1 Team 'til Kickoff: Florida
by utesfan100 on Sep 2, 2010 10:00 AM EDT
in Teams 'til Kickoff 2010
1 comment
[Editor's note: This series presents teams in order of the value each team would add to a conference hypothetical near the border of the criteria used by the BCS to determine future automatic qualifications. It is not a predictive measure of the 2010 season.]
Tonight ... FOOTBALL!!! [FYI, don't expect to see me near here until sometime this weekend]
Did I mention that the season kicks off tonight yet?!? I mean, one last team, and we are done. Kickoff. When I started that it seamed like forever from now. Now it seems each second lasts forever. Its like the clicking of the chain pulling the roller coaster up the hill to the twists, turns and loops ahead.
I have an interview to do.
FOOTBALL STARTS TONIGHT !!!
Today's look at the Florida Gators, WHO KICK OFF THEIR SEASON THIS SATURDAY!!!, is provided by mlmintampa, editor of Alligator Army.
What are you most anticipating seeing this Saturday vs. Miami?
What do they let John Brantley do? I am of the opinion that Brantley will be better for the Gators passing game than Tim Tebow was. However, with Jeff Demps, Emmanuel Moody and Chris Rainey, Florida has much better backs than receivers. That's not including future stars Mike Gillislee and Mack Brown. I think UF will run the ball a lot, but I hope they let Johnny pitch it around.
What parts of your team will you be watching to see what answers have been found?
Defensive line, who replaces Joe Haden at corner and who replaces Brandon Spikes at middle linebacker. We might see platoons the entire season. On the line, Justin Trattou and Duke Lemmens look to be the starters on the ends. Hopefully Omar Hunter will be the maneater promised out of high school and clog the middle. Terron Sanders will likely be the other tackle. Behind them on the depth chart is the future of Florida football; Shariff Floyd, Dominique "I realized in 9th grade I liked hitting people" Easley, Leon Orr and Ronald Powell. At corner, Moses Jenkins and Jeremy Brown are the top candidates to play opposite Janoris Jenkins. At middle linebacker, Jelani Jenkins should be the starter with Jon Bostic also seeing time. As a fan, it worries me that there are still starting spots up for grabs.
Based on the past three years, do you feel a ranking of #1 is deserved? How about a strength of schedule of 48?
Florida has won two of the last four National Championships and has only lost two games in the last two seasons, so I guess No. 1 is deserved if going on recent experience. Obviously, without Tim Tebow and All-Americans at center, corner, MLB and tight end, UF won't match their previous seasons. The strength of schedule sounds about right, since UF hasn't played an OOC game against a brand-name opponent since before the Gators' freshmen were born. The Gators are more worried about making coin from scheduling Miami-Ohio or Appy State than the schedule boost of a home-and-home with Ohio State or Utah.
What do you expect to see in 2010?
I expect more frustration (from fans) at Florida's play calling, but eventually understanding that the Gators are better running than passing. On defense, I expect growing pains similar to the 2007 season. This defense is more experience than that defense was, but UF is also breaking in a new defensive coordinator.
Will Urban impress yet again this even year, and can he survive it if he does?
I think people would be impressed if the Gators win the SEC. However, I really would like the Gators to have a goal to win all home and rivalry games. That means they can drop one at Alabama, but beat FSU on the road. I'm almost sure UF will drop a second regular season game (at Tennessee or home to LSU?), but they will be favored in those games. Meyer tells the team that the goal is to get to Atlanta, which means winning there is the only way to be considered a success.
As for Meyer's health, I think he will be fine, at least for the next several years. UF President Bernie Machen (who hired Meyer at UF and Utah) has said Meyer will eventually burn out and I subscribe to that theory. But I think it was pushed deep into the future with this recent episode. Between the athletic department, the football staff and his family, all of them have shouldered some of the stress to keep Meyer upright.
Thank you, mlmintampa, for taking the time to enlighten up about what to expect form the Gators this season. You can follow the Gators much more closely this season at Alligator Army. And you can do so starting THIS WEEKEND!!!
One last thing before the season launches...
1 Conference 'til Kickoff: SEC
by utesfan100 on Sep 2, 2010 9:00 AM EDT
in Teams 'til Kickoff 2010
1 comment
Tonight we have football, and tomorrow we will have real football news!
Finally, we will look at the top conference in the land. Don't believe me? Ask any of their fans. Or you could note the fact they are the only conference in the top two by all three criteria used by the BCS to determine future automatic qualifications.
