The Predictive Powers of Pythagoras

Regardless of what any talking head or former player may say on ESPN regarding intangibles and heart, team success is a function of the points they score and the points they allow. With that in mind, I want to take a fresh look at the Pythagorean Theorem and its predictive powers in college football. I've looked at the Pythagorean Theorem on this blog before. In fact, in my very first blog post nearly seven years ago (time flies), I accurately surmised that the 2005 Tennessee Vols were not national title contenders despite their top-5 preseason ranking. For those who don't know what the Pythagorean Theorem is (at least as to how it relates to sports), here's a snippet from that first post:

'In 1980 noted baseball analyst and the founder of sabermetrics, Bill James, developed a theory for predicting a team's winning percentage based on the number of runs a team scored and allowed. He called it the Pythagorean Theorem of baseball and it looked something like this:

(Runs Scored)^2
------------------------------------
(Runs Scored)^2 +(Runs Allowed)^2

The resulting ratio was a team's estimated winning percentage. Over the course of a 162 game season the Pythagorean Theorem predicted the final record for most teams within three or four games of their actual performance. The Pythagorean Theorem has application beyond baseball (and some triangles I hear). It could also be applied to predict a football team's actual performance.'

The other day I was brainstorming ways to make the Pythagorean Theorem more accurate. Football has a unique scoring system. Touchdowns are worth six points, field goals three, and safeties two. In addition, after touchdowns, teams can attempt to kick for one point or cross the goal again for two additional points. By contrast, in baseball and hockey, scoring events, runs and goals, are worth the same amount each time. Basketball is a little more complex, with free throws worth one point, field goals worth two points, and shots behind a certain arc worth three points. Basketball also has more scoring events than baseball and hockey. With that in mind, I wanted to look for a scoring event in football that is analogous to a run in baseball or a goal in hockey. Its actually pretty easy to find. Offensive touchdowns. Teams score offensive touchdowns at about the same ratio that teams score runs in baseball and goals in hockey. In addition, offensive touchdowns help us get rid of some of the statistical 'noise' generated during a football game. Field goals (both for and against) are heavily dependent on one individual player in a sport where team play matters most of all. Special teams and defensive touchdowns, while they play a huge role in the winner of an individual game, do not have a great deal of predictability going forward. Notice I said 'some' of the noise, but certainly not all. Defensive and special team ability can make offensive touchdowns easier by setting up the offense with a short field. Still, ignoring all scoring plays except for offensive touchdowns should give us a good idea about a team's strength.

So how does this relate to the Pythagorean Theorem? Well instead of looking at a teams ratio of points scored to points allowed, we'll look at a teams ratio of offensive touchdowns to offensive touchdowns allowed. The formula will look a little something like this:

(Offensive Touchdowns)^2.37
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
(Offensive Touchdowns)^2.37 +(Offensive Touchdowns Allowed)^2.37

We'll call the resulting record a team's Adjusted Pythagorean Record (or APR). I used 2.37 as the exponent because research has shown it makes the resulting ratio a more accurate predictor.

Now lets take a look at the Adjusted Pythagorean Theorem in action.

In 2007, Oklahoma State enjoyed a rather middling season in the Big 12. There were some highlights of course. They beat Nebraska in Lincoln for the first time since 1960, upended a Kansas State team ranked in the top-25 at the time, and gave Texas a run for their money in Stillwater. They were also trounced by Oklahoma and beaten by by Kansas in Stillwater for the first time since 1995. All in all, the Cowboys went 4-4 in the Big 12. How did they do according to the Adjusted Pythagorean Theorem? Well, in their eight conference games, they scored 35 offensive touchdowns. Not bad. That tied for the third highest number in the conference. Unfortunately, teams also scored 35 touchdowns against their defense (tenth in the conference). All in all, the Cowboys record base on their offensive touchdowns scored and offensive touchdowns allowed was 4-4. And lo and behold, that was their record. Of course, this is just one cherry picked example. the Adjusted Pythagorean Theorem rarely his the nail directly on the head. However, it does usually correctly predict a team's record within one game of their actual record. Since 2007, the Adjusted Pythagorean Theorem predicted each team's conference record within one game for nearly two-thirds (386 of 582 team seasons or 66.3%) of all teams. So if the Adjusted Pythagorean Theorem does a pretty good job of predicting a teams record based solely on how many offensive touchdowns they scored and allowed, what happened to those teams that significantly out or underperformed their APR? I thought you might ask that. To answer that question, I looked at all teams from 2007-2010 with a conference record at least one and a half games different (either better or worse) than their record as predicted by the Adjusted Pythagorean Theorem. I then looked at how they did in conference play the following season. And now I will share with you the results. As with the previous two blog entries, I have separated BCS and non-BCS conference teams to see if there appear to be any differences. First off, the BCS conference teams that exceeded their APR.
Of the 15 teams that exceeded their APR in conference, 13 declined the following season. One team stayed the same, and only Oregon State circa 2007 improved. Many of the declines were significant. 11 of the 15 teams declined by at least two games in conference play, and some (Texas, Auburn, and Cincinnati) totally fell off a cliff. On average, these teams declined by 2.27 games in conference play the following season.

Now the BCS conference teams that underperformed their APR.
Of the 20 teams that underperformed their APR in conference, 13 improved the following season. Three stayed the same and four finished with worse conference records. Overall, the teams improved by just a shade over one game (1.025) in conference play the following season.

Now the non-BCS conference teams that exceeded their APR.
Of the 15 teams that exceeded their APR in conference, 12 declined the following season. One team stayed the same and two improved. Overall, these teams decline by 1.8 games in conference play the following season.

Now the non-BCS conference teams that underperformed their APR.
Of the 14 teams that underperformed their APR in conference, 11 improved the following season. Two stayed the same and only one team (New Mexico circa 2008) declined. Overall, the teams improved by nearly two games (1.964) in conference play the following season.

