One Yard, One Thousand Questions: How the Play that Changed the Super Bowl is Misunderstood

It was like being down five with less than 30 seconds remaining in a clinching game of the NBA Finals.  Or, being down the your final half inning and down 3-0 in the American League Championship Series.  It is over.  Get on the bus, it is over.  The remaining few moments are just torturous.  Unless some crazy Buffalo Wild Wings intervention took place, you need to just watch the other team do confetti angels and make laps around the stadium.

But, sometimes after you exited the arena, the Miami Heat nail two three-pointers in the shadow of the O’Brien Trophy.  Sometimes, a pinch runner swipes a base against the best reliever of all time and the Boston Red Sox come back from the dead and win the ALCS 4-3.  Sometimes, the impossible happens.

So, here we were; Super Bowl XLIX.  A Super Bowl that may go down as the greatest of the 49 ever played.  It had it all — a virtual toss-up matchup; Tom Brady versus the NFL’s best defense; pre-game storylines [“deflate-gate”; Silent Marshawn; nut grabs; a budding dynasty versus a previous dynasty]; and the game itself was entertaining.  Even the Halftime Show was noteworthy, if only for the psychedelic singing trees and dancing sharks.  The commercials could have been more entertaining, but it will go down as one of the most memorable championship games for any sport.

And yet, the entire game is being encapsulated in one play…one impossible play that prior to that moment, many were believing that it was virtually over.  Dan Patrick was going to have to give away a Chevrolet truck in Seahawk blue…or green.  Or, whatever.  The question that was being developed centered on Brady and if he could lead the Patriots downfield, if he was even given that chance at all.  The narrative that was emerging was that the Pats once again fell to team that benefited from an impossibilities.

But, the impossibilities were not over, as on 2nd and goal from the one-yard line, Seattle and Offensive Coordinator Darrell Bevell opted to throw the ball rather hand the ball off to Marshawn Lynch and let him bring “that New Jack City, boy!”  According to post-game comments, the play was based on the defensive package that the New England Patriots had on the field.  But when you have a running back known as “Beast Mode” and often seen casting off defenders like a bad case of fleas, to not run is crazy.  And, that Malcolm Butler stepped up and intercepted the ball is something that should have never happened.

Because of these things, that impossibility turned what seemed to be another Patriots loss into a miraculous Super Bowl victory.  And, it brought forth a blitzkrieg of criticism for the play call there.  However, such criticism ignores the realities of the play, of the entirety of the game, and of football as a whole.

The Play

The Play; and the moment that Butler broke on the play.

The Play; and the moment that Butler broke on the play.

First, the play itself is less about Bevell’s play call, Russell Wilson’s throw, or Ricardo Lockette’s [lack of] effort and more about the play and effort of Butler.  Go watch the play again and give credit to Butler.  Yes, some have noted the play Butler made, but when they do it they typically do it when chastising the offensive play call.  But, Butler knew what was coming.  Jermaine Kearse jams/picks Pats DB Brandon Browner.  Browner even knew it was coming as he reach out to make contact first as soon as the ball was snapped.  Butler knew; he jumped the route as soon as he saw that pick.  He takes off to the spot even before Wilson squares his shoulders to throw.  By the time Wilson gets ready to cock back and throw, Lockette and Butler are approximately equidistant from where the ball ended up; Butler made a hell of an effort to get there and make the play.

Ignore the play call.  We can second-guess that all day.  Fact is that if Butler does not make that play, then Lockette scores.  If Butler did not feel the play and jump the pass, Seattle likely takes the lead [assuming Lockette did not somehow drop it].  The play was called and thus what played out is what it is…Butler stepped up when he needed to.  Yes, Lynch would have been the better play call, but that was not the played call so we should not — nay, CANNOT — play the what if game.  What if they give it to Lynch and he’s stuffed or loses two yards or fumbles?  What if I’m taking a shower and I slip on a bar of soap?

We’ve discussed before the celebration of gutsy calls, at least when it works.  The thing is, what if Butler did not make the play?  I know that I just stated to not play the What-If game, but if people want to do that, then what if Seattle scored with the play that was called?  Wilson would be clutch; Bevell and [more audiably] Pete Carroll would be praised.  This happens all of the time.  When “controversial” plays like this fail, the Blame Game begins.  But when those plays hit, the acclaim never stops.

We don’t have to look far to see proof of that — six seconds to go in the first half, to be exact.  Less than two hours earlier, Wilson and the Seahawks gambled by running a play rather than kicking a field goal.  The field goal would have been virtually automatic and made it a 14-10 Patriots lead.  But, a touchdown?  With the Seahawks getting the ball to start the second half??  It was too tempting.  So, Seattle went for it and Wilson threw a quick strike to Chris Matthews for the game-tying touchdown.  While the risk was noted, the onions of Seattle could not be talked about enough.  Now, imagine that the play was picked off.  That’s what happened at the end of the game and we see the results.  That’s how quickly glory can turn into gore.

One final point.  Analyst Chris Simms noted on the Jim Rome Show that throwing the ball was not a bad play call; but calling that play was bad.  It was a typical play that the Seahawks like to run down by the goal line, so it was definitely a play that the Patriots were prepared to defend.  It is why Butler had his vision of making a play.  Think about the “Statue of Liberty” play that Boise State ran against Oklahoma in the 2007 Fiesta Bowl.  It was set-up so well because the Broncos ran a similar two-point conversion play, but where Jared Zabransky threw the ball instead of the behind-the-back handoff.  Oklahoma expected a similar play, and Boise State fooled them.  ANYTHING but ordinary and Seattle likely scores.  By playing tendencies, the Patriots got the best of the Seahawks.

The Game

But, the game was not decided just there.  Yes, it ultimately decided the game, but the game is 60 minutes and there were numerous plays that got us to that point in the game.  There were three big plays after the two-minute warning, all involving Butler including the interception.  There was the deep ball down field to Kearse that Butler went up and batted away.  There was then the acrobatic catch by Kearse.  Kearse made the catch on his back and then proceeded to get up.  Butler kept playing; he did not hear a whistle.  Had Butler not made a play and knocked Kearse out of bounds, the slant of doom would have never occurred.

But there were other moments in the game that are worth discussing.  What about Seattle running the ball just four times for ten yards after taking a ten-point lead [and prior to New England taking the lead]?  They had two three-and-outs and another drive of only four plays.  Some of those incomplete passes hit and we are not discussing it.  But, throwing on first down when you have Lynch, who averaged 4.6 per carry up until Seattle took a 24-14 lead, is crazy.

What about the errors made by Tom Brady?  Had the Seahawks scored — whether on the slant to Lockette or with a hypothetical Lynch run — Brady would have been questioned about the poor passes, especially the first interception to Jeremy Lane.  He would have been the goat rather being proclaimed the GOAT.

And, of course, what about Carroll’s decision to go for it with six seconds to go in the first half?  Remember Super Bowl XLIII?  First and goal at the one [hmm…] with under 20 seconds to go in the first half [hmm!!!] and Kurt Warner throws an interception that is returned 100 yards for a touchdown!  Any number of things could have happened there, but instead the Seahawks tied it up.

