For a few years, I had something going with the Charles Rogers Theorem. With seeming scientific accuracy, I could write a column before the season in which I would spot teams that would finish well below their preseason rankings by looking at two factors: (1) a disparity between returning skill position and line talent; and (2) a hot finish obscuring average results over the first ten games. Then, the Theorem spit out Florida in 2006 and Georgia in 2007. Florida won the national title in 2006 and Georgia finished #2 in 2007. If the available evidence disproves a hypothesis, then the hypothesis ought to be retired.
Orson's post on the consensus preseason top ten sent me in a new, simpler direction: just pick the non-traditional powers in the top ten and confidently assert that they are overrated. Doesn't that accomplish what the Charles Rogers Theorem purported to do? Wouldn't that have caught Michigan State in 2002, Auburn in 2003, and Clemson just about every year?
The trick is identifying the elite of college football properly. For instance, one would have to have spotted quickly that Florida State and Miami had departed that category at some point in the first part of the decade. One would have to decide whether Alabama is now in that category or will be joining in the next season or two. Is Virginia Tech an elite program or merely a good program swimming in a shallow pool? Was West Virginia elite when Rich Rodriguez was there? (Could they ever be elite with their recruiting base?) And what about Notre Dame? They certainly fit the definition of traditional power, but they haven't played like one since Lou Holtz's heyday.
However, if you identify the elite properly, then picking overrated teams is easy. Pollsters start to struggle after their first five picks, so they start scraping for teams that will make their preseason polls look interesting. This year, those teams are Ole Miss and Oklahoma State. Last year, those teams were Missouri, West Virginia, and Clemson. In 2007, it was West Virginia, Louisville, and Wisconsin. In 2006, it was Notre Dame, West Virginia, Auburn, and Florida State. On that list, do you see many teams that met expectations, other than the White/Slaton/Rodriguez Mountaineer teams?
The thinking behind this new theory is fairly basic. The elite programs compete with one another to sign the top high school talent. To varying degrees, their rosters are full of it. The programs in the next tier down have talent, but not on the same level. Thus, they are more vulnerable to injuries over the course of the season. They are vulnerable to the phenomenon of good players playing above their talent levels for a period of time and then coming back down to earth. They are vulnerable to having their average defenses finally catch up with them.
I'll freely admit that this new theory has a definitional problem: which programs are truly elite? Which programs are joining that category and which ones are leaving it? The theory also needs a cool name, maybe something from C. Wright Mills' oeuvre? As basic as it sounds, it does seem fairly useful.
Showing posts with label Charles Rogers Theorem. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Charles Rogers Theorem. Show all posts
Tuesday, June 09, 2009
Saturday, August 11, 2007
Charles Rogers has a Sore Bum, but He's Going to Tough it out
In the summer of 2002, perplexed that Michigan State was being hyped as a top 20 team despite the fact that they had no defense and were replacing their offensive line, I created the Charles Rogers Theorem. The Theorem is a means to identify overrated teams based on the confluence of two factors:
1. Lots of returning skill position players, but few returning linemen; and
2. Playing much better at the end of the season (typically in an end-of-year rivalry game and then the bowl game) than they did over the first 10-11 games.
The Theorem rolled along nicely for several years, spotting overrated teams like '02 Michigan State, '04 Clemson, and '05 Iowa and Tennessee. Last year, to paraphrase Merle Haggard. Charles Rogers let me down by flagging Florida as the most overrated team in the country. Yes, the Florida team that won the national title. Because I'm blessed/cursed with the intellectual self-confidence to believe that my baby can't be wrong, I'm ploughing ahead with the theorem. When it flagged Auburn as overrated going into 2004, I created an exception for teams that undergo dramatic coaching improvement, such as going from Hugh Nall calling the plays to Al Borges. After the Florida debacle last year, there are two new lessons:
1. The Theorem isn't responsible for hasty misapplication by its operator. Florida did indeed play much better in 2005 in its last two games and it was replacing four starters on the offensive line, but the defensive line was returning virtually intact. The only new starter was Jarvis Moss, a much-hyped recruit going into his senior season. Sure enough, Florida's offense struggled (at least by the standards of a national champion, or even an SEC champion), but their defense was outstanding and carried them to Glendale, where they played Sonny to Ohio State's Carlo. I was too eager to flag the Gators and didn't appreciate that their defense was going to be excellent.
