Bowl Appetit

Meineke Car Care Bowl
Wake Forest -2.5 Connecticut

The last time these two teams played, on September 16th, 2006, it was very non-descript early season affair. Wake Forest was fresh off a 4-7 season while Connecticut had just finished a 5-6 campaign. The Demon Deacons won 24-13, despite being outgained by 115 yards (a common refrain for both teams recently). Of course, Wake Forest finished a Cinderella season with an 11-3 record and played in the Orange Bowl. Connecticut meanwhile struggled through a 4-8 season. The Deacons enjoyed another solid season this year, finishing 8-4 and playing in a bowl game for the second consecutive year for the first time in school history. Connecticut rebounded this season, and actually was the Big East co-champion. They have a great deal in common with both the 2006 and 2007 Demon Deacons.

The past two season, Wake Forest has gone an incredible 9-5 in games where they were outgained (5-3 in 2006 and 4-2 in 2007). They have done this by creating a ton of turnovers and being very careful with the football. In 2006 their turnover margin was +13 (6th in the nation) and in 2007 it was +10 (14th in the nation). They have also excelled at scoring unconventional (special teams and defensive touchdowns). In 2006 they returned a blocked punt and 2 interceptions for touchdowns. In 2007, they returned a kickoff, a punt, 6 interceptions (3 apiece by corner Alphonso Smith and linebacker Aaron Curry), and 2 fumbles for touchdowns. In two seasons, that is 13 unconventional touchdowns!

Connecticut has done their best Wake Forest impression this season. In 7 of their 12 games, the Huskies were outgained. They won 4 of those games. The reason? Surprise. Surprise. A turnover margin of +13 (7th in the nation) and some unconventional touchdowns. The Huskies have returned a punt (fair-catch gate against Louisville), 2 kickoffs, and 5 interceptions for touchdowns. I guess what I'm saying is, don't be surprised if the defense and special teams do some scoring in this game.

So if we consider the defense, special teams, and turnover capabilities of both teams to be a wash, what will be the difference in this game? Both teams have very competent quarterbacks. Riley Skinner of Wake Forest finished second in the nation in completion percentage, connecting on 71.9% of his passes. However, most of those passes were dinks and dunks. As a team, Wake Forest averaged only 9.18 yards per completed pass (119th or dead last in the nation). For Connecticut, their quarterback Tyler Lorenzen, a junior college transfer, stepped in and improved the Huskie passing game substantially, from terrible to average. In 2006, the Huskies sported a cumulative passer rating of 103.94 (104th in the nation) and averaged 5.4 yards per pass (117th in the nation). This season the Huskies have a passer rating of 126.46 (63rd in the nation) and average 7.0 yards per pass (47th in the nation). Both quarterbacks are also fairly nimble. Skinner rushed for only 16 yards on the season on 55 rushes, but when you consider that yards lost due to sacks are subtracted from rushing yardage, and his numbers are not in the red, it is a little more impressive. As an ardent observer of Wake Forest football, I can tell you that Skinner makes his best plays when he moves around within the pocket and buys time waiting for his receivers to come open. Lorenzen on the other hand gained over 300 yards (304) rushing on the season.

Connecticut has a better point differential (+111 to +59), better per game yardage differential (+12 per game to -16.5), and a better yards per play differential (+.1 per play to -.1 per play), all while playing a more difficult schedule. Both these teams are very close, and Wake is a slight Vegas favorite. Connecticut should be the slight Vegas favorite.

The Pick: Connecticut will cover the 2.5 point spread.



Liberty Bowl
Central Florida -3 Mississippi State

While the Bulldogs are certainly not the worst bowl team this season (that distinction likely belongs to Memphis or Nevada), they are the worst participant from a BCS conference. The Bulldogs gave up 29 more points than they scored on the season (2.4 per game), 432 more yards than they gained (36 per game), and averaged 4.5 yards per offensive play while allowing 5.0 yards per play on defense. All 5 of their losses were by at least 12 points, and the average margin in those defeats was 22.6 points. So how did the Bulldogs win 7 games and qualify for a bowl? Their opponents fell on their own swords. Prior to the season, most observers would have counted on 4 sure victories for the Bulldogs--home dates with UAB, Gardner-Webb, and Ole Miss, as well as a road game at Tulane. Mississippi State won those 4 games, but they also achieved 3 relatively unexpected victories--at Auburn, at Kentucky, and a home game against Alabama. Mississippi State was outgained by 110 yards in the Auburn game, but won 19-14 thanks to a +4 turnover margin. Mississippi State did outgain Kentucky by 33 yards, but won 31-14 thanks mostly to a +5 turnover margin. In the 17-12 win over Alabama, the Bulldogs were outgained by only 59 yards and were only +1 in turnover margin. However, one of the two passes they intercepted was returned 100 yards for a touchdown by defensive back Anthony Johnson to close the first half and change a possible 12-3 or 16-3 deficit into a 10-9 lead. This is not meant to denigrate the job Sylvester Croom has done in bringing the Bulldogs back to a bowl game for the first time since 2000. Rather it is to serve as a reminder that luck and random chance played a significant role in sending the Bulldogs to Shreveport.

Consider that Mississippi State ranked a woeful 112th in the nation in total offense, averaging only 305 yards per game. While freshman quarterback Wesley Carroll was an extreme improvement over Michael Henig, who began the season under center, the offense still managed to average only 5.8 yards per pass (113th in the nation) and compile a passer rating of 101.41 (117th in the nation). What Carroll gave the Bulldogs was an improvement from terrible to sub-par in accuracy (53.2% completion percentage for Carroll to 47.4% for Henig) and a knack for not throwing interceptions. Carroll threw only 6 interceptions in 237 pass attempts (2.5 per 100 passes), while Henig threw 9 in only 76 attempts (11.8 per 100 passes). Once the Bulldogs were able to take better care of the ball, they could rely on their defense (28th nationally in yards allowed per game) to keep them close and perhaps generate some luck to nab a few upsets.

The Bulldogs will need to follow that same formula against the Golden Knights because the Knights are clearly the superior team. As you may have heard, UCF is led by their junior running back Kevin Smith. Smith currently has 2448 yards and 29 touchdowns through 13 games. Smith's emergence as a star has also coincided with the rise of senior quarterback Kyle Israel (who is the chicken and who is the egg?). Israel split time last season with Steven Moffett and posted a better completion percentage (65.1% to 55.3%), yards per pass (8.6 to 6.4), and passer rating (142.82 to 117.09). In his first season as a full-time starter, Israel has continued his solid play, throwing 15 touchdowns to only 8 interceptions while completing nearly 60% of his throws (59.9%).

The Golden Knights also have a solid, if not spectacular defense. They intercepted 23 passes on the year (tied for most in the nation). They were also able to pressure opposing quarterbacks, generating 38 sacks (18th in the nation in sacks per game). While senior linemen Leger Douzable had 7.5 and freshman linebacker Bruce Miller had 7, the remaining 23.5 sacks were split among 13 players.

So can the Bulldogs contain Kevin Smith, or more accurately can we expect the Bulldogs to hold Smith in check? Smith's lone sub-par performance (his lone game under 100 yards or 4.00 yards per rush) came against South Florida. Mississippi State has a good defense, but they are not in the class of the Golden Bulls. The Bulldogs allowed over 200 yards rushing to West Virginia and Arkansas (understandable) as well as Tennessee and Ole Miss (somewhat understandable) and Auburn (inconceivable). Look for Smith to have a solid game (he won't get to 200 yards though) and the Golden Knights to win by two scores.

The Pick: Central Florida will cover the 3 point spread.