So now the next question on your mind should be: Who under and over-performed their APR in 2011? Eight BCS conference teams exceeded their APR in conference play. In the ACC, Virginia allowed more offensive touchdowns than they scored, yet managed a 5-3 ACC record. Mike London may find it hard to take the Cavaliers to back-to-back bowl games for the first time since Al Groh did it in 2004 and 2005. In the SEC, Auburn allowed 10 more offensive touchdowns (27) than they scored (17), yet still somehow managed to win half their league games! With Texas A&M joining the SEC West and Clemson on the non-conference schedule, the Tigers could miss the postseason altogether in 2012. In the Big 12, Kansas State allowed more offensive touchdowns than they scored yet managed a 7-2 conference record, finishing all alone in second place. A reversal of fortune is almost certainly in store in 2012. The Big 10 had three teams drastically exceed their APR. Penn State won six Big 10 games and was in contention until the final weekend of the regular season. However, the Lions allowed more offensive touchdowns than they scored and will be breaking in a new coach for the first time since 1965. Michigan State won seven conference games and nearly earned their first Rose Bowl bid since 1987. However, based on APR, the Spartans should have only won a shade over five league games. Nebraska underachieved all season and actually allowed more offensive touchdowns than they scored. That should make Michigan the favorite in the Legends Division in 2012. UCLA 'won' their division in the Pac-12 despite allowing more offensive touchdowns than they scored. Jim Mora may be in for a long season during his first year at the helm. And finally, Louisville was a surprise co-Big East champ in Charlie Strong's second season. However, the Cardinals allowed more offensive touchdowns than they scored (sensing a theme?), so even with West Virginia out of the picture, a BCS bid is still likely a pipe dream.

Six BCS conference teams significantly underperformed their APR in conference play. Miami scored team more offensive touchdowns than they allowed, yet finished with a losing record in the ACC. Perhaps Al Golden can coax a solid showing out of this under-performing group. North Carolina also scored more touchdowns than they allowed in league play, yet finished with a losing record. Larry Fedora steps into a pretty good situation assuming the NCAA investigation has run its course. In the SEC, Vanderbilt showed some moxie and was much better than their 2-6 SEC record. Could James Franklin take then to consecutive bowls for the first time ever? Texas A&M was expected to be a contender during their last run through the Big 12. A plethora of second-half collapses caused the Aggies to finish 4-5 despite scoring seven more touchdowns than they allowed. They move to an insanely tough division and must contend with Alabama, Arkansas, and LSU, but could position themselves in the middle of the division. South Florida lost seven of eight after a 4-0 start and finished tied for last in the Big East. No one would be shocked if the Bulls went from worst to first. Syracuse also drastically underperformed their expected Big East record. Syracuse probably won't be winning the league in 2012, but a return to the postseason is likely.

Five non-BCS conference teams exceed their APR in conference play. Marshall finished 5-3 in Conference USA despite allowing more offensive touchdowns than they scored. The Herd will find returning to the postseason quite challenging in 2012. UAB won three games in Conference USA despite allowing twice as many offensive touchdowns as they scored (those teams typically only win about one game). Despite the relative good fortune, the coach was still canned. New coach Garrick McGee has his work cut out for him. Northern Illinois won the MAC Championship despite posting the profile of a solid, but hardly elite MAC team. Dave Doeren deserves credit for leading the Huskies to the summit in his first season, but a repeat is highly unlikely. Arkansas State finished unbeaten in the Sun Belt and got coach Hugh Freeze a job with Ole Miss. New coach Gus Malzahn may yet make the Redwolves into a Boise State-like power, but there is likely to be some regression in his first season. And speaking of Sun Belt powers, Louisiana-Lafayette also significantly exceeded their expected Sun Belt record. A second straight bowl appearance would likely have coach Mark Hudspeth in line for some big time jobs.

Four non-BCS conference teams significantly underperformed relative to their APR in conference play. UCF followed up their top-25 final ranking in 2010 with a losing season in 2011. They'll be back at or near the top of the league in 2012. Miami of Ohio followed up their MAC Championship in 2010 with a losing season in 2011. With Temple gone to the Big East in 2012, the MAC East is wide open. Air Force scored more offensive touchdowns than they allowed, yet finished with a losing record in the Mountain West. The Falcons could be poised to take flight in 2012. And finally, Louisiana-Monroe scored more offensive touchdowns than they allowed in the Sun Belt, but finished just 3-5 in the league. With some breaks, they could overtake their in-state brethren and get to a bowl.

Turnovers = Turnaround

Last time out, I published a piece examining how extremely lucky or unlucky teams perform the season after they experienced extreme fortune (either good or bad). Now I want to turn to another method that can be used to identify potential sleeper teams and teams that are likely to disappoint their collective fan base.

One of the preseason magazines I cannot do without is published by Phil Steele. In the fall, with the television on while on slaving away at this blog, I heard a commercial for a movie starring Hugh Jackman and thought they were making a documentary based on the college football guru. Imagine my disappointment when I discovered it was a derivative boxing movie featuring Rocky + robots. Oh well, I digress. One of the items Mr. Steele harps on in his preseason magazine is how big a role turnovers play in team performance. His magazine always features a section titled 'Turnovers = Turnaround'. Steele's contention is that teams with extreme turnover ratios (either good or bad) will see their margin trend back toward average the following season. Consequently, teams with great turnover margins tend to see their records decline and teams with poor turnover margins tend to see their records improve. I wanted to test his theory in a similar fashion to the way I tested close game performance. Thus, I looked at every college football team (excluding independents) from 2007-2010 and calculated their turnover margin in conference play. I looked only at conference games because teams often play extremely divergent non-conference schedules. Conference schedule strength on the other hand, remains relatively constant. I also decided to differentiate between BCS and non-BCS conferences based on the assumption that the non-BCS conferences would have greater shifts in year-to-year conference record thanks to a much less intrinsic ruling class. I then chose the most 'extreme' teams, those with a turnover margin greater than or equal to +10 or less than or equal to -10, and examined how they performed (in conference) in the season during which they had a great or poor turnover margin. Next I looked at how they performed the following season and calculated the difference. Here are the results. First the BCS conference teams with great turnover margins.
Of the 18 BCS conference teams with great turnover margins, 12 (or two thirds) declined by at least one game in conference play the next season. Four stayed the same and two improved. Overall, the teams declined by about 1.2 games in conference play the following season.

Now the BCS conference teams with poor turnover margins.
Of the 20 BCS conference teams with poor turnover margins, 14 improved by at least one game in conference play the next season. Two stayed the same and four declined. Overall, the teams improved by about 1.6 games in conference play the following season.

Now the non-BCS conference teams with great turnover margins.
Of the 19 non-BCS conference teams with great turnover margins, 13 declined by at least one game in conference play the next season. Three stayed the same and three improved. Overall, the teams declined by just a shade over one game in conference play the following season (-1.026). That number is not very far from the 1.2 game decline felt by similar BCS conference teams.