2. Good coaching can hedge against a team being truly overrated. Urban Meyer did a really good job last year of improvising a run game despite a suspect offensive line and an absence of a competent running back. He and his defensive brain trust (Charlie Strong and Greg Mattison) unleashed hell on SEC offenses with a combination of Ron Zook's wonderful recruits and terrific defensive scheming. The defensive scheme in the National Title Game, specifically the blitz looks that ensured single-blocking on the defensive ends, stands out as an especially salient example. In the Theorem's best years, it flagged teams coached by people with names like "Bobby Williams" and "Phil Fulmer." It was up against it when it went after Urban Meyer. This exception to the rule is the one source of hope for the team that screams "OVERRATED!!!" this year...
Category One – Red Flag – won last two games (at least) and an imbalance between skill position and lines or between offense and defense:
Georgia
Georgia played much better in its last three games, all of which were wins over ranked opponents, than it did for the first ten games of the season, when the Dawgs eked by luminaries like Colorado and Ole Miss before giving up 51 at home to Tennessee and then losing to Vandy and Kentucky. I just don't buy the explanation that Georgia became a different team in those last three games. Rather, the better explanation is that they were a flawed team that had slightly underperformed in a 6-4 start before correcting themselves in their final three games. It must also be said that Georgia corrected itself against three ranked teams that happened to have really bad quarterbacks. Brandon Cox isn't terrible, but he was slumping badly and was probably hurt at the end of the year. (He followed the Georgia game with 137 passing yards in the Iron Bowl and 111 passing yards in the Cotton Bowl. Hats off to Tommy Tuberville for finishing on a two-game winning streak without a real passing threat.) Reggie Ball and Sean Glennon were ridiculously easy pickings. A superficial look at the Dawgs says "hey, they matured and beat three ranked teams!" A more realistic look says "they didn't magically transform from the team that was mediocre for ten games and they picked on some flawed opponents in their final three."
Going into 2007, every discussion of the Dawgs (at least from 30,000 feet) has focused on two aspects: Matt Stafford's maturation and a pair of excellent running backs. If you think that returning linemen tend to matter, then the picture is bleak. Georgia returns two starters on the offensive line and have a true freshman penciled in at left tackle. That couldn't be a problem against Derrick Harvey or Quentin Groves, could it? On the defensive line, Georgia returns one starter. Its projected starters at defensive end are a junior college transfer and a senior who has never started before. (Warning!) The Dawgs start the year against Bobby Reid (2nd in the Big XII in passing efficiency) and Blake Mitchell (threw for 275 at Florida, 284 at Clemson, and 323 in the bowl game); you think that quality defensive ends who can generate a pass rush will be important?
The one saving grace for Georgia is that Mark Richt has been a consistent winner at Georgia. The Dawgs had to replace their entire offensive line in 2003 and yet they won the East. That said, the 2003 Georgia team returned seven starters (including David Pollack) from the defense that led Georgia to the 2002 SEC Title. Additionally, that defense was helmed by Brian VanGorder, who was more confidence-inspiring than Willie Martinez. All told, Georgia won't have a disastrous season this year, but their pre-season #13 ranking is significantly overstating their merit. This looks like an 8-4 team that will lead fans to blame Matthew Stafford for not improving when his pass protection is the real reason that the offense struggles.
Conversely, Georgia's friends on the Flats look underrated this year, as they played worse in their final three games than they did for the rest of the season and they return almost everyone on the lines while replacing Calvin Johnson. The factor cutting against Georgia Tech being underrated is the consensus that they are better without Reggie Ball, which leads to a push in the conventional wisdom that they'll be better this year. Also, in the realm of bowl games being over interpreted, Taylor Bennett's performance against a bad West Virginia secondary is a problem, as is the fact that a significant portion of his 326 yards passing was of the "I'll throw it up and Calvin will go get it" variety.
