Pac-10 Look-Ahead: SDPI

One of my favorite set of posts from last offseason was the conference recap using SDPI. SDPI is a statistic I borrowed from Eddie Epstein that he used in his book, Dominance, to rank pro football's all-time greatest teams. SDPI stands for Standard Deviation Power Index and looks at how teams performed relative to the league average (or conference average in this case) and standard deviation in terms of points scored and allowed. The more standard deviations a team is above the mean, the better they are, and vice-versa. Here is the link to last year's Pac-10 post. As you can see, SDPI was a useful tool in predicting some of the rise and fall among the Pac-10's teams. In the interest of providing an even better offseason analysis, I will now be conducting another SDPI, this time for yardage. It is calculated in the same manner as the SDPI for points, but will obviously be measured against the conference mean and standard deviation for yards. Think of it this way: Points are the end result and yards are the means to that end. Thus, looking at both sets of data, we can get an even better idea about which teams are likely to improve or regress in 2008.

If you want the meat of the article, skip this next paragraph as it just gives an example of how the SDPI is calculated. The mean points scored and allowed for all Pac-10 teams in conference play was 240.6 points. The standard deviation for points scored was 43.80. The standard deviation for points allowed was 51.13. Arizona scored 257 points in Pac-10 play and allowed 249. Their offensive SDPI was 0.37 = ([257-240.6]/43.80). Their defensive SDPI was -0.16 = ([240.6-249]/51.13). Their total SDPI for points (SDPIP) was 0.21 which ranked 6th in the conference. The mean yardage for and against for all Pac-10 teams in conference play was 3435.9 yards. The standard deviation for yardage for was 376.58. The standard deviation for yards allowed was 578.27. Arizona gained 3393 yards in conference play and allowed 3410. Their offensive SDPI was -0.11 = ([3393-3435.9]/376.58). Their defensive SDPI was 0.04 = ([3435.9-3410]/578.27). Their total SDPI for yards (SDPIY) was -0.07 which ranked 7th in the conference.

To refresh your memory, here are the 2007 Pac-10 Standings.

Now here are the 2007 SDPI standings.

Points wise, SDPI conforms pretty well with how things shook out. However, there certainly are some surprises when we look at yardage. For starters, Washington State and California, winners of only 1/3 of their Pac-10 games in 2007, rank ahead of Arizona State, the league's co-champ. How can this be? The Sun Devils began the season 7-0 and their only blemishes in conference play were to the league's top two teams; Southern Cal and Oregon (with Dennis Dixon). As is often the case, the simple answer is turnover margin. The Sun Devils led the Pac-10 with a +7 turnover margin in conference play. On the other hand, Washington State and California finished at the bottom of the league with a -4 and -6 margin respectively. The yardage differential also fleshes out just how bad Stanford was, relative to the rest of the league. Despite finishing a game ahead of Washington, tied with Washington State and California for 7th place, the Cardinal had both the worst offense and defense in the league.

Best Offense: Oregon 1.38 (SDPIP) and 1.46 (SDPIY)
The Ducks still ranked as the best offense in the Pac-10 despite the absence of Dennis Dixon for the last 2 and 3/4 games. In the 6 Pac-10 games Dixon started and finished, the Ducks averaged 506 yards per game. In the 3 he did not finish, they averaged 317 yards per game.

Worst Offense: Stanford -2.11 (SDPIP) and -2.03 (SDPIY)
Stanford gained the fewest yards and scored the fewest points. They averaged 146 fewer yards and 17 fewer points per game than the top-ranked offense in Eugene.

Best Defense: Southern Cal 1.77 (SDPIP) and 2.02 (SDPIY)
Only two Pac-10 teams gained over 300 yards against the Trojans--Oregon and California.

Worst Defense: Washington -1.57 (SDPIP), Stanford -1.42 (SDPIY)
At this point, it really is take your pick. They were both horrible.

Looking ahead to next season, the prohibitive favorite should be...

Southern Cal
If there is one thing this blog does, its go out on a limb. The underdog Trojans have a shot at the Pac-10 title if things break their way. Who are we kidding? The Trojans have 3 co-championships and 3 out-right titles the past 6 seasons. If you're bad at math, that means they have earned at least a share of the last 6 Pac-10 championships. All signs point to lucky number 7 in 2008.

The team(s) that will improve are...

California and Washington State
If you're curious, Jeff Tedford did not forget how to coach in 2007. The Bears suffered through easily the worst season of the Tedford era in 2007. However, if we look at their yardage differential (a pretty good indicator of down to down success), the Golden Bears were about the 4th best team in the conference. Their undoing in 2007 was their proclivity to turn the football over. Their turnover margin of -6 was the worst in Pac-10 play. In their first two conference games, they defeated Arizona and Oregon and had a turnover margin of +6. In their last 7 conference games, they won only once and, not surprisingly, lost the turnover battle in each game (-12 in that span). Expect the Bears to migrate toward the middle of the league in turnover margin and jump a few spots in the standings as well. Based on the yardage incarnation of SDPI, the Cougars were one of the better teams in the Pac-10. Behind the efficient passing of quarterback Alex Brink, the Cougars finished behind only Oregon in yards gained in Pac-10 play. Unfortunately, their defense betrayed them. Only Washington and Stanford allowed more yards in conference play. Despite losing Brink to graduation, the Cougars could make a push at a bowl bid in the uber-competitive Pac-10 thanks to a few factors.

1. Their turnover margin of -4 was second to last in the Pac-10. Turnovers and turnover margins are highly variable, so its highly likely the Cougars will be more fortuitous in this department next season.
2. The defense, by all rights pretty bad last season, does get 8 starters back including the two leading sackers, Andy Mattingly and Greg Trent (both linebackers).
3. Brink is gone as well as one starting receiver and tight end, but the leading receiver, Brandon Gibson, is back for his senior season. The two leading rushers, Dwight Tardy and Christopher Ivory, both return. Plus the starting quarterback (Gary Rogers), while he lacks experience, is a senior.
4. The new head coach, Paul Wulff has been reasonably successful at IAA Eastern Washington. Wulff's teams have posted winning records in 7 of his 8 seasons and made the playoffs 3 of the last 4 seasons.
5. The Cougars' luck just has to change.
The above table lists the yardage each Pac-10 has accumulated and allowed the past 3 seasons. The Cougars have basically played their opponents even over the past 3 seasons, as they have been outgained by 2 yards over 26 games. Unfortunately, that has not correlated to any success in the won/loss department as the Cougars have fared better than only Stanford over that span. If only they had the good fortune of the Bruins. UCLA has been outgained on the year each season, yet has finished no worse than 5-4 in Pac-10 play and actually boasts the second best conference record over that span.

Before we leave the Cougars, I feel the need to tout the accomplishments of departing signal caller Alex Brink. Brink will never be as revered as his predecessors in Pullman, Drew Bledsoe, Ryan Leaf, and Jason Gesser, because he never led the Cougars to a bowl game. However, Brink has been an outstanding quarterback and his accomplishments should not be forgotten because his teammates were not as good.

The team(s) that will decline are...

Arizona State and Oregon State
Dennis Erickson's first season in Tempe was a great success, resulting in a Pac-10 co-championship. Unfortunately, his encore performance will not be quite as good. For starters, the Sun Devils performance placed them around the middle of the pack in the Pac-10. They were 3-0 in one-score conference games, so instead of evaluating them as a 7-2 conference champ, it would probably be more prudent to consider them a 6-3 or 5-4 mid-level Pac-10 team heading into 2008. The Sun Devils should also see some regression in their turnover margin. The Sun Devils led the Pac-10 with a +7 margin in conference play. Should that number come down, which it likely will, the Sun Devils record will follow suit. Finally, thanks to the Pac-10's 9-game conference slate, the Sun Devils must play more than half of their conference games on the road. After beginning the season 2-4 (0-2 in Pac-10 play), the Beavers won 7 of their last 8 games, losing only to the Trojans. However, their margin of error was razor thin. They parlayed an excellent defense, second to the Trojans in yards allowed in conference play, a good turnover margin, tied for second at +5, and a little luck, 3-0 in one-score conference games, into a 6-3 conference record. With such great success on defense, why did the Beavers fail to win the conference crown? Because the offense was just plain bad. They finished 8th in the league in yards gained. Neither sophomore quarterback, Sean Canfield or Lyle Moevao, was able to throw more touchdowns than interceptions, compete 60% of their passes, or average over 6 yards per pass. In 2008, the Beavers can expect their turnover margin and general good fortune to regress. Thus, they need improved quarterback play, especially with the loss of senior running back Yvenson Bernard. However, even if they get that, the defense loses a ton of talent and will probably not be as strong next season. The Beavers main strength on defense in 2007 was tackling opposing ball carriers in the backfield (6th in the nation), and more specifically, generating sacks (10th in the nation). Of the 6 gentlemen with 10 or more tackles for loss, 4 are gone. Only defensive linemen Victor Butler and Slade Norris remain. The Beavers will have a tougher time getting into the backfield in 2008, and this will not be offset by enough improvement from the offense.