Alamo Bowl
Penn State -5.5 Texas A&M

The Nittany Lions are playing in their 3rd consecutive bowl game. That's quite a feat for Joe Pa and the boys considering in the 5-year span from 2000-2004, the Lions played in only one bowl game. Opposing the Nittany Lions are the Aggies from Texas A&M. The Aggies did beat their archrivals in Austin for the second straight year, but other than that victory, the season was a huge disappointment. The Aggies were beaten by perennial doormats (Kansas), perennial powers (Oklahoma), and former powers (Miami) alike. To be fair, 3 of their losses were to teams currently ranked in the top-10 (Kansas, Oklahoma, and Missouri). But, besides Texas, where is the marquee win? The last 2 and 4 of the past 6 Alamo Bowls have come down to the wire. Can the 2007 version continue this trend, or will the Nittany Lions roll over the Aggies?

In keeping with their recent success, Penn State is led by their defense. For the 4th consecutive year, and 5th time in the last 6 seasons, the Penn State defense allowed fewer than 20 points per game. Penn State sacked opposing passers 45 times in 12 games (2nd in the nation behind only Georgia Tech). That consistent pressure and the resulting lost yardage helped the Lions finish 6th in the nation in rushing yards allowed per game (88 per game). They also finished 9th in total yards allowed per game (307 per game). When they didn't bring opposing quarterbacks down, they were susceptible to the pass. They finished only a solid 44th in the nation in opponents' quarterback rating (119.11) and 41st in the nation in yards per pass attempt allowed (6.5).

Offensively, Penn State was a run-first team. Senior running back Rodney Kinlaw, who came into the season with just 226 yards rushing on 80 carries, toted the rock 222 times and gained 1186 yards. His backfield mate, senior quarterback Anthony Morelli, had a decent season, substantially improving upon his 2006 numbers, but still keeping Penn State out of the national championship picture with his erratic play. He improved his quarterback rating from 111.90 to 126.97, but this number still ranked only 61st among qualifying quarterbacks. On special teams, Penn State was pretty good at returning punts (ranking 34th in the nation punt return average), but only decent at returning kickoffs (ranking 60th in the nation in kickoff return average). However, they did not do a good job covering kickoffs, allowing over 26 yards per kickoff return (116th in the nation).

Texas A&M was also a run-first team. In fact with 538 rush attempts, they were 17th in the nation in total runs. They were pretty proficient when they ran too, averaging 4.81 yards per rush (21st in the nation) and gaining 215 yards per game (13th in the nation). Their leading rusher was actually quarterback Stephen McGee who gained 858 yards. Their thunder-n-lightning running back combo of Jorvorskie Lane and Mike Goodson gained 746 and 646 yards respectively. McGee had a decent season throwing the ball, albeit a significant regression from 2006 when he threw only 2 interception, but the Aggies live and die with the running game.

Defensively, the Aggies had trouble pressuring opposing quarterbacks, generating only 18 sacks all season (96th in the nation). That lack of pressure allowed opposing quarterbacks to get very comfortable. They compiled a cumulative quarterback rating of 141.77 (100th in the nation), averaged 7.8 yards per pass (102nd in the nation), and had three times as many touchdown passes as interceptions (21-7).

So in the Alamo Bowl, we have a team with a decent offense and very good defense facing off against a team with a good offense and a bad defense. So Penn State wins right? Not so fast. The Lions main defensive strength was sacking the opposing quarterback. The Aggies allowed only 14 sacks all season (18th in the nation). The Aggies main weakness on defense was stopping the pass. Penn State has a decent passing game, but their attack is predicated on the run. Finally, Penn State struggles at covering kickoffs, while Texas A&M ranks 20th in the nation in average kickoff return. The Aggie offense will have a hard time running consistently against the Penn State linebackers, but look for them to bust a few big plays and win the field position battle with their special teams.

The Pick: Texas A&M will cover the 5.5 point spread.

Bowl Appetit

Champs Sports Bowl
Boston College -3.5 Michigan State

The Eagles go for their 8th consecutive bowl victory while the Spartans are making only their 4th bowl appearance in the last decade. The Eagles had their sights set on a possible national championship as recently as the first weekend in November and a BCS bowl bid as recently as the first weekend in December. Unfortunately, the Eagles lost 3 of their last 5 games to finish with a still exemplary 10-3 record. Michigan State meanwhile sandwiched a 1-5 midseason lull around a 4-0 start and a 2-0 finish. Both schools are led by a pair of first-year head coaches--Jeff Jagodzinski at BC and Mark Dantonio at Michigan State--who look to cap their inaugural seasons with a bowl win.

As mentioned earlier, Boston College lost 3 of their last 5 after an impressive 8-0 start. The main reason? Turnover margin. In their first 8 games, the Eagles forced 23 turnovers while committing only 12 for a margin of +11. In their last 5 games, the Eagles forced only 5 turnovers while committing 13 for a margin of -8. Ah the fickleness of turnovers. The other aspects of the team, especially the offense, have been remarkable consistent. In their first 8 games, the offense averaged 438 yards per game and 5.6 yards per play. In the last 5 games, the offense has averaged 434 yards per game and 5.7 yards per play. The defense has played a little worse over the last 5 games (355 yards per game and 4.9 yards per play versus 316 yards per game and 4.4 yards per play over the first 8). However, included in those first 8 games, were contests against Notre Dame (119th in yards per game), NC State (97th), Wake Forest (98th), Virginia Tech (99th) and UMASS (non-Division IA). So the defensive stats were probably inflated a bit by the early season competition.

So what can we expect from BC in this game? The Eagles will rush the passer (27th in sacks per game) and protect Matt Ryan (30th in sacks allowed per game). As for Ryan, well he's a tad overrated, finishing only 57th among qualifying quarterbacks in passer rating. One spot above Chase Clement (you don't know he plays for Rice) and one spot below Matthew Stafford (you know he plays for Georgia). The real strength of the BC passing game is that they spread the ball around. 4 players had at least 50 catches (5 had at least 44) and 5 players had at least 500 yards receiving.

And what of the men of Sparta? It appeared not much had changed 10 games into this season. In a season eerily similar to most of John L. Smith's debacles, the Spartans squandered a hot start and stood only 5-5. They rebounded to win their last 2 games (against bowl teams Purdue and Penn State) to finish with 7 wins. All 5 of the Spartans losses were by 7 points or less and they were only 2-5 in one-score games. All the Spartans' losses were to teams that finished bowl-eligible, and with the exception of the loss to Northwestern, all the losses were respectable. The Spartans get things done on the ground. After losing senior quarterback Drew Stanton following the 2006 season, the Spartans decided to pound Javon Ringer early and often in 2007. Ringer responded with 1346 yards while averaging over 6 yards per rush. As a team, the Spartans finished 22nd in the nation in rushing yards per game, averaging 200 per contest. Quarterback Brian Hoyer also played well in hist first season as a starter. Hoyer had fewer touchdowns (28-18) and yards (4258-2594), but he also had fewer interceptions (7-18), a higher completion percentage (61.5%-60.3%), more yards per pass (7.6-7.0) and a higher quarterback rating (138.90-128.52) than the more publicized Ryan. The Spartans did have some trouble protecting the passer, finishing 93rd in the nation in sacks allowed per game. That was the only thing the Spartans did not do well on offense.

Despite allowing all those sacks, the Spartans returned the favor on defense. The Spartans accumulated 3 sacks per game, good for 13th in the nation. They finished 40th in the nation in total defense, allowing 351 yards per game. That is only 20 more yards per game than the Eagles allowed, and the Spartans' schedule was at worst a shade tougher.

One final matchup to watch is the Eagles kickoff coverage against the Spartans kickoff return game. BC allowed only a shade over 17 yards per kickoff return (4th in the nation), while the Spartans averaged over 24 yards per kickoff return (9th in the nation). Interestingly though, the Spartans did not return a kickoff for a touchdown, making them the only team in the top 10 in kickoff returns to not house a kickoff.