Now the non-BCS conference teams with poor turnover margins.
Of the 15 non-BCS conference teams with poor turnover margins, 11 improved by at least one game in conference play the next season. One team improved by half a game, two teams stayed the same, and only one declined. Overall, the teams improved by 2.3 games in conference play the following season. While the decline suffered by BCS and non-BCS conference teams was very similar, the improvement by the non-BCS conference teams is vastly superior (nearly 50% more) to that enjoyed by BCS conference teams.

So what teams should we keep an eye on in 2012? Who could be slated for improvement and who may fail to meet preseason expectations? BCS teams with great in-conference turnover margins last season include Oklahoma State (+17), Wisconsin (+13), Kansas State (+13), LSU (+12), and Arizona State (+10). Oklahoma State, Wisconsin, Kansas State, and LSU went a combined 29-5 against their conference foes, so some regression is certainly in order here. Meanwhile, Arizona State went just 4-5 in the Pac-12, so while they do not have as far to fall, they probably will not be contending for the division title either.

Only two BCS conference teams from last season meet the criteria for poor in-conference turnover margin. Ole Miss (-11) and Illinois (-10) went a combined 2-14 in their respective leagues. Perhaps not coincidentally, they also have new coaches for 2012. At the very least, those new coaches should see at least modest improvement (and they can take all the credit).

Six non-BCS conference teams had great in-conference turnover margins in 2011. Memphis (+12), Toledo (+12), Houston (+11), Louisiana Tech (+11), Arkansas State (+10), and Wyoming (+10) posted double-digit margins. Four of those teams (Arkansas State, Houston, Louisiana Tech, and Toledo) combined to lose just two conference games. Wyoming also had a solid year in the Mountain West, going 5-2. But Memphis...The Tigers went 1-7 despite a great turnover margin. Arkansas State, Houston, and Toledo all lost their head coaches after their successful seasons so the new hires may be unfairly evaluated if their teams dip somewhat.

Three non-BCS conference teams had poor in-conference turnover margins in 2011. SMU (-13), East Carolina (-11), and Florida Atlantic (-10) were all bitten by the turnover bug. Amazingly, East Carolina and SMU both finished with at least .500 marks in league play, a sign that they may be contenders in Conference USA in 2012. Meanwhile, the Owls from Florida Atlantic bottomed out at 0-8 in the Sun Belt, so there is no place to go but up for new coach Carl Pelini.

Close Game Luck

Perhaps one of the more ubiquitous themes I have promulgated in the nearly seven years I have been writing this blog is that close game are a crap shoot. Good teams don't win more close games than bad teams. Close game success is not correlated across seasons, or even within seasons. Et cetera, et cetera. However, one of the things I have never analyzed is exactly many games teams that are either exceedingly lucky or unlucky tend to win the next season. Well, now I can cross one thing off my bucket list. In this analysis, I looked at all team seasons from 2005-2010 and calculated their performance in close conference games (games decided by one score -- eight points or less). Once this was complete, I looked at how the best and worst teams (in terms of close game record) fared in their conference during the season in which they had a great or poor record in close games and the subsequent season. In order to only examine those teams that enjoyed significant success or lack thereof in close games, teams had to be at least two games better or worse than expected (expected record .500). For example a team that goes 4-0 is two games better than expected (expected record of 2-2) as is a team that goes 5-1 (expected record 3-3) and vice-versa (0-4 and 1-5). I looked only at conference record in close games because teams often play extremely divergent non-conference schedules. Conference schedule strength on the other hand, remains relatively constant. I also decided to differentiate between BCS and non-BCS conferences based on the assumption that the non-BCS conferences would have greater shifts in year-to-year conference record thanks to a much less intrinsic ruling class. So with that out of the way, here are the results. First, the lucky BCS conference teams.Of the twelve teams that had a great record in close games, ten of them declined by at least one game the following season and only one (Cincinnati) improved. In the aggregate, the teams declined by about 1.6 games in conference play the following season.

Now the unlucky BCS conference teams.We're dealing with a much smaller sample size here, but four of the five teams improved, some (Arkansas and Michigan State) significantly. Only one team declined. In the aggregate, the teams improved on average by nearly two games in conference play the next season.

Now the lucky non-BCS conference teams.Of the seven lucky teams, five declined the following season and only one (East Carolina) improved. In the aggregate, the teams declined by about 1.7 games in conference play the following season. That's not very different from the decline enjoyed (or endured) by the BCS conference teams (1.6).

And finally the unlucky non-BCS conference teams.Of the ten unlucky teams, eight improved the following season and only one (UAB) declined. In the aggregate, the teams improved by 2.2 games in conference play the next season. That's higher, but not extremely different from the improvement by the BCS conference teams (1.9).

So, with this information at hand, who is poised to make a significant splash in 2012 and who may come in a little over-hyped and is likely to take a step back? The only lucky BCS team from last season was Kansas State. The Wildcats went 6-1 in close Big 12 games last season on their way to a 7-2 runner-up finish.

There were two lucky non-BCS conference teams, with Marshall (4-0) and Utah State (5-1) posting great close game conference records. Marshall needed every win they could muster as they went just 1-3 in conference games decided by more than one score.

The unlucky BCS conference teams were headlined by Ohio State. The Buckeyes went 1-5 in close Big 10 games (each of their league losses was close) as they finished below .5oo in the conference for the first time since 1999. With a new proven coach (Mr Meyer) the Buckeyes should be poised for a return to glory even if they are ineligible for the postseason in 2012. The Miami Hurricanes were also a tough luck 1-5 in close league games and the South Florida Bulls were 0-4 in close Big east games as they missed out on a bowl for the first time since 2004. Vanderbilt was also 0-4 in close SEC games, losing in heartbreaking fashion to Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, and Tennessee.

The only unlucky non-BCS conference team was Central Florida. The Knights dropped all four of their close Conference USA games and compounded their troubles by losing two close non-conference games (to BYU and Florida International) to miss out on a bowl for the first time since 2008. Look for the Knights to contend for the Conference USA crown in 2012.

The Crimson Armada: Where Does 2011 Alabama Stand?

While calculating my mid-season SDPI ratings back in October, I got the notion that this year's Alabama team could be one of the best college football teams ever. Of course, almost immediately after that post, the Tide lost a tight home game to LSU and seemed doomed to be just another Sugar Bowl champion. After they were written off, all the other challengers faltered and the Tide ended the season ranked number two in the BCS. In the hyped rematch, the Tide dominated LSU and claimed their second BCS Championship in three years. Even with the loss, Alabama still enjoyed a dominant campaign. But how dominant? Where do the Tide rank in terms of recent national champion? To find out, I looked to see how Alabama compared to each national champion since 1993 in four different categories. Why 1993? Its completely arbitrary, but that is when I first began to follow college football.