Big 12 Look-Ahead: SDPI

One of my favorite set of posts from last offseason was the conference recap using SDPI. SDPI is a statistic I borrowed from Eddie Epstein that he used in his book, Dominance, to rank pro football's all-time greatest teams. SDPI stands for Standard Deviation Power Index and looks at how teams performed relative to the league average (or conference average in this case) and standard deviation in terms of points scored and allowed. The more standard deviations a team is above the mean, the better they are, and vice-versa. Here is the link to last year's Big 12 post. As you can see, SDPI was a useful tool in predicting some of the rise and fall among the Big 12's teams. In the interest of providing an even better offseason analysis, I will now be conducting another SDPI, this time for yardage. It is calculated in the same manner as the SDPI for points, but will obviously be measured against the conference mean and standard deviation for yards. Think of it this way: Points are the end result and yards are the means to that end. Thus, looking at both sets of data, we can get an even better idea about which teams are likely to improve or regress in 2008.

If you want the meat of the article, skip this next paragraph as it just gives an example of how the SDPI is calculated. The mean points scored and allowed for all Big 12 teams in conference play (championship game not included) was 249.33 points. The standard deviation for points scored was 69.14. The standard deviation for points allowed was 60.98. Colorado scored 238 points in Big 12 play and allowed 276. Their offensive SDPI was -0.16 = ([238-249.33]/69.14). Their defensive SDPI was -0.44 = ([249.33-276]/60.98). Their total SDPI for points (SDPIP) was -0.60 which ranked 9th in the conference. The mean yardage for and against for all Big 12 teams in conference play (championship game not included) was 3429.33 yards. The standard deviation for yardage for was 524.93. The standard deviation for yards allowed was 411.71. Colorado gained 3077 yards in conference play and allowed 3520. Their offensive SDPI was -0.67 = ([3077-3429.33]/524.93). Their defensive SDPI was -0.22 = ([3429.33-3520]/411.77). Their total SDPI for yards (SDPIY) was -0.89 which ranked 9th in the conference.

To refresh your memory, here are the 2007 Big 12 Standings.

Now here are the 2007 SDPI standings with conference rank in parentheses.

There's not a great deal of difference between the actual standings and either of the SDPI measures. Most teams were within a place or two of where SDPI thought they should be. The two slight exceptions are Oklahoma and Texas Tech. In regards to SDPIP, both finished about where they should have, but in terms of SDPIY, they were a little off. We'll begin with a look at the Sooners. Despite winning the conference, the Sooners are only seen as about the 5th best team by the yardage incarnation of SDPI. If you read my Fiesta Bowl preview, you'll know why. The dynamic and ballyhooed Sooner offense, led by freshman quarterback Sam Bradford, was actually below average in Big 12 play. The Sooners finished 9th in the Big 12 in yards gained, ahead of only Colorado, Baylor, and Iowa State. In Big 12 play, they gained 405 yards per game. If we look at all games, the Sooners finished 19th in the country by gaining 449 yards per game. That number is inflated by non-conference contests against North Texas (668 yards), Utah State (617 yards), and Tulsa (553 yards). The Big 12 was also very conducive to offense in 2007, as 7 teams finished in the top 20 nationally in yards per game. Here are the conference-by-conference breakdown of total yards conference game.

As you can see, the Big 12 was the second most offensively proficient conference in 2007, as the average Big 12 game saw roughly 857 combined yards. It was easily the most proficient of the BCS conferences as the second most prolific BCS conference, the Big East, saw roughly 90 fewer yards per conference game. Moving on to Texas Tech. The Red Raiders were recognized by SDPIY as the league's second-best team, yet managed only a 4-4 record in Big 12 play. How so? For starters, the Red Raiders style is very conducive to gaining yards. They rarely run the ball (246 rush attempts last season--dead last in the nation) and passing gains more yards on average than running. Pretty simple stuff. But, passing is also much more inconsistent than rushing; more often resulting in negative plays such as sacks (which are actually counted as rush attempts in college), incompletions, and turnovers. Head coach Mike Leach also has a tendency to go for it on 4th down (2nd in the nation with 31 4th down attempts in 2007), enabling the Red Radiers to run more plays (9th in the nation in offensive plays per game at nearly 78 per) and thus gain more yards. Texas Tech also finished 10th in the Big 12 in turnover margin (-8 in Big 12 play) helping to explain why they only finished 7th in scoring while leading the conference in yards gained.

Best Offense: Missouri 1.24 (SDPIP), Texas Tech 1.30 (SDPIY)
Both high-powered offenses will be bringing back senior quarterbacks in 2008, Chase Daniel for Missouri and Graham Harrell for Texas Tech, and at least one if not both will be in New York as a Heisman finalist.

Worst Offense: Baylor -2.04 (SDPIP), Iowa State -1.73 (SDPIY)
The Bears may have a chance to rebound somewhat as offensive guru Art Briles moves across the state to Waco.

Best Defense: Kansas 1.32 (SDPIP), Missouri 1.45 (SDPIY)
Kansas was first in points allowed and second in yards allowed while Missouri was first in yards allowed and third in points allowed. Kansas benefitted a great deal from their schedule which we'll discuss shortly.

Worst Defense: Baylor -1.68 (SDPIP), Nebraska -1.61 (SDPIY)
It's not really a surprise to see Baylor at the bottom in some category, but this is quite embarrassing for the once-vaunted Husker defense.

Hardest Schedule (based on cumulative SDPI of opponents): Iowa State 5.93 (SDPIP) and 5.13 (SDPIY)
The Cyclones got the shaft in the scheduling department. Not only did they have to face Missouri and Kansas in their own division, but in their games against the Big 12 South, they drew Oklahoma, Texas, and Texas Tech. By either measure, those were the 5 best teams in the Big 12.

Easiest Schedule: Kansas -5.48 (SDPIP) and -5.12 (SDPIY)
In their games against the Big 12 South, Kansas was fortunate to avoid Oklahoma, Texas, and Texas Tech. By either SDPI measure, they played the 7 worst teams in the Big 12 (Oklahoma State, Kansas State, Texas A&M, Colorado, Nebraska, Iowa State, and Baylor). They did not play a single team in the top-5 of the Big 12 until the regular season finale against Missouri.

Looking ahead to next season, the prohibitive favorite should be...

North: Missouri
It won't be a cake-walk, not with only 3 conference home games and the departures of running back Tony Temple and tight end Martin Rucker, but Missouri will rightly be the odds-on favorite to repeat as Big 12 North champs. As mentioned earlier, senior quarterback Chase Daniel is back to lead one of the nation's best offenses. Wide receiver Jeremy Maclin, a threat catching the ball and running it out of the backfield, should improve in his sophomore season. The defense gets 9 starters back, and although it will feel the loss of leading sacker Lorenzo Williams, it will still be very good. Plus with only 3 Big 12 home games, you have to like a road schedule that includes trips to Iowa State and Baylor, two of the league's perennial punching bags.

South: Texas
That's right friends, the Horns, not the Sooners should be the favorites to take the Big 12 South. As mentioned earlier, the Sooners, while far from a bad team, were not the juggernaut they were made out to be in 2007. Both the Sooners and Horns suffer some significant losses on defense. Oklahoma is down 7 starters, while Texas must relace 5 gentlemen in the defensive back 7. Texas also suffered a major hit when running back Jamaal Charles decided to leave early for the NFL. Texas quarterback Colt McCoy had a down year in 2007, producing a pass efficiency rating of only 139.16 after exploding onto the scene as a freshman with a rating of 161.82. If he can cut his interceptions (22 in 2007), he should once again be one of the Big 12's stars and the Horns should be even better. Oklahoma quarterback Sam Bradford, on the other hand, is coming off an amazing freshman season where he posted an efficiency rating of 176.53. Bradford won't be bad by any stretch in 2008, but it is statistically unlikely for him to improve upon those numbers.