Boston College buoyed their early season record and ranking by creating a ton of turnovers and simply not losing while others around them fell. In the last third of the season, those turnovers have dried up and the team has struggled. Michigan State only lost 13 turnovers all season (3rd in the nation), so there is a great chance they will not beat themselves. Look for Michigan State to upset the Eagles and turn their sights toward a bigger bowl game next season.

The Pick: Michigan State will cover the 3.5 point spread.



Texas Bowl
TCU -4 Houston

It's fitting that the eponymous bowl played in Houston, Texas would not only feature two teams from the state of Texas, but also one from the city of Houston. This is one of two bowl games on the NFL Network, so cable subscribers should either visit your friends with satellites, seek refuge at a sports pub, or watch Numb3rs.

TCU began the 2007 with dreams of a Mountain West title, and if things broke right, perhaps a spot in the BCS. The Horned Frogs lost 2 of their first 3 games, and after 10 games stood only 5-5. They did close the season by besting UNLV and San Diego State to finish 7-5 (4-4 in Mountain West play). However, it should be noted that 4 of TCU's 5 losses were by 7 points or fewer (combined 18 points). The lone loss by more than 7 points was at Texas (lost 34-13). Furthermore, 4 of their 5 losses were to bowl teams. Their defeat at Wyoming marked the only time they lost to a team with fewer than 8 regular season wins (5-7 record). On the flip-side of that logic, the Horned Frogs only managed to defeat one team that finished with a winning record. That win was a 37-0 trouncing of New Mexico (finished 8-4 in the regular season). As has long been the case under Gary Patterson, the Frogs won their games with fantastic defense. They finished 13th in the nation with 3 sacks per game, 16th in the nation in yards allowed per game (320 per), and 9th in the nation in opponents' quarterback rating (104.91). They were also very adept at returning punts, ranking 19th in the nation with an average of 12.79 yards per return.

The offense, or lack thereof, was the reason TCU did not live up to preseason expectations. In 2006 senior quarterback Jeff Ballard posted a quarterback rating of 138.11 and helped the Frogs average 408 yards per game (17th in the nation). His replacement(s) sophomore Marcus Jackson and freshman Andy Dalton (who received most of the playing time as the season wore on) only managed a cumulative passer rating of 116.22 and the offense dipped to 388 yards per game (64th in the nation).

The Houston Cougars meanwhile are the mirror image of their Texas brethren. They score points aplenty, but have trouble stopping their opponents. Despite losing quarterback Kevin Kolb to the Philadelphia Eagles, the Cougars kept humming along under Art Briles' offense. Behind the two-headed quarterback monster of Case Keenum and Blake Joseph, they actually averaged a shade over 3 more points per game in 2007 than they did in 2006. Of course, a lot of that is due to senior running back (converted wide receiver) Anthony Alridge. Alridge had only 95 rushes in 2006, but still gained nearly 1000 yards (959) by averaging an unholy 10.09 yards per rush. He was featured more prominently in the offense in 2007, getting 244 rushes. His yards per rush did drop precipitously to a merely outstanding 6.43. Alridge stayed somewhat true to his wide out roots by catching 41 passes for 424 yards and 5 touchdowns. 4 Houston players had at least 40 catches, headlined by senior Donnie Avery who caught 81 passes for 1336 yards and 7 touchdowns.

Defensively, the Cougars finished around the middle of the pack allowing 366 yards per game (49th in the nation). That number belies how poor the Cougars were at stopping the pass. Opposing quarterbacks finished with a cumulative rating of 131.68 (78th in the nation) and averaged 7.5 yards per pass (87th in the nation). The interesting facet about the Cougars pass defense is that they allowed opposing quarterbacks to complete only 50.6% of their passes (4th in the nation), yet they allowed a ton of big plays, permitting 14.76 yards per completion (118th in the nation).

TCU's defense will contain the vaunted Houston attack and their offense will do just enough to pull the game out. Look for the TCU offense to hit some big plays against the Houston secondary.

The Pick: TCU will cover the 4 point spread.



Emerald Bowl
Oregon State -5 Maryland

For some reason this bowl game reminds me of the Chaos Emeralds from the Sega Genesis Sonic games. Hopefully the trophy looks something like the above picture. Both these teams lived charmed lives in 2006. Oregon State went 5-1 in games decided by 7 points or less, including winning their last 3 games by a combined 6 points en route to a 10-4 finish. Maryland meanwhile went 6-1 in games decided by 7 points or less. They had a 5-game winning streak where their total margin of victory was 13 points. Needless to say, both teams looked like they were in for long seasons due to regression and the loss of a pair of senior quarterbacks--Matt Moore for Oregon State and Sam Hollenbach for Maryland. Oregon State began the season 2-3, being outscored by 52 points by D-IA competition in that span. They rallied to win 6 of their last 7, with the lone loss coming at Southern Cal. They held on to the rabbit's foot too, finishing 3-0 in one-score games. On the flip side, Maryland started strong (4-2 with one of the losses to West Virginia), but then lost 4 of 5 to stand at 5-6 heading into the finale at NC State. Their good fortune in close games had eluded them as they were only 2-4 in one-score games. The Terps crushed State on the Pack's homefield winning 37-0 and outgaining the Pack by over 200 yards to finish bowl eligible for the second consecutive season.

The Beavers are led by their defense. Their pass rush is outstanding. They accumulated 41 sacks on the season, finishing 4th in the nation in sacks per game. The majority of those sacks (33 of 41) were by defensive linemen, meaning the Beavers don't have to use fancy blitzes or schemes to get pressure on the quarterback. Led by Victor Butler and Slade Norris (18.5 sacks between them), the front four has become very acquainted with opposing quarterbacks. All that pressure has enabled the secondary to limit opposing quarterbacks to a passer rating of only 115.27 (30th in the nation) and pick off 20 passes (8th in the nation). All those sacks also boost the rush defense ranking, since sacks are counted as lost rushing yards in college. The Beavers allowed an NCAA best 2.13 yards per rush, and were second in the nation in rushing yards allowed per game (75 per). Aiding and abetting the Beaver defense was their kick coverage. They ranked 6th in the nation in opponents' punt return average (4.88 yards per return) and 8th in the nation in opponents' kickoff return average (17.97 yards per return).

As good as their pass defense was, the pass offense was that bad. Neither Sean Canfield nor more recently Lyle Moevao were very efficient. In fact as a team, Oregon State ranks 114th in the nation in quarterback rating (104.03), 107th in yards per pass (5.9 per attempt), 113th in touchdown passes (10), and 111th in interceptions thrown (20). Part of the problem is that fine receiver Sammie Stroughter has not played since the 4th game, but another part is frankly, Canfield and Moevao kinda suck. What little the Beavers do well on offense, is limited to running the football. Yvenson Bernard had a solid, if not outstanding senior season, gaining 1037 yards and averaging 4.38 yards per rush.

Maryland does not do anything particularly well, they rank 88th in total offense (actually worse than Oregon State) and 42nd in total defense, or particularly poorly, except...gulp...give up sacks. Maryland allowed 35 sacks on the year, good (or bad) for 106th in the nation in terms of sacks per game. If your short term memory is fading, getting to the quarterback is Oregon State's biggest strength. Ralph Friedgen has a pretty good track record of coaching in bowl games, winning his last 3 by a combined score of 95-17. The Terps have also shown an ability to beat good teams, knocking off Rutgers in New Jersey, taking care of Boston College at home, and the aforementioned beatdown of NC State. However, they also lost at North Carolina, at Florida State, and at home against Virginia. In a precarious pick give me the Beavers.