The data used are the average in the six BCS computers for each team each year and any top 25 appearances each year. The highest ranked team is marked in bold and BCS rankings, where they exist, are listed below each teams average in the six BCS computers.
| Team | 2008 | 2009 | Average |
| Alabama Crimson Tide | 5.83 (4) |
1.00 (1) |
3.42 |
| Florida Gators | 3.67 (2) |
3.17 (5) |
3.42 |
| Georgia Bulldogs |
15.50 (15) |
25.50 | 20.50 |
| LSU Tigers | 45.83 | 10.17 (12) |
28.00 |
| Mississippi Rebels | 29.83 (25) |
27.83 | 28.83 |
| South Carolina Gamecocks | 40.50 | 31.67 | 36.08 |
| Arkansas Razorbacks | 62.33 | 28.17 | 45.25 |
| Auburn Tigers | 69.50 | 31.17 | 50.33 |
| Tennessee Volunteers | 67.67 | 37.83 | 52.75 |
| Kentucky Wildcats | 64.67 | 42.33 | 53.50 |
| Mississippi St. Bulldogs | 83.00 | 48.50 | 65.75 |
| Vanderbilt Commodores | 53.33 | 98.83 | 76.08 |
| Average | 45.14 |
32.18 |
38.66 |
Average Rank of the Highest Ranked Team: 1.5
Average Conference Ranking: 38.66
Adjusted Top 25 Performance Ranking: 97.78% ( 22 / 22.5 * 1)
The SEC lost its top spot in the adjusted top 25 performance index when the MWC added Boise State and lost Utah, as Boise State carries more points than Utah. The SEC has a higher raw score, but the MWC has a higher a multiplicative factor (determined by conference size).
An average conference ranking of 32.18 in 2009. That is just crazy good.
GAMES TONIGHT !!!!!!!!! !! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Bill Hancock Addresses BCS Proposal
by utesfan100 on Sep 2, 2010 12:07 AM EDT
in My Proposal
5 comments
Last month, BCS Executive Director Bill Hancock agreed to address questions related to core concepts of the BCS proposal I drafted last year. Basically this involved crafting the ideas into individual questions on each component rather than a cohesive design uniting them all.
Before the questions could be addressed, BYU launched a swirl of activity that Hancock was able to navigate and still find time to honor this request, and answer a few questions added on after the original questions were addressed.
So, without further interruption, here is the E-mail interview with Bill Hancock:
The first topic I would like to look at is in regards to your statement at the MAC media day regarding a playoff needing to include 16 teams so all conference champions could be included.
With eleven conferences and a few independents, wouldn't a twelve team format be sufficient and allow first round byes for the top four champions in the BCS standings to maintain a competitive edge for all teams late in the season?
Couldn't the field be narrowed by requiring conference champions to earn nine regular season FBS wins to qualify for a tournament? This would typically narrow the field to 7-8 teams and be a standard that gives all FBS teams an opportunity every year.
Bill's response: Most importantly, I am personally not in favor of a playoff because it would diminish the greatest regular season in sports, and would drastically change the popular bowl system that thousands of students and fans enjoy every year. Also, the consensus of the university presidents, conference commissioners, athletics directors, coaches and student-athletes does not support any kind of playoff. With such strong feelings from the people with the most deep understanding, a playoff is not going to happen. But if, at some point in the distant future, those groups change their minds and the NCAA membership does decide it wants a playoff consistent with the other sports' NCAA championships, then a 16-team format seems to be the minimum-sized bracket that would achieve something close to the current balance of automatic qualifiers and at-large teams that participate in those other NCAA events.
Actually, an awkward 24-team bracket would come closest to matching the AQ/at-large ratio of the 68-team Division I Men's Basketball Championship. A playoff bracket of that size would require five weeks to complete, thus subjecting fans to excessive travel costs and athletes to additional weeks of preparation and other students to more weeks of distraction at a time period encompassing final-exam periods and the holidays. It would also weaken the regular season in untold ways, and it would end the bowl system. Do folks really want to see that? I doubt it.
On August 6th SEC Commissioner Mike Slive discussed a "Flexible Final" format with Clay Travis. Have you had any discussions with Commissioner Slive about any such plans?
Bill's response: I have not.
The next topic involves the opinions of the university presidents. Many people have ideas about changes they would like to see but don't have access to the university presidents who would ultimately decide on any changes. Part of my proposal was to implement a formal survey of university presidents and athletic directors to provide an official reference for people interested in these two questions.
What aspects of the BCS contribute most to the overwhelming support it has received among the university presidents and AD's?