The team(s) that will improve are...

Baylor, Nebraska, and Texas Tech
Saying Baylor will improve does not mean I think they will be good. It just means they should notch a conference victory in 2008 after going winless in 2007. For starters, the Bears nabbed a very good coach in Art Briles. Briles is somewhat of an offensive guru, and since Baylor will likely never be able to recruit the kind of players needed to have a dominant defense, developing a unique, and fun (to entice recruits) offensive system seems to be the only way for Baylor to be competitive. Plus the Bears will probably not finish with a turnover margin as poor as they had in 2007. The Bears were -18 in turnovers in Big 12 play last year. Another team that had lousy luck in the turnover department last season was Nebraska. The Huskers were -14 in turnovers in Big 12 play last year, ahead of only Baylor. This is not to say that was the Huskers only problem. Defensively they were awful. It stands to reason though that the defense cannot be any worse, especially with the hiring of a coach with a good track-record as a defensive coordinator, Bo Pellini. Lost in the abysmal finish to 2007 (1-6 record in the last 7 games), was the improvement by the offense in the final 3 games with Joe Ganz as the quarterback. After averaging about 371 yards and 18.8 points per game over their first 5 Big 12 contests, the Huskers exploded to the tune of 599 yards and 54.3 points per game over their last 3. Of course, they lost two of them as they allowed 76 points to Kansas and 65 to Colorado, but the Huskers are a team to watch in 2008. They shouldn't be able compete for the division yet, but with 8 home games a bowl game is almost assured. And finally we have Texas Tech. The Red Raiders lose only 1 solitary starter from their run and shoot offense, wide receiver Danny Amendola. 8 of the top 10 tacklers are back on a defensive unit that only needs to be decent to give the team a chance to win big. I wouldn't be so bold as to predict a division title for Mike Leach, but a second Cotton Bowl invite in 4 years would not be out of the question.

The team(s) that will decline are...

Kansas
Any person who read this blog during the 2007 season knows there was not a bigger Jayhawk fan than myself. But alas, facts are facts, and the Jayhawks will not be finishing 7-1 in Big 12 play in 2008. For starters, Kansas was 3-1 in one-score games in Big 12 play last season, so they may see some regression in that department. Secondly, Kansas led the Big 12 in turnover margin in conference play. They were +15 in 8 conference games, meaning they gained nearly two more turnovers per game on average than their opponents. That extreme good fortune will not continue. Finally, their decline will be a matter of scheduling. Last season, Kansas was fortunate to play the 3 weakest teams from the Big 12 South. In 2008, they must play the 3 strongest teams from that division. Texas, Oklahoma, and Texas Tech replace Baylor, Oklahoma State, and Texas A&M. Kansas returns a great deal of talent, and Mangino is a fine coach, so I don't expect them to fall out of the bowl picture. Their season will probably look a lot like Rutgers in 2007. Kansas will probably finish 8-4 or 7-5 in the regular season and be bowl-eligible for the 4th season in a row. Much like Rutgers 8-5 season, it will be seen as somewhat of a disappointment, but considering where the program was just a few years ago, it will in fact be a solid accomplishment.

Big 10 Look-Ahead: SDPI

One of my favorite set of posts from last offseason was the conference recap using SDPI. SDPI is a statistic I borrowed from Eddie Epstein that he used in his book, Dominance, to rank pro football's all-time greatest teams. SDPI stands for Standard Deviation Power Index and looks at how teams performed relative to the league average (or conference average in this case) and standard deviation in terms of points scored and allowed. The more standard deviations a team is above the mean, the better they are, and vice-versa. Here is the link to last year's Big 10 post. As you can see, SDPI was a useful tool in predicting some of the rise and fall among the Big 10's teams. In the interest of providing an even better offseason analysis, I will now be conducting another SDPI, this time for yardage. It is calculated in the same manner as the SDPI for points, but will obviously be measured against the conference mean and standard deviation for yards. Think of it this way: Points are the end result and yards are the means to that end. Thus, looking at both sets of data, we can get an even better idea about which teams are likely to improve or regress in 2008.

If you want the meat of the article, skip this next paragraph as it just gives an example of how the SDPI is calculated. The mean points scored and allowed for all Big 10 teams in conference play was 210.55 points. The standard deviation for points scored was 34.45. The standard deviation for points allowed was 64.99. Purdue scored 213 points in Big 10 play and allowed 226. Their offensive SDPI was 0.07 = ([213-210.55]/34.45). Their defensive SDPI was -0.24 = ([210.55-226]/64.99). Their total SDPI for points (SDPIP) was -0.17 which ranked 7th in the conference. The mean yardage for and against for all Big 10 teams in conference play was 3055.64 yards. The standard deviation for yardage for was 294.16. The standard deviation for yards allowed was 528.69. Purdue gained 3100 yards in conference play and allowed 3171. Their offensive SDPI was 0.15 = ([3100-3055.64]/294.16). Their defensive SDPI was -0.22 = ([3055.64-3171]/528.69). Their total SDPI for yards (SDPIY) was -0.07 which ranked 8th in the conference.

To refresh your memory, here are the 2007 Big 10 Standing.

Now here are the 2007 SDPI standings.

Two teams stand out when looking at the SDPI rankings versus the actual standings. Iowa, which finished tied for 5th with Penn State with a 4-4 conference record, actually rates as the worst team in the Big 10 in terms of yardage (even worse than winless Minnesota!) and second to last if we look at points scored and allowed. We'll get to the Hawkeyes offensive futility in a bit, but for now we'll try to answer the question of how Iowa was able to win 4 conference games, while Minnesota was not able to bag a single victory. For starters, whether it be clutch play or blind chance, Iowa won close games. They were involved in 4 one-score games in Big 10 play. They won 3 of them (one of which was against Minnesota). The Gophers on the other hand, were involved in 3 one-score games in Big 10 play, and lost all 3. Iowa was also very fortunate in regards to turnover margin in Big 10 play. They gained 9 more turnovers than they lost in conference play (best in the Big 10), while Minnesota had a margin of -6 (second to last). Finally, for all their offensive struggles, Iowa was much stronger than Minnesota defensively. The Gophers allowed the most yards in conference play, and the second most points, while Iowa was 5th in both yards allowed and points allowed. Preliminary research has shown that defense has a bigger impact in a team's won/loss record than offense. The second team that stands out is Michigan State. The Spartans finished tied for 7th in the Big 10 with Indiana, Purdue, and Northwestern, but were statistically the second best team in the conference. All 5 of the Spartans' conference losses, and their loss in the bowl game to Boston College, were by 7 points or fewer. With a few breaks, they could have very easily been the conferences' sacrificial lamb in Pasadena.

Best Offense: Michigan State 1.96 (SDPIP) and 1.34 (SDPIY)
The Spartans gained the most yards and scored the most points in Big 10 play. They were shutdown against Ohio State, gaining only 185 yards, but they amassed over 400 yards in 6 of 8 conference games.

Worst Offense: Iowa -2.08 (SDPIP) and -2.31 (SDPIY)
This is not even close. The second worst team at scoring points, Minnesota, managed to score 44 more points than the Hawkeyes. That is less than the difference between the 3rd highest scoring team (Illinois) and Minnesota (38 points difference). In terms of yardage, the 2nd worst prolific team was !gasp! Michigan. However, the Wolverines gained about 53 more yards per game than the Hawkeyes. That is less than the difference between the team that gained the most yardage (Michigan State) and the team that finished 8th in yards (Penn State). The Spartans gained only about 45 yards more per game than the Nittany Lions.

Best Defense: Ohio State 1.65 (SDPIP) and 2.21 (SDPIY)
The Buckeyes nearly lapped the field in both categories. The second best defense by both metrics (Michigan) allowed about 85 more yards per game and 5.6 more points per game than Tressel's Troops.

Worst Defense: Northwestern -1.48 (SDPIP), Minnesota -1.73 (SDPIY)
Northwestern allowed the most points and the second most yards, while Minnesota allowed the most yards and the second most points. Either way, these two schools are bringing up the rear.

