Those Mountains Have Possibilities!

As it stands the Mountain West has an excellent argument to be considered one of the six best conferences in the nation. The problem with the Mountain West is two-fold: the prestige of football teams from that region of the nation lag behind the rest of the country and the conference is top heavy with very little depth.



But there are enough names in the Mountain West to strike fear into the established BCS conferences. Utah has done more for BCS busters than any other program in the nation, they were the first to get in and they pulled off the biggest win.



Though Boise State probably won the most memorable BCS game when they beat Oklahoma in overtime with the now legendary statue of liberty play, Utah beat a stronger Alabama team that had a legitimate case to be in the national championship game. But don't forget about Boise State, they will be back.



BYU, TCU, Colorado State, and Air Force round out the more respectable programs in the Mountain West. UNLV, Wyoming, San Diego State and New Mexico represent the bottom levels of the conference.



With a little help (from the WAC) this conference can not only scare the BCS conferences, I think this conference can be strong and prestigious enough to become a BCS conference. Imagine for a second if Boise State, Fresno State and Hawai'i switch conferences and join the Mountain West. This move would add quite a bit of firepower to the Mountain West's arsenal and give it much needed depth. In the perfect world some of the smaller schools like New Mexico and Wyoming would be kicked back the WAC.



No doubt this move would shatter the WAC, putting on par with the Sun Belt and MAC as the nations worst conferences. But it would make more sense to consolidate the best teams from the West and let the other fill out a minor conference. The same situation is seen with the Big Ten overshadowing the MAC and the SEC being the big, drunken brother of the redheaded stepchild Sun Belt.



As for the Mountain West becoming a BCS conference with an automatic bid, who would they replace? Nobody. There are now five BCS bowls which mean that seven automatic bids with three at-larges being the new ratio. If this proposition could ever actually happen, the Mountain West would contain every team that made a BCS bowl from a non-BCS conference.



With the rise of Boise State and Utah, and the consistant play of TCU, Fresno State, Air Force and BYU the new Mountain West could have enough names to overcome the lack of prestige and give the Mountain region a BCS conference.

Small Colleges Lead the Way Into the Biggest Sporting Event of the Year

Kurt Warner played his college ball for FCS Northern Iowa, Big Ben graduated from Miami of Ohio, and two weeks from now these men will lead their teams into the biggest sporting event in the world.

While the NFL remains a quarterbacks league, these two past Super Bowl Champions will be in much more prestigious company on the field as far as Alma Mater's are concerned. For example protecting Kurt Warner will be products of the powerhouse Universities USC, Texas, Notre Dame, Penn State as well as not so well-known division II Clarion.

The defensive and offensive starting lineups for the NFC and AFC champions will represent 39 different NCAA universities. It might be surprising to know that there are eight universities represented that are not FBS schools; including five FCS schools, two division II school and even a division III representative.

Naturally a conference break down is in order for the FBS players.

Big XII - The Big Twelve will send four starters to Super Bowl 43, including two Texas products, and one from each Kansas and Oklahoma State.

SEC - The SEC will contribute six players to the starting lineups. Two from Georgia, and one from Alabama, Florida, Louisiana State and Auburn.

Big Ten - The Big Ten leads the way with the most starters in Super Bowl 43, seven overall. Michigan is the single most represented team with three players. Minnesota, Purdue, Illinois and Penn State also have one player each.

ACC - The ACC follows the Big Ten closely with six starters. Two from each Virginia University and Florida State, with North Carolina and North Carolina State adding one each.

Pac-10 - The Pac-10 ties the Big East the fewest players from a BCS conference with only three. Two come from the NFL factory USC and one from Arizona State.

Big East - Two players from Pittsburgh University will play against Pittsburgh's NFL team, add one Rutgers product and the Big East sends three players to Super Bowl 43.

MAC - Two players come from the MAC, of course there is Big Ben from Miami of Ohio and Kent State also pitches in with one player.

Mountain West - This year Mountain West powerhouse Utah has made its presence felt not only in the BCS but also in the Super Bowl.

WAC - The WAC has sent two starters to the Super Bowl, one from Hawai'a and one from Fresno State.

Sun Belt - One player from Louisiana Lafayette graces the roster.

Conference USA - Tulane is the only school to represent Conference USA in the Super Bowl starter ranks.

Independents - Notre Dame sends its prayers and one player.

USC's Sanchez Entering NFL Draft

USC quarterback Mark Sanchez says that he will skip his senior season and enter the upcoming NFL draft.