The first category of dominance I looked at is scoring margin. The following table lists how the past 21 national champions (1997 and 2003 featured two champions) have fared in terms of per game scoring margin.By this measure, Alabama ranked eighth among the 21 teams. Their scoring margin was very good, but not quite ridiculous like that of 1995 Nebraska. Notice that if we take the scoring margin of the two worst teams (2006 Florida and 2002 Ohio State), and add them together, it still does not equal the margin of that Nebraska team. A few other tidbits from the table: Four of the top-eight teams on the chart actually lost a game (1993 Florida State, both Florida teams, and this year's Alabama). I think its a little ironic that the bottom two teams are Ohio State and Florida. As you may recall, Florida beat a solidly favored Ohio State to win the title in 2006.

The second category of dominance is scoring ratio. Scoring ratio is simply the number of points scored divided by the number of points allowed. A team with a ratio of 1 would have scored and allowed the same number of points. While scoring margin tends to favor teams with great offenses, teams with great defenses will fare well in scoring ratio. Here is how the past 21 champions have fared in scoring ratio.When you only allow a shade of eight points per game, your scoring ratio is bound to be pretty good. 2011 Alabama ranks second to the 2001 Miami Hurricanes in terms of scoring ratio and are one of just three teams to have scored more than four times as many points as their opponents. Once again, as in the previous table, a loss certainly does not preclude dominance. Four of the top-six teams (2011 Alabama, 1993 Florida State, 2008 Florida, and 2003 LSU) all lost a game.

The third category of dominance is number of wins by twenty or more points.Alabama ranks very highly by this measure. Ten of their twelve wins came by 20 or more points. The only victims that were able to hold the margin under 20 points were Penn State (16 points) and perhaps surprisingly, Mississippi State (17 points). 1995 Nebraska is tied with 2008 Florida atop the list. The Cornhuskers lone victory by fewer than 20 points in 1995 came against Washington State (14 points).

The final category of dominance is performance away from home. The table below ranks the 21 teams by their road/neutral field scoring margin. Their road/neutral field record is also listed.Once again, the Crimson Tide do not disappoint. Only 1995 Nebraska (sensing a trend?) and 2005 Texas fared better on the road than Alabama. Once again five of the top-eight teams in road scoring margin lost a game (2011 Alabama, 2008 Florida, 2003 LSU, 2003 Southern Cal, and 1993 Florida State). Perhaps more interestingly, 2011 Alabama, 2008 Florida, and 2003 LSU all lost at home! The most surprising number on this chart belong to 2001 Miami. The Hurricanes are widely regarded as one of the best champions of the BCS-era, and they do rank third in scoring margin, first in scoring ratio, and tied for third in wins by 20 or more points. However, their road/neutral field performance ranks only 15th. The Hurricanes struggled mightily in a pair of road games against decent, but hardly dominant conference foes. They beat Boston College 18-7, in a game with a misleading final thanks to a steal of an interception and return by Ed Reed. See below.

They also edged Virginia Tech 26-24. Both of those teams managed 8-4 marks, but neither was a great.

So where does 2011 Alabama rank in terms of champions of the past two decades? For my money, 1995 Nebraska is head and shoulders above everyone else. However, after the Cornhuskers, I think Alabama belongs in the conversation with 2008 Florida, 2005 Texas, 2001 Miami, and 1993 Florida State (a very underrated champion) as the second best champion. And who is the worst? No one team stands completely out, but two certainly do. Its a close race between either 2006 Florida or 2002 Ohio State.

Bowl Preview: Part V

The Game: BCS National Championship Game
The Teams: Alabama vs LSU
The Line: Alabama -1
I'll say this for LSU, they have impeccable timing. They always seems to save their best teams when the national championship is in New Orleans. See 2003 and 2007. The difference this year though is that the Tigers actually avoided losing any games in the regular season. And what a regular season it was. The Tigers beat the Pac-12 champ (Oregon) at a neutral site, the Big East champ (West Virginia) on the road, and their opponents in this game (Alabama) on the road. Aside from the 9-6 win over Alabama, no opponent came closer than 13 points against the Tigers. Alabama had a similarly dominant season. While they lacked the non-conference scalps procured by LSU (Alabama's best win was at offensively inept Penn State), nine of their eleven wins came by at least 20 points, with the other two coming by 16 and 17 respectively. While it is likely we will see at least one touchdown in this game, it should be low-scoring like their initial encounter. Both these teams were uber-dominant on the defensive side of the ball in 2011. In their eleven games against BCS-conference teams, LSU allowed 12 offensive touchdowns. That's amazing! However, Alabama one-upped them, allowing just six offensive touchdowns in their nine games against BCS-conference teams. Both these teams are clearly the best the nation has to offer this year. LSU has the better scalps, but Alabama has the better statistical profile. Thus, the Tide are my final lock of the bowl season.

Bowl Preview: Part IV

The Game: Sugar Bowl
The Teams: Michigan vs Virginia Tech
The Line: Michigan -3
Congratulations are in order for Virginia Tech. The Hokies stole earned the ACC’s first ever at-large BCS bid. Did they deserve it? Probably not. However, every game that is not the BCS National Championship Game, be it the Rose Bowl or the Famous Idaho Potato Bowl, is nothing more than a glorified exhibition. The powers that be choose who they want to play in those games, and we the public have just three options available to us. To watch, to not watch, or to sort of watch while playing Words With Friends. While the Hokies may not deserve this bowl game, it still presents an intriguing matchup. Virginia Tech suffered two losses all season. Unfortunately, both defeats came at the hands (or paws) of the Clemson Tigers, preventing the Hokies from winning their fifth ACC Championship since joining the conference in 2004. While the Hokies won eleven games, their non-conference schedule was especially soft (Appalachian State, East Carolina, Marshall, and Arkansas State), and their only wins of note in the conference were over Georgia Tech and Virginia. Still, the Hokies were plenty dominant against their soft schedule, finishing with the third-best defense in the ACC and the second-best offense. The Hokies will be taking on a Michigan team making its first BCS bowl appearance since the Rose Bowl following the 2006 season. Michigan lost that game in unflattering fashion, lost the 2007 season opener to Appalachian State, pushed Lloyd Carr out the door, hired Rich Rodriguez, fielded the worst three defenses ever at the school under his watch, and culminated his tenure with a thrashing at the hands of an SEC also-ran. But now the Wolverines appear to be back on the right track under his successor Brady Hoke. The Wolverines maintained the offensive efficiency they developed under Rodriguez (finishing third in the twelve-team Big 10), and also improved their defense (finishing third after ranking last in 2010). The Wolverines also defeated Ohio State for the first time since 2003, though it should be noted the Buckeyes managed just a 6-6 record, so there was no parade. Michigan is probably the better team, but the Wolverines lack of a smooth passing attack has caused them to bog down (see games against Michigan State and Iowa) when facing a strong defense. For that reason, a play on the Hokies to win outright may not be a bad idea.