Hardest Schedule (based on cumulative SDPI of opponents): Penn State 3.50 (SDPIP), Michigan 3.73 (SDPIY)
This is really splitting hairs. While both played one of the bottom two teams in the conference (Penn State played Iowa and Michigan played Minnesota), they also played nearly every team in the top half of the league (Illinois, Wisconsin, Michigan State, Ohio State and each other).

Easiest Schedule: Indiana -2.82 (SDPIP), Illinois -1.78 (SDPIY)
Indiana played both Iowa and Minnesota while avoiding Ohio State. Illinois did play the wheat of the conference (Ohio State, Wisconsin, Penn State, and Michigan), but they also drew a sizeable portion of the chaff (Iowa, Minnesota, Northwestern, and Indiana).

Looking ahead to next season, the prohibitive favorite should be...

Ohio State
Some team may rise up and shock us all, but heading into next season the smart money is on the Buckeyes. Look who's coming back. Quarterback. Check. Running back. Check. Starting receivers and tight ends. Check. Majority of offensive linemen. Check. 9 of the top 10 tacklers from a fantastic defense. Check. Plus look at the teams that finshed closest to them in the standings. Illinois loses a game-changing running back, and were a bit fortunate to finish where they did in the standings in the first place. Michigan loses their starting quarterback and running back and must learn new schemes on offense. Wisconsin and Penn State both lose their starting quarterbacks. And the team closest to them in terms of SDPI? The Spartans do bring back some very good offensive talent, but they lose 6 of their top 10 tacklers. Plus the Buckeyes get Penn State and Michigan in Columbus. They do have to go on the road to take on the Illini, Spartans, and Badgers, but even if they drop 2 of those, they can still take home the league title.

The team(s) that will improve are...

Michigan State, Minnesota, and Northwestern
As discussed, probably ad nauseum earlier, the Spartans were extremely unlucky in 2007, and yet still finished bowl eligible. Despite starting a relatively inexperienced junior quarterback, and breaking in a new head coach, the Spartans had the best offense in the Big 10. In 2008, the quarterback (Brian Hoyer), starting running back (Javon Ringer), and leading receiver (Devin Thomas) all return. The Spartans do lose Ringer's backfield mate and second leading rusher, Jehuu Caulcrick, as well as star tight end Kellen Davis, but the pieces are in place to have another top notch offense. The defense does lose 6 of its top 10 tacklers, including both defensive ends, Jonal Saint-Dic and Ervin Baldwin (combined 18.5 sacks), but even if the Spartans don't improve at all performance-wise, some progression to the mean in the luck department will equate to a better record. And if everything goes right, well Michigan State could win the conference title. Picking Minnesota to improve is a lot like picking the sun to rise. It's hard to get any worse than 0-8 in the conference. With their relatively soft non-conference schedule (Northern Illinois, Montana State, and Florida Atlantic come to the Metrodome, while the Gophers travel to Bowling Green), they have a real shot at being 4-0 before conference play starts. Thus, two wins would get them to bowl-eligibility. The Gophers have 3 very winnable home games against Iowa, Northwestern, and Indiana in conference play, so don't discount the chances of a bowl invite following a one-win season. The Gophers also have a few positive trends. They were second to last in the Big 10 in turnover margin (-6) and quarterback Adam Weber will be in his second season as a starter. Weber played reasonably well for a freshman throwing 24 TDs and 19 interceptions, while running for over 600 yards. But the Gophers success or failure next season will be based on their performance on the other side of the ball. The defense must improve on the nearly 500 yards and 38 points per game they allowed in conference play. Finally, we have the Northwestern Wildcats. Year 3 of the Pat Fitzgerald era should end with a bowl invite. The Wildcats did finish 3-0 in one-score conferece games in 2007, but they also finished last in the conference with a turnover margin of -12 in Big 10 play. Quarterback CJ Bacher and running back Tyrell Sutton both return for their senior campaigns. 3 of their top 4 receivers are also back. The defense does lose 3 of its top 4 tacklers, but also brings back 8 of its top 11. Still, the Wildcats turnover margin cannot be as bad as it was in 2007 and with Duke, Syracuse, Ohio, and Southern Illinois on the non-conference schedule, a good start is almost a given.

The team(s) that will decline are...

Iowa and Indiana
I will say this for the Hawkeyes, despite their offensive ineptitude, they at least managed to not further soil their season by limiting their turnovers. In 8 conference games, they turned the ball over only 7 times (best in the Big 10). The main issue for the Hawkeyes was their inability to protect quarterback Jake Christensen. Including non-conference games against Northern Illinois, Syracuse, Iowa State, and Western Michigan, the offensive line allowed 46 sacks (115th in the nation in sacks allowed per game). All 5 starters do return and Christensen is back under center, but running backs Albert Young and Damian Sims are gone. And the offense simply has a long way to go to even be 'bad'. The Hawkeyes will certainly not be as fortunate in the turnover department, so don't expect them to win more than 3 conference games. After an unexpected bowl bid, the Hoosiers appear to be on the rise. Not so fast. Despite the presence of Kellen Lewis under center and the 6-7 James Hardy boxing out defenders down field, the Hoosiers still finished 9th in the Big 10 in yards per game. The offense showed flashes, but altogether was not good. Now Hardy is gone a year early to the NFL and Lewis will be forced to shoulder more of the load. As for the defense? It's been terrible for sometime. The Hoosiers did sack opposing quarterbacks 42 times (6th in the nation in sacks per game), but only two teams (Northwestern and Minnesota) allowed more yards in Big 10 play. Now the best defenders in the back 7, Tracy Porter and Leslie Majors, are gone. If the Hoosiers improve defensively, it won't be by much. The scedule is bereft of both Michigan and Ohio State, and the 4 non-conference games are all home contests against mid-major teams (Ball State, Central Michigan, Murray State, and Western Kentucky), but don't look for a second consecutive bowl bid for the Hoosiers.

Just a Note

I usually don't hawk other websites here; you can find several of the sites I visit daily on the right, but I feel I owe a debt of gratitude to CFB Stats dot com. That smorgasboard of statistics is where I get all my information to do my research. Even if you are not a stat geek and just want to know who led the nation in quarterback rating in 2005, give it a look.

In other football news, the Giants pulled off one of the most shocking upsets in Super Bowl history. While the point spread wasn't the largest ever, I think you'd be hard-pressed to come up with a game that went as far against what everyone thought was going to happen. Congrats Giants. Congrats on defeating a team I rue more than any other in professional sports. Their smug coach, insuffereable fans, and arrogant quarterback can go away to lick their wounds for a few months.

And congrats Art Monk. Finally, the Hall called.

I'm still holding out hope for this guy.

Big East Look-Ahead: SDPI

One of my favorite set of posts from last offseason was the conference recap using SDPI. SDPI is a statistic I borrowed from Eddie Epstein that he used in his book, Dominance, to rank pro football's all-time greatest teams. SDPI stands for Standard Deviation Power Index and looks at how teams performed relative to the league average (or conference average in this case) and standard deviation in terms of points scored and allowed. The more standard deviations a team is above the mean, the better they are, and vice-versa. Here is the link to last year's Big East post. As you can see, SDPI was a useful tool in predicting some of the rise and fall among the Big East's teams. In the interest of providing an even better offseason analysis, I will now be conducting another SDPI, this time for yardage. It is calculated in the same manner as the SDPI for points, but will obviously be measured against the conference mean and standard deviation for yards. Think of it this way: Points are the end result and yards are the means to that end. Thus, looking at both sets of data, we can get an even better idea about which teams are likely to improve or regress in 2008.

If you want the meat of the article, skip this next paragraph as it just gives an example of how the SDPI is calculated. The mean points scored and allowed for all Big East teams in conference play was 186.75 points. The standard deviation for points scored was 41.35. The standard deviation for points allowed was 45.16. Rutgers scored 171 points in Big East play and allowed 195. Their offensive SDPI was -0.38 = ([171-186.75]/41.35). Their defensive SDPI was -0.18 = ([186.75-195]/45.16). Their total SDPI for points (SDPIP) was -0.56 which ranked 5th in the conference. The mean yardage for and against for all Big East teams in conference play was 2684.13 yards. The standard deviation for yardage for was 373.40. The standard deviation for yards allowed was 447.01. Rutgers gained 2832 yards in conference play and allowed 2578. Their offensive SDPI was 0.40 = ([2832-2684.13]/373.40). Their defensive SDPI was 0.24 = ([2684.13-2578]/447.01). Their total SDPI for yards (SDPIY) was 0.63 (difference due to rounding) which ranked 3rd in the conference.