Ben Liebenberg / NFL.com

QB Mark Sanchez started only 16 games and fondles imaginary friends during a throw.

Welcome to the first segment in our multi-part series: "Athletes who are overconfident in their abilities and their value in the marketplace."

Thursday was the deadline for underclassmen to apply for the 2009 NFL draft, which takes place in NYC on April 25-26, and apply they did! Mark Sanchez joined Ohio State's Donald Washington as applicants forgoing the rest of their NCAA eligibility to enter the Draft.

For a full list of underclassmen heading to the draft check here.

It has been reported (NFL.com and USC.com) that Trojans coach Pete Carroll tried to talk Sanchez into coming back for another season by correctly pointing out:

• Sanchez started only 16 college games
• NFL teams generally prefer quarterbacks with much more experience.
• He wasn't even close to the Heisman picture.
• No one likes him anyways.

Fun Facts:

Sanchez only started one full season at USC

He started in three games during the 2007 season for the injured John David Booty.

Sanchez follows in the footsteps of three quarterbacks currently on NFL rosters who also played for Pete Carroll: Palmer, Leinart and Booty.

Lets see how Sanchez matches up!

Carson Palmer

• Heisman Trophy winner
• First overall pick in the 2002 draft

Matt Leinart

• Heisman Trophy winner
• Tenth overall pick in the 2005 draft

YEAR YDS TD INT
2004 3322 33 6
2005 3815 28 8

John David Booty

• Not a Heisman Trophy winner

YEAR YDS TD INT
2005 327 3 2
2006 3347 29 9
2007 2361 23 10

Mark Sanchez

• Not a Heisman Trophy winner
• The only one of the four to leave school early for the pros.
• Bad foot odor
  

YEAR YDS TD INT
2006 63 0 1
2007 695 7 5
2008 3207 34 10


Okay, the Heisman would have been nice, but that's a popularity contest anyways. A popularity contest that was won this year by an ape-boy, but a popularity contest nontheless.

Assuming you only compare each QB's best season, side-by-side those numbers don't look so bad. Right? Wrong. With a conference as unbelievably weak as the PAC-10 during 2008 (except for the state of Oregon and a bowl eligible Arizona) do those number really hold up? Nope. Guys like Sanchez thrive in conferences with winless and 2-11 teams.

Here's how it went down:
Win over VA
Beating an overrated Ohio State program
Pwned by an Oregon State team that ended the season unranked
Running up the points against Apple Cup winning Washington St.
Barely beating Arizona
Running up the points against winless Washington
Rinse, Repeat.


I gotta run, check back for more in our multi-part series: "Athletes who are overconfident in their abilities and their value in the marketplace."

Defending an Amazing Streak

From now on nobody is allowed to dismiss Texas' streak of consecutive ten win seasons because of the Big XII championship game. This is why: Texas has unfortunately only been to the Big XII championship game four times, and won only twice. The first win was in 1996 when they upset Nebraska. That was before the ten win season streak started. The second win was in 2005 when the team put together a 14-0 season National Championship season. Never was the Big XII championship game the reason the Longhorns reached ten wins, because the only year they won the game during the continuing streak they already had ten wins easily wrapped up. On a number of occasions the bowl game was the reason they were able to get to ten wins, but not once the conference championship game.

NFL Playoff Widget

Follow live NFL Playoff scoring updates on the NFL's widget:

The State of Iowa

Iowa is a riddle wrapped in an enigma grown in a corn husk. Everything about the funny looking little state in 2008 gave birth to ambiguous positions. Last year I focused in on Iowa and most likely found it to be more intriguing than anyone else in recorded history, and I learned some things. Did you know that Iowa is the only state that the Big XII and Big Ten share? And the sharing mostly goes to the Big Ten lately with Iowa States fall to the basement in the post Seneca Wallace era. Iowa also is currently experiencing a farming boon due to the government mandated production of ethanol. Also, Iowa alum seem to love to move to Texas, and then change our flag to from Red, White and Blue to Black, White and Gold and put this mutant flag on everything from bumper stickers to sweaters in order to announce their presence. Furthermore, on this banner the famous Lone Star has been replaced with the Hawkeye symbol, and the words "The Hawkeyes of Texas are Upon You" hovering above the new, distorted flag. Clever. Clever in a way that makes me want to run my shopping cart into an old mans heels. Iowa is also known for painting the opposing teams locker rooms pink, because the color is supposed to have a calming effect. One time I ate at a Des Moines Denny's on my way up to Minnesota during college. That's really about all I know about Iowa, but those five things put me well ahead of the nationwide curve.