All of these mattered.  Heck even the lesser running-into-the-kicker penalty when it should have been roughing changed the trajectory of the game.  Even the possibility that Patriots wideout Julian Edelman was concussed yet played on changed the trajectory.  Hell, Brady drawing the Seahawks offsides to get them off of the one-inch line changed the trajectory.

Every play changed the direction of the game.  Football is not linear in that it does not just go from 15:00 to 0:00.  It weaves its way around like a “Choose Your Adventure” book.  Every decision has repercussions and every repercussion leads to new decisions.  And in the end, it is up to the players to do what they will with the situation at hand, even if the play called in is one that is second-guessed after the fact.

Thus, instead of wasting time questioning the play call, let us celebrate the plays made on the field in the situations that presented themselves.  Let’s give props to Malcolm Butler credit rather than wondering if Ricardo Lockette could have tried harder.  And let’s examine the game in its entirety and appreciate what will go down as one of the greatest Super Bowls of all time…

…sad Nationwide commercials included.


Creating Their Own Controversy: How the College Football Playoff Messed Up

The teams are not yet announced.  And yet, the College Football Playoff [sic] has already messed up.

Moving from two teams to four teams was the right move.  Don’t get me wrong.  I have not felt compelled to watch as much college football this year as i have in years past…and i LOVE college football.  The notion that a playoff of any kind would make the regular season matter less and turn people away is absurd.  In most years, Baylor would not even be up for discussion.  Maybe a few disgruntled Bears fans, but the BCS would be about Florida State and either Alabama or Oregon.  And, despite the fact that people would not like it, everyone knows those would be the three teams in discussion.

But, with four spots open, games became more intriguing.  Seriously, how fun was it to watch everything unfold since Friday night [despite the blowouts]?  As stated before, games matter.  Previously, yes games matter but when those games occurred mattered more.  Results in November — win or loss — carried a lot  more weight under the BCS system than results in September.  Why?  Because the BCS took the polls at face value, and the polls were based on the previous week’s results rather than a culmination of the season to that point.  It was severely flawed.

But the College Football Playoff figured it out.  They stated that they were going to re-rank teams every week.  It is what many wanted, even if they did not realize it.  This way, every game matter including the previous week’s results; including Thursday nighters in September.  And hopefully when the Committee emerges, they stick to that and do not allow yesterday’s results tip the iceberg too much.

Yes, Ohio State’s win was impressive; perhaps one of the most impressive of the year.  But what about the fact that they faced six defenses that ranked 90th or worse and six offenses that were 100th or worse?  And that Virginia Tech loss?  Horrible.

Or that Oregon, despite having to battle against some high-powered offenses, also face the 104th [twice], 113th, and 124th ranked defenses?

Or that Alabama is ranked 60th in pass defense despite not facing many prolific passing attacks?  And, they can’t seem to cover the long ball!

Or the entire Baylor-TCU debate, where both faced mediocre defenses and though the Bears beat TCU, in comparison the Bears loss to West Virginia was worse than the Horned Frogs’ loss at Baylor.

Hopefully all of that is taken into consideration.  But one thing that the CFP never really considered…

Power Five.

Four Slots.

The entire purpose was to move away from the controversy of leaving deserving teams out.  And yet, the system set up to replace the detested BCS simply multiplied that controversy in its inherent structure.

Forget the fact that there is no set criteria like in the other real playoffs in the NCAA, where conference champs get automatic bids.  That there are five conferences that are being considered for four spots means that even if we take the conference champs only, one conference is going to be left out.

Hell, since the Big XII decided to change its own rules, it is possible that if Ohio State gets in then TWO conference champions will be left out!  Actually, because of the co-champion, two champs are likely to be left out anyway.

Now, we can pile on here that it is possible for non-champs to get in meaning that it is conceivable that three conference champions are left out!  Think about that.

It is crazy to consider that we moved from the BCS to get away controversy only to have controversy follow us like a lost puppy.  It is crazier to think that whatever decision is made is going to be more controversial because of the fact that more teams are being affected and “left out.”  Again, in the BCS era, we are typically only talking about three teams at most.

This year?  Yes, it appears three are safely in.  But really, we could even debate the merits of Alabama, Oregon, and yes even Florida State.  Add to that Baylor, Ohio State, and TCU and we are left an exponentially greater controversy because the net of debate is cast wider.

The CFP is a step in the right direction and one that many anti-BCS’ers have been pining for — at least an And-One system.  But, by not have a set of criteria to go by and by inventing the Power 5 conferences to compete for only four spots, we are left with more controversy.

Imagine that…a world where the BCS is actually less controversial.

Schoffel of Shit: The Continuous Victim Playing by Florida State

Victim playing is the attempt to self-victimizing in order to bring pity and sympathy onto the manipulator.  Perhaps more than any other season, we are seeing an increase in victim playing in the FBS tier of college football.  And no other team self-victimizes more than the Florida State Seminoles.

After the made-for-TV announcement of this week’s College Football Playoff [sic] rankings, many across the country were surprised to see Florida State ranked fourth.  Even those who criticized the Seminoles and their lackluster play all season were taken aback by the positioning.  How can an undefeated team be behind three one-loss teams and be in danger of not making the pseudo-playoffs?

This position only increased the screaming of victimization.  Ira Schoffel, a longstanding writer on the Seminoles beat and now with the website, quickly penned an article taking the entire victim playing scheme to a whole new level.  It has now moved into full-blown politicization and lobbying territory.  Some quick highlights from the article.

  • The ratings are corrupt and absurd.  It is a “Runaway Committee.”
  • Struggling to win games is not a measure of a team.  A win is a win and tFSU is undefeated…so…
  • Other sports do not take into account performance.
  • Because there is a “Power 5” alliance, it should matter.
  • The BCS would have had the Seminoles second, but that’s bullshit, too.
  • Because of parity, it is fair to look at more than just win/loss record, even though looking at a team’s struggles is not relevant.
  • Recent history has never had an undefeated team “from a power conference” lower than number one when “every other team has a loss.”  All key terms.
  • Oh, and he is not into conspiracy theories.

Did I miss anything?  So, essentially, everyone is out to get the Seminoles because there is a Runaway Committee that should not just look at wins and losses but should ignore how a team “controls” games because other sports don’t do it and that “Power 5” [and thus conference perception] should matter and that just because recent history has not done it then it should not start now.  Oh, and it is not a conspiracy theory.

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.  Or, it is all becoming figure skating.

Let me first hit the Jimbo Fisher comment about figure skating.  College sports, especially college football, has long been akin to figure skating…only more radical.  And by radical, i do not mean awesome.  It has all been a show; who looks better.  Yes, records matter, but to some extent — at some point — they don’t.  Since Schoffel likes obscure examples, allow me to use one to explain context.

China and football???  Together!?!?

China and football??? Together!?!?