To refresh your memory, here are the 2007 Big East standings.

Now here are the 2007 SDPI standings.

The one team very far removed from their place in the actual Big East standings and their performance is the Connecticut Huskies. The Huskies were co-champions with West Virginia, and if we look at SDPIP, they still finish a respectable 4th; having outscored their Big East opponents by a scant 4 points over the course of the season. However, if we look at the Huskies in terms of yardage, they fall all the way to the bottom of the league; ahead of only Syracuse. The Huskies gained only 333 yards per game in Big East play (ahead of only Pitt and Syracuse) while allowing 417 per contest (ahead of only Syracuse). How were the Huskies able to overcome their down-to-down inferiority and win 5 of 7 conference games? Turnover margin.

The Huskies were tops in Big East play gaining 8 more turnovers than they committed over 7 conference games. In the 5 conference games where the Huskies won the turnover battle, they won. In the 2 conference games where they were in the red, they lost. The Huskies also scored 5 non-offensive touchdowns in conference play to aid their cause. An interception return for a touchdown provided the winning margin in a 7-point home defeat of South Florida. A 74-yard punt return by wide receiver Larry Taylor (illegal I might add) was the difference in a 4-point home win over Louisville. The previous few sentences were not intended to demean the accomplishments of the Huskies, merely to serve as a reminder that they may not be so fortuitous next season. Elsewhere, point and yardage differentials have very different views on Cincinnati (3rd in points and 5th in yards), Rutgers (5th in points and 3rd in yardage), and Louisville (7th in points and 4th in yardage). We'll get to Louisville later. For now, let's see how Rutgers, Cincinnati, and Connecticut performed in a few areas in Big East play in 2006 compared to 2007 with conference rank in parentheses.

The Big East as a whole, was much more stingy in regards to yardage in 2006. Rutgers gained about 70 more yards per game in 2007 than 2006, yet only moved up one spot in conference rank. They also allowed about 63 more yards per game, but fell only from 2nd to 3rd. The biggest difference between Rutgers Cinderella season in 2006 and their somewhat disappointing follow-up in 2007 was turnovers. The Knights led the Big East with a margin of +6 in 2006, but were tied for last at -8 in 2007. Under first year head coach Brian Kelly, the Bearcats improved substantially on offense, averaging about 73 more yards per game. Unfortunately, the defense allowed 94 more yards per game and their yardage differential actually decreased. A lot of people think Cincinnati was much better in 2007 than they were in 2006. Not so. Did you know they beat the same 4 Big East teams both seasons (Rutgers, Connecticut, South Florida, and Syracuse) while losing to the same 3 Big East teams (West Virginia, Louisville, and Pittsburgh). So why did Cincinnati finish 8-5 in 2006 and 10-3 in 2007? The Bearcats played road games at Ohio State and Virginia Tech in 2006, while in 2007 their toughest non-conference tests were against Oregon State and Miami of Ohio. And finally we have the aforementioned Huskies. Their slight improvement in offense was nearly offset by their regression on defense. The Huskies owe most of their success to an improvement in turnover margin, going from worst to first, and subsequently doing the same in the standings.

Best Offense: West Virginia 1.29 (SDPIP), Louisville 0.88(SDPIY)
West Virginia scored the most points of any Big East team in conference play, but were only 4th in yards gained. Louisville gained the most yards, but were only 4th in points scored. The reason for this disparity is twofold. The distance between Louisville and West Virginia in yardage gained in conference play was only 54 yards (less than 8 per game). The other reason? Of course it was turnovers. Louisville turned the ball over 20 times in conference play, while West Virginia committed only 16.

Worst Offense: Syracuse -1.35 (SDPIP) and -1.40 (SDPIY)
While the Pitt Panthers were close in terms of offensive ineptitude, Syracuse sweeps both measures.

Best Defense: West Virginia 1.35 (SDPIP), Pitt 1.48 (SDPIY)
Any question towards the validity of Pitt's ranking should be quelled by looking at the boxscore from their season finale.

Worst Defense: Syracuse -1.87 (SDPIP) and -1.76 (SDPIY)
Another clean sweep for a once proud program.

Looking ahead to next season, the prohibitive favorite should be...

West Virginia
Yes the Mountaineers lost a great coach in Rich Rodriguez. Yes they may have pulled the trigger too soon on Bill Stewart, while basking in the afterglow of a Fiesta Bowl win. Still, if Bill Stewart is the wrong man for the job, that won't be known until a few years down the road. His presence next season will not make Pat White or Noel Devine slower, nor will it make the 5 returning starters on the offensive line weaker, nor will it prevent the Mountaineers from having 4 Big East home games. Stewart was a failure at VMI, but if Norv Turner can succeed with superior personnel in the NFL, Bill Stewart should be able to do the same at West Virginia for at least a few seasons.

The team(s) that will improve are...

Louisville and Rutgers
Louisville went from the BCS to bowl-less in less than one calendar year. A revival in 2008 is not out of the question despite the loss of star quarterback Brian Brohm and receivers Harry Douglas and Mario Urrutia. For starters, the Cardinals do bring back a host of talented running backs (Anthony Allen, Brock Bolen, and George Stripling) for their new quarterback to hand off to. And while that quarterback will not be Brian Brohm, Hunter Cantwell has some experience, subbing for the injured Brohm in 2006 when he put up pretty good numbers. The Cardinals defense should also improve next as 7 of their top 11 tacklers return. Their defense was bad last season, but not not nearly as terrible as the most folks believe. They were 5th in the league in yards allowed, about 1/4th of a standard deviation below average. The Cardinals should also see their luck in the turnover department rebound. They were -7 (6th in the conference) in turnover margin in league play. Finally, for all the criticism he endured, Steve Kragthorpe is a fine football coach. You don't resurrect the Tulsa football program without possessing a solid football acumen. Louisville gets 4 conference home games in 2008 and one of their road games is at Syracuse, so the Cardinals are a lock for at least 4 conference wins, and if things break right could find themselves as the Big East champion. As for the Scarlet Knights, they do lose their workhorse running back Ray Rice, but also return a veteran senior quarterback (Mike Teel) who has improved substantially in his 3 seasons. Teel also gets his 2 playmaking receivers, Kenny Britt and Tiquan Underwood, back for another campaign. Britt averaged 19.9 yards per catch (5th in the nation) and Underwood averaged 16.9 (30th in the nation), making them the epitome of a big-play duo. The defense also returns 7 of its top 10 tacklers and should continue to be one of the Big East's best. The Knights do lose 3 starting offensive linemen, but that is likely the only area of concern. Their -8 (last in the conference) turnover margin should also improve as they continue their improbable rise under Greg Schiano.

The team(s) that will decline are...

Connecticut
Only Syracuse allowed more yards than the Huskies and only Pitt and Syracuse gained fewer yards. As their league-best +8 turnover margin regresses closer to the middle of the pack, the Huskies will certainly not repeat as Big East co-champs and even with Hofstra, Temple, and Baylor on the schedule outside the league, they could find themselves on the outside looking in come postseason time.

What about the other 4 teams? What is their prognosis. If Ben Mauk is allowed to return for a 6th year of eligibility (and he should be), the Bearcats could hold their place in the upper-half of the league. Remember though, despite the improvement by the offense under Kelly, the defense regressed and 5 starters from that unit are gone. Keep those predictions of a Queen City renaissance under wraps until about 2010 (if Kelly sticks around that long). South Florida was the second best team in the league based on points or yardage. However, for an offense that relies so much on Matt Grothe (65.7% of team's total offense), the Bulls are one injury or bad game from Grothe of being an also ran offensively. The defense was stellar in the 2007, but the unit loses linebacker Ben Moffitt and both starting corners (Trae Williams and Mike Jenkins). Plus the defense was shredded the last two games by Pitt (unacceptable) and Oregon (somewhat acceptable even without Dixon) so it remains to be seen how consistent they can be. Finally in 2008, they must travel to Louisville and West Virginia so I don't foresee them taking the conference crown either. If Pitt can find an offense, they will be dangerous in 2008. They had the league's best defense in 2007 and return a host of talent from that unit. LeSean McCoy is a playmaker at running back, but Pitt should see if there is any eligibility left for Tyler Palko. Finally Syracuse is bad, and has been ever since Paul Pasqualoni left. Should be the same old song and dance in 2008.

