 |
| |
|
 |
 |
Don't count out Seminoles this weekend Posted: Thursday October 24, 2002 1:08 PM
Sports Illustrated senior writer Ivan Maisel will answer your college football questions every Thursday. Click here to send a question. Thank you to all of those BYU, Texas A&M and Washington fans who wrote in to say their teams haven't had a losing season in the era of electric lights. However, I meant that Florida State, Michigan and Nebraska had streaks of winning seasons. A .500 record is not a winning season, at least according to the calculator on my PowerBook. The Mailbag was uncharacteristically light this week. While our server thanks you, the rest of us want to know if I have said anything that didn't offend you. If I was somehow too polite, too often correct (yeah, right) or otherwise conformed to social norms, I apologize. I don't know what I could have been thinking. On to the questions ... Now that Notre Dame is 7-0 going into Tallahassee, what kind of a shot do you think the Irish have against the Seminoles? I think they have a great chance, especially after what they did to the powerhouse option of Air Force. You gotta admit they looked good.
Notre Dame made Air Force look like the smaller, slower team it was. That's harder to do than you can imagine. The Irish are very good. Even I've swung one leg onto the bandwagon. If they figure out how to win this game, I'm on board. However, they have to beat an opponent just as big and probably faster, that has had two weeks to prepare, and I'm guessing that the loss to Miami turned the Seminoles into a team determined to prove itself. Is Chan Gailey the victim of bad luck this year at Georgia Tech or was he a mistake hire?
Andy, there are very few coaches whom I am willing to define as a "mistake" eight games into their careers. Paul Hackett at USC, yes. Chan Gailey at Georgia Tech, no. Gailey seemed awful smart when Tony Hollings was healthy. Once Hollings got hurt, the Yellow Jackets were reduced to what we expected they might be: a young team trying to learn new systems. How likely do you think it is that N.C. State will win its last five games and finish the season undefeated? Also, what are the chances that a 13-0 Wolfpack team might still be left out of the Fiesta Bowl even if there is only one or no other remaining undefeated teams?
Ryan, I'd say that you win the long-distance award, but then I would have to figure out which city is farther away, Chengdu or Nanjing (see below), and I never did well in geography. I think it's likely that N.C. State will finish 13-0, but then I still like the Braves to win the World Series. Which means, and let me spell this out for you literalists out there, I don't think N.C. State will finish unbeaten. I ranked the Wolfpack 20th in my latest AP ballot, which gives you an idea of what I think. They have managed to get to 8-0, before Thursday night's game at Clemson, and for that they should be congratulated. But the meat of the ACC order has not come to the plate yet (maybe I'm watching too much of the Series). State's last three opponents are 5-2 Maryland, 6-2 Virginia and 5-2 Florida State, all teams that will be tough to beat. As a Minnesota alum and Big Ten fan, I'm interested in your take on the Gophers' 7-1 season. I know they played a powder-puff nonconference schedule, but they've looked pretty impressive in their last three victories. Following the bye week, do they have a chance in Columbus? Will home-field advantage give them a chance against Michigan and Iowa? They should be able to beat Wisconsin, but the game is in Madison this year. Or am I just dreaming, and Minnesota will end up 7-5?
The Gophs, like N.C. State, their 2000 bowl opponent, have built a record on a foundation of sand. Must have been something both teams found on the Florida beaches two years ago. I think Minnesota has a chance in Columbus and Madison. I like Iowa and its powerful offensive line, no matter where the game is. Don't ask me about Michigan; I still think the Wolverines are playing over their heads to be 6-1 at this point of the season. And let's congratulate coach Glen Mason, who has now gone 22 months without looking for another job. I guess that Coaching Anonymous plan really works. One day at a time. Many writers have criticized Oregon this year (and rightfully so) for playing a soft nonconference schedule. Yet no one applies the same criticism to "traditional powers" like Oklahoma (one legitimate nonconference opponent: Alabama) or Texas (only nonconference opponent with a winning record: 4-3 Tulane). In fact, Oklahoma is atop the first BCS rankings ahead of Miami, which scheduled Florida and Florida State. Does this mean that simply belonging to the Pac-10 or Big East will hurt a team's national championship hopes, while playing a Big 12 schedule can negate the effect of a soft nonconference slate?