The Game: Orange Bowl
The Teams: Clemson vs West Virginia
The Line: Clemson -3
Clemson and West Virginia. A rematch of the 1989 Gator Bowl. Can the Mountaineers gain a measure of revenge for the Tigers abuse of Major Harris more than 20 years ago? Eh, maybe the rematch angle is a little overblown, seeing as how the majority of the key players in this game were not even in utero during that game. For Clemson, this Orange Bowl appearance is their first since they won the National Title in 1981 and their first conference title since 1991. After suffering their first losing season since 1998 last year, the Tigers hired a former high school offensive coordinator (Chad Morris) and played at a much faster pace. Add in a stud freshman receiver (Sammy Watkins), an NFL-bound tight end (Dwayne Allen), and a solid quarterback (Tajh Boyd), and voila—the best offense in the ACC. Despite their offensive firepower, the Tigers struggled at the end of the regular season, losing to Georgia Tech, barely escaping Wake Forest at home, getting annihilated at NC State, and struggling to find any semblance of an offense in their annual rivalry game with South Carolina. Then, in the ACC Championship Game, it was suddenly October again. The Tigers mauled Virginia Tech for the second time this season and secured their Orange Bowl bid. West Virginia did not wait quite as long between conference titles, though it must have seemed that way to fans. After three years of Bill Stewart (and just a share of one conference title), the Mountaineers brought in Dana Holgorsen to lead the offense and replace Stewart after this season. However, as to be expected, Stewart did not enjoy being a lame-duck coach, and long story short, Holgorsen took the big job a year earlier than expected. The Mountaineers posted the best offense in the Big East, and won the three-way tiebreaker with Louisville and Cincinnati to take the BCS bowl bid. For the most part, West Virginia won the games they were supposed to, save for a huge upset at the hands of Syracuse in the Carrier Dome. Clemson is probably a better team, and should certainly have sufficient motivation in playing in their first-ever BCS bowl game. However, ACC teams are just 2-11 in BCS bowl games. Keep that in mind if you plan on wagering on this game

The Game: Cotton Bowl
The Teams: Arkansas vs Kansas State
The Line: Arkansas -8.5
Win or lose, Kansas State will remain one of the most surprising teams of 2011. After failing to win more than seven games in any season since 2003, the Wildcats already have ten wins and will be clawing for their eleventh against Arkansas. The Wildcats won ten games despite ranking just ninth in the ten-team Big 12 on offense and fifth on defense. Their statistical profile befits a team that went 6-6 or 7-5, not 10-2. How did they do it? For starters, their turnover margin of +13 ranks sixth in the nation. They also added five non-offensive touchdowns and went an amazing 8-1 in one-possession games. That's not to say the Wildcats don't have players. Quarterback Calvin, err Collin Kelin ran for an amazing 26 touchdowns! Klein is somewhat limited as a passer, but the Wildcat offense is built around the running game. Arkansas on the other hand, is built around the passing game. Quarterback Tyler Wilson helped lead the third-best offense in the SEC (behind Alabama and Georgia). Wilson tossed 22 touchdowns and just six interceptions on the year. On paper, this seems like a walk in the park for Arkansas. However, Hogs were below average on defense, finishing ninth in the SEC. Plus, outside of South Carolina, the Hogs don't really have any great wins. Sure they beat bowl teams (Texas A&M, Auburn, Vanderbilt, and Mississippi State), but none of those teams were especially strong. Look for Kansas State to keep this one close, but I don't think they have the firepower to win outright.

The Game: BBVA Compass Bowl
The Teams: Pittsburgh vs SMU
The Line: Pittsburgh -3
SMU and Pittsburgh have quite a bit in common. At least more than you probably think. Both were college football powers in the late 1970's and early 1980's, with Pitt winning a national title in 1976 and SMU finishing in the top-10 in 1981, 1982, and 1984. Both went through serious dips in the 1990’s with Pitt suffering five straight losing seasons from 1992 through 1996. SMU was given the Death Penalty thanks to their cavalier attitudes toward boosters during their run in the early 80’s. They were forced to shutter the program for the 1987 and 1988 seasons. When they returned to playing football in 1989, they endured eight straight losing seasons and did not play in a bowl game until 2009. Both also had ties to the most recent Arizona State coaching search. SMU coach June Jones initially interviewed for the job, and was apparently ready to accept the position until the Sun Devils went in another direction. That direction was due northeast. Pitt coach Todd Graham accepted overtures from the Sun Devils to become their coach and left Pitt after just one season guiding the Panthers. Thus there is quite a bit of drama for a bowl game featuring teams that enter with a combined 13-11 record. Despite their 6-6 mark, Pitt actually performed quite well in Graham’s first and only season at the helm. The Panthers boasted the third ranked offense and second ranked defense in the Big East, but were undone by a poor record in close games (2-4). The Mustangs from SMU seemed poised for a breakthrough season when they upset TCU and beat defending Conference USA champ UCF on consecutive weekends to stand 5-1 in early October. They proceeded to win just two of their final six games, losing in non-competitive fashion to Houston, Tulsa, and Southern Miss (lost by 85 combined points in those games). Surprisingly, SMU has yet to feature the dynamic offense that Jones was known for at Hawaii. The Mustangs ranked just eighth in Conference USA on offense and have yet to finish higher than fourth in any of Jones’ four seasons (cue Frankie Valli) at the helm. Pitt is the better team and should win, but with the turmoil (on both sides) and the motivation factor (SMU would love to knock off a team from a BCS conference) I wouldn’t feel confident taking them to cover here.