ACC Look-Ahead: SDPI

One of my favorite set of posts from last offseason was the conference recap using SDPI. SDPI is a statistic I borrowed from Eddie Epstein that he used in his book, Dominance, to rank pro football's all-time greatest teams. SDPI stands for Standard Deviation Power Index and looks at how teams performed relative to the league average (or conference average in this case) and standard deviation in terms of points scored and allowed. The more standard deviations a team is above the mean, the better they are, and vice-versa. Here is the link to last year's ACC post. As you can see, SDPI was a useful tool in predicting some of the rise and fall among the ACC's teams. In the interest of providing an even better offseason analysis, I will now be conducting another SDPI, this time for yardage. It is calculated in the same manner as the SDPI for points, but will obviously be measured against the conference mean and standard deviation for yards. Think of it this way: Points are the end result and yards are the means to that end. Thus, looking at both sets of data, we can get an even better idea about which teams are likely to improve or regress in 2008.

If you want the meat of the article, skip this next paragraph as it just gives an example of how the SDPI is calculated. The mean points scored and allowed for all ACC teams in conference play (championship game not included) was 187.75 points. The standard deviation for points scored was 39.26. The standard deviation for points allowed was 43.06. Maryland scored 194 points in ACC play and allowed 180. Their offensive SDPI was 0.16 = ([194-187.75]/39.26). Their defensive SDPI was 0.18 = ([187.75-180]/43.06). Their total SDPI for points (SDPIP) was 0.34 which ranked 7th in the conference. The mean yardage for and against for all ACC teams in conference play (championship game not included) was 2762.17 yards. The standard deviation for yardage for was 338.33. The standard deviation for yards allowed was 351.69. Maryland gained 2780 yards in conference play and allowed 3081. Their offensive SDPI was 0.05 = ([2780-2762.17]/338.33). Their defensive SDPI was -0.91 = ([2762.17-3081]/351.69). Their total SDPI for yards (SDPIY) was -0.85 (difference due to rounding) which ranked 9th in the conference.

To refresh your memory, here are the 2007 ACC Standing.

Now here are the 2007 SDPI standings with conference rank in parentheses.

Both versions of SDPI correspond pretty well to the actual standings. Both versions see Clemson as the best team in the Atlantic Division, but as has become a common refrain around the upstate, Bowden just 'can't win the big one' (or 'un as it were). One stat that really jumps off the page is how dominant Virginia Tech looked in regards to points and scoring margin versus yardage. The Hokies outscored their ACC opponents by 135 points in 8 games (almost 17 per game), but 'only' outgained league foes by about 80 yards per game. One reason for this large disparity is the fact that the Hokies scored 4 non-offensive touchdowns in ACC play (2 interceptions, 1 punt return, and 1 kickoff return), including 3 in the game against Clemson, allowing them score 41 points and win by 18 despite gaining only 219 yards. Another facet of that dichotomy is that the Hokies outstanding defense (2nd in SDPI yards and first in SDPI points) consistently gave the offense outstanding field position either through turnovers (+15 in ACC play) or forcing 3 and outs. The second team that shifts a little when we contrast points and yards is Wake Forest. Based on points scored and allowed, the Deacons finished about where they should have, but in regards to yardage they finished better than expected. Wake can also thank non-offensive touchdowns for their good fortune. The Deacons returned one fumble, one kickoff, and 5 interceptions for scores in their 8 ACC games. The final team with a large disparity between points and yards in Georgia Tech. Using the SDPIP, the Jackets finished a little below the middle of the pack (8th place) as they were outscored by 13 points in ACC play. However, when we look at yardage, they shoot into the top 4. Unlike the Hokies and Deacons, the Jackets only managed a single non-offensive touchdown in ACC play and were -8 in turnover margin.

Best Offense: Virginia Tech 1.71 (SDPIP), Boston College 2.06 (SDPIY)
The Hokies scored the most point and the Eagles gained the most yards. Virginia Tech's proclivity at scoring on defense and special teams allowed them to score more points despite gaining about 78 fewer yards per game than the Matt Ryan led Eagles.

Worst Offense: Duke -1.45 (SDPIP) and -2.14 (SDPIY)
No controversy here as Duke was simply terrible at moving the ball. Good luck Mr. Cutcliffe, you have your work cut out for you.

Best Defense: Virginia Tech 1.57 (SDPIP), Clemson 1.86 (SDPIY)
In points allowed per game the Tigers were second and in yards allowed per game the Hokies were second. Either way, these two were the cream of the defensive crop in the ACC. I'd be inclined to give the Tigers the edge as 4 touchdowns were scored against their special teams or offense versus 1 for Virginia Tech.

Worst Defense: Duke -1.79 (SDPIP), NC State -1.39 (SDPIY)
Again no surprise to see Duke at the bottom. It does have to be a little disturbing for Wolfpack fans to see they allowed the most yards in conference play (over 406 per game). To be fair, that statistic is bolstered by the 608 yards Clemson put up against them.

Hardest Schedule (based on cumulative SDPI of opponents): Duke 4.26 (SDPIP) and 3.91 (SDPIY)
The Devils played in the weaker division, but unlike their division brethren, did not have Duke on their schedule.

Easiest Schedule: Virginia -4.78 (SDPIP) and -5.80 (SDPIY)
The Cavs played in the easier division, and in their games against Atlantic teams, they avoided the clear cut powers, Clemson and Boston College.

Looking ahead to next season, the prohibitive favorite should be...

Atlantic: Clemson
If Clemson fails once again in their quest to play in the ACC Championship Game, Mr. Bowden may be in serious trouble. The past 3 seasons, the Tigers have finished within one game of the Atlantic Division lead each year, but have been unable to see the deal. If Shakespeare had any inklings of writing athletic tragedies, he could do a lot worse than model the Tigers' ACC sojourn. In the span, the Tigers have lost 10 ACC games. 7 have been decided 6 points or fewer, and in 3 games, the margin has been a single point. Clemson brings back a senior starting quarterback, their top 2 running backs, every player who caught a pass save La'Donte Harris (only 12 catches), and a host of talent on defense. They do face 3 touch road games within the division (Florida State, Boston College, and Wake Forest), but with the departure of Matt Ryan, this is clearly Clemson's race to lose.

Coastal: Virginia Tech
Though not as dominant as their point differential would indicate, the Hokies have to be the favorites to come out of the Coastal Division. They should be a much weaker pole leader than Clemson though. For starters, the Hokies lose their top 4 pass-catchers and the defensive unit loses stalwarts Xavier Adibi, Vince Hall, Chris Ellis, and DJ Parker, as well as any underclassmen who decide to leave early.

The team(s) that will improve are...

North Carolina and Georgia Tech
In the second season of the Butch Davis era, the Tar Heels should certainly get to bowl eligibility, and I wouldn't be too surprised if they hang around in the conference race. Last season, the Heels were involved in 8 one-score games. They won only 3 of those contests. Some improvement in both the luck department and from quarterback TJ Yates could mean big things for the Heels in 2008. Jealous fans of the Blue Devils and Wolfpack should not get too worried though. As the Butch Davis era approaches its zenith in 2010, some big-money school will come calling and despite protests to the contrary, Davis will be gone faster than a bottle of Jack in Phil Ford's refrigerator. Over in Atlanta, Paul Johnson is the right man for the job. In my opinion, Johnson is the best coach in the NCAA. He probably won't win an ACC Championship in his first season, but the indicators are there for some improvement in the Jacket's won/loss record. If the defense can remain in the good to steady range, the offensive improvement will put the Jackets in the Orange Bowl by January of 2012. As for other teams that may improve, I expect that come July we will be hearing a lot about how Miami and Florida State are about to reclaim their place at the table with college football's elite. Consider me skeptical until it happens. Especially Miami. They were simply atrocious in 2007. The offense was and has been bad for sometime now, but the defense also slipped last season. There are no positive indicators for a Canes' revival. Certainly, Miami could get to bowl-eligibility, but anything more than a 7-win regular season would be shocking. As for the Noles, well a second-place finish in the Atlantic would certainly not be out of the question, but that is more an indication of the relative parity (suckiness) of the ACC than any praise that should be heaped on the elder Bowden's boys.

The team(s) that will decline are...