Category Two – Yellow Flags – Either played better at the end of the season than they did for the first 11 games or have an imbalance between returning starters at skill positions and on the lines, but not both:
Penn State
After Georgia, the Theorem feels the strongest about the Nittany Lions. Penn State's win over Tennessee in the bowl game was the first time the Lions beat or were ever competitive with a good team, such that even Stewart Mandel figured out that the Outback Bowl could cause the Lions to be overrated this year. They replace two starters on the offensive line and three starters on the defensive line. The lost defensive line starters will be replaced by sophomores whose job it will be to keep opposing offensive linemen and fullbacks off of Dan Connor and Sean Lee. That preseason #18 ranking looks awfully optimistic. Don't be shocked if they lose to Notre Dame.
Actually, I'm kinda hoping that that happens because the Michigan-Notre Dame series has been VERY friendly to the underdogs and Notre Dame will be a decided underdog if they come to Ann Arbor at 1-1 or 0-2. Incidentally, I think that Notre Dame is underrated this year, mainly because they have the Theorem working in reverse. They were beaten decisively in their last two games and they lost their glamour boys. That said, they lost a ton of players on the lines and will be starting a parade of young players because of the Ty Willingham Experience, so they aren't a perfect fit for the mantle of underrated. Still, 8-9 wins wouldn't surprise me in the least.
Florida
Cue the definition of insanity as doing the same stupid thing and expecting the result to change. Florida did play better in its last two games than it did for the first 12 games, especially on offense when the Gators finally broke the 26-point barrier against a living, breathing opponent. Additionally, Florida is replacing all of its defensive line, save Derrick Harvey, and the replacements aren't as VHTerrific as the players they are replacing. Florida is returning four starters on the offensive line and, as we have seen before, coaching matters. Thus, they are by no means a perfect fit for the Theorem. That said, they are massively overrated as pre-season #3. Phil Steele agrees, as he has the Gators at #14, but he also has Georgia at #11, so I can't cite the guru approvingly for everything.
Cal
If ever there was an obvious instance of the coaching exception overruling the Theorem, it was the '04 Cal team, which was excellent despite being flagged. I heart Jeff Tedford, so it's with significant trepidation that I point out that Cal returns DeSean Jackson and played its best game of the year in the bowl rout over Texas A&M, but they have to replace two offensive linemen and three defensive linemen. They're preseason #12, but Phil Steele has them at #28, which means that either the guru is wrong or we can prepare for an "I was the only one..." intro to the Cal section of Phil Steele's 2008 spectacular.
LSU
I don't really think that the Tigers fit the Theorem because they return so much on the lines, but they did play their two best games in the two last games of the year. Additionally, Les Miles seems like the sort of coach who will eventually preside over a team that is significantly disappointing. Plus, you can almost never go wrong dubbing the preseason #2 team as overrated. All that said, I'd be surprised if they don't win at least ten in the regular season.
South Carolina
Like LSU, they return a ton on the lines, so the only reason to think that the Cocks are overrated is that they played better in their final two games. Oh, and because they're South Carolina and they don't exactly handle expectations well. They're sure to make me feel dumb for picking them to win the East, which is what I'm doing right now. They're also outside of the preseason top 25, so they can't really be overrated except by people like me, Phil Steele, and Orson Swindle.
South Florida
The only flag here comes from the fact that they beat West Virginia and thumped East Carolina after starting 7-4. They return almost everything on the lines and they're 37th in the preseason coaches poll, so the Theorem doesn't really apply. That said, if they flame out this year, I'll be sure to claim that I saw it all along.
Texas Tech
The Red Raiders started last year 6-5 before winning their final two (including an epic comeback in the bowl game) and they replace four on the offensive line and three on the defensive line. On the other hand, they are chronically underrated and as a result, they're 38th in the preseason coaches poll. They don't belong on this list.
1. Lots of returning skill position players, but few returning linemen; and
2. Playing much better at the end of the season (typically in an end-of-year rivalry game and then the bowl game) than they did over the first 10-11 games.