The Pick: Oregon State will cover the 5 point spread.

Bowl Appetit

Holiday Bowl
Texas -2.5 Arizona State

The first bowl game of the year to feature two BCS-conference teams may also be one of the best. Arizona State finished as the Pac-10's co-champions in Dennis Erickson's first season. The Sun Devils parlayed 8 home games, an efficient passing offense, some good luck, and a great kicker into a 10-win regular season. The Longhorns finished 9-3, but all three of those losses came in Big 12 play, including two to teams most unbiased football observers and Texas fans would say they shouldn't have lost--Kansas State and Texas A&M. The A&M loss was their second in a row to the Aggies. The Horns also survived some close scrapes with Arkansas State (8 points), Central Florida (3 points), Nebraska (3 points), and Oklahoma State (3 points), so things could have been much worse.

The primary reason for the Sun Devils' success this season was the play of quarterback Rudy Carpenter and the improvement in the pass defense. Carpenter finished the season as the 15th best quarterback in terms of passer efficiency rating. As a team, the Sun Devils averaged 8.2 yards per pass attempt (9th in the nation) and threw only 8 interceptions on the season (15th in the nation). The Sun Devils pass defense finished 15th in the nation in opponent quarterback rating (108.20). Opposing quarterbacks completed only 51.9% of their passes (8th in the nation) and the Sun Devils picked off 17 errant throws (21st in the nation).

While Carpenter did have a fantastic season throwing the football, there was a downside to the Sun Devil passing attack. The Sun Devils allowed 50 sacks on the season (117th in the nation--ahead of only Syracuse and Notre Dame). While the Sun Devils' offensive line should bear the brunt of the responsibility, Carpenter also shares some culpability. Fortunately for the Sun Devils, Texas only finished in the middle of the pack in sacking opposing quarterbacks (60th in the nation at two sacks per game). The Longhorns also finished in the middle of the pack in opposing quarterbacks pass rating (72nd--129.47). The Longhorns main strength on defense was shutting down the run. They allowed just 2.99 yards per rush (11th in the nation) and 99 yards per game (10th in the nation).

The strength of this Texas team rests squarely on the offensive side of the ball. Running back Jamaal Charles gained 1458 yards on the ground while averaging 6.31 yards per rush. After a 5-game midseason lull where he never gained more than 79 yards or carried the ball more than 17 times, Charles broke out in the last 4 games. He gained 736 yards while averaging 8.27 yards per rush and scored 8 of his 16 rushing touchdowns. In particular, two of these performances--his 290 yards against Nebraska and his 180 yards against Oklahoma State--allowed the Horns to pull those games out of the fire. His backfield mate, quarterback Colt McCoy had a solid season, but suffered through a bit of a sophomore slump. After completing 68.2% of his throws with 29 touchdowns and only 7 interceptions as a freshman, McCoy's completion rate dipped slightly to 64.9%, but more importantly so did his touchdowns (21) and his interceptions rose dramatically (18).

Colt McCoy may have a rough go of it against the superb Sun Devil pass defense, but expect Jamaal Charles to pick up the offensive slack. Two keys to the game in the all important special teams category:
1) The Longhorn's punt return coverage. Texas finished 99th in the nation allowing 11.75 yards per return. Remember the Kansas State game? Arizona State was 41st in the nation in punt return average (10.15 yards per return).
2) Freshman kicker Thomas Weber of Arizona State made 22 of his 23 field goal attempts.

Despite that advantage in the special teams department, Arizona State's fantastic season will end on a down note. Their inability to keep Carpenter upright will end up being their downfall in a tight game.

The Pick: Texas will cover the 2.5 point spread.

Bowl Appetit

Motor City Bowl
Purdue -7.5 Central Michigan

Nothing says congratulations on a good season like a trip to Detroit on December 26th. For the Boilermakers, this season ended like so many before it. After starting out red hot in non-conference action, Purdue ended Big 10 play with a 3-5 record. Since their co-Big 10 Championship/Rose Bowl season in 2000, the Boilers have only managed a collective 29-27 record in Big 10 play. That would have been cause for celebration before Joe Tiller arrived as Purdue was a collective 13-40-3 in Big 10 play in the 7 seasons immediately preceding his arrival from Wyoming. Still, one may be inclined to believe that the program has stagnated in the last half decade. Can Tiller fire the Boilers up to play a Central Michigan team they have already played and disposed of once, in a low-level bowl game the day after Christmas?

Central Michigan is probably more than content to be playing in their second consecutive Motor City Bowl. The Chips concluded their 10-win season and MAC Championship last year with a thrashing of Middle Tennessee State in this very same bowl game. The Chips won their second consecutive MAC Championship this season, but are not nearly as good as last year's incarnation. They are still very prolific on offense, sporting a poor man's Tim Tebow, Dan LeFevour, at quarterback. LeFevour not only threw for 3360 and 23 touchdowns, he also rushed for 1008 yards and 17 scores. As a team the Chips averaged 448 yards of offense (22nd in the nation). They were also one of only 14 teams to average 5 yards or better per rush (5.00) and they were tied for 8th in sacks allowed per game, permitting only 13 in 13 games. Unfortunately, the defense was able to undo a good portion of the offenses' good work. They allowed 450 yards per game (106th in the nation). They were especially susceptible to the pass, surrendering 285 yards per game (111th in the nation) while allowing opponents to compile a quarterback rating of 143.90 (105th in the nation), complete 65.4% of their passes (111th in the nation), and average 7.6 yards per pass (94th in the nation).

And what do you know, if there's one thing Purdue has been able to do under Joe Tiller, its throw the ole pigskin around. The Boilers averaged 287 yards per game through the air (17th in the nation). Their quarterback rating (127.90--56th in the nation) and yards per pass attempt (6.4--86th in the nation) were relatively pedestrian. However, against non-BCS teams, those numbers shoot up to 320 yards per game, 163.78 quarterback rating, and 7.8 yards per pass. Defensively, Purdue is a middle of the road team, allowing 385 yards per game (60th in the nation). They did hold opposing quarterbacks to a cumulative rating of only 112.03 (23rd in the nation), but that number is inflated by their performance against Toledo, Eastern Illinois, and offensively impotent Iowa. LeFevour and the Chips were able to move the ball in the first meeting, as they gained 465 yards and scored 22 points.

In the first game, a Purdue win by the count of 45-22, the Boilermakers turned the ball over 5 times (to the Chippewas' 3). Despite allowing 465 yards, they gained 583 themselves while averaging 7.6 yards per play. It seems the only way this game will be close is if Purdue comes out disinterested. The Chips defense is just too bad to keep this one close, no matter how well their offense performs. Also, be on the lookout for Purdue to consistently start with great field position following a Central Michigan score. the Boilers rank 7th in the nation with an average kickoff return of 25.22 yards. Wide receiver Dorien Bryant has taken two kickoffs to the house, and fellow receiver Desmond Tardy has run one back.

The Pick: Purdue will cover the 7.5 point spread.

Bowl Appetit

Hawaii Bowl
Boise State -11 East Carolina

Boise State returns to the scene of their last loss, a 39-27 defeat at the hands of the Hawaii Warriors, to try and capture the 6th bowl win in school history. Their opponent, East Carolina, is making their second consecutive bowl appearance under third year coach Skip Holtz.

Boise State did not miss a beat on offense despite losing three-year starting quarterback Jared Zabransky. His replacement, Taylor Tharp, threw 28 touchdowns against just 9 interceptions while directing an offense that averaged 475 yards per game (1oth in the nation). Running back Ian Johnson missed two games, but still had over 1000 yards (1030) on the season. His backup, Jeremy Avery added 603 yards on the ground and averaged 6.48 yards per rush. Sophomore receiver Jeremy Childs became the Broncos first 1000-yard receiver since Tim Killigan in 2003. The Broncos scored at least 30 points in 9 of their 12 games, and only one of their wins were by fewer than 10 points (a 69-67 OT thriller against Nevada).