The Game: GoDaddy.com Bowl
The Teams: Arkansas State vs Northern Illinois
The Line: Arkansas State -1
Very quietly, Arkansas State has positioned themselves to be a Sun Belt power for at least the next season or two. It started when they hired Hugh Freeze to direct the offense after a disappointing 2009 campaign. The 2009 team finished with the worst offense in the Sun Belt, and hired Freeze to heat things up. The Red Wolves responded by posting the third best offense in the Sun Belt in 2010. However, the team posted a poor record in close games (1-5) en route to a 4-8 finish and head coach Steve Roberts was canned. Freeze was promoted to the top job and the offense continued clicking, this time ranking first in the conference. The defense also improved (ranking first in the conference as well) and the team blitzed through Sun Belt play unbeaten. The Red Wolves became the first Sun Belt team to win ten games in the regular season (joining the 2009 Middle Tennessee State team as the only other Sun Belt team to win ten period). They are also ranked 28th in the latest AP Poll, so with a win here, they could conceivably become the first Sun Belt team to ever be ranked in the top-25 as a Sun Belt member (North Texas was ranked once back in the day). Of course, as is often the case at schools like Arkansas State, success usually means your coach is leaving. Sure enough, Ole Miss tabbed Freeze to become their next coach. Not to worry though, the Red Wolves pulled off one of the biggest coups in finding their next coach when Gus Malzahn agreed to lead the team. Malzahn is an offensive innovator, and while his offense at Auburn struggled in the SEC without Cam Newton, Malzahn’s previous track record at Arkansas and Tulsa indicates the offense should remain in good hands. Arkansas State will be battling a fellow mid-major conference champion in the Northern Illinois Huskies. The Huskies won the MAC for the first time since 1983 in Dave Doeren's first season as coach. The Huskies were especially good on offense, where they ranked second in the MAC, but much less so on defense, where they ranked just seventh. This is one of the better, more under-appreciated bowl matchups of 2011. It’s a little off the beaten path, but tune in to see a pair of established signal callers, Ryan Aplin of Arkansas State (can we call them the Aplin Dumpling Gang?) and Chandler Harnish of Northern Illinois (a poor man’s Dan LeFevour who was a poor man’s Tim Tebow), running a pair of entertaining offenses. If you feel like making a play, take the Red Wolves in this one.

Bowl Preview: Part III

The Game: Texas Bowl
The Teams: Texas A&M vs Northwestern
The Line: Texas A&M -10
The Aggies came into the season riding high, ranked eighth in the nation and dreaming about their first Big 12 championship since the days of RC Slocum, Dat Nguyen, and Dante Hall in 1998. The Aggies played well, but were doomed by second half collapses and a poor turnover margin. The Aggies actually boasted the fourth best offense and second best defense in the Big 12, but struggled in close games. Five of their six overall losses came by a combined 17 points. Meanwhile, only one of their six wins came by fewer than 16 points. Alas, those solid peripheral number could not save Mike Sherman's job. However, if the team is motivated, it could mean another year of postseason misery for Northwestern. This bowl game marks the fourth consecutive postseason trip for the Wildcats, but unfortunately the Wildcats have not emerged victorious in a postseason game since winning the 1948 Rose Bowl over Cal. The Wildcats boasted the Big 10's second best offense, behind senior quarterback Dan Persa. However, their defense was among the worst in the conference, ranking ahead of Indiana only. Northwestern beat a single bowl bound team in 2011, upsetting Nebraska in Lincoln. Their other five wins came against Boston College, Indiana, Rice, Minnesota, and Eastern Illinois (IAA). Boston College, Indiana, Rice, and Minnesota combined to post a 12-36 record. Oh, and for good measure, Northwestern also lost to Army. This game is far from a lock, especially with Texas A&M's penchant for second half collapses, but the odds are seriously stacked against Northwestern ending their postseason victory drought.

The Game: Sun Bowl
The Teams: Georgia Tech vs Utah
The Line: Georgia Tech -3
Year Four of the triple option at Georgia Tech looked like it was to be one for the ages at midseason. The Yellow Jackets were 6-0 and averaging 554 yards and 46.5 points per game. Since then, the Jackets have gone just 2-4 while averaging 366 yards and 23.3 points per game. Looking back though, its clear the early barrage of points and yards were accumulated against less than capable defenses. Of the first six victims, Western Carolina is a IAA school, Middle Tennessee State ranked 104th, Maryland ranked 108th, and Kansas ranked 120th (or dead last) in total defense. Only NC State (39th) and North Carolina (40th) were respectable defensive squads. Over the second half of the season, the Jackets faced teams ranked third (Georgia), 14th (Virginia Tech), and 29th (Virginia) in total defense, and only one team (Duke) ranked in the bottom half of the national total defense rankings. The bad news for Georgia Tech is that Utah is pretty good defensively. In league play, the Utes featured the third best defense in the conference, and nationally, they were 30th in total defense. Utah did not get off to a blazing start in their new BCS conference, as they opened Pac-12 play with four consecutive defeats. They did win their next four heading into the regular season finale against Colorado (a team that came into the game with a 2-10 record). A win against the Buffaloes would have sent the Utes to the inaugural Pac-12 Championship Game for a shot at the Rose Bowl against Oregon. Naturally, Utah lost and UCLA backed into the game. Utah won seven games, but missed out on a special season because their offense was garbage. Starting quarterback Jordan Wynn went down with an injury in the fourth game and has not played since. Without him, the Utes finished dead last in the Pac-12 on offense. Utah's defense should keep them in this game, but methinks Georgia Tech will find a way to win their first bowl game since the 2004 Champs Sports Bowl.

The Game: Liberty Bowl
The Teams: Vanderbilt vs Cincinnati
The Line: Vanderbilt -2
After waiting more than a quarter century between their last two bowl bids, the Vanderbilt Commodores decided an abbreviated postseason drought was more to their liking. Head coach James Franklin is the first Vanderbilt coach to lead the Commodores to a bowl game in his inaugural season. If Vanderbilt can win this game, he would become the first Vanderbilt coach to record a winning record in his first year since Fred Pancoast in 1975. If the Commodores had performed a little better in close games, they would already have a winning record. Vandy lost four games by less than a touchdown, with each loss coming to an SEC school (Georgia, Arkansas, Florida, and Tennessee). By contrast, five of Vandy's six wins came by at least 20 points. On the season, Vanderbilt has outscored their opponents by 73 points, their largest scoring margin since 1974. While Vandy went just 2-6 in the SEC, they are actually betting line favorites over Cincinnati, a team that tied for the Big East championship. The Bearcats rebounded from a poor 2010 season by winning (at least) nine games for the fourth time in five seasons. The Bearcats were not particularly adept on either side of the ball, finishing just below average on offense and defense in the Big East. However, they won the close ones (3-1 in one-score games) and avoided the turnover troubles that plagued them in 2010 (second worst margin in the nation at -15). This spread on this game seems about right. Vanderbilt is better than you think and Cincinnati is a shade worse. Look for the Commodores to win just their third bowl game in school history here.

