Meyer and His Dream Job

Bill proposed to end BCS system

Story Highlights
A Congressman is planning on introducing anti-BCS, pro-playoff legislation
Rep. Joe Barton did not specify a playoff set-up, only that the BCS must go
Only a playoff game could be marketed as a "national championship" game
Read the full story

Mullen To Be Mississippi State's New Head Coach

No word yet on whether he is staying for the BCS Championship Game. I think he is (slightly) overrated because he doesn't have the best in-game play calling (He stubbornly kept up with the first and second down run plays against Alabama, making the game closer than it needed to be because of our 3.4 yards per carry statistic). He makes some good adjustments between games, but a head coach can do that for a team. And who couldn't be a good coordinator with those players? The approach itself is identified with Meyer more than Mullen, who (Mullen) is considered more conservative on plays and play-calling, so it shouldn't be difficult for the players to transition to a new coordinator. But he is young and smart so things could change. He is certainly as worthy as many other coaches, but not more worthy than Charlie Strong, and Miss St. had already fired one of about 3 or 4 black head coaches in Division I, so Strong would have seemed to make more sense. The Mullen pick is sexier, and Miss St is probably sick of having bad offenses-even their coach before Croom was all about defense (Jackie Sherril). So in that way Mullen makes sense. He is also a good recruiter. And Miss St is a tough job, so whomever got it was going to have trouble keeping it very long.

Harvin should probably get the Heisman (I know, he won't). If he had played in the SEC Title game, and had a great game, I would say that with more self-assurance.

You might wonder whether Mullen leaving affects Tebow's decision to leave or stay, since the two seemed to work so closely together and actually be good friends.

"Random Walks Polling": I Don't Totally Understand It Yet, And Its Data Is From Last Year, But It's Intriguing.

This Could Have Been Titled, "Ideology and Southern Football."

A Rare Agreement With A WSJ Editorial

(But this isn't to say that I suddenly decided the computers are just fine without a playoff.)

Flood It

A game to play while we wait for The BCS Championship game
Flood It! game. The object of the game is to flood the whole board with one color in less than 25 steps. You start from the top left corner and progress by selecting one of the colored balls on the left. When you change your current area color, every adjacent square with the same color also changes, that way you can flood other areas on the board.

Tebow, Saban and Berry receive top SEC honors

Story Highlights

Tebow claimed his second straight SEC offensive player of the year award

Alabama placed a high of six players on the all-SEC first team

Crimson Tide wide receiver Julio Jones was named the SEC 's top freshman

CBS announcer goes to hospital after Tebowner lasts for more than four hours

Got this from Tom Alexander in Chicago. A pretty funny read
ATLANTA, GA — At approximately 11 pm Saturday night, CBS sports announcer Gary Danielson realized it was time to head for the emergency room. Read full story

How the Coaches Voted

Prediction Thread At The Quad

Saban's Defense

This breaks down Saban's approach to scheming on defense. I had posted earlier a piece from the same site on Meyer's offensive approach and scheming. It's a very informative site. This entry is really good as well, I posted it below under the "Game Theory" heading.

BCS Defends BCS!

"I really think the BCS is good for college football. We have tremendous amount of interest in our regular season - more so than in any other sport. I ran the Final Four for 13 years and we just don't have this kind of passion in the regular season. And the BCS has moved college football from regional to national. The SEC fans are now very interested in the Pac-10. Before the BCS, that interest was there but not at the level it is today. College football is more popular than ever and we believe how our postseason is handled is a big factor in that. When you consider a change, the single biggest thing we have to think about is what would it do to the regular season. That's the great unknown and there would be unintended consequences to any change, with out a doubt. This is the crown jewel and it's too risky to just tinker with it. I think the commissioners are on the right track in being very deliberate about change. We don't know if this is perfect, so let's not tinker with it until we're sure we know how it's going to be better."

This quote is from an interview with Bill Hancock, the ONLY BCS employee/administrator. It argues the "regular season is exciting" theory of pro-BCS advocacy. I've basically addressed this in a post below. It should be pointed out how idiotic his point about basketball is. 1) basketball regular season games are inherently less exciting than football's since they occur every night. 2) he is arguing against playoffs in football by using an example of a sport that has the MOST exciting postseason in sports, March Madness. 3) Is he really suggesting that it would be really cool if college basketball dropped March Madness and selected 2 teams to play in a BCS championship game at the end of the season? Really!?!? He also brings up "unintended consequences." This is a classic argument used by neo-conservatives in the 1970s (not so much when they argued for the Iraqi invasion!). What you get is the worst kind of non-action, or incremental action, which both are capable of producing terrible consequences, intended or not. Also, what does he mean about SEC interest in the PAC-10? Have we cared about the PAC-10 this year anyway? Yes, we have. When? When Oregon St had a shot to win the PAC-10. In a playoff format with conference winners, the same exact thing would have happened, except in even more quantities. We would have been paying attention to Oregon-Oregon St to see if Oregon St would have made the playoffs. Does he really think a playoff would make college football popularity crumble and force it into some kind of quixotic, regional interest-type thing? This is pathetic.