The Broncos were pretty good on the other side of the ball too. They had 33 sacks (26th in the country), held opponents to a cumulative quarterback rating of 112.34 (24th in the country), and were 21st in the nation in total defense (326 yards per game). These numbers, both offensively and defensively, are inflated by the fact that the Broncos play in the WAC, but the Broncos are still a darn good football team.

East Carolina played a significantly tougher schedule than the Broncos and managed only a 7-5 record. Three of their losses were to BCS conference teams (NC State, West Virginia, and Virginia Tech). Two of those teams are currently ranked in the top 11. East Carolina did manage to beat two bowl teams, Houston and UCF, the latter of which ended up winning Conference USA. East Carolina was significantly outgained on the season (702 yards over 12 games or 58 yards per game), but they scored more points than they allowed (and won more than they lost) thanks to a turnover margin of +14 (6th in the nation). They turned the ball over only 13 times all season (3rd in the nation), while gaining 27 from their opponents (22nd in the nation). The Pirates needed those turnovers because they were already giving up plenty of field position in the return game. They allowed two kickoff and punt returns for touchdowns and finished 112th in the nation in opponent's punt return average and 98th in the country in opponent kickoff return average.

On paper Boise State appears to be the far superior team. However, in the last two postseasons 9 teams have been favored by 10 points or more. Only two of those 9 of those favorites have covered the spread. 6 of the 9 have won straight up. I think that trend will continue. Boise State will win, but East Carolina will cover.

The Pick: East Carolina will cover the 11 point spread.

Bowl Appetit

Papa John's.com Bowl
Cincinnati -11 Southern Miss

This spread is the second largest of the bowl season (behind the 13.5 points Southern Cal is giving Illinois), and so it should be. The Bearcats are 9-3, and all of their losses have come by 7 points or less. Currently sporting a #20 ranking in the AP Poll and a #23 ranking in the Coaches Poll, the Bearcats have a great chance to finish the season ranked for the first time in school history. And with Michigan recently filling their head coaching vacancy, perhaps Brian Kelly will stay awhile in the Queen City and build a team that is consistently ranked and revered. Meanwhile, the Golden Eagles are only 7-5 with losses to both good (Tennessee, Boise State, and Central Florida) and bad (Rice) teams. The only Division IA team they beat with a winning record was East Carolina. This marks the sixth time in seven seasons that Southern Miss has finished with at least 5 losses. That slippage into mediocrity caused longtime coach Jeff Bower to be forced out/resign at season's end. So can the Golden Eagles, in the last game of the Jeff Bower era, keep this one interesting?

To answer that question, we need to assess what (if anything) Southern Miss does well. For the most part, the Golden Eagles rank where we we would expect a 7-5 team to rank; somewhere around average. However, their is one area where they do distinguish themselves. Running the football. Southern Miss ranks 22nd in the country in rush yards per game (200 yards). They also rank 29th in yards per rush (4.65 per attempt). Led by sophomore running back Damion Fletcher (over 1400 yards on the ground) and senior quarterback Jeremy Young (294 rush yards), the Golden Eagles were very proficient on the ground.

So now that we know what the Golden Eagles did well, what about the Bearcats? What did they excel at? Creating turnovers. The Bearcats created 39 turnovers (23 interceptions and 16 fumble recoveries) which ranked 2nd in the country. Their turnover spree consistently put the offense in great field position, and allowed the team to score almost 37 points per game (14th nationally). The Bearcats also excelled at throwing the football. Behind senior quarterback and Wake Forest transfer Ben Mauk, the offense ranked 23rd in passing yards per game, 8th in quarterback rating, 9th in yards per pass, and 29th in completion percentage.

On paper, this game should not be close. The Bearcats won their 5 non-conference games by an average score of 46.4-10.6. Several of those teams were bad (San Diego State was 4-8, Marshall was 3-9, and SE Missouri State is not D-IA), but Oregon State (8-4 record) went bowling and Miami (Ohio) (6-7) was bowl-eligible and won their division in the MAC. Plus two of those games (San Diego State and Miami) were on the road. Southern Miss should not be able to run the ball consistently against the Cincinnati defense, and their passing game leaves a lot to be desired (83rd in quarterback rating and 100th in passing touchdowns). Barring a slew of turnovers or a plethora of injuries, Cincinnati should win rather comfortably.

The Pick: Cincinnati will cover the 11 point spread



New Mexico Bowl
New Mexico -3 Nevada

The New Mexico Lobos are playing at home in the New Mexico Bowl for the second season in a row and in their 5th bowl game in the last 6 seasons. Head coach Rocky Long deserves a great deal of credit for consistently fielding a winner since taking over for Dennis Franchione following the 1997 season. After winning just 12 games in his first three seasons, Long has led the Lobos to at least 6 wins in each of the past seven seasons, though he has yet to guide the Lobos to a postseason win. On the other sideline, head coach Chris Ault has the Wolfpack in a bowl game for the third consecutive season. The Wolfpack won their first bowl game in Ault's second go-round with the team by a single point in the 2005 Hawaii Bowl (49-48 over Central Florida). Last season they lost MPC Computers Bowl by a single point (21-20 to Miami). This game has the potential to be as good as those two.

New Mexico struggled moving the football in 2007. The offense averaged only 357 yards per game (84th in the nation). The running game was the weakest link, as despite having a 1000 yard rusher in Rodney Ferguson (1177 yards), the team averaged only 3.48 yards per rush (93rd in the nation). The passing game was a little better, but not much, ranking 77th in quarterback rating, 66th in yards per pass, and 59th in passing yards per game. The Lobos made their money on defense (to an extent) and in the kicking game. The Lobos ranked 31st in rushing yards allowed per game (126 yards), 27th in yards per rush allowed (3.30), 37th in opponent's quarterback rating (117.10), and 23rd in yards per game (329 yards). In the kicking game, the Lobos held opponents to only 19.45 yards per kickoff return (21st in the nation) and their kicker John Sullivan made 26 of his 29 field goal attempts (6th best percentage in the nation).

For the Wolfpack, its all about offense. Freshmen quarterback Colin Kaepernick is the ideal fit to run Chris Ault's unique Pistol offense. Kaepernick took over full time for injured starter Nick Graziano in the 6th game. For the season, Kaepernick has averaged 9.4 yards per pass (3rd behind Tim Tebow and Paul Smith among qualifying quarterbacks), thrown 19 touchdowns against just 3 interceptions, and has a quarterback rating of 161.06 (5th among qualifying quarterbacks). He also rushed for 567 yards and added 6 touchdowns on the ground. Of course, Kaepernick is not the only threat in the backfield. Fellow tri-syllable surname having Luke Lippincott (the rarest of all breeds, a white running back) gained 1380 yards and averaged 5.37 yards per rush.

On defense it was a different story for the Wolfpack. The Wolfpack defense could not stop the pass. Nevada only held opposing quarterbacks to a quarterback rating of 134.43 (87th in the nation). The primary reason for the high rating was an inability to intercept passes. They grabbed only 6 all season (116th in the nation). Opposing quarterbacks used the pass to move the ball down the field and when they got close to pay dirt, they punched it in on the ground. The Wolfpack allowed 25 rushing touchdowns (94th in the nation). The Wolfpack also did a poor job of covering punts, allowing 10.48 yards per return (84th in the nation).