The Game: Fight Hunger Bowl
The Teams: Illinois vs UCLA
The Line: Illinois -2.5
I know its weird to say, but Illinois actually had the makings of a decent team in 2011. Their defense was tied with Wisconsin as the best in Big 10 play. Their offense was poor, ranking just tenth in the twelve team league, but it wasn't historically bad. One could have reasonably expected a team with their down-to-down profile to win about half their league games. Instead the Illini went just 2-6 in the conference, dropping their final six games and costing Ron Zook his job. The Illini lost those games thanks to the offense's inability to score (averaged just eleven points per game in the skid) and proclivity for turning the ball over (16 turnovers in the last six games). To put the turnover number in perspective, the offense committed nearly twice as many turnovers in the last six games (16) as they scored touchdowns (9). The 1985 Chicago Bears would have had difficulty winning games with an offense like that. Still, in the bowl spirit of rewarding mediocrity, the Illini will get to play a 13th game against a team that has also fired its coach. Rick Neuheisel came to Los Angeles intending to end Southern Cal's death grip on the Pac-10. The Trojans have ceded control of the conference, but not to their cross-town neighbors. Neuheisel leaves Los Angeles with an 0-4 record against the Trojans, with each loss coming by at least 14 points. Miraculously though, his team did 'win' the Pac-12 South thanks to the Trojans' probation and the general ineptitude of the rest of the division. For their 'victory', they received a thrashing at the hands of Oregon, and now head into the bowl season with a 6-7 record. The Bruins become the first team to enter the postseason with a losing record since North Texas in 2001. Of course, that team did at least win its conference. Neither team in this superfluous bowl game is very good, as indicated by their combined 12-13 record. However, when in doubt, take the team that does at least one thing well. Illinois is legit on defense, and should do just enough to win here.

The Game: Chick-Fil-A Bowl
The Teams: Auburn vs Virginia
The Line: Auburn -3
Welcome back to the postseason Virginia! After becoming bowl stalwarts under George Welsh and continuing the run at the beginning of the Al Groh era (15 bowl games in 19 seasons from 1987-2005), the Cavs fell on hard times. Hearkening back to their days at the bottom of the ACC, the Cavs played in just one bowl game from 2006-2010. They had also lost three straight games to Duke entering the 2011 season. To the surprise of nearly everyone, Virginia won twice as many as they lost and were in contention for the Coastal Division title until being thumped by Virgina Tech in their final regular season game. Mike London, winner of a national title as coach of Richmond in 2008, has guided the Cavs to a bowl game in just his second season. The Cavs were probably not as good as their 8-4 record would indicate, as they posted a phenomenal 5-1 record in one-score games. The Cavs seemed to play close games regardless of the competition. Two of their narrow wins were over dregs Indiana and Idaho, while the other games came against decent (Miami) to good (Georgia Tech and Florida State) competition. Speaking of close games, Gene Chizik must have acres of four leaf clovers in his backyard. Since losing to Alabama in the regular season finale of 2009 by a score of 26-21, the Tigers have reeled off eleven straight one possession wins, including seven last season when they claimed the BCS National Championship. They were 3-0 in such games in 2011, helping to explain how they won seven games overall despite being outscored by 61 points on the season. Both teams were pretty average in their respective conferences and appear pretty evenly matched here. That being said, take a flier on Virginia to win this one outright.

The Game: Ticket City Bowl
The Teams: Houston vs Penn St
The Line: Houston -5.5
This is the consolation prize for the Houston Cougars. About a month removed from hosting the Conference USA Championship Game, a win away from a BCS bowl berth, the Cougars must instead settle for a trip to Dallas to take on a Penn State team in disarray. The Cougars are led by their offense, featuring record-breaking quarterback Case Keenum, and a stable of senior wide receivers. Patrick Edwards and Justin Johnson both went over 1000 yards through the air, and if Tyron Carrier has a good game in the Ticket City Bowl (comes in with 914 yards receiving), he would join them, giving the Cougars three 1000-yard receivers for the second time in three seasons (Edwards and Carrier joined James Cleveland as 1000-yard receivers in 2009). Penn State enters this game having lost two of three since an 8-1 start. The Nittany Lions also have their fare share of drama going on off the field. What impact will that have on this game? Its impossible to tell, so lets focus on what we do know. Penn State's offense, particularly their passing offense is bad. As a team, Penn State completed less than half their passes (112th in the nation in completion percentage) and threw just nine touchdown passes (116th in the nation) with four of those coming against Eastern Michigan. The Lions were a little better running the ball, with Silas Redd gaining nearly 1200 yards on the ground. The Lions defense was solid, but far from an elite unit, ranking fifth in the Big 10. Houston is probably better than Penn State, and they should be sufficiently motivated with a chance to finish the season ranked for the first time since 1990. However, in their lone game versus a BCS conference opponent this season, the Cougars narrowly escaped UCLA by a 38-34 score at home. Houston will probably win, but I wouldn't lay the five and a half points.

The Game: Gator Bowl
The Teams: Florida vs Ohio St
The Line: Florida -2.5
This seems like a battle between these two schools' JV squads. With both teams coming into the game with 6-6 records, one will leave with a losing record for the first time in a long time. Florida has not finished with a losing record since they lost (almost) all their games in 1979. Meanwhile, Ohio State last finished below .500 in 1988. This game is being called the 'Urban Bowl' by some even though:
1) Urban Meyer has not coached Florida in a calendar year.
2) Urban Meyer will not coach Ohio State until next September.
3) Urban Meyer will not coach this game.
By this logic, next season when Arkansas hosts Ole Miss, we should refer to it as the 'Nutt Bowl'. What this game possesses in terms of name recognition, it more than makes up for in lack of appreciable football talent. Here's a composite list of the twelve teams these two have beaten: Florida Atlantic, UAB, Tennessee, Kentucky, Vanderbilt, Furman, Akron, Toledo, Colorado, Illinois, Wisconsin, and Indiana. Those twelve victims include just three bowl teams (Vanderbilt, Illinois, and Wisconsin), and only two of those wins came on the road (Kentucky and Illinois). These teams should have been playing in late-December, not early January. That being said, I'll give a slight nod to Florida in this one because the game is in Florida and the Gators appear to have a better defense.