China has a gross domestic product of just over $13 trillion.  Compare that to Liechtenstein, which has a GDP of $3.2 billion.  Now, you’re probably thinking three things.  First, where the hell is Liechtenstein!?  Second, holy crap China’s economy is huge!!!  Third, what does this have to do with Florida State?  Well, Liechtenstein is a tiny country in Europe, yes China’s economy is huge, and it is all about context.  China’s “wins” are huge, but when you break it down you’ll see that the per capita income for Chinese is $9,800; 121st in the world.  Our Liechtensteiner friends take home on average $89,400!!!  Number two in the world!  Context matters.

Maybe China v. Liechtenstein loses some of you; like tFSU v. Mount Union.  Perhaps Germany v. United States would be a better comparison.  Two economies of large size both in similar regions…or “conferences.”  Or hell, we can keep China with all of their “wins” and compare it to a U.S. that despite a few recent losses is still strong.  Even though China is poised to overtake the U.S. according to one measure [purchasing power parity], plenty of other measures still hold the U.S. as stronger.  In fact, there are a few countries — Germany and Japan in addition to China — that are referenced as being stronger than China based on per capita income.  Hmm, three countries ahead of China.  Interesting.

Anyway, back to football.  The “figure skating” comparison has always existed because we have needed to differentiate between teams since not every team plays each other.  It is why Marshall was not even close to being considered for the Top Four.  Performance matters.  Perhaps the better analogy is diving, where performance AND degree of difficulty matter.  But nevertheless, performance has always matter.  Why should it be any different now?

Not All Records Are Created Equal

Now, moving on…Schoffel’s article.  The argument, of course, is that Florida State is the only undefeated team is THAT ALONE should be reason enough to place them at number one, or at worst number two.  This is an easy argument to make since the Seminoles are the only undefeated team in the country.  However, before last week’s “basketball game,” the Marshall Thundering Herd were also undefeated.  Yet, Marshall was ranked 24th going into that shootout with Western Kentucky.  Why?  Context.  In this case, it was the quality of opponents that kept Marshall out.  All of the talk from tFSU about being “the only team to finish every game” was false; they would later add on the “from the Power conferences” to better qualify it.  But still, it was a measure of context.  Marshall was not only behind one-loss teams, but also behind two- and three-loss teams.

Here is what Seminole fans don’t want to discuss.  Marshall was 24th!  Now, if you want to argue that the ACC and C-USA are completely different conferences, that is fine.  But you are bringing in perception — you are bringing in “figure skating.”  Sorry, “diving.”  Marshall finished their games; they beat the teams they were supposed to, just like Florida State.  Yet, the Seminoles were third. If winning matters, then the Thundering Herd could be second behind number one Florida State.  But it is not all that matters…hence 24th versus [at the time] third.

Now, what about that perception.  The perception is that Marshall plays a weaker schedule so of course they won.  But, they were not just winning; they were DOMINATING.  With the exception of the UAB game [RIP], Marshall won every game by an average of 31.2 points.  Think about that…yes, they faced weak competition but they were winning as a team would against weak competition!  Now, if we are going to ignore Florida State’s struggles because we shouldn’t worry about how teams control games, should the same not apply to Marshall?  Or, if we are to look at tFSU and say they struggled but against good competition you will struggle but still win; then why not say that Marshall beat the weak teams because that what happens?

Now, of course Marshall lost and the comparison is moot.  And I am by no means saying Marshall and Florida State are the same.  But, given that Marshall was relegated to an afterthought based on perception, why can the same not apply to Florida State?  Why was Marshall undefeated and behind one-, two-, and three-loss teams and very little was said about it, but moving tFSU behind a one-loss team is a conspiracy?

The Power Five Argument

Perception!  And that perception extends to the concept of the “Power 5 Conferences.”  This entire notion of a Power 5 is a self-fulfilling assignment where by saying that these are the “Power 5” we simply assume that these are far and away the best teams.  They are the Power 5 so we assume they are the Power 5 and thus top high school recruits will go to those schools to assist in maintaining the Power 5 mirage.  And fans are led to believe this and thus non-P5 schools play an inferior brand of football.

The Power 5 argument was employed by Schoffel as a way to separate the top programs.  However, he believes that this “Runaway Committee” is ignoring the Power 5, which were created “for a reason.”  No, they are not ignoring it.  The problem is that there are five conferences with vastly differently levels of competition.  This is not an ACC sucks; SEC is better argument.  But, to assume that all Power 5 conferences are the same is erroneous.

The Power 5 argument only works when separating out now one-loss Marshall from one-loss Alabama or Oregon.  But you have to go back to context and when comparing teams how you finish games is just as important as the fact that you “finished” the game [by the way, every team “finishes”…some finish better than others].  Now, I do believe that too much is made of Florida State’s struggles.  But, that is still relevant when comparing them to the other teams competing for the Top Four.  Just like how Marshall was perceived as being behind 23 other teams, it is fair to judge the Seminoles based on their performance.  This is not a question of quality of opponent; it is the struggle.  If we were examining last year’s Florida State team, there would be absolutely no question that they would be number one.  That team dominated every team it faced in the regular season and its position was clear.  This team?  Not so much.

The Committee is not ignoring it.  If anything, it is saving the Seminoles because if Florida State was not in the “Power 5” they might not even be ranked despite an unblemished mark.

The CFP and Other Sports

Finally, let’s look at Schoffel’s crazy analogies to other sports.  I’ll let Schoffel speak for himself.  In assuming it is “crazy” to punish a team based on performance and thus placing an undefeated “Power 5” team behind three one-loss teams, he notes the following:

In tennis, Rafael Nadal doesn’t forfeit his spot in the finals of a tournament if he needs five sets to win every early round match. In boxing, Floyd Mayweather doesn’t lose his title if he’s behind on the scorecard but delivers a 12th-round knockout.

In college basketball, teams are selected for the NCAA Tournament based on who they’ve played, where they’ve played them and whether they’ve won or lost … not whether they controlled the games.

In the NFL, playoff seedings are decided entirely by win-loss records. Same with MLB, the NBA and NHL.

Okay, first we need to kick out professional team sports.  These sports do use win-loss records, but do so that also benefits division winners.  It is what a shitty NFC South team is going to make the playoff.  It is also why in the NBA, for example, the Boston Celtics hosted the Atlanta Hawks in 2012 despite the Hawks having a better record.  It is also why, this past NBA season, a sub-.500 Hawks team got into the playoffs in the Eastern Conference while the 48-34 Phoenix Suns stayed at home.  Professional sports operate differently and records matter to a certain extent.

Yeah...this entire article is probably a stretch.

Yeah…this entire article is probably a stretch.

Now…tennis?  The comparison is not the same.  Nadal is in a tournament with guidelines that specify that the winner advances.  There exist a structured understanding that the winner advances.  Now, a better comparison would have been performance in a tournament affecting rankings.  Well, in fact, that does as well.  Novak Djokovic is number one followed by Roger Federer.  Djokovic has more tournament wins and a better match record than Federer so that makes sense.  However, the difference between 3, 4, and 5 is interesting.