Nevada returns 8 or 9 starters on offense next season, depending on whom you consider a starter. Their defense should also improve on the lowly 6 interceptions they were able to grab. They should also see some improvement in the luck department as they went only 3-5 in games decided by 8 points or less. They could be poised for a big season and possible WAC title next year. If season-to-season momentum exists, they will have that to because they will conclude this season with an upset win in the New Mexico Bowl. The Lobos' defense will not be able to hold down the Pistol attack.

The Pick: Nevada will cover the 3 point spread.



Las Vegas Bowl
BYU -5.5 UCLA

Forget about Hawaii and their tissue-soft schedule in the Sugar Bowl, the best mid-major team this season (and possibly last season) is the BYU Cougars. Coming off an 11-2 campaign that included an undefeated season in Mountain West conference play and culminated with a 30-point beatdown of Oregon in the Las Vegas Bowl, this was expected to be a rebuilding year with all the personnel losses (especially quarterback John Beck who now plys his trade for the Miami Dolphins). After beginning the season 1-2, the Cougars have simply reeled off 9 consecutive victories (6 by 10 points or more) to once again stand 10-2 at the close of the regular season and undefeated in conference play. They face a UCLA team that has limped to the finish line (1-4 last 5 games) and will be without the services (?) of fired head coach Karl Dorrell.

If your memory is anything like mine, you may not remember that these two teams have already tangled once in 2007. In the season's second weekend UCLA defeated BYU 27-17 in Pasadena. However, BYU outgained the Bruins by almost 200 total yards (435-236), but were undone by two lost fumbles and an interception. The Cougars have gone 9-1 since that defeat, while the Bruins have floundered, going only 4-6. BYU ranks 10th in the nation in yards allowed per game (307). They are especially proficient at shutting down the run. Only one team averaged more than 4 yards per rush against them this season (Air Force averaged 4.16 per rush). They were also pretty good against the pass, limiting teams to a cumulative quarterback rating of 111.95 (22nd in the nation). And like most good teams, BYU was not a one-trick pony. On offense, their sophomore quarterback Max Hall, in his first season as a starter, threw twice as many touchdowns (24) as interceptions (12). Their freshman running back Harvey Unga gained 1211 yards while averaging 5.33 yards per rush. Unga also added 41 catches and 629 yards through the air, making him their third leading receiver in both categories. Their top two receivers, sophomores Austin Collie and Dennis Pita, both had over 50 catches and over 700 yards receiving.

Meanwhile, the Bruins suffered through injury and inconsistency on offense throughout their 6-6 season. Juniors Ben Olson, Patrick Cowan, freshman McLeod Bethel-Thompson, and even sophomore wide receiver Osaar Rasshan spent time playing quarterback. The Bruins only managed to complete 48.3% of their passes as a team, good for 116th in the country, and ahead of only Washington, Florida International, and Idaho. Bruin quarterbacks were also sacked 33 times (103rd in the nation). Defensively, the Bruins were pretty strong. They ranked 19th in the nation with 35 sacks, 25th in opponent's quarterback rating (113.58), 17th in yards per pass allowed (6.0), and 19th in yards per rush allowed (3.12). In all likelihood the Bruins defense will keep this one interesting for a time, but they won't be able to score enough to hold off the Cougars.

The Pick: BYU will cover the 6.5 point spread

Bowl Appetit

New Orleans Bowl
Florida Atlantic -2.5 Memphis

The 7th annual New Orleans Bowl features a matchup of two teams that finished with losing records in 2006. Florida Atlantic improved from 5-7 to 7-5 (and Sun Belt champs) to qualify for their first ever bowl game. Memphis meanwhile, also went 7-5, a 5-game improvement from their 2-10 finish in 2006. The Tigers are playing in their 4th bowl game in 5 years. One of those bowl games was the 2003 New Orleans Bowl where they defeated North Texas 27-17.

While Memphis was able to finish 7-5 (including 6-2 in Conference USA play), they were more lucky than good. They were outscored by 22 points on the year (roughly 2 per game) and finished an outstanding 5-2 in games decided by 4 points or less. Those 5 narrow wins were not over good teams either. They beat Marshall (3-9 record) by 3, Rice (3-9) by 3, Tulane (4-8) by 1, Southern Miss (7-5) by 3, and SMU (1-11) by 3. Their other victories were over Jacksonville State (non-Division IA) and UAB (2-10). Those two were by comfortable margins, but the tale of the tape shows the Tigers have won exactly one game over a Division IA team by a comfortable margin.

Of course, that doesn't mean Memphis does not have a few strengths. On the contrary, they are quite proficient offensively. Led by senior quarterback Martin Hankins, the Tigers scored over 29 points per game and finished 23rd nationally in total offense (447 yards per game), 12th in passing yards per game, 33rd in quarterback rating, and 8th in sacks allowed per game. Unfortunately, all the good their offense accomplished was undone by their defense. The Tigers finished 100th in total defense, allowing 440 yards per game. Part of the problem (and I stress only part because there were many) was the pass rush. The Tigers accumulated only 14 sacks in 12 games (109th in the country). All that time in the pocket allowed opposing quarterbacks to get very comfortable. The Tigers were 82nd in the country in opposing quarterback rating and 87th in completion percentage allowed. Tiger opponents completed nearly 62% of their throws! Of course, the run defense was not great either, as they were gouged to the tune of 5.20 yards per rush (113th nationally).

So can Florida Atlantic exploit that porous Tiger defense? Yes. In 2006, the Owls averaged only 15.1 points per game. This season, they averaged 30.1 points per game. The primary reason for the offenses' improved output was quarterback Rusty Smith. As a freshman in 2006, Smith completed 55.7% of his passes, averaged about 6.6 yards per pass while throwing 6 touchdowns, 8 interceptions, and compiling a rating of 113.27. Smith has improved in every area in 2007. he completed 57.3% of his passes, averaged 7.5 yards per pass, threw 27 touchdowns, 8 interceptions, and compiled a rating of 136.61. The Owls offensive line also did a great job protecting Smith allowing only 12 sacks all season (tied for 8th nationally--with Memphis).

What about the Owl defense? They allowed 33.8 points per game (which is actually about 2 points per game more than Memphis), but they were a bit better in total defense (85th nationally allowing about 417 yards er game). Like Memphis, the Owls struggled getting to the opposing quarterback, accumulating only 12 sacks all season (114th nationally). The Owls were also worse than Memphis at limiting their opponents completion percentage. Opposing quarterbacks completed 64.8% of their passes against the Owl defense (108th nationally). The one thing the Owls did do well on defense, was generate turnovers. They forced 33 turnovers (4th nationally); 19 interceptions and 14 fumbles. Of course the Tigers were no slouch either, forcing 25 (37th nationally); 12 interceptions and 13 fumbles.

With two defenses this bad and two offenses this good, there should be some fireworks in this game. Both these teams are fatally flawed on defense and covering punts (Florida Atlantic finished 78th in the nation at covering punts and Memphis finished 118th), making their defense seem a little worse than it really is. Their saving grace is their offense and their ability/luck in forcing turnovers. Both teams are 7-5 and Florida Atlantic is from the historically weaker conference, but 4 of their 5 losses have come to Oklahoma State (6-6 record), Kentucky (7-5), South Florida (9-3), and Florida (9-3). Memphis meanwhile lost to a pair of Sun Belt teams that Florida Atlantic defeated (Arkansas State and Middle Tennessee State).

The Pick: Florida Atlantic will cover the 2.5 point spread.

Bowl Appetit

Poinsettia Bowl
Utah -8 Navy

The bowl season kicks off on Thursday December 20th with the 3rd annual Poinsettia Bowl. Navy is making their second Poinsettia Bowl appearance, having won the inaugural game in 2005 by a 51-30 count over Colorado State. The Midshipmen will undoubtedly come into this game with somewhat heavy hearts as their admiral, and the formerly highest paid federal employee, Paul Johnson has jumped ship to captain the Yellow Jackets. As a favor to my readers, I will now cease with all maritime related puns.