Bill's response: Many factors contribute to those groups' support of the BCS. In my opinion, the most important are (1) it allows a bowl game between the top two teams, (2) it preserves and enhances the importance of the regular season, (3) it preserves the bowl system that benefits 70 universities each year, and (4) it fits within the academic calendar.
What are the most commonly mentioned areas for improvement among university presidents and AD's?
Bill's response: The vast majority of presidents and athletics directors are quite happy with the current system. Of course, the group has always been open to new ideas, and that will continue. But I don't sense any groundswell for significant change. As for logistics, personally I believe the group needs to evaluate the dates of the games when the time comes to consider the BCS structure for 2015-2018.
Revenue sharing, why the Cotton Bowl is not a BCS bowl, should the Bowls count for BCS AQ determination and more topics are addressed in the full interview.
2 Conferences 'til Kickoff: Big 10
by utesfan100 on Sep 1, 2010 11:00 AM EDT
in Teams 'til Kickoff 2010
0 comments
Today we look at the Big 10. The criteria are based on 2011 membership and Nebraska will be a member in 2011.
The data used are the average in the six BCS computers for each team each year and any top 25 appearances each year. The highest ranked team is marked in bold and BCS rankings, where they exist, are listed below each teams average in the six BCS computers.
| Team | 2008 | 2009 | Average |
| Ohio St. Buckeyes | 11.50 (10) |
14.16 (8) |
12.83 |
| Penn St. Nittany Lions | 9.33 (8) |
19.17 (13) |
14.25 |
| Iowa Hawkeyes | 35.33 | 11.00 (10) |
23.17 |
| Nebraska Cornhuskers | 25.17 | 32.83 (22) |
29.00 |
| Wisconsin Badgers | 48.33 | 28.67 (25) |
38.50 |
| Northwestern Wildcats | 30.33 (23) |
47.17 | 38.75 |
| Michigan St. Spartans | 19.67 (18) |
60.17 | 39.92 |
| Minnesota Golden Gophers | 56.83 | 56.17 | 56.50 |
| Purdue Boilermakers | 77.33 | 74.00 | 75.67 |
| Illinois Fighting Illini | 66.67 | 89.67 | 78.17 |
| Michigan Wolverines | 88.50 | 82.33 | 85.42 |
| Indiana Hoosiers |
96.67 | 92.17 | 94.42 |
| Average | 47.14 | 50.63 | 48.88 |
Average Rank of the Highest Ranked Team: 8
Average Conference Ranking: 48.88
Adjusted Top 25 Performance Ranking: 95.00% ( 19 / 22.5 * 1.125)
The Big 10 slightly moved away from the MWC in the Average Conference Ranking. The addition of Nebraska was neutral in the Adjusted Top 25 Performance Ranking as Nebraska brought points to balance the lowered weight of twelve teams. Ground was lost as the MWC accelerated past them to the top.
The MWC and WAC swapped places around the Big 10 in the Average Rank of the Highest Ranked Team.
2 Teams 'til Kickoff: Ohio State
by utesfan100 on Sep 1, 2010 10:00 AM EDT
in Teams 'til Kickoff 2010
7 comments
[Editor's note: This series presents teams in order of the value each team would add to a conference hypothetical near the border of the criteria used by the BCS to determine future automatic qualifications. It is not a predictive measure of the 2010 season.]
For the record, the Ohio St. Buckeyes did not get bonus points for being a bunch of worthless nuts. The fact is that getting to and losing the BCS NCG is better than most teams have done. Although this list is purely formulaic, Ohio State's penchant for losing the NCG makes the #2 spot very fitting in hindsight.
Today we have two opinions. One by Johnathan Franz, co-founder and Ohio State voice for the recently rechristened Off Tackle Empire, and the second by Tyler T, from the newly launched Ohio State blog Along The Olentangy.
1) What aspects of the 2010 Ohio State football team are you anticipating most tomorrow?
Jon: The most important unit for this team's success is the offensive line, so I'll be extremely focused on the guys up front. Although Offensive Line Coach/Offensive Coordinator Jim Bollman has averaged one NFL linemen per season with Ohio State, he has yet to produce a truly dominant unit, and the general consensus in Columbus is that Bollman's lines underachieve. Last year, struggles on the edge and with pass blocking chained our offense to the ground. The success of the skill position players (Terrelle Pryor, DeVier Posey, Brandon Saine, Boom Herron) absolutely depends on a competent front five. Although the 2010 edition is a little thin on the depth chart, our starting group, anchored by Center Michael Brewster, Right Guard Bryant Browning, and Left Tackle Justin Boren, should be as good as anything we've seen at OSU in half a decade.