Raphael Nadal is third with four tourney wins and a match win percentage of 81.3 percent.  Fourth is Stan Wawrinka with three tourneys and a win percentage of 69.6 percent.  So that ordering makes sense.  But then comes Kei Nishikori at five.  He has the same number of tourney wins as Nadal [in three more tournaments] and a better match win percentage than Wawrinka.  Yet, he is fifth.  Why?  Tournament performance [and in which tournaments].  Despite the same number of wins as Nadal and a better win percentage than Wawrinka, the Japanese tennis star is ranked behind both…by quite a lot.  So, even using the tennis example does not fit.

What about boxing?  Again, doesn’t fit.  A knockout signals victory.  At that point, losing every round does not matter.  The performance will matter if there is no knockout victory.  But, until that time, performance does matter.  That twelfth round is not until 12 January.  Besides, rankings in boxing are ALL about perception and how fighters perform in the ring.  That, and getting the matchup that promoters want.  Maybe that is what Schoffel meant by bringing up boxing.

And then there is college basketball.  Of all sports, this was the wrong one for Schoffel to bring up because it fits so well.  To assume that the NCAA tournament selection committee does not take into account performance undermines Schoffel’s credibility.  The thing is, I am sure that he is better than that.  He’s been writing about Seminole athletics — not just football — for quite some time.  He is correct that for college basketball it matters who they play, where they play, and the outcome.  But “control” of the game — performance — matters.  Beating Chaminade by three is not the same as beating them by twenty-three.

And, look at how seeding is done.  Last year, the four number one seeds went to teams ranked first, second, fourth and fifth [according to the Coaches’ Poll; AP poll was top four teams].  One of those teams — Arizona — did not even win its conference tournament.  That third ranked team was Louisville, a team ranked fifth in the AP poll.  Any idea what their seed was?  Second?  Nope.  Try fourth!  Iowa State, which won the Big XII tournament and finished ranked ahead of Kansas, was seeded below the Jayhawks!!  The Cyclones even had two more wins [and two fewer losses] than Kansas.  This happens every year.  I mean, let us not forget in 2006 when 11th ranked George Washington with one loss [coming in their conference tournament] was seeded eighth!  EIGHTH!!!

College basketball seeds based on perception, rankings be damned!  Yes, record matters.  But so does a host of other factors.  It is why Michigan was seeded ahead of Duke despite a worse record [percentage wise] or Baylor ahead of Oregon despite having more losses.

The New Reality of College Football…And How to Fix It

Schoffel quotes Mark Schlabach who notes that “we celebrated Notre Dame’s close wins in 2012.”  Well, that is part of the problem.  We assumed that simply because Notre Dame was undefeated that we should ignore how they were undefeated.  This is not to say that 2014 Florida State is 2012 Notre Dame; I think the Seminoles are a good team and much better than that 2012 Irish team.  But Schlaback, and by extension Schoffel, believes that we should continue with the old ways and apply those today rather than facing the reality that birthed with this new system.

The greatest problem is not that Schoffel is critiquing the new system.  There are still flaws that need to be addressed, namely criteria.  But, Florida State being ranked behind one-loss teams is actually not one of those flaws.  It is actually a move in the right direction.  In the FCS, still the real playoffs for Division I, teams are seeded based on a number of factors, including win-loss record but also perceptional variables.  It is why North Dakota State is seeded higher than Jacksonville State despite both having one loss and the Gamecocks’ lone loss coming against an FBS team [Michigan State].

Being able to parse out team performances is something that is a welcomed change to a system that long had question marks about how decisions were made.  We have covered here ad nauseum the illogical nature of polls.  This committee is the new reality of college football.  For years we as college football fans bitched about how the pollsters do not take things into context while the computers never made sense.  Now, the committee is putting things into context, much like college basketball.

Consider the discussion surrounding Ohio State.  The unfortunate injury to J.T. Barrett has an effect on the decision makers on the Committee.  I like that.  I think in the end that the loss to Virginia Tech should keep the Buckeyes out, but I like that when discussing their merits there is some reservation in putting them in the Top Four.  That makes sense and is something very few [if any] of the pollsters realistic pondered.  Furthermore, consider the Baylor-TCU debate.  That game is being placed in context.  A collapse by the Horned Frogs on the road was a big win for Baylor.  However, Baylor lost to a lesser team.  While head-to-head should not be ignored, I like that we are examining it in greater context and other factors.  Hell, UConn beat Central Florida.  Do people really think that the Huskies are better than UCF?

Plus, also consider that the committee releases its seeding every week.  This is something that the basketball selection committee does not do.  If anything, THAT should be questioned more than the CFP selection committee.  With basketball, there is actually no clue until they magically appear from behind the current and say, “well, there ya go!”  Relatively speaking, this process is more transparent.

If anything, the one thing that needs to be fixed is the clarity on the criteria for making the playoffs.  In all other real playoffs, winning a division or conference gets you automatically into the playoffs, with some at-large/wild card bids sprinkled about.  The criteria for guaranteeing a spot is understood; the system and structure is set.  The CFP lacks that and is an area for correction.

The majority of Florida State fans are upset because of this new reality, one that does not care about preseason polls and what happened last year; one that looks at the games in context rather than just superficially.  As tFSU fans worry, they need to remember that for a few weeks, Alabama was on the outside looking in.  But, Alabama had not done enough in the minds of the committee; Alabama still had key games ahead.  And Alabama knew that if they took care of business, they would be in.  Being fourth for the Seminoles is a reflection of RIGHT NOW and should they beat Georgia Tech, then they would have taken care of business.

It’s time to stop playing the victim game.  This is the new reality and it is time everyone wakes up to it.

Strange Bedfellows: Why the SEC Needs Florida State

You could sense it.  Feel it.  Though there is no academic way to prove it, it is likely that approximately 90 percent of the college football nation was beginning to feel uneasy…sort of sickening.  Like realizing that Einhorn is a man!  They knew, probably after the 68-yard touchdown strike, that the game was not going to end up the way they were wishing…praying.  But, they knew…like Josh in Searching for Bobby Fischer.  They knew that Louisville had already lost…the Cards just didn’t know it yet.

Drowning in tears, the country saw the Florida State Seminoles win another game.  It is apparent, given the amount of support seen for Notre Dame and now Bobby Petrino’s team, that Florida State has replaced Alabama as the most reviled team in college football.  Yahoo! Sports columnist Dan Wetzel wrote an excellent piece on Coach Jimbo Fisher, and how while he is respected as a coach and a recruiter, Fisher’s handling of issues in Tallahassee have left his team marked as arguably the most hated team in the U.S.

Nowhere is this hatred more galvanized than in SEC country.  The hatred SEC fans harbor for Florida State likely began with the university shunning SEC overtures to join the conference in the early 1990s.  Many saw the Seminoles’ dominance to be a product of a weak conference, ironically similar to the run Boise State produced in the WAC.  This perception was even echoed when former coach Bobby Bowden opined that Florida State should remain in the ACC due to its “weakness.”  While the overtures then were mostly from the Big 12, Bowden’s notion that the Seminoles could win championships in the ACC because other conferences were “stronger” only reinforces the ACC stereotype.