Back to college football. To begin with, Iowa saved my football season by not allowing Penn State to carry an undefeated record into the National Championship game. This years game, though unfulfilling in the face of demands for playoffs, was well-played and exciting, and for once actually competitive. Another year of the Big Ten getting spanked would have probably killed me... if I didn't live for the big ten getting spanked. But alas! Iowa allowed me to have my cake, and eat it too when the Big Ten still went 0-2 in BCS games for the third straight year, and didn't throw snake eyes in the title game. For all you have done for me Iowa I am truly grateful. But you also ruined the perfect Big Ten bowl season by winning your bowl. Ohio State, Penn State, Northwestern, Michigan State, Minnesota and Wisconsin all followed my plan perfectly; but you had to win. A 1-5 Big Ten bowl season makes me happy, a 0-6 would have been pure bliss. But maybe I am wrong to blame you, South Carolina did roll over and die for you the way the Big Ten rolls over for the ACC in the basketball challenge. Which brings me to my next point. South Carolina is a riddle wrapped in an enigma covered with a Confederate flag...

Explaining the BCS

Since the BCS is political in nature the best way to explain it would be through an analogy with, well politics. The BCS poll is a combination of three polls which include the Coaches, the Harris Poll and the computers polls; and in this way it works a lot like the federal government. The Coaches Poll consists of around 65 FBS coaches who vote weekly on the top 25. We will call the coaches poll the legislative branch of the BCS. This poll is undeniably subject to special interests because it directly affects the people who run it and often gives birth to strange oddities. For example during the 2007 season when Kansas put together a cinderella run every ballot for the final poll going into bowl season listed Kansas somewhere in the top 12, except for Texas Tech's ballot. In fact the Mike Leach never once voted Kansas in the top 25, maybe he had something against coaches who looked like blueberries, or maybe coach Mangino said something to insult pirates, who knows. Most of the conspiracies are based on more concrete reasons: Oklahoma was making a case to be in the 2007 National Championship Game and their ballot reflected it, not only were they ranked number 1, but every team they had beaten was an average of five spots higher than they appeared  on the actual poll. Currently the statistical research team of Thinking Outside the Ranking is looking into the oddities of the coaches poll, including why the Big Ten gets nine votes when they have eleven teams and if there is indeed a Midwest conspiracy to rank everyone in the conference four or five spots higher in order to make the conference look better, until the results are published we will assume the conspiracy is very real and ongoing. The computer poll is actually the average of six different computer programs, with the high and low results dropped. The computer poll functions without the consequences of popular opinions and without having to listen to the other polls and for that they are the judicial branch. There isn't much more to elaborate on really. That leaves the Harris Poll as the executive branch. Harris voters are experts, on college football and on statistical matters, and are paid to be right. It is only a matter of time before I receive a vote in the Harris Poll. These are the three branches of the BCS, each poll generated is exactly 1/3 of the final BCS poll. I hate them all. 

Two Teams in the BCS Bowls, a Valid Excuse?

Ask any of my college room mates, I was calling the Big Ten overrated way before it was cool. So when an Ohio State fan on a chat room blamed the BCS bowl games always taking two Big Ten teams for the conference's poor Bowl records I presented my hastily gathered case against him. His accusation did not catch me off guard, I often thought about the consequences of having two BCS bowl teams, but had never explored it fully. Well, here it is: the inside and outside look at the claim that two teams in the BCS Bowls can really hurt a conference's bowl record.

The claim by the Buckeye was true, the Big Ten constantly puts two teams in the BCS games. In 2006 the National Championship game was added to the four BCS games, giving us a grand total of five BCS bowl games. Since 2005, a year before two more slots opened, the Big Ten has put two teams in the BCS bowl games every year. Lately they aren't doing so hot in those BCS bowls. Since winning both games in 2005 when Penn State beat Florida State in an overtime instant classic kind of game and Ohio State was given a gift of a game against Notre Dame, the Big Ten has lost six straight BCS games. More often than not over the three year stretch the Big Ten team was also on the wrong side of an ass whooping.

The Ohio State fan was also correct about his claim that the BCS gave the Big Ten a tougher bowl schedule. When a conference puts two teams in the BCS one of them no longer counts in the conference hierarchy, thus the at-large team that received a BCS Bowl is left out of the conference standings as far as the non-BCS bowl games are concerned. The number three team bumps up to the number two spot and plays a tougher bowl game and so on down the line. Over the past six years the Big Ten put two teams in the BCS five times, the Big XII has accomplished that feat four times, the SEC has put two in the last three years running, the ACC, Big East and Pac-10 have never put two teams in the BCS. So obviously conferences putting two teams into the BCS gives it tougher match-ups. But, we are here to determine how much tougher.