So what can we expect from this game? For starters, one of the nation's best pass defenses will probably not have the opportunity to showcase its abilities. The Utah Utes rank 15th in the nation in passing yards allowed per game, 2nd in opposing quarterback rating, 1st in passing touchdowns allowed, 3rd in opponent's completion percentage, 4th in yards per pass attempt, and 13th in sacks per game. Amazingly, the Utes allowed only 7 touchdown passes all season, and 4 came in their win over Louisville. Unfortunately for the Utes, Navy attempted the fewest passes of any team in Division IA this season. Their 122 pass attempts were 72 less than the second least pass-happy team (Air Force) and less than half (246) of the third least pass-happy team (West Virginia). They attempted more than 15 passes once (21 against Duke) and less than 10 passes seven times. Suffice it to say that Utah's biggest strength will probably not have a dramatic impact on the outcome of this game.

What about the Utes run defense; can they shut down one of the nation's best and most unique rushing attacks? Well, the Utes did play a team that runs an option offense at least vaguely similar to Navy's. That team was Air Force, and the results were not great. The Falcons gouged the Utes for 334 yards on the ground (5.30 per rush) in their 20-12 win in early September. The good news for the Utes is that game was early (second game of the year) and the Utes are likely (judging from what they accomplished over their last 10 games) at least marginally improved at stopping the run (though not necessarily the option). The Utes also get almost a month (since the bowl pairings were announced) to prepare for Navy's attack. Contrast this to the 9 days they had to prepare for Air Force after falling to Oregon State in the season opener. Utah will not be able to stop the Navy rush offense, but they should fair better against it than they did against the Air Force option.

All that is well and good, but the difference in this game will be Navy's defense. Their atrocious defense. The Midshipmen allowed 438 yards per game (99th in the nation). Only 4 teams failed to break 400 yards against the Navy defense. Those teams were Northern Illinois (93rd in yards per game), Temple (113th), Army (116th), and Notre Dame (119th aka last). Utah only finished 80th in yards per game (362 per game), but I would be shocked if they didn't top 500 against the Navy defense. Since beginning the season 2-3, and averaging only 304 yards per game, the Utes have gone 6-1, while averaging 404 yards per game. That is partly due to quarterback Brian Johnson's injury in the 2nd quarter of the season opener. He missed the rest of that game, the next two, and part of the next, before returning full time in game number 5.

Utah coach Kyle Whittingham, has led the Utes to bowl wins in each of his first two season, and the program has collectively won 6 bowl games in a row. Navy's struggles on defense, coupled with the departure of head coach Paul Johnson, and the solid Utah defense will give the Utes lucky number 7.

The Pick: Utah will cover the 8 point spread.

While You Were Sleeping: Pittsburgh Defense

In the first of what I hope becomes a sporadic fixture on this blog, I will examine an aspect of a particular team that may have slipped by you in the tumultuous college football season. Our first stop takes us to Pittsburgh Pennsylvania.

On the final weekend of college football's regular season, the Pitt Panthers did what numerous underdogs had done before them; they vanquished a heavy favorite, on the favorite's homefield no less. The Panthers held an explosive West Virginia offense, one that only a week before had run for over 500 yards and scored 66 points, to a lone touchdown. And lest you think that was an aberration, the Panther defense had been playing quite well for most of the year. Just looking at points allowed, you would very likely disagree. The Panthers allowed 24.3 points per game in 2007. That figure was good for 42nd in the nation. With 119 teams playing Division IA football, that number is not even in the upper third. If you stopped right there, you'd have a hard time believing the Panthers were anything but a mediocre defensive team. But look a little closer. Here are the Panthers' rankings in a few other defensive categories.

The Panthers rank better than 42nd in nearly all the important statistical categories. In terms of yards per game and yards per play, they are outstanding. Of course, part of that is due to the fact that teams ran the ball so much against them (they faced more rushing plays that 80 teams as teams were often nursing leads) and runs on average are shorter than passes, hence the great yards per play number. But that still does not explain why their points allowed falls so far below their other defensive statistics.

This helps explain a lot though. When the Panthers punted or kicked off, their opponents often ended up with great field position. It's hard for a great defense to consistently keep opponents off the board when they are time and again given good field position. Pitt's defense was hardly great, but this is one of the hidden reason why their achievement did not match their performance.

And here's one more reason. For all the things Pitt did well on defense, they did not force turnovers, especially interceptions as they had only 8 on the year. Even a casual observer of football knows that turnovers are a big deal. When an offense turns the ball over, they have no chance to score, and depending on where it occurs, it can lead to a great scoring opportunity for the other team.

So what are Pitt's prospects heading into next season? Can the defense continue it's strong performance and can can the offense improve to lead Pitt to their first bowl bid in Wannstedt's tenure?

First the defense. The Panthers do lose their leading sacker, defensive end Joe Clermond, but they return 6 of their top 10 tacklers, including all 3 starting linebackers. The defensive backfield loses one starting corner and one starting safety. Even if the Panthers suffer some regression in the performance department, their results can hold steady if they can just force some more turnovers. But can they? Turnovers are essentially a random event, and Pitt as had some relative turnover success in Wanny's tenure. They finished tied for 34th nationally with 14 interceptions in his first season (2005) and tied for 38th nationally in turnovers forced last season. What about the other aspect that distorted the perception of the Pitt defense in 2007, special teams? At best Pitt has been mediocre on limiting punt and kickoff returns under Wannstedt. In 2006 they were 62nd in the nation in opposition kickoff return average and 46th in 2005. They were also 57th in opposition punt return average in 2006. But at their worst, they have been atrocious. In 2005 they were dead last (119th) in opposition punt return average. It appears the best Pitt can aspire to in regards to limiting the return game in 2008 is mediocrity. Still, even marginal improvement in limiting the return game and creating more turnovers in 2008 could mean Pitt's defense goes from under the radar to nationally respected.

And what about the Pitt offense? That unit was rather anemic in 2007, scoring only 22.8 per game, while being held to under 20 points in half of their 12 contests. There is hope though. Freshmen running back LeSean McCoy rushed for over 1300 yards and averaged 4.8 yards per rush. Unfortunately, his backfield mate, quarterback and fellow freshmen Pat Bostick did not adjust quite as easily to the college game. He was erratic at best, throwing more touchdowns than interceptions in a game only once. He did complete over 60% of his passes as a freshman, so there is a real chance at improvement in his sophomore season...Especially with all four of his top wide receivers returning. In fact the only player with a reception not returning is tight end (and 3rd leading receiver) Darrell Strong.

As has seemingly been the case throughout Wanny's tenure in the Steel City, Pitt has some very strong indicators for improvement in 2008. The relative youth on both sides of the ball coupled with some luck in the turnover department and some marginal improvement on special teams could have Pitt bowling for the first time in the Wannstedt era.

Housekeeping Notes

Friends, the bowl season is a time for great joy, and at the same time great sadness for me. Contrary to what Stewart Mandel may believe, I think the BCS gave us at least 3 rather intriguing matchups: good vs evil in the Orange Bowl (the Super Mangino Bros are the good guys), Cinderella vs a championship contender in the Sugar Bowl, and a super-sexy Oklahoma/West Virginia showdown in the Fiesta Bowl. And hey, as a true college football fan, I'll also watch most of Fresno State/Georgia Tech. Unfortunately though, bowl season also means there are only 32 games left to be played. After early January, we have to wait almost 8 whole months for a college football game that counts:( Fear not loyal readers, just as in this past offseason, Statistically Speaking will be updated at least once a week with studies that will try to gauge who will surprise and who will disappoint next season. I've got several irons in the fire. Every conference will get the SDPI treatment, not just for points, but also for yards and possibly one other stat. Plus I've been doing some regression analysis during the season that I will get around to posting. Bowl previews will also start popping up here in the next week or so. So get excited.