Nevertheless, choosing to go to and remain in a perceived weaker conference creates a sour taste in the mouths of SEC fans.  After all, the SEC is God’s gift to the modern college football world.  Why the heck would any team NOT want to join the SEC?  This shunning allowed tFSU to dominate the ACC and have a clearer track to potential championships.  Of course, this was always examined by SEC fans through the lens of the SEC.  What they saw was a talented Florida State team that was mostly buoyed by the weak competition in the ACC.  The accolades were “tarnished” in the eyes of SEC fan as the Seminoles earned them against inferior competition.

How happy SEC fan must have been when Florida State was struggling during the end of the Bowden era!  Florida State shut out at home to Wake Forest?  That had to make SEC fan grin from ear to ear.  All the while the SEC was beginning its reign of dominance, starting with the Seminoles’ bitter rival — the Florida Gators.  From the 2006 season until the 2013 season, the SEC dominated the BCS.  During this reign of terror, the SEC went 7-1 in the BCS Championship game.  That one loss?  Well, that occurred against another SEC foe when Alabama defeated LSU in a somewhat controversial rematch.  So, for SEC fans, that “loss” was not really a loss for the SEC since it came against another SEC team.  In the other six matchups, the SEC defeated the Big Ten (twice), the Big 12 (twice), the Pac 10, and even an Independent for good measure.

The only two “power” conferences that the SEC did not destroy were the ACC and Big East.  But those were weak conferences.  Who cares about those posers?  Yes, life was pretty swell for the SEC.

Then, a resurrection.  Jimbo Fisher took over in Tallahassee and since 2010 has gone 5-1 against SEC opponents.  The rise of the Seminoles was nearly complete in 2012 before Fisher suffered his only loss against an SEC foe — a 37-26 loss to the Florida Gators.  Still, the SEC was put on notice.  And, in 2013, the Seminoles stormed through the ACC on the way to the BCS Championship Game.  There was no doubting that tFSU was a talented team, but the old questions of the weak ACC reemerged.  And, while there was chatter that a battle between Alabama and Florida State would be lopsided, Auburn happened and changed the course of history.

Early in the BCS Game, it appeared that the perception that Florida State — and by extension the ACC — was no match for the SEC was going to prove true.  Auburn raced out to a lead.  But, the Seminoles withstood the flurry and came out victorious.  The mighty SEC struck out.

I see you hatin' over there, SEC fans.

I see you hatin’ over there, SEC fans.

Since the clock hit zero, SEC fans have been waiting for tFSU to get what’s coming to them — a loss to prove they are inferior.  Something needs to happen to the Seminoles for pulling the mask off of the SEC and exposing it.  They needed to pay.  And, for SEC fan, the only way for this to happen is for the Seminoles to falter; to lose.  While the rest of country might be pulling against the Seminoles because of the handling of the off of the field issues, the SEC Nation is dying to see Florida State lose to anyone.  It led to them supporting Clemson, only to after-the-fact call the Tigers overrated since they did not fulfill the deed.  It led to rooting for Notre Dame.  Imagining Alabama fans rooting for the Fighting Irish would make Bear Bryant weep into his Houndstooth hat.  And, then there was the backing of Bobby Petrino, who to some is the epitome of the sketchy football coach.

But, unfortunately for SEC fans, Florida State found a way.  And as the wins keep piling up, the anger in SEC fans burns brighter.  And they glance at the remaining schedule to see where Florida State could falter; what team could keep the Seminoles from making the pseudo-playoffs?  It is looking grim.  Colonel Reb is cryin’.

But why?  Why are SEC fans so desirous for the Seminoles to lose?  Well, the belief is rooted in the notion that the ACC is weak and therefore Florida State is weak.  We’ve touched on this before with Boise State and the WAC — a dominant team is a dominant team regardless of its conference affiliation.  But, there is something about the Seminoles beating the SEC that has them pissed off.  Losing to Ohio State or Oklahoma or Oregon?  Though SEC fans would not be happy, they could likely stomach those teams winning.  However,  for the ACC and Florida State to be the one to end the SEC’s dominance?  A team from a basketball conference?  What in the wide, wide world of sports is going on here?

Thus, for SEC fans, they need Florida State to lose.  You see, when the Seminoles lose, it will (re)balance the universe.  According to the SEC narrative, in order to return the SEC to its “rightful place” as the king of college football, the ACC and Florida State must be placed back into its inferior position.  But, until tFSU loses, the world is out of whack.  And the more Florida State wins, the more the knife twists.  Hence, the deep-rooted hatred for Florida State and the desire to see them lose.

However, it appears that SEC fans are missing the point.  Or, at least, approaching this situation the wrong way.  Florida State took what was the SEC’s — college football dominance.  The Seminoles beat an SEC team and took home the crown.  Now the Seminoles are rulers of the college football landscape.  If the Seminoles were to lose to an ACC team, it will NOT prove that the SEC is once again the dominant conference.  At best, it will “prove” how weak Florida State must be since they cannot beat a “weak” ACC team.  But, even then it is a stretch.  What it really does is muddy the water.  And, by no means does it reassert the SEC’s dominance.  If anything, it continues to signal its decline as the team that ended the reign is losing to ACC foes.  What does that make the SEC now?

The reality is that the SEC needs Florida State.  The SEC needs the Seminoles to make the College Football Playoff.  Sure, SEC fan would be satisfied with Florida taking out the Seminoles — a weak SEC team beating tFSU.  But, the better way for the SEC to reassert its dominance is to have its best beat the Seminoles.  Alabama?  Auburn?  Georgia?  Mississippi?  Mississippi State?  Does not matter.  It must be an SEC team that does it.  This is not a proxy war where others need to take out Florida State.  To paraphrase former President Lyndon Johnson, the SEC doesn’t need to send ACC teams to do what SEC teams ought to be doing for itself.  The SEC cannot even have the Seminoles lose in the “Playoff” to a team from another conference.  The SEC must do this and do it alone.

It certainly makes for strange bedfellows.  The SEC knows that they will have at least one team in the pseudo-playoff.  But they need to be hoping that Florida State makes it as well, rather than praying for the Seminoles to falter.  Because until an SEC conquers the Seminoles, Florida State will continue to parade around with the SEC’s manhood.

How Florida State and Mississippi State Prove the Uselessness of Polls

“We’re #1!”

That is what fan bases desire to say.  NAY!  They demand to say that their chosen team is #1.  The use of “we” incorporates a sense of how the accomplishment is shared by the fan base in addition to the team.  Being #1 speaks volumes to the superiority of your team over that of rivals and “lesser” teams and conferences.  Being #1 matters…it means something.  Hell, even if a team has no business claiming to be #1, we see fans of those team throwing up a single finger — a flash that claims to be the best.  Sorry, Vandy fans…beating UMass and Charleston Southern does NOT make you #1.

Naturally, in order to have a #1 we need to have a concept of what being #1 constitutes.  There must be some ordinal ranking that allows us to look and say, “ah yes, Steve…Southwest Wisconsin State Tech is indeed #1.”  So, we have polls.  Multiple polls to be exact.  And while there are multiple polls, generally the same team occupies the top slot.  Certainly other teams might state their claim to superiority.  But we obediently look to polls to justify team standings; to justify a team’s place in the hierarchy of football dominance.