The Theorem rolled along nicely for several years, spotting overrated teams like '02 Michigan State, '04 Clemson, and '05 Iowa and Tennessee. Last year, to paraphrase Merle Haggard. Charles Rogers let me down by flagging Florida as the most overrated team in the country. Yes, the Florida team that won the national title. Because I'm blessed/cursed with the intellectual self-confidence to believe that my baby can't be wrong, I'm ploughing ahead with the theorem. When it flagged Auburn as overrated going into 2004, I created an exception for teams that undergo dramatic coaching improvement, such as going from Hugh Nall calling the plays to Al Borges. After the Florida debacle last year, there are two new lessons:
1. The Theorem isn't responsible for hasty misapplication by its operator. Florida did indeed play much better in 2005 in its last two games and it was replacing four starters on the offensive line, but the defensive line was returning virtually intact. The only new starter was Jarvis Moss, a much-hyped recruit going into his senior season. Sure enough, Florida's offense struggled (at least by the standards of a national champion, or even an SEC champion), but their defense was outstanding and carried them to Glendale, where they played Sonny to Ohio State's Carlo. I was too eager to flag the Gators and didn't appreciate that their defense was going to be excellent.
2. Good coaching can hedge against a team being truly overrated. Urban Meyer did a really good job last year of improvising a run game despite a suspect offensive line and an absence of a competent running back. He and his defensive brain trust (Charlie Strong and Greg Mattison) unleashed hell on SEC offenses with a combination of Ron Zook's wonderful recruits and terrific defensive scheming. The defensive scheme in the National Title Game, specifically the blitz looks that ensured single-blocking on the defensive ends, stands out as an especially salient example. In the Theorem's best years, it flagged teams coached by people with names like "Bobby Williams" and "Phil Fulmer." It was up against it when it went after Urban Meyer. This exception to the rule is the one source of hope for the team that screams "OVERRATED!!!" this year...
Category One – Red Flag – won last two games (at least) and an imbalance between skill position and lines or between offense and defense:
Georgia
Georgia played much better in its last three games, all of which were wins over ranked opponents, than it did for the first ten games of the season, when the Dawgs eked by luminaries like Colorado and Ole Miss before giving up 51 at home to Tennessee and then losing to Vandy and Kentucky. I just don't buy the explanation that Georgia became a different team in those last three games. Rather, the better explanation is that they were a flawed team that had slightly underperformed in a 6-4 start before correcting themselves in their final three games. It must also be said that Georgia corrected itself against three ranked teams that happened to have really bad quarterbacks. Brandon Cox isn't terrible, but he was slumping badly and was probably hurt at the end of the year. (He followed the Georgia game with 137 passing yards in the Iron Bowl and 111 passing yards in the Cotton Bowl. Hats off to Tommy Tuberville for finishing on a two-game winning streak without a real passing threat.) Reggie Ball and Sean Glennon were ridiculously easy pickings. A superficial look at the Dawgs says "hey, they matured and beat three ranked teams!" A more realistic look says "they didn't magically transform from the team that was mediocre for ten games and they picked on some flawed opponents in their final three."
Going into 2007, every discussion of the Dawgs (at least from 30,000 feet) has focused on two aspects: Matt Stafford's maturation and a pair of excellent running backs. If you think that returning linemen tend to matter, then the picture is bleak. Georgia returns two starters on the offensive line and have a true freshman penciled in at left tackle. That couldn't be a problem against Derrick Harvey or Quentin Groves, could it? On the defensive line, Georgia returns one starter. Its projected starters at defensive end are a junior college transfer and a senior who has never started before. (Warning!) The Dawgs start the year against Bobby Reid (2nd in the Big XII in passing efficiency) and Blake Mitchell (threw for 275 at Florida, 284 at Clemson, and 323 in the bowl game); you think that quality defensive ends who can generate a pass rush will be important?
The one saving grace for Georgia is that Mark Richt has been a consistent winner at Georgia. The Dawgs had to replace their entire offensive line in 2003 and yet they won the East. That said, the 2003 Georgia team returned seven starters (including David Pollack) from the defense that led Georgia to the 2002 SEC Title. Additionally, that defense was helmed by Brian VanGorder, who was more confidence-inspiring than Willie Martinez. All told, Georgia won't have a disastrous season this year, but their pre-season #13 ranking is significantly overstating their merit. This looks like an 8-4 team that will lead fans to blame Matthew Stafford for not improving when his pass protection is the real reason that the offense struggles.
Conversely, Georgia's friends on the Flats look underrated this year, as they played worse in their final three games than they did for the rest of the season and they return almost everyone on the lines while replacing Calvin Johnson. The factor cutting against Georgia Tech being underrated is the consensus that they are better without Reggie Ball, which leads to a push in the conventional wisdom that they'll be better this year. Also, in the realm of bowl games being over interpreted, Taylor Bennett's performance against a bad West Virginia secondary is a problem, as is the fact that a significant portion of his 326 yards passing was of the "I'll throw it up and Calvin will go get it" variety.