Over the course of the Fab Five weekly column, I managed to go 71-60-4 against the spread. That's a winning percentage of .542. With the break even gambling mark of .524, you could have made a profit of about 3.5% if you had followed my picks and bet the same for every game. Not bad for 14 weeks of work. I give these numbers, not out of hubris, but as a reference for next season which I hope will be an improvement.

One final note, the Predictomatic contest is over. One player was downright prescient in his BCS conference picks. LSU/Tennessee, BC/VT, Mizzou/Oklahoma, West Virginia, Ohio State, and Southern Cal all won their respective conferences/divisions. His last place picks were not quite as perfect, but he also selected Hawaii to play in the BCS, so he cannot be caught, not matter which team wins the national championship. So, Edward Baker, please send me an email from the same address that you used to send your predictions. I will cut you a check for the vast sum of $12.43 (the ad-click revenue over the course of the college football season). Congrats and enjoy.

In Case You Missed It: Season Finale

...Congrats FIU. The Golden Panthers ended their 23-game losing streak by knocking off North Texas 38-19. FIU has steadily improved as the season has progressed. After averaging 8.5 points per game, 234 yards per game, and 3.7 yards per play in their first 8 games, the Golden Panthers averaged 28.3 points per game, 340 yards per game, and 5.1 yards per play. 'Of such inconsequential beginning dynasties are begun.'


...Not to be outdone by their Sun Belt instate brethren, the FAU Owls upset Troy on Saturday to win the Sun Belt title and gain a berth in the New Orleans Bowl. Unfortunately, for the Sun Belt, the Troy Trojans get left out of the bowl picture despite finishing 8-4 with their other losses coming on the road to Arkansas, Florida, and Georgia. Oh and don't forget their 18-point thrashing of Oklahoma State.

...Hawaii's comeback win was huge on Saturday night. For the conference, for Colt Brennan's Heisman hopes, and especially for the school. This bowl appearance will do wonders for recruiting and the $$ from Sugar Bowl will go a long way toward ensuring Hawaii's continued ability to field a football team. Those flights ain't cheap.


...In other mid-major news, Bronco Mendenhall has started a mini-dynasty in Provo, Utah. The BYU Cougars have won 16 straight Mountain West conference games, including 12 by double digits.


...In other, I suppose bigger news, the BCS got it right. I guess. As one of only two major conference one-loss teams, Ohio State has certainly earned a spot, despite the dearth of quality wins. LSU on the other hand, does appear to be the best two-loss team. However, every team with an argument has their fair share of flaws and ugly marks on their resume. Ohio State has by far the best loss (Missouri has the best losses), but they lack the quality wins LSU has. Georgia has several good wins, but when you lose by 21 to a decent Tennessee team and at home to a 6-6 South Carolina team, you have no room to bitch Mark Richt. Oklahoma may well be the best team, but falling in half of the road games they played to teams that range from pretty good (Texas Tech) to average at best (Colorado) should keep them out. As mentioned earlier, Missouri has the best set of losses, but unfortunately it came to the same team, so we pretty much know without a doubt they are not as good as Oklahoma. Virginia Tech? Please. Where's the beef? Their best wins are Clemson and BC. Good, but not great teams. Then there's the matter of that drubbing at the hands of LSU. No champion should get thrashed by 41 points. Yet if their hands team hadn't failed them in the first BC game, they'd have a chance to beat Ohio State for the title deserved or not. Southern Cal? Stanford. And let's not forget they may not even be the best team in the conference had Dennis Dixon stayed healthy at Oregon. As for Kansas? Well, I love the Mangenius, but their schedule does not have anywhere near the bulk to get them in the title game barring an undefeated season.

...One more note on the BCS. Actually two. Missouri got screwed. They beat two BCS bowl teams (Illinois and Kansas) and lost their only games to BCS bowl participants (Oklahoma). I do have a problem with them being left out at the expense of Kansas. As for Hawaii, they probably don't deserve their BCS bid considering the schedule. But I remember a certain independent playing in 3 undeserved BCS bowls this decade (and getting routed in everyone to my delight). If the hallowed teams garner rediculous BCS bids, I have no problem with the little guys using the system to their advantage.


...Finally I'll end with a commentary on Les Miles. Good coach? Sure. Great coach? Ummm excuse me? By my estimation, he has had the most talent in the SEC 3 years running, yet has somehow managed to lose 2 games every year and finally won his first conference title on Saturday. It's probably best Michigan didn't get this guy, especially if they end up with Brian Kelly. For my final note on Miles, I leave you this video.

To Bowl or Not to Bowl?

To bowl or not to bowl, that is the question;
Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer
The indignity of a losing season,
Or perchance a victory many miles away?
And thus delivering 7 wins to thee.

My humblest apologies to William 'Bill' Shakespeare.

As a resident of Columbia, South Carolina, I have had the opportunity to witness the weeping and gnashing of teeth that has accompanied the Gamecocks' 5-game skid to end their once-promising season. A bowl bid that once seemed certain, now has only a snowball's chance of coming to fruition. Around talk radio and the water cooler, the sentiment is that the Gamecocks need a bowl bid in order to improve heading into next season. Conventional wisdom says that the extra practices and extra game will give the Gamecocks a better chance at improving in the 2008 season. Being the inquisitive type, I wanted to find out if this is indeed true. I looked at every BCS conference team that finished the regular season with either 5 or 6 wins from 2000-2005. I divided those teams into two categories: 6-win teams that went bowling, and 5/6-win teams that stayed home. I think its safe to assume that BCS teams that finish with either 5 or 6 wins are pretty even (not outstanding and not terrible), whether or not they go bowling. The two tables below compare how those teams fared the following season.


As you can see, both sets of teams improved marginally the following season. The teams that participated in bowl games had a better overall record. However, the difference in winning percentage equates to less than half a win over the course of an 11 or 12-game regular season. In terms of improvement, the non-bowl teams fared better. Their winning percentage improved by .065 and the bowl teams' winning percentage improved by .024. Still, as before, the difference over the course of an 11 or 12-game season is less than half a win.

After compiling those numbers, I decided to further test the notion that bowl games aid improvement by running two sets of regression analysis. Both sets included the same sample of 5 and 6 win regular season BCS teams from 2000-2005. They were coded either as '0' if they didn't play in a bowl game and '1' if they did. I ran the regression to see how well playing in a bowl correlated with 1) the next season's winning percentage and 2) whether they played in a bowl game the next year.

Both those R squared values are about as close to zero as you can get. Bowl game participation, in and of itself, has basically no correlation with success the following year. The 6-year window I observed has examples of 6-win bowl teams that improved substantially (Southern Cal from 2001 to 2002), 6-win bowl teams that imploded (West Virginia from 2000 to 2001), 6-win non-bowl teams that improved substantially (Syracuse 2000 to 2001), 6-win non-bowl teams that imploded (Washington 2003) and everything in between. So Gamecock fans, don't worry about a possible bowl snub. While the pageantry and trip may make memories for players, fans, and coaches, the effect it has on the next season's success or failure is negligible at best. Gamecock fans can take heart in the case of the Kansas Jayhawks, a team not included in this study because their 6-6 bowl-less season occurred in 2006. The Jayhawks you may have heard, are currently sitting at 11-1 and closing in on a BCS bowl bid.

All the world 's a stage, and all the men and women merely players. They have their exits and their entrances; And one man in his time plays many parts.