Congrats, Zach, this is the first question of the year asking me to explain some mindless aspect of the BCS. I can't explain Oklahoma's strength-of-schedule ranking, except that Texas and Iowa State were both in the top 10 when they lost to the Sooners. Oregon may be the only highly ranked team in the nation that can't mock Oklahoma for who it played out of conference this season. Is it possible that strength of schedule is weighted too much in the BCS rankings, since it is a separate item in the calculations and most of the computer rankings also take it into consideration? Any thought about the true value of strength of schedule?
Ralf, I'd love to answer to your question, but I grew up where the answer to 2+2 was "third and 6." Strength of schedule is a component of everything in the BCS formula. If voters are doing their homework, they are considering it in how they vote. In other words, your estimate is probably low. What has happened to the down lineman in defensive formations? Many teams put their defensive tackles between the offensive guards and their ends just outside the offensive tackles, whereas others still use the defensive guards and tackles and add defensive ends to stop option teams. Some teams even plug in a nose guard against running teams. Alabama uses the first scheme and places a linebacker between the defensive tackles, forming a triangle on each side of the line. What caused these changes in defense?
Everything defenses do these days is tilted toward versatility. Coordinators want to be able to handle the run and the pass. They want players who can defend both. That's why linebackers are plugging gaps and blitzing while defensive ends drop into coverage. That's why more defenses are going to nickel schemes on every down, so that coaches don't have to deal with matching offensive substitutions on every down. Offenses are using more of the field, so defenses must cover more. It seems like the current overtime setup is still not an equitable way to decide a game. It's more fair than the NFL, where the team that receives the kickoff has an advantage, but it's also not really football -- more like a shootout. How about this for a plan: Kick off just like in the NFL. The receiving team gets one drive. Whether it scores or not, the other team gets the ball (via punt, turnover or a kickoff following a score). So both teams get a chance on offense. After those two drives, if the score is still tied, then just play sudden death. The two major advantages: 1) The teams are playing actual football; 2) You can't have a six-overtime game. What do you think?
I like your plan, Andrew. It is certainly less complicated than the current system, and it more closely approximates the sport of football than does the current system. What about Kliff Kingsbury of Texas Tech for the Heisman? He has almost 3,000 yards passing for the season, which leads the NCAA, and an efficiency rating over 140, which is better than Ken Dorsey's. I think you are ignoring him because of his team's record.
Yep, Raymon, that's exactly what I'm doing. Texas Tech has beaten one good team (Texas A&M), lost a close game to another good one (N.C. State), been beaten soundly by a third (Iowa State) and humiliated by a fourth (Ohio State). Team record does count, especially for a quarterback. That's why Dorsey is still in the race. Dominick Davis, LSU's running back/kick returner, is one of the primary reasons the Tigers are playing as well as they are. On top of his current stats, he's had two punt returns for touchdowns negated by penalties. The first return that was brought back, in the opening minutes against Virginia Tech, may be the reason LSU is ranked 10th instead of third. Teams have begun to kick away from Davis, giving LSU's offense a short field. This intangible has been key the last four weeks. Please don't punish Davis simply because he wasn't on your preseason radar.
I promise, Bill, that I will keep an eye on Davis, as long as you promise to stop deluding yourself into thinking that Davis' punt return would have significantly changed the course of the Tigers' loss at Virginia Tech. With such a poor Heisman race, can we go back and award the trophy to Peyton Manning who should have won a Heisman in the past?
I'm with you, Michael. And I still think Tommie Frazier should have beaten Eddie George in 1995. Sports Illustrated senior writer Ivan Maisel covers college football for the magazine and is a regular contributor to CNNSI.com. Click here to send him a question or comment.
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