Boston College, Wake Forest, and Virginia
The Eagles bid adieu to their senior quarterback, Matt Ryan, two of their better receivers (Andre Callender and Kevin Challenger), and the best players on their turnover happy defense (Jamie Silva, Jolonn Dunbar, DeJuan Tribble, and Nick Larkin). The Eagles' shot at the ACC was last season. Now the rebuilding must begin. My alma mater seems to owe the piper a healthy check after their good fortune the past 2 seasons. Although they return most of both starting lineups, the loss of both Kenny Moore and Kevin Marion will hurt the passing and return games. The extreme turnover margins (+13 in 2006 and +9 in 2007) and non-offensive touchdowns appear to be unsustainable, so don't be surprised if the Deacons slip in the standings. And finally we have Virginia, patron saint of winning ugly. While Wake did it first and better (in 2006), the Cavs seemed to have a rabbit's foot with them at all times. Take away the 48-point sloshing of Miami, and the Cavs scored 3 more points than they allowed in ACC play. Game-changing defensive end Chris Long is gone so the onus will be on the offense if the Cavs are to compete for anything more than a trip to Charlotte in 2008.

Non-Offensive Touchdowns

Some of football's biggest plays and most spectacular moments occur when you least expect them. A fumble return, a pick six, or a blocked punt are all huge momentum shifting scoring plays. They are also highly random. Whether or not a fumble or interception gets returned for a touchdown depends on a host of variables: field position, personnel on the field (for both teams), where the fumble/interception occurs (middle of the field or along the sideline, backfield or in the secondary), and the awareness of the team that loses the football to name just a few. Touchdowns scored by special teams units are also quite random. The weather (slick ball, wind, etc.), the quality of the officials (did they miss that clip?), injuries to key personnel, and missed blocks are a couple that spring to mind. Thus a team that scores a large number of non-offensive touchdowns (known as NOTDs henceforth) one season, will probably not score them with the same regularity the following year, and vice-versa. This post will examine the top and bottom NOTD scoring teams from 2007 in terms of their net NOTDs. That is, the number of NOTDs they scored versus the number they allowed. Before we dive into the 2007 numbers, lets take a look back at 2006 to see if we can gleam any insight into what happens to teams who have very good or very bad NOTD net numbers the following season.

The teams we want to examine from 2006 are the extreme teams. If a teams score one more NOTD than they allowed (+1), well we really don't care. We are concerned about the teams at the far end of the bell curve. Thus we are going to be looking at teams that were +4 or greater in NOTD or -4 or worse in 2006. 21 teams fit that criteria (12 who were +4 or greater and 9 who were -4 or worse). Here are the top 12 teams from 2006, their NOTD net rating, their record in 2006, and their record in 2007.


Only one team declined significantly. Cal went from 10-3 and co-Pac-10 champs to a low-tier bowl game against Air Force. 6 other teams declined, but their declines were negligible and can be attributed to random chance. Overall, the 12 teams saw their cumulative winning percentage decline by .035; hardly a drop at all. What about conference record? Maybe these teams all beat up on pansies in their non-conference schedule and took it on the chin once the real action started.


Not so much. Again Cal is the only team that suffered any pronounced decline not attributable to random chance. Now let's examine the opposite side of the coin. Here are the teams with the worst NOTD net from 2006, along with their records from 2006 and 2007.


Of these 9 teams, all but two improved, and 5 improved substantially (at least a 2 game improvement). Florida Atlantic went from 5 wins to Sun Belt champions and the New Orleans Bowl. Stanford went from being one of the worst teams in IA to being marginally competitive. Virginia went from 5 wins to a near appearance in the ACC Championship Game. Bowling Green went from 4 wins to the GMAC Bowl, and finally, Illinois went from 2 wins to the Rose Bowl. In the interest of completeness, here's how those teams performed in conference play.


Again only 2 teams did not improve in conference play (perennial cellar dwellers Duke and Baylor) while the aforementioned 5 teams improved by at least 2 games in league play. What this seems to suggest is that the best (or luckiest depending on semantics) NOTD net teams don't necessarily drop off the face of the Earth, but rather that the worst (or unluckiest) NOTD net teams often improve. Please be award that this is only one season's worth of data, but when you are looking for some surprise teams in 2008, it might not be a bad idea to peruse the bottom of the NOTD net list. With that qualifier, here are the best and worst NOTD net teams from 2007.


My alma mater, the Demon Deacons led the nation with 10 NOTDs and were +8 in that category on the season. In my Fiesta Bowl preview, I noted that Oklahoma was not dominant (at least in terms of yardage) in their Big 12 games. Their +7 NOTD net rating helps explain why their final scores made us think we were watching a dominant team. The Huskies +6 NOTD net helped a flawed, mediocre team tie with West Virginia for the Big East crown. The other 9 teams on this list all owe a portion of their success to NOTDs. While a few will likely suffer a decline next season (two of the canines in particular), fans of these 12 teams should not be unsettled based on what happened to the top NOTD teams from 2006. And now the worst NOTD teams from 2007.


While all 13 of these teams were unlucky, some did experience success. Kentucky, East Carolina, and Florida Atlantic all won bowl games despite very low NOTD net ratings. I wholeheartedly guarantee a few of these teams will be pleasant surprises in college football next season when their luck improves. East Carolina is a pretty good sleeper pick to win Conference USA and further down the league standings, don't be surprised if SMU flirts with bowl-eligibility after a 1-11 season. If Pitt gets some consistent quarterback play, they could be a contender in the Big East. Ditto for Temple in the MAC and Wyoming in the Mountain West. Also take a flyer on North Texas in the ever-improving Sun Belt. Last season, 5 of the 9 teams with an NOTD rating of -4 or worse improved substantially. If a similar ratio holds true this season, 6 or 7 of these squads could see big time improvement.

Bowl Appetit

BCS National Championship Game
LSU -4 Ohio State

Warning: This preview may contain healthy doses of sarcasm.

SEC speed versus Big 10 bulk. Surely the plodding Buckeyes, who run like they have pianos strapped to their backs, are no match for the fleet-footed gazelles from Baton Rouge. LSU has steamrolled through their competition this season, winning all of their games, except that one against Kentucky and that other one against Arkansas. Kentucky and Arkansas are in the SEC though, so those two losses are excusable. In the SEC you have to gear up to play every week. Meanwhile, the Suckeyes, enter the BCS Championship game with a big asterisk in the form of a home loss to Illinois. I mean LSU would never lose at home. In the weak and slow Big 10, the Buckeyes beat only 6 teams who were bowl-eligible. The mighty Tigers beat 7. Even Les Miles knows that 7 is more than 6. Edge Tigers.

Knows 7 > 6

After beginning the season 5-0, with a point differential of 167 (33.4 per game), the Tigers have won 6 of their last 8, but their point differential is only 81 (10.1 per game). In the first 5 games, the Tigers outgained their opponents by an average of 266 yards per game. In their past 8 games, they gave outgained their opponents by 101 yards per game. Were the Tigers playing over their heads in the first 5 games? Hardly. It's clear LSU has been bored by their lack of competition over the 2nd half of the season, even in the rugged SEC, sleepwalking through their last 8 games. With a title on the line, they will be pumped and ready to play.

What about the coaching matchup? Jim Tressel has had some success...at the IAA level. Sure he won 4 national titles at Youngstown State, but I defy you to name one IAA coach who experienced success upon moving up to the play with the big boys. All Tressel has done at Ohio State is beat an overrated Miami team to claim the 2002 National Championship. But it took him overtime to do it, and as any LSU fan knows, OT losses do not count. Plus, Miami and Ohio State were only in that game because they play in JV conferences. Vanderbilt would have had an even chance of beating both those teams on a neutral field. The SEC rules! Les Miles on the other hand just won his first of many SEC titles in only his third season at the school. Sure he probably had the most talent in the SEC in both 2005 and 2006, but the league is just too rugged and tough to penalize him for that. Some Miles is not the best strategist, but those people don't understand the emotion of football. Give me a fiery coach who throws caution to the win and goes for it on 4th down and throws passes into the end zone as time expires over some sweater-vest wearing pansy.

Wears faggy sweater-vests

In summation, Ohio State has no chance in this game. The SEC is just too fast and its teams are too battle-hardened by having to play hard every week. Take your mortgage payment/rent money/petty cash/change in your coach and put in on LSU. Geux Tigers!

The Pick: Ohio State will cover the 4 point spread.

Bowl Appetit

GMAC Bowl
Tulsa -5 Bowling Green

The penultimate bowl game of the season could also end up being one of the most entertaining. While neither of these teams should end the season within spitting distance of the top 10, they do boast their respective charms.