But college (team) sports are one of the few sport leagues that utilize polls to determine its best team.  Most examine only records (or in the case of the NHL and various domestic soccer leagues a point system) to determine the best team.  Of course, there is a reason why this is unfeasible for college athletics, such as football.  Other than the NFL, every team in professional sports at least plays each other within their subdivision [conferences in NBA and NHL; leagues in MLB].  For professional basketball and hockey, every team plays all other teams at least once.  The smaller number of teams in professional leagues allow for better comparisons because of the way the scheduling works.

More importantly, there is greater balance between the various teams in professional sports versus college sports.  Yes, the Jacksonville Jaguars are terrible and the Dallas Cowboys are in the upper echelon [ugh, that pained me to write that].  But generally speaking, there is more competitive balance.  With college athletics, the difference between the haves and have-nots is clear.  And, it only seems to be getting worse.

Because of these two points, examining only records can be misleading.  It is why no one is taking undefeated Marshall as seriously as undefeated Florida State or Baylor.  Thus, polls are necessary to differentiate between the “quality” of teams.

But are polls truly necessary?  Or, to put it another way, have we moved beyond the usefulness (or utility, if you will) of polls?  I will make the case that polls are absolutely worthless in college basketball because the seeding of teams for the NCAA Men’s Basketball Tournament is not based on where teams are ranked.  I mean, remember that Connecticut was ranked 19th in the coaches’ poll, seeded 8th [which in reality is between 29th and 32nd], and after winning the title jumped to #1 in the coaches’ poll.  How ridiculous is that!  [Not saying the Huskies winning and being #1 is ridiculous, just the way the poll reflected that].  Thus, i think agreeing to do away with polls for college basketball would be accepted by some.  [I’ve made this argument before].

However, doing away with football polls?  Inconceivable!!!  But, i think that now is as good of a time as any.  And, i have harped on this point on numerous occasions [here, and here, too!].  So why now?  Well, it is not so much as to now being the “right time” inasmuch as there is a perfect example of the flaw of polls — the Florida State v. Mississippi State debate over which team should be #1.

Full disclosure: I privately told someone last week that i thought that Mississippi State was the best team in the SEC following its victory over Texas A&M.  It had little to do with the Aggies and more to do with the fact that in a season when the so-called top teams have underwhelmed, the Bulldogs have been consistent.  I also noted that if they beat Auburn, they should be number one.  So, i do have an opinion that Mississippi State should be the number one team over Florida State.  So yes, i have a position and i am making it known.

The Bulldogs versus Seminoles Debate

Now, that stated, i want to start with this article that came across my personal Facebook feed.  It attempts to kvetch about the media bias towards the SEC at the expense of the Seminoles.  It focuses on schedules, perceptions, and preseason polls.  In doing so, however, it overlooks key points while also undermining his own argument.  First, the author attempts to show that beating Texas A&M and Auburn did not amount to much for Mississippi State because neither of those teams have beaten anyone of note.  But that does not mean that these victories should be discredited any more than tFSU’s wins over Oklahoma State and Clemson should be.  You cannot claim that your team’s wins should matter while simultaneously dismissing another team’s victories.  Those wins over the Aggies and Tigers are quality wins AT THIS POINT IN TIME.

But here is where the argument falls apart.  The author complains about the Bulldogs’ “other” wins and how “difficult” it must have been.  After all, South Alabama and UAB are simply dyn-o-mite!  But then, conveniently ignores similar “weaknesses” on Florida State’s schedule, only noting that those were not struggles.  Typical fandom mentality that when your team does something it is okay, but when others do it DAMN THEM!!!!!!!!!!!  DAMN THEM ALL TO HELL!!!  Simply put, this is ignorance.

These aren't the only Bulldogs they were worried about.

These aren’t the only Bulldogs they were worried about.

However, the author does bring up a point that is quite vital to the entire debate here — context.  He notes that the Seminoles beat Clemson with their back-up quarterback [he tries to argue that Sean Maguire is actually the third or fourth string QB due to defections, but difficult to buy that argument].  This is a fair point.  Even if you want to argue that it was in Tallahassee and that the Seminoles defense could not stop Clemson for much of the game, you cannot dismiss the impact that not having Jameis Winston had not only on offense but on the entire team [if the offense cannot move the ball, it puts pressure on the defense].  Thus, context is important.  The UAB game cannot be explained, but the LSU game saw a close game only because of the late comeback against second teamers.  Furthermore, while criticizing margin of victories, the author fails to note the double digit wins against two ranked opponents.  Yes, context is important with the Auburn game, but the Bulldogs dominated Texas A&M [a team that admittedly was overhyped due to an opening night victory over South Carolina].

What of the contexts of the Seminoles’ opponents?  This, of course, is ignored by the author…well, other than the Clemson game.  Still, remember that game, Clemson had a freshman QB going into Tallahassee and the Tigers were able to move the ball at will against tFSU.  The Winston point is fair, but so are the other aspects of the game.  It is more than one variable and it works both ways.  The Citadel game was just flatness — a team uninterested in playing the Bulldogs.  But, North Carolina State is noteworthy as the author quickly dismisses this game as not being a struggle against an unranked opponent.  The Seminoles were down 17 points early and 10 in the third quarter.  The Wolfpack were still within one score midway through the fourth before Florida State scored again for the final margin…of 15 points.  FIFTEEN!!!  The author believes that the magic number is, for some reason, 14 points…as though 15 is significantly more superior than 13.

Finally, the author never critiques tFSU’s “best” opponents, which would be Oklahoma State and Clemson [in that order].  Oklahoma State’s victories include an FCS school, the Roadrunners of UT-San Antonio, and the bottom three teams in the Big XII [sic].  Explain to me how that justifies the Cowboys being #15!  Clemson?  They beat Louisville, which I guess counts as a quality win.  But, the Cardinals are unranked.  NC State and UNC are not world beaters.  Oh, but there was that close game with South Carolina State.  So, why should I take Florida State’s victory over Clemson seriously??

Once you start looking objectively, you see that Florida State’s schedule is not all that impressive either.  The argument i made elsewhere is that while Florida State did not necessarily do anything to move out of the top spot, they did not do anything to earn that spot either.  Which brings me to …

The Illogical Polls Revisited and the Myth of the #1

Again, i could speak ad nauseum about how the polls, rooted entirely on opinions, are illogical and biased.  Of course, the author of the cited piece would argue the same and it is here that we are in agreement.  The divergence comes over why it is illogical.  The author’s belief is that the flaw is in the love for the SEC.  If that were the case, Alabama or Auburn would have begun the season #1.  Neither team did.  Which team started #1?  Florida State.  Why?  Well, that is where the flaw truly exist.

See, the preseason polls operate off of two concepts — perception [of how a team will do in the upcoming season] and reputation [of how a team fared last season].  Florida State was privileged a starting position at #1 because of what happened last season.  That is important to remember.  In the past ten years, the only reigning BCS champion NOT to be ranked in the top ten [a favorable starting position] was Auburn in 2011 [interesting to note, Auburn was also not ranked in the top ten in 2005 following their undefeated 2004 season].  Certainly, teams that win titles do tend to return key players, which feeds into the perception factor [both Auburn teams lost many key players].  But, the weight of winning in the previous season matters.