On the other side of the ball, I'll be paying close attention to the secondary, where we've got some new (but experienced) starters. Ohio State will face solid passing attacks in Miami (FL), Purdue, Wisconsin, and Iowa, and needs to continue to be able shut down opposing pass offenses in the red zone. Finally, I'm dying to see if our defensive line -- which should be one of the team's greatest strengths -- can continue to wreak havoc with a more limited rotation than in 2009.
Tyler: Seeing the team in totality is the most exciting moment every season. It's been many days since the Buckeyes last played in the Rose Bowl, so it will be a thrill to watch them run out of the tunnel once again. And, of course, it's always interesting to see which newcomers make an impact early in the season. Quite frequently, it's not the ones that the recruiting rankings would indicate, and that seems to be holding true for Ohio State this season. Big Johnathan Hankins and Philly (Corey) Brown have had the most positive noise coming out of fall camp, but a few others will have the opportunity to make their mark on special teams and in the two deep.
What areas will you be watching to gauge progress at potential weaknesses?
Tyler: Depth will be interesting to gauge. Under Jim Tressel, It has been tradition to rotate various personnel groups and non-starters early into the first game of the year. How well they play can determine how much playing time they will receive in the later games. The safety position lost both starters from the previous year, but senior Jermale Hines is experienced enough where we know that he is a capable replacement. Redshirt sophomore Orhian Johnson has played minimally, which makes his ability more intriguing, both positively and negatively. The fans are not really sure of what he brings to the table, and I'm sure many will be watching his play closely.
Jon: Like I said before, the offensive line, secondary, and defensive line are litmus tests for this team. To meet expectations the offensive line will have to play better than, and the secondary and defensive line will have to play at least as well as they did last year. That being said, the Buckeyes will face equally important challenges in the special teams arena. Ohio State's return coverage on kickoffs and punts was absolutely atrocious at times in 2009, particularly against Iowa and Oregon. Additionally, the Buckeyes lack a proven distance kicker (although Devin Barclay has reportedly made significant strides in the off-season).
Finally, the team needs to limit turnovers, and sustain drives. Both are essential to keeping a talented, but thin defense fresh.
Based on the past three years, do you feel a ranking of #2 is fair? How about a strength of schedule of 48?
Jon: The No. 2 ranking is fair only if you believe in the time tested formula of preseason rankings: Number of quality returning starters - Number of quality departing starters x Statement made in bowl game = Hype. The fact that Ohio State has 15 starters coming back from an 11-2 Rose Bowl Championship team is promising, especially when you consider the lack of other runaway favorites, but I won't be convinced until the Buckeyes show that they can compete consistently at a high level.
Although the offense I watched from the seventh row in Pasadena was impressive, Oregon's defense was marginal at best. I'll believe the Buckeyes are one of the best teams in the country when they prove it on the field.
As far as strength of schedule goes, I'm inclined to think that number is a little low. I think you'd be hard-pressed to find 47 other teams that will face a Top 15 out of conference opponent, like we will in Miami (FL) as well as play Top 10 (Iowa) and Top 15 (Wisconsin) teams in conference on the road. That's not to mention Penn State and Michigan, who always play us tough. As far as I'm concerned Ohio State has one of the toughest schedules in the country in 2010.
Tyler: Consistent quality defines the Buckeyes' run under Jim Tressel, so the ranking does not shock but does surprise. Since the Buckeyes have not gone undefeated during a single season in that span of time, I would have expected a few teams to have a spot above them.
As for the strength of schedule, it seems fair enough. 2007 was unquestionably a down year for the Big Ten, with 2008 being of slight improvement. The 2009 ranking is offset by those two seasons, bringing the SoS into the mid-range nationally.
What do you expect to see in 2010?
Tyler: An improvement upon 2009. The growth of Terrelle Pryor has allowed the coaches to be more expansive with the offensive design, and the experience on the offensive line and skill positions is valuable to the growth of the offense as a whole. With the defense, we know to expect greatness every year. The special teams must improve, and has been a point of focus for the coaches during fall camp. If everything comes together, I expect a special year for the Buckeyes this season.
Jon: A true offensive identity for the first time in Columbus since 2006, as well as an Ohio State team that for the first time in three years gets punched in the mouth in the Big Ten instead of out of conference.
Who do you want in your division in 2011?