From 1992-2002, a span of 11 seasons, the Tulsa football team won 34 games, lost 88, and tied 1 for a winning percentage of .280. From 2003-2007, a span of 5 seasons, first under Steve Kragthorpe (4 years), and continuing under first-year head coach Todd Graham, the Golden Hurricanes have won 38 games and lost 26 for a winning percentage of .594. In the course of half a decade, Tulsa has gone from one of the worst programs in Division I to one of the best mid-majors. The Hurricanes were certainly led by their hurry up offensive attack this season. The offense, led by senior quarterback Paul Smith, averaged nearly 543 yards per game (tops in the nation). Smith averaged 9.5 yards per pass (2nd in the nation among qualifying quarterbacks), threw 42 touchdown passes (2nd in the nation), and boasted a quarterback rating of 160.29 (7th in the nation). The Golden Hurricanes have a pair of 1000-yard receivers in Trae Johnson (1039) and Brennan Marion (1244). Marrion is a big play waiting to happen. He averages over 30 yards per reception (31.9)!

Tulsa does struggle defensively though. They gave up an average of 469 yards per game (111th in the nation). They were equally bad at stopping the run (allowed 4.61 yards per rush--91st in the nation) and the pass (allowed 7.7 yards per pass--98th in the nation). Tulsa held their opponents under 30 points only 4 times in 13 games. They allowed at least 40 points in almost half (6) of their games.

Bowling Green has been pretty successful in the new decade too. First under Urban Meyer (coach from 2001-2002) and since then under Gregg Brandon, the Falcons have won 55 games and lost only 29. In those 7 seasons, the Falcons have had 6 winning seasons, played in 2 bowl games (soon to be a 3rd on Sunday), and averaged more than 30 points per game 6 times. The Falcons can best be described as a diet version of Tulsa. Their offense is not as prolific (417 yards per game--43rd in the nation) nor as porous on defense (413 yards allowed per game--79th in the nation). After a 4-4 start, the Falcons have reeled off 4 straight wins to become bowl-eligible. However, neither of those 4 victims finished with a winning record (Akron, Eastern Michigan, Buffalo, and Toledo finished with a combined record of 18-30).

After 4 straight no-frills NFL playoff games, take some time to enjoy what should be a very high-scoring game. Both teams will move the ball up and down the field, but Tulsa should be able to outscore the Falcons.

The Pick: Tulsa will cover the 5 point spread.

Bowl Appetit

International Bowl
Rutgers -11 Ball State

Here's a fun little trivia question to try on your friends before this game: Which team, Rutgers or Ball State, has more bowl appearances? The answer: Neither. This is the 4th bowl appearance for both teams, and the 3rd in a row for Rutgers. If Rutgers is properly motivated, this game should not be very competitive, but it is still worth a look to see one of the best quarterbacks you've never heard of, Nate Davis of Ball State.

After a freshman year in which he tossed 18 touchdown passes and just 8 interceptions while compiling a quarterback rating of 146.65, Nate Davis maintained the status quo, throwing for more touchdowns (27), fewer interceptions (6) and a nearly identical quarterback rating (141.18). Plus after totalling negative yardage on the ground in 2006 (-48) and no touchdowns, Davis rushed for 197 yards and 5 touchdowns. His great play helped the Cardinals average 432 yards per game (30th in the nation). But, the Cardinals finished only 7-5 (5-2 in the MAC) thanks to their defense, or lack thereof. The Cardinals gave up 419 yards per game (87th in the nation), and if not for the the offensive unit's stinginess with the football (only 10 turnovers all season--tops in the nation), the defense would have looked much worse on the scoreboard (allowed 26.3 points per game--56th in the nation).

The Rutgers Scarlet Knights followed up their Cinderella performance with a mediocre year, but at 7-5, are much better than most Scarlet Knight incarnations. In fact, statistically, the Knights are much better than their 7-5 record. Even when we remove the stats from their joke of a non-conference schedule (Navy and Maryland were the only teams they played with a pulse), they still have the 3rd best yardage differential in the Big East (behind only West Virginia and South Florida). What happened to the Scarlet Knights between 2006 and 2007? Our old pal regression is mostly responsible for the decline in wins. In 2006, the Knights lived a pretty charmed life. They were 3-1 in one-score games, including a season-opening 21-16 victory against a very bad North Carolina team (3-9 record). In 2007, they were 2-2 in one-score games. That's not a terrible winning percentage, but it does represent a decline from 2006. However, the main area where the Knights suffered an ill-fated regression to the mean was in turnover margin. In 2006, the Knights had a turnover margin of +11, thanks mainly to the fact that they recovered 2/3rds of their opponents' fumbles (an area of luck, not skill). In 2007, their turnover margin was -6, thanks mainly to the fact that they lost 12 of their 14 fumbles on the season (again, luck, not skill).

Against teams from outside the BCS conferences in 2007, Rutgers beat Buffalo by 35, Navy by 17, Norfolk State by 59, and Army by 35. Ball State held up pretty well against BCS competition, losing by a single point to Nebraska (albeit a bad Nebraska team), by 11 to Illinois, and by 18 to Indiana (both bowl squads). Still, if Rutgers is motivated, Ray Rice and Co. should slash through the Ball State defense and make this a laugher by the middle of the 3rd quarter.

The Pick: Rutgers will cover the 11 point spread.

Bowl Appetit

Orange Bowl
Virginia Tech -3.5 Kansas

The Mangenius and Kansas have the stage to themselves on Thursday night when they take on the Hokies of Virginia Tech. Critics can poo-poo the Jayhawks soft schedule all they want, but this fact remains--the Jayhawks have dominated it. They have outgained their opponents by over 2000 yards on the season and outscored them by 340. The Jayhawks are not like Hawaii, who struggled against soft competition and got exposed in the Sugar Bowl. And the Hokies are not like the Bulldogs. The Hokies are a fine team certainly, but they are not a championship contender as they may fancy themselves.

In the Jayhawks only loss this season, they faced a dynamic spread offense (Missouri) that they could not stop. They allowed 519 yards to the Tigers and yet they lost by only 8 points because they were able to eventually get their offense going against a solid defense (ask Arkansas how good it was). The Virginia Tech Hokies do not boast a dynamic offense. In fact, their offense is poor. They rank 99th in the nation in yards per game (332 per contest). The Hokies won 5 games this season when they gained 300 or fewer yards thanks to their outstanding defense and special teams. The Hokies brought two punts back for touchdowns and rank 7th in the nation in punt return average (14.35 yards per return). Kansas will not be able to move the ball efficiently against Virginia Tech, but the Hokies will find it tough going against the Jayhawks as well. In what should be a low-scoring affair, Kansas will pull off the upset.

The Pick: Kansas will cover the 3.5 point spread.

Bowl Appetit

Fiesta Bowl
Oklahoma -8 West Virginia

Can West Virginia, jilted by its head coach for a program with better history and infrastructure, at least make this BCS game competitive? The first two BCS games of the New Year were total gag-fests. This one has all the trimmings as well.

Both these teams have looked like world beaters at times. Oklahoma was poised to play for the national title until a late season loss at Texas Tech, and West Virginia looked ready to do the same until a home no-show against Pitt. Both these teams boast impressive yardage differentials. Oklahoma outgained their opponents by 1654 yards on the season (a shade more than 127 per game). West Virginia outgained their opponents by 1903 yards in one fewer game (158 per game). However, most of Oklahoma's alleged dominance occurred in 2 games--against North Texas and Utah State. If we remove those yardage margins where the Sooners outgained severely undermanned teams 1285-400, their yardage differential drops to 769 over 11 games (70 per game). In fact, if we only look at Big 12 conference games, their yardage differential is only 342 yards (38 per game). West Virginia did not play any cupcakes the likes of North Texas and Utah State. The worst teams they beat were Marshall, Western Michigan, and conference brethren Syracuse. If we remove their two most non-conference performances (Western Michigan and East Carolina) where they outgained their opponents by a yardage count of 1141-437, their yardage differential is still an impressive 1199 in 10 games (120 per game). In fact, in 7 Big East games, West Virginia outgained their opponents on average by 109 yards per game. West Virginia will probably lose as teams with interim coaches have yet to notch a victory this bowl season, but this one will be very close.

The Pick: West Virginia will cover the 8 point spread.