How?  The argument many lay out for Florida State being, and remaining, #1 is that they are the defending champs and have not lost yet.  But, what does last year have to do with this season?  Nothing.  New season; new circumstances.  This angle lacks logic because certain factors beyond the players go into a team winning a title.  Thus, each season is different.  Another example of this is that the author makes mention of Mississippi State’s record from last season — 7-6.  What bearing does that have on anything?  Well, it does explain why MSU was unranked.  But apparently this does not resonate with Florida State fans; that what happened last year — something that should have nothing to do with this season — is why the Seminoles and Bulldogs were ranked where they are.

But, that leads to perception, a point the author and many other Nole fans will point out with regards to the SEC.  But, keep in mind that perception applies to all teams, especially once it comes to preseason polls.  By the end of last season, seven teams that were ranked in the preseason poll was NOT in the final poll; none of those seven even received votes!  As of right now, six teams ranked in the 2014 preseason poll are no longer ranked.  Three teams currently in the top ten did not begin there (Mississippi, Mississippi State, and Notre Dame).  Preseason polls are an inexact guessing game.  It is only natural for it to even out over the season.

Most Seminole fans will admit this — the preseason rankings were wrong and Mississippi State should have at least been ranked.  They will disagree with the meteoric rise and the displacement of Florida State.  And therein lies the rub…and the myth behind being number one.  If the preseason polls were “wrong” and the Bulldogs should not have been unranked, then why can we not accept that the #1 team in the country may not be the best team in the country?    Why must we stand by the notion that they are number one and should not be displaced?  That’s the myth behind being #1…the myth that they are untouchable.

Consider this.  The argument is that a #1 team should not be displaced UNLESS it loses.  But, this logic applies ONLY to the #1 team.  Every other position in the polls can be displaced without such backlash [admittedly, there is some but not to the extent of if a #1 is unseated].  It happens quite often that one undefeated team will jump over other undefeated teams…UNTIL we reach #1.  Last year, Florida State leaped over Ohio State to move to #3.  The Buckeyes did not lose; they in fact won their game against Iowa.  But, the Seminoles beat a then-undefeated Clemson team and thus that catapulted tFSU up.  No complaining from Seminole fans…coz it benefited their team!  If this can happen elsewhere, than it should happen with #1.  If the point of the polls is to rank the 25 best teams — from the #1 team [i.e., best of the best] to #25, then it should be accurate!  Thus, let it be truly fluid and displace #1 teams when necessary.

Death to the Polls

As long as we are top four, we good, right?

As long as we are top four, we good, right?

This weekend, Florida State will take on undefeated #5 Notre Dame.  And, should the Seminoles win, they should (rightly, according to the model) become #1 again.  Ironically, the same Seminole fans that are kvetching about Mississippi State displacing Florida State will have no qualms when/if the Seminoles do the same to the Bulldogs.  They will argue, of course, that it is righting the injustice of tFSU dropping to #2, but that argument also ignores the injustice of a seemingly good Mississippi State team starting out unranked.

Still, that the Bulldogs and Seminoles may swap claims to #1 in back-to-back weeks does not reflect the fluidity of the polls [as it likely should be if we are going to use polls].  Rather, it is a reflection of the uselessness of polls.  The Harris Poll and, to a certain extent, the BCS poll had it right by waiting until at least some games have been played before releasing a poll.  The problem is that even then the poll is incomplete.  All it does is offer a snapshot of the season for that particular moment in time.  Even waiting until the midpoint of the season is not perfect.  Last season, the first BCS poll had Miami ranked seventh…they ended up unranked.  This is why claiming the Bulldogs beat three straight top ten teams is misleading because those teams might have been top ten at that moment, but were they clearly one of the ten best?

The only way of truly knowing is once the season is over and looking at the complete picture.  EVEN THEN there are flaws.  Injuries or suspensions to players can affect a team and change the course of a season [for better or worse]; so too can a devastating loss [looking at you, 2013 Northwestern].   Therefore, while Bulldog and Seminole fans battle over who is truly #1, the reality is that we will not know until the season is over.  Being a temporary #1 for a week or a month means nothing if you are not there in January.  Leading early does not matter if you do not take home the prize…just ask Rick Santorum.

Since only one moment in time matters as it pertains to being number one — after the winner of the pseudo-playoff is determined, isn’t it time to kill the polls?

Iron Bowl: Taiwanese Style!

Living in Taiwan makes it difficult for me to closely keep up with sports in the United States, even with the beauty and awesomeness of the Internets!  Sure, many professional games occur during a time where i can at least keep track of them — most NBA, NHL, and MLB games happen during the morning here.  But, a majority of games in college football and the NFL take place over night.  And, the sports world often turns by events that unfold and by storylines pushed forward during the daytime in the U.S. — or overnight here.

Thus, i have not been able to write as much as i would like.  Even though, through the power of Slingbox, i’ve been able to watch more games, it is tough to get up/stay up for 2am NFL games of 4:30am SEC games.  And, my work schedule has not been conducive to blah’gging!  Even our good ol’ Uncle Popov college football ranking and the newly christened College Football Belts have fallen off.

BUT, every so often, something comes across that is definitely worth posting about…especially when it originates from Taiwan.

This is a video that is a product of NEXTMedia and their animated studio arm Next Media Animators, and it is carried by TomoNews.  These types of “Taiwanese animations” are widely known in the U.S. as NMA often makes humorous clips of events and scandals that happen not only in the U.S., but also in East Asia [see their recent video of China’s air defense zone as a regional example].  The studio has close to 500 talented people who work on these videos that have become almost as popular as stinky tofu [and if you don’t know what stinky tofu is, trust me…you don’t want to know].

And the video “accurately” depicts the fandom and rivalry that is the Iron Bowl.  Here is the Chinese version as it is funnier to hear this in Mandarin rather than English:

Yes, Alabama and Auburn.  Once you’ve received your very own Taiwanese animation, you know that you’ve made it in the world!

Suck on that, Michigan/Ohio State!

So, Cary Williams Said What?

Look, stoking this whole Riley Cooper “drama” fire is so unnecessary and (honestly) boring.  But, there is something ironic about the recent incident.

I do tend to believe with Stephen A. Smith that black DBs are going to target Cooper [and not because of Marcus Vick’s “bounty”].  But, other than that, it is not worth even really exploring.  Actually, even DBs targeting Cooper does not mean much.  I don’t really care.

However, this altercation [don’t call it a “fight”; it’s not a fight!] brought something potentially interesting.  Fights happen all the time in practice…especially after going against each other so many times; you’re just waiting to face actual opponents.  So, that this is being blown up is because of the overblown Cooper issue.

Hell, any time Cooper has some sort of “issue” with a black player, this shit is going to get played up.  So the fight…I don’t give a fly fuck about that.