Category Two – Yellow Flags – Either played better at the end of the season than they did for the first 11 games or have an imbalance between returning starters at skill positions and on the lines, but not both:
Penn State
After Georgia, the Theorem feels the strongest about the Nittany Lions. Penn State's win over Tennessee in the bowl game was the first time the Lions beat or were ever competitive with a good team, such that even Stewart Mandel figured out that the Outback Bowl could cause the Lions to be overrated this year. They replace two starters on the offensive line and three starters on the defensive line. The lost defensive line starters will be replaced by sophomores whose job it will be to keep opposing offensive linemen and fullbacks off of Dan Connor and Sean Lee. That preseason #18 ranking looks awfully optimistic. Don't be shocked if they lose to Notre Dame.
Actually, I'm kinda hoping that that happens because the Michigan-Notre Dame series has been VERY friendly to the underdogs and Notre Dame will be a decided underdog if they come to Ann Arbor at 1-1 or 0-2. Incidentally, I think that Notre Dame is underrated this year, mainly because they have the Theorem working in reverse. They were beaten decisively in their last two games and they lost their glamour boys. That said, they lost a ton of players on the lines and will be starting a parade of young players because of the Ty Willingham Experience, so they aren't a perfect fit for the mantle of underrated. Still, 8-9 wins wouldn't surprise me in the least.
Florida
Cue the definition of insanity as doing the same stupid thing and expecting the result to change. Florida did play better in its last two games than it did for the first 12 games, especially on offense when the Gators finally broke the 26-point barrier against a living, breathing opponent. Additionally, Florida is replacing all of its defensive line, save Derrick Harvey, and the replacements aren't as VHTerrific as the players they are replacing. Florida is returning four starters on the offensive line and, as we have seen before, coaching matters. Thus, they are by no means a perfect fit for the Theorem. That said, they are massively overrated as pre-season #3. Phil Steele agrees, as he has the Gators at #14, but he also has Georgia at #11, so I can't cite the guru approvingly for everything.
Cal
If ever there was an obvious instance of the coaching exception overruling the Theorem, it was the '04 Cal team, which was excellent despite being flagged. I heart Jeff Tedford, so it's with significant trepidation that I point out that Cal returns DeSean Jackson and played its best game of the year in the bowl rout over Texas A&M, but they have to replace two offensive linemen and three defensive linemen. They're preseason #12, but Phil Steele has them at #28, which means that either the guru is wrong or we can prepare for an "I was the only one..." intro to the Cal section of Phil Steele's 2008 spectacular.
LSU
I don't really think that the Tigers fit the Theorem because they return so much on the lines, but they did play their two best games in the two last games of the year. Additionally, Les Miles seems like the sort of coach who will eventually preside over a team that is significantly disappointing. Plus, you can almost never go wrong dubbing the preseason #2 team as overrated. All that said, I'd be surprised if they don't win at least ten in the regular season.
South Carolina
Like LSU, they return a ton on the lines, so the only reason to think that the Cocks are overrated is that they played better in their final two games. Oh, and because they're South Carolina and they don't exactly handle expectations well. They're sure to make me feel dumb for picking them to win the East, which is what I'm doing right now. They're also outside of the preseason top 25, so they can't really be overrated except by people like me, Phil Steele, and Orson Swindle.
South Florida
The only flag here comes from the fact that they beat West Virginia and thumped East Carolina after starting 7-4. They return almost everything on the lines and they're 37th in the preseason coaches poll, so the Theorem doesn't really apply. That said, if they flame out this year, I'll be sure to claim that I saw it all along.
Texas Tech
The Red Raiders started last year 6-5 before winning their final two (including an epic comeback in the bowl game) and they replace four on the offensive line and three on the defensive line. On the other hand, they are chronically underrated and as a result, they're 38th in the preseason coaches poll. They don't belong on this list.
