instituted in what was Division 1-a. It would be such a huge money maker; just look at how huge the contract for the Basketball tournament is. On top of that the bowl system could still exist as the NIT and CIT still can exist in Basketball. The Bowls may be a big money generator in themselves, but I think a playoff would make that figure seem tiny if they gave it a chance.
I do think that there will be an evolution to the heavily suggested Plus-1 model eventually. I welcome that change. It's not what I think is a perfect playoff would look like, but it's a start. More importantly, once they start with four teams, I guarantee that it will expand. Things like that just can't help themselves. Playoffs get bigger; just look at NCAA Basketball Tournament or what the MLB did this offseason. It would expand to eight teams, then twelve and down the line to sixteen.
People who are opposed to a playoff system often will say that a playoff doesn't get rid of controversy. That a playoff will have a controversy about 16 vs. 17 and such. That's true, but a playoff would push that where it's non-consequential for the National Championship. Look at the Basketball Tournament. There's controversy about bubble teams that Sunday night, but by noon on Thursday no one gives a damn anymore.
I don't think the scenario that we saw with the BCS this season is all that unusual. It was unique, but it seems to be just a variation on the discussion that goes on after most seasons. Teams get excluded from a chance at the Crystal Ball unfairly. The unfairness of the system is a problem that predates the BCS, but it is made very clear by the nature of the BCS.
My final thought on this issue as it pertains to this year is that LSU should win the A.P. National Championship unless they are absolutely embarrassed by Alabama in the National Championship game. I think Alabama has a very good chance at winning the game, but LSU did what they needed to do in the regular season and beat Alabama away from home. They don't deserve to be punished by this rematch. Also a split National Championship is a nice jab at the flawed nature of the BCS.
Thanks for reading and please comment
-Michael
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)