But, it is what Cary Williams allegedly said:

I’m not a nigger to fuck with!

Whoa now!  I know that Riley wanted to jump the fence and fight a brotha or two, but geez settle down Williams.

Now, keep in mind, this is what Williams “allegedly” said (coming from an anonymous third party).  No one is really stating that he did (or didn’t) say that…just that the initial June incident “was not mentioned.”  But it does — if true — present and interesting twist to all of this because of what Williams stated back in early August:

We as a black community sometimes pounce on somebody who uses it in a derogatory way when there are times in the black community when we use it freely.  . . . I think there’s no place for that word in anybody’s language, in anybody’s mouth or off anybody’s tongue, whether you’re black, white, green, purple, blue.  It’s still the same meaning, it’s still a harsh word.


Again, this is all based around an allegation that is still unfounded.  But, he DOES bring up a good point in his initial response to Riley’s uttering of “nigger.”  While it is “just a word,” it is one that needs to be eliminated from our vocabulary.  Yes, there is a sense of power gained by co-opting the word and altering the meaning, but this might be one of those words that should go the way of the interrobang.

Still, that Williams stated a very thoughtful response in August and “allegedly” said what he did during his altercation with Cooper is incredibly ironic.  Hopefully, for Williams, that did not happen.  I hope that it didn’t.

But then again, if it did, it brings to light the double standard of the word that he so carefully attempt to rally against.  Maybe it can be a good thing.

Or, perhaps we should take a cue from the Wu Tang Clan:

2013 Uncle Popov College Football Table [Week 1]

With Week 1 in the books, here is the top 23 for the Uncle Popov College Football Table.  The full list will appear in the “College Football Table” section of the website.

Remember that with bonuses and whatnot, some teams receive a lot of points overall.  In the end, this tends to level off.  So while NC State pulled down 6 points this week (3 for a win; 2 for a win over a Tier 1 team; 1 for a win by a Tier 3 team over a Tier 1 team), the Wolfpack’s early lead is not insurmountable.






North Carolina State






Bowling Green


















Oklahoma State



Penn State



South Carolina



Texas A&M


















Florida State









Texas Tech



California-Los Angeles





Tiers for the 2013 Uncle Popov College Football Table

Last year witness yet another modification to the Uncle Popov College Football Poll as we moved from a formula-based poll to one that awards points based on certain types of wins [as well as OT losses, in some cases].  I thought it worked well.

So, this year we continue the Uncle Popov College Football Table with all new tiers.  And, there has been a slight alteration to how the tiers are designed.  Now, Tier 1 — the top tier — only contains 20 teams rather than 31.  The other three tiers contain 35 teams.  This is done so that there are fewer top tier teams and the “bonus” for beating a Tier 1 team is more well-earned.

The rules are still the same.  I thought that the point system was fair and worked quite well.  So, no need to reset that.  As for the Tiers:

Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4
Alabama Arizona Air Force~ Akron
Clemson^ Arkansas State^ Arizona State~ Alabama-Birmingham
Florida Ball State^ Arkansas~ Army~
Georgia Boise State~ Baylor~ Auburn~
Kansas State^ Bowling Green State^ Brigham Young~ Boston College~
Kent State^ Central Florida Central Michigan Buffalo
Louisiana State Cincinnati~ Connecticut~ California~
Louisiana Tech^ East Carolina^ Duke^ Colorado
Louisville^ Florida State Georgia Tech~ Colorado State
Nebraska Fresno State^ Houston~ Eastern Michigan
Northern Illinois^ Iowa State^ Indiana^ Florida Atlantic
Northwestern^ Louisiana-Monroe^ Louisiana-Lafayette Florida International
Notre Dame^ Miami (FL)~ Marshall^ Georgia State~
Ohio State Michigan Memphis^ Hawaii~
Oregon Middle Tennessee State^ Michigan State~ Idaho
San Jose State^ Mississippi State Minnesota Illinois~
South Carolina North Carolina Mississippi~ Iowa~
Stanford Ohio^ Missouri~ Kansas~
Texas A&M^ Oklahoma~ Navy~ Kentucky~
UCLA^ Oklahoma State~ Nevada~ Maryland~
Oregon State North Carolina State~ Massachusetts
Penn State~ Pittsburgh~ Miami (OH)
Rice^ Purdue Nevada-Las Vegas
Rutgers Southern Methodist New Mexico
San Diego State^ Tennessee~ New Mexico State
Southern California~ Texas Tech~ North Texas
Syracuse^ Texas-El Paso^ South Alabama
Texas~ Troy South Florida~
Texas Christian~ Utah~ Southern Mississippi~
Toledo^ Virginia Temple~
Tulsa Virginia Tech~ Texas State
Utah State^ Wake Forest Texas-San Antonio
Vanderbilt^ West Virginia~ Tulane
Washington^ Western Kentucky^ Washington State
Wisconsin~ Wyoming^ Western Michigan~

^ – promoted

~ – relegated

As you can see, teams that performed well last year such as Notre Dame (the 2012 Uncle Popov Champion) and Kent State (who won ten FBS games) moved into Tier 1.  In fact, the Golden Flashes jumped from Tier 4 to Tier 1.  That can happen.  On the other hand, a team like Iowa dropped from Tier 1 to Tier 4.  That’s the cruel fate of this Tier system.

The good thing, however, is that it is very fluid.  However, starting next season, the Tiers will be based on a two-year average rather than just one year.

Now, with one more game to go, the first table for 2013 will be up and ready soon.  And, there will already be eight teams with negative points, including newcomer Georgia State.


Conference Belt Title Game Results for Week 1

There were seven different title defenses during Week 1, including the new WAC Heritage Belt.  Overall, the  title defenders were 5-2, with one of those losses helping a belt return to its conference.


  • Result: Clemson Tigers defeated Georgia Bulldogs (c)
  • Belt Status: Clemson’s fourth title reign
  • Next Title Defense: Sept. 19 at North Carolina State Wolfpack


  • Result: Texas State Bobcats (c) defeated Southern Miss Golden Eagles
  • Belt Status: Texas State’s first successful defense
  • Next Title Defense: TBD


  • Result: Ohi State Buckeyes (c) defeated Buffalo Bulls
  • Belt Status: Ohio State’s 21st successful defense
  • Next Title Defense: TBD


  • Result: UCF Knights (c) defeated Akron Zips
  • Belt Status: UCF’s fourth successful defense
  • Next Title Defense: TBD


  • Result: Texas A&M Aggies (c) defeated Rice Owls
  • Belt Status: Texas A&M’s third successful defense
  • Next Title Defense: Sept. 14 versus Alabama Crimson Tide
  • GAME NOTE: this is a unification match; Alabama can unify the two SEC belts with a win; Texas A&M is not eligible for the Unified SEC Belt


  • Result: Oklahoma Sooners (c) defeated UL-Monroe Warhawks
  • Belt Status: Oklahoma’s third successful defense
  • Next Title Defense: TBD


  • Result: Utah Utes defeated Utah State Aggies (c)
  • Belt Status: Utah’s first title reign
  • Next Title Defense: Sept. 21 at BYU Cougars