Thursday, August 24, 2006
Charles Rogers will have his vengeance, in this life or the next: the 2006 Charles Rogers Theorem
Wouldn’t you have liked to have known before last season that Iowa, Florida State, Georgia Tech, and Tennessee were all going to lose 5+ games and finish significantly below their pre-season rankings? Wouldn’t that have been a great chance to impress the girl of your dreams after she just finished a blistering set for Crucial Taunt? (Yes, I just finished watching Wayne’s World.) Well, here’s your chance at enlightenment: the 2006 application of the Charles Rogers Theorem.
(For your reading enjoyment, here are the 2005 and 2004 versions. Other than labeling Cal and Auburn as overrated in 2004, I’m not embarrassed by these columns at all, and isn’t that what we all strive for in writing?)
The Theorem is named after the Detroit Lions’ oft-injured wide receiver because his 2002 Michigan State team illustrated the two parts of the Theorem perfectly:
1. The team played better at the end of the season than they did over the first 10 games. It’s a basic precept of psychology that human beings overrate the importance of the most recent evidence in making evaluations. Think about how many previews mention a team’s late season results specifically. Think about how many times a bowl victory is referred to as a “springboard” for a team for the following season. Think about how few times the bowl victory actually acts as a springboard. For instance, LSU, Ohio State, Florida State, Tennessee, Michigan, and Florida have all won national titles in the past decade without the mystical power of a bowl win as a springboard. Did West Virginia’s pounding at the hands of Florida State in the 1/1/05 Gator Bowl stop them from having arguably the best season in school history the following season? What was Penn State’s big springboard for the 2005 season? Conversely, how much did Tennessee’s big Cotton Bowl win over Texas A&M mean? Or Iowa’s dramatic win over LSU in the Citrus Bowl?
You may think that bowl wins are like this, but they aren't.
2. The team has an imbalance between their skill position players and their offensive and defensive lines and/or an imbalance between a great offense and a poor defense. Most college football fans and writers watch the ball on just about every play. As a result, they tend to think almost exclusively about skill position players, especially offensive skill position players, when evaluating teams in the summer. When was the last time you read a write-up of a team that mentioned its dominant lines? Just look at this year’s pre-season #1, Ohio State. Do you see any mention of the fact that they have to replace their front seven? (OK, people do mention it, but then they rank OSU #1 anyway, which shows you how seriously defense is actually taken.) Or take West Virginia, which has been the subject of numerous heavy pettings from the media because of Pat White and Steve Slaton, ignoring new tackles and many new faces on a defense that was not so great to begin with.
So which teams are certain to take a big dive this year? I’m glad you asked…
More important than ESPN lets on.
Category One – Red Flag – won last two games (at least) and an imbalance between skill position and lines or between offense and defense:
Florida – I was fantasizing about writing this paragraph during the Outback Bowl last year. (That’s what marriage will do to you.) The theorem was invented to handle teams like the Gators. Imbalance between offensive skill positions and line? How about dreamy-eyed Chris Leak, freshstud (homoerotic term used tongue in cheek...I feel so much more comedic on a second beer) Tim Tebow, and some fancy receivers on the one hand, with four new starters on the offensive line on the other. And then add in the fact that they played their two best games in the finale against Florida State (a truly misleading 34-7 score, since the Gators were outgained in the game) and then the bowl win over Iowa, covering their cover-your-eyes performances against Alabama, LSU, Vandy, and South Carolina in the meat of the schedule. The only factors saving them from true Charles Rogers oblivion are a great defensive line and Urban Meyer’s track record in year twos. I’ll go on record as saying that no one will remember that track record (with a statistically insignificant sample size of two) come November.
You know I'm right.
Category Two – Yellow Flag – went 1-1 in final two games with an imbalance between skill positions and lines or between offense and defense:
Auburn – I’m a stuck record on the Tigers, or at least I have been since Brian at MGoBlog rated them #1. (I see Auburn at #1 pre-season and I immediately think of 1984, the first year I was rooting for El Tigres after moving to Macon, a year in which the Tigers went 0-2 out of the gate and finished 9-4. And then I think of ’85, when I was still an Auburn fanatic after having been teased like the red-headed child I was, and the Tigers parlayed a pre-season #1 ranking into an 8-4 season. My favorite memory from that season is my Dad buying me a sweet Auburn hat, me wearing it to school the following Monday, and the other kids stealing it and tearing the brim, leading me to come home awash in tears. And where the hell was I, anyway?) Auburn seems overrated because they definitely have the imbalance – returning QB and star TB, but new tackles and defensive line – and the only factor preventing a full-on Auburn orgy in the media is that pesky loss to Wisconsin in the Citrus Bowl.