The Game: Outback Bowl
The Teams: Georgia vs Michigan St
The Line: Georgia -3.5
Last season the Outback Bowl hosted a pair of teams (Florida and Penn State) that entered the game with a combined ten losses. While there was certainly some name recognition with the Gators and Nittany Lions, this season the bowl features better teams. Georgia and Michigan State combined to go 14-2 in their respective conferences and have just six losses combined. In fact, as both these were losers in their respective conference title games, they actually had just four combined losses in the regular season. Georgia is no stranger to double-digit wins, having won ten games seven times in the last ten seasons. Michigan State on the other hand, has posted back-to-back seasons of at least ten wins for the first time in program history. In fact, Michigan State has gone a Big 10 best 14-2 in league play over the past two seasons, but has no Rose Bowl (or other BCS bid) to show for it. Ah, the vagaries of a three-way tiebreaker. Michigan State was hardly excellent on either side of the ball, but they were very solid, finishing fourth in the Big 10 (which now was 12 teams) on both offense and defense. Their solid play and a little bit of luck in close games allowed them to win seven games in the conference for the second year in a row. Meanwhile, down south, the Georgia Bulldogs followed up the first losing season of the Mark Richt era with an 0-2 start, putting the current longest-tenured SEC head coach squarely on the hot seat. The Bulldogs responded by riding a relatively easy schedule (no Alabama, Arkansas, or LSU) to ten straight wins. While the schedule certainly made it easier for Georgia to win ten games, it didn’t do it for them. The Bulldogs played very well in their SEC games, finishing a distant third in my SEC SDPI ratings (behind the behemoths at Alabama and LSU). The one thing Mark Dantonio has not done well at Michigan State is win bowl games. The Spartans are 0-4 in bowl games under his guidance, including a loss to Georgia in the state of Florida (though not in this bowl game) after the 2008 season. Look for that trend to continue here with Georgia winning a close one.

The Game: Capital One Bowl
The Teams: South Carolina vs Nebraska
The Line: South Carolina -2.5
South Carolina began the season in the top-10 and despite the best efforts of now-departed quarterback Stephen Garcia, have a chance to finish there for the first time ever. As a resident of Columbia, and part time Gamecock fan (they can sometimes be a little insufferable here), I followed the season closely. Without a doubt, while the Gamecocks have enjoyed an historic season, but it could have been much better had they not squandered a home game against a very beatable Auburn team. That was Garcia’s last hurrah, and a prime example for how not to manage the clock in the two-minute drill. The Gamecocks gave Garcia the boot, or spur (for real this time) and handed the keys to Connor Shaw. Shaw went through some growing pains, as would be expected from an inexperienced player, but the Gamecocks won each game he started save for their trip to Arkansas. For the season, the Gamecocks finished fifth in the SEC on offense (quite an accomplishment considering the injuries and quarterback play) and fourth on defense (behind the impenetrable forces that were Alabama and LSU and to a lesser extent Georgia). The Gamecocks will face a team that also began the year with grandiose expectations. The Nebraska Cornhuskers began the year ranked number ten, but were quickly exposed in their first game against an elite team, losing in grisly fashion to Wisconsin. The Huskers would also lose to Michigan in a similar fashion and in an upset at home to those nerds from Northwestern. For the first time under Bo Pelini, the Huskers were less than elite on defense. The Huskers were middle of the pack in the Big 10 on defense, finishing sixth in the twelve-team league. They were gouged by several teams, most notably in their three losses where they gave up an average of 457 yards and 40.3 points per game. South Carolina appears to be a safe pick to win here. The only thing that would give me pause from picking them is their poor performance in bowl games under Steve Spurrier. The Gamecocks have won just once in five postseason trips under the Ol’ Ball Coach. Not only are they 1-4, but they have actually been favored in every game save for the Outback Bowl versus Iowa following the 2008 season. Still, this Gamecock team seems to be different. Take them to win, but I still don’t quite trust them to cover.

The Game: Rose Bowl
The Teams: Oregon vs Wisconsin
The Line: Oregon -6
This year’s Rose Bowl is the postseason game I am most looking forward to. Both participants boasted their respective league’s strongest offense. Wisconsin, behind transfer Russell Wilson and a stout offensive line ran roughshod over the Big 10, dominating their foes outside of a pair of close to defeats to Michigan State and Ohio State. Meanwhile, Oregon continued their high-octane ways under Chip Kelly. The Ducks cranked out the best offense in the Pac-12 for the sixth season in a row (this is Kelly's fifth season with the team and third as head coach). The Ducks lost just once in league play, against a revitalized Southern Cal team. Ultimately, that loss may have cost them a place in the BCS National Championship Game. Still, the Rose Bowl is not a bad consolation prize. What about defense? Does any team stand a chance at stopping the other, or is this destined to be the highest scoring Rose Bowl ever (surpassing the 1991 game). This may come as a surprise, but Wisconsin actually boasted the best defense in the Big 10 (tied with Illinois). Oregon on the other hand, was hardly a pushover defensively, finishing fourth in the Pac-12, but they were not an elite unit. The last time Oregon came into the Rose Bowl as a solid favorite against a Big 10 team, they left an outright loser, with their offense never quite getting on-track. This game should be tilted in Wisconsin’s favor much more than the six-point spread. For that reason, the Badgers are my fourth lock of the bowl season.

The Game: Fiesta Bowl
The Teams: Oklahoma St vs Stanford
The Line: Oklahoma St -3.5
Oklahoma State was oh so close. Instead of playing for the national championship, the Cowboys will have to settle for their first conference title since 1976 and first outright conference title since 1948! Despite their gaudy record and laundry list of victims, Oklahoma State was somewhat of a house of cards in 2011. They did rank second in the Big 12 on offense, but their defense was just seventh in the conference. They won games with a ridiculous turnover margin. They were second nationally with a +20 turnover margin (behind LSU at +22). They intercepted 23 passes on the year and also recovered an amazing 19 of the 25 fumbles they forced! They will need to force their fair share of turnovers against Andrew Luck and Stanford as the Cardinal should be able to move the ball against the Cowboys. Stanford ranked just a shade behind Oregon on offense in the Pac-12, and actually boasted the conference's top-ranked defense! Both teams should be motivated here, with a chance to finish in the top-3 and perhaps even as high as number two depending on the outcome of the BCS National Championship Game. Since they are getting points, take Stanford to win this one outright if you insist on making a wager.