Jon: I'm not as concerned as some with splitting Ohio State and Michigan up. Although there's a considerable amount of value in protecting our tradition of matching up on the final weekend of the season, I think it's outweighed by the headache of having to move Penn State "west" to maintain parity. I'd like to see a Big Ten East comprised of Ohio State, Penn State, Wisconsin, Purdue, Northwestern, and Indiana, with protected rivalries with Michigan and Illinois.
Tyler: Michigan. It's all that really matters to me. The preservation of The Game, in its current date and form, means more than any outsider can surmise, even Spencer Hall.
Thank you both for taking the time to look deeper into THE Ohio State Buckeyes than most of us know! For more please visit the power run of conference rivalry blogs, Off Tackle Empire, or the Ohio State dedicated Along The Olentangy!
BYU is out, so now what for the BCS AQ picture?
by utesfan100 on Aug 31, 2010 8:25 PM EDT
in BCS Analysis
4 comments
The BCS will use the membership on December 4th, 2011 to determine where each team counts in the next evaluation. Fresno State, Nevada and Colorado are not cleared yet to move by then.
They also don't do anything to the numbers other than a little changing of the last few digits listed. The numbers involving Boise State, Nebraska and Utah moving have already been run. This included the impact on the PAC 10 and Big 12 in the unlikely event Colorado moves in 2011 instead of 2012. How much does BYU leaving impact the MWC's bid for an automatic qualification for 2012 and 2013?
I do know this much. If Hawaii goes independent or LA Tech moves to the geographically closer Sun Belt (HQ in New Orleans) the WAC would no longer qualify for an exemption to the 8 team rule to be an FBS conference.
BYU Goes Independent - Conference Expansion Recap
by utesfan100 on Aug 31, 2010 7:31 PM EDT
in Conference Alignments
3 comments
Brigham Young University will leave the Mountain West Conference for the 2011-12 season, become independent in football and join the West Coast Conference in all other sports.
This happened after plans to join the WAC fell through due to the Fresno St. Bulldogs and Nevada Wolfpack moving to the MWC. Rumors suggest Hawaii may follow suit. BYU will be independent starting next year. Nevada and Fresno State are trying to get into the MWC for next year. Utah is leaving while Boise State is already set to join next year.
The WAC is one defection short of becoming a defunct conference, and Hawaii would push them past that ledge.
At this point it would not surprise me at all to hear that the Louisiana Tech Bulldogs have accepted an invitation to the Sun Belt. In fact, I would almost be surprised not to hear that at this point.
I will retrace the conference expansion time line and look at what moves might come next in the full post ...
3 Conferences 'til Kickoff: Big 12
by utesfan100 on Aug 31, 2010 11:00 AM EDT
in Teams 'til Kickoff 2010
0 comments
Today we look at the Big 12's BCS automatic qualification numbers. The criteria are based on 2011 membership and Colorado may not be a member for 2011. Currently they are set to be a member in 2011, but numbers are provided to in case they go to the PAC 10 a year early in italics, when different.
The data used are the average in the six BCS computers for each team each year and any top 25 appearances each year. The highest ranked team is marked in bold and BCS rankings, where they exist, are listed below each teams average in the six BCS computers.
| Team | 2008 | 2009 | Average |
| Texas Longhorns | 2.67 (3) |
3.17 (2) |
2.97 |
| Oklahoma St. Cowboys |
14.00 (13) |
21.50 (19) |
17.75 |
| Oklahoma Sooners |
1.00 (1) |
39.50 | 20.25 |
| Texas Tech Red Raiders |
4.17 (7) |
37.67 | 20.92 |
| Missouri Tigers | 20.83 (21) |
40.83 | 30.83 |
| Kansas Jayhawks | 33.33 | 75.17 | 54.25 |
| Texas A&M Aggies | 79.67 | 63.67 | 71.67 |
| Kansas St. Wildcats | 75.67 | 70.17 | 72.92 |
| Colorado Buffaloes | 60.17 | 90.17 | 75.17 |
| Baylor Bears | 73.00 | 78.17 | 75.58 |
| Iowa St. Cyclones | 106.67 | 69.67 | 88.17 |
| Average | 42.83 | 53.61 | 48.22 |
| Average | 41.10 | 49.95 | 45.53 |
Average Rank of the Highest Ranked Team: 1.5
Average Conference Ranking: 48.22 (45.53)
Adjusted Top 25 Performance Ranking: 95.00% ( 19 / 22.5 * 1.125)
The only number that changes with the loss of Colorado is the Average Conference Ranking, which increases with the loss of Colorado. The Big 12 gained ground in the Average Top 25 Performance Ranking due to a change in weighting when they lost Nebraska, with no further gains due to the potential loss of Colorado.
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