Why, Bo, why?
LSU – I guess no one is going to win the West this year, because the theorem flags LSU, as well. The stable of quarterbacks and running backs return, as well as the criminally underused receivers, but LSU has three new starters on each of its lines this year. Their final two games confuse and frighten the “my memory extends for two games” knuckle-draggers in the media: “They lost 34-14 to Georgia…and then beat Miami 40-3...in the same stadium? Keyrock is very confused!!!” A top ten ranking seems a little much for a team replacing so much on the lines.
My primitive mind can't grasp these concepts. But there is one thing I do know - if a team wins their bowl game 40-3, they must be great!!!
Louisville – I was surprised to see the Cards pop up on the Theorem’s radar this year, since I have joined the Phil Steele-led revanchist backlash against West Virginia by tabbing Louisville as a team to watch, but lo and behold, the Cards return Brian Brohm (flashy quarterback!) and Michael Bush (thunderous running back!), but replace three offensive linemen and three of four defensive linemen. Maybe the Big East is just going to suck this year, like they were supposed to last year (and actually did, other than one night in Atlanta).
Category Three – Slightly Lighter Shade of Yellow Flag – went 2-0 in final two games, but no imbalance between skill positions and lines or between offense and defense:
Ohio State – It’s always easy to call the pre-season #1 overrated, since you can’t really be wrong, but I’ll do it anyway. The Bucks have a major offense/defense imbalance and their two best performances last year came in the last two games, against the two winningest programs in college football, no less, which helps in the overration (the new English!) process. What’s saving them from a fate worse than having to do number two at a bar at 1:45 a.m. is a great offensive line and some returning experience at defensive tackle. 10-2 seems to be about right for the Bucks.
Nebraska – No team better exemplified the second part of the Theorem last year than Nebraska. They were an exceedingly average football team last year until the final two games, when they destroyed Colorado in Boulder and then nipped a disinterested Michigan team in San Antonio. They are certainly not as good as the team that we flawed humans remember. They have three starters back on the offensive line and two on the defensive line, including the highly-competent Adam Carriker, who has restored Nebraska’s tradition of terrifying Caucasian defensive ends. They seem overrated to me, but they don’t quite scream it from the rooftops.
Thrilled by angry white guy coming from the edge.
Clemson – I don’t know why I’m doing this to myself, but I’m pretty high on the orange overalled freaks from the Upcountry this year. They did play much better in their final three games, as is their custom when the Tigers have to save their coach’s job so he doesn’t have too much time and Google on his hands to figure out where those rumors about his daughter started. (This and this [NSFW] will bring you up to speed if you don’t know about one of the best internet rumors ever.)
The most scrutinized picture in Clemson history.
However, they have a new quarterback, which holds down their overrated quotient, and they return the entire offensive line and both defensive ends. I feel a lot stronger that Nebraska is overrated as compared to Clemson.
West Virginia – They wouldn’t be nearly as highly ranked as they are if Georgia would have paid attention during the first quarter of the Sugar Bowl. That said, they do return three of five on the offensive line and two of three on the defensive line, so they don’t fit the theorem perfectly, although they are still being identified solely on the basis of the merits of Pat White and Steve Slaton who, last I checked, cannot block or tackle. My belief that they are overrated comes from the Sugar Bowl, combined with being unimpressed by their defense last year.
Category Four – Joseph and his Amazing Technicolored Flag – I don’t know what to make of this team:
Penn State – In favor of the conclusion that they’re overrated, we have the facts that they return their runners and receivers and they won their last two games. Against the conclusion that they’re overrated, we have the facts that they have a new quarterback (so they must not be any good) and they weren’t necessarily better in their last two games than they were for the rest of the year. And then you have further shades of gray because Penn State followed their last good season (accomplished with veteran offensive and defensive lines) with two years of craptastic performances, but on the other hand, JoePa seems to have finally accepted his own limitations and devolved the locus of decision-making to quality coordinators, just like his buddy Saint Bobby…before he replaced Mark Richt with Fredo Bowden. (If Jeff is Fredo, then who is Michael?)
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)