Saban Critical of Coach-Firings

Saban talking loyalty. Hmm.

Uh Oh!

I guess this post is not moot since, so called, "head-to-head" advocates could still keep Florida out.

---

I think if Florida wins they will get more boost in human polls than the article implies since they will get lots of first-place votes. However, if Texas holds, we will get a scenario where Texas and Oklahoma play for a BCS Title and Texas Tech would NOT get into a BCS bowl...amazing! They could join Boise St in the "Isn't the BCS Great!" Bowl.

I've mentioned this point before, but I will say it here again, I support a 16-team playoff (11 conference winners + 5 at-large picks) that would NOT put limits on the number of teams that can be represented in the playoffs from any particular conference. So, under such a system this year, we would (likely) get OK, Tech, and Tex in the playoffs, as well as Alabama and Florida. And, of course, Boise, Utah, and Ball St would all get in, as conference champs. After this Saturday, we can have some fun with hypothetical brackets.

Now, someone might argue that such a playoff would decrease excitement for some of these regular season and championship games. This point isn't very serious, though. First of all, we don't know before the year, or even by the middle of the year, whether or not the SEC championship winner or loser will get into the National Championship game, in fact, we still don't know for sure that Florida could get in, even if they win. So, the meaning of any given win or loss is never clear until the end of the year...and it would be the same during the regular season in a playoff system--a certain win or loss COULD mean a lot...or not. BUT! we do know that in a playoff structure like the one I've mentioned, the SEC winner would DEFINITELY go to the playoffs.

Another point on this is the ridiculousness of these championship games and in-season rivalries somehow meaning less if there were playoffs (actually, these championship games ARE playoffs). They are just as likely to mean MORE, since playoff stakes may be at hand. Currently, a BCS bid may or may not be at stake, and actually, most regular season games for most teams are meaningless from a national championship perspective. And by adding more teams to the mix, with a playoff, you are getting a net-gain of meaningful games since more teams will have a shot.

Also, even with 16 teams, losses would hurt quite a bit (and so, wins would help a lot). As I've said before, just one loss in the race for the SEC East is often costly. It is always a loss that knocks a team from some kind of championship, and we never know which loss that is until the season is at least near over (and even then, if multiple losses are involved, it may not be clear which loss was the stake in the heart). Likewise, we can never pin the achievement of a championship on any given win, since it's the accumulation of all of the wins that makes it possible. Even more perplexing, though, is the fact that wins nor losses decide the champion at this point--just rankings.

So, the single-game theory (the theory that holds tight to a "2-team" playoff because it argues that it fosters a more interesting regular season) is a myth. Those exciting games are exciting simply because they are upsets and because championships and rivalries are at stake. Changing the form of the championship-determining structure will not change the character of the excitement of upsets and rivalry wins. Increasing the possibility for a championship for more teams, in fact, without demeaning the standards of success, would create a more interesting college football regular season.

This is just from the perspective of pleasure for the fans. Even more powerful arguments can be made from legal-justice-equality-funding-type perspectives.

The Recruiting Story of Tebow and Alabama

Medical Analysis of Harvin's Injuries (Not Really)

This site (EDSBS) was founded by Gators. They also link to a Smart Football (the blog) posting that analyzes Saban's defense. More Smart Football stuff in postings below.

Florida Offense Historicized, Dissected. A Real Treat.

Game Theory and Offensive Strategy? A New Favorite Blog For Ode?

Franklin Blacklisted After Delivering Dish on Mumme, and "Airraid" Spread Not Recognizable At Auburn--Tubs Didn't Buy In?

"If the teams play a rough approximation of how they have the whole year [...], it appears Florida will win," says Gator Tailgating.

Some number crunching. Gator Tailgating (educated) guesses, 25-17 Florida, or 35-21 Florida.

Teams With Great Defenses Usually Underrated, But Great Offensive Teams Often Overrated, Argues Chait

This years Gator team has both, I think. At least a much better Defense than that 2005 USC team Chait is referencing. But his point really bared out for the 2006 Gators. I love that he nailed the truth about that USC team BEFORE they lost to Texas. If you're curious after reading the article, this year's Gator team outscores their opponent by a 3.8-to-1 ratio.

Smiting Irish

Chait normally writes on politics and economics, but occasionally knocks out some wise collegiate football pieces. This is from last year, but still applies. What struck me was near the end where he describes the trouble some NFL assistants have had coaching in college. You don't hear that point too often. People will say that college coaches usually struggle at the pro-level, which is an observation based on selective evidence or insufficient data (many don't coach very long, so if, say, Belichick were held to a similar standard, he would have been declared a failure since he had a losing record until his 9th! season as a head coach). And then you will maybe hear that it's just a different coaching experience at each level, meaning they require different strengths. But the emphasis is usually on college coaches struggling at the pro-level.

Auburn Testing Leach's Interest