Over the last five Bowl Seasons the Big Ten has had four losing seasons, all of them coinciding with the year they had two teams playing in the BCS Bowl games, and one .500 season the year that they had only one. That would point towards the Ohio State fan being absolutely correct; while not having winning seasons when they had one BCS team they did do better and have an even Bowl season. However the data for the other two conferences points the opposite way. The years the SEC had two teams in the BCS they had winning, and very good, records in the Bowl Seasons, the years they did not have two teams they had .500 Bowl Seasons, it seems they do better with tougher schedules. When the Big XII has two BCS bowl teams they have winning records, without two they have one winning and one losing bowl record. Like the SEC the Big XII also preformed better with two teams in the BCS Bowl games.

Looking at that data I don't think the Big Ten can complain about the two BCS bowl games, but there are a list of other reasons that I came up with for them, and I am not even going to list the ever-popular "lack of team speed" as one of them.

From what I can tell there are two forces that pull Big Ten at-large teams into the BCS when they don't have the best resume. The first is the Rose Bowl, which I have already talked about, a since the 2007-2008 Bowl season has the guarantee of the classic Big Ten versus Pac-Ten match up. This mechanism has only happened once, but in the 2007 season Illinois catapulted seven or eight teams with better at-large cases because Ohio State was in the National Championship game and the Rose Bowl wanted its precious match up. To make a long story shot USC destroyed them. The second force is what I call the Notre Dame attraction. This is simply name-recognition, and an example of that force is this years Ohio State. Both Boise State and TCU were ranked higher than the Buckeyes and the Rose Bowl had Penn State, but the fan base of Ohio State and the prestige of the name put them in the Fiesta Bowl over the two non-conference teams. (Texas Tech was also ranked higher but only two teams from a conference can have BCS bowl bids.)

As for losing Bowl records with the non-BCS bowl games there is one huge fact: the Big Ten has a a very tough set of tie-in's. The two and three teams go to play SEC two and SEC four. In case you were wondering the SEC is good. The Big Ten four goes to play the Big XII four, and the Big Ten six the Big XII six. The Big XII, also good. So besides having the absolutely brutal trend that the Big Ten winner either plays in the National Championship game or against the seven year running Pac-10 champion Trojans, the Big Ten has two forces pulling in at-larges to face higher ranked opponents. Add on top a tough bowl tie-in ladder that pits four teams against the best two conferences over past five years and you have a much more legitimate set of reasons than the two BCS Bowl team argument. Also your team speed is holding you back.

So never let anyone say I am not fair to the Big Ten, I am a college football fan and an honest enough man who cares about the facts. While everyone else is happy knowing that the Big Ten sucks, I am determined to show WHY the Big Ten Sucks.

Ode to the Pac-10

USC made the closing arguments for their case to be in the BCS National Championship game new years day in vain. For the third year in a row they steamrolled the Big Ten team that was tossed to them in the Rose Bowl, excuse me, the Trojan bowl. USC was so dominant in this game that the biggest accomplishment for Penn State was the excellent playing of Bohemian Rhapsody by the band during halftime. Everyone who knows anything about college football knows USC is good, everyone who is a part of the college football nation knows USC is just plain scary. Everyone who likes Queen enjoyed the Penn State band. Earlier this season the loss to Oreron State was the reason for a nationwide exhale. Under thursday night lights fans of Alabama, Florida, Penn State, Oklahoma, Texas Tech and Texas all toasted each other because perhaps, if they made the National Championship game, they wouldn't be looking at Trojans on the other sideline.

The case presented by USC was good, but it should not change as many minds as the what the rest of the Pac-10 did. An undefeated bowl season is a hell of an accomplishment for any conference, something the west coast can hang a hat on for a long time. But the fashion in which the Pac-10 competed this bowl season was more impressive than just going 5-0. It starts with the blowout in the Trojan Bowl. Next most impressive is the Oregon upset win against a very, very good Oklahoma State team. Oregon State upset Pittsburgh in a 3-0 barnburner that still baffles me. Arizona upset BYU and looked every bit the better team the entire time they were doing it. California also won a close game against Miami. The Pac-10 can close a game out, they can pull the upset, they can bowl an underdog opponent over, they can win a game when they score only three points, they can show everyone in the nation that "weak conference" belongs to someone else.

So now what? What happens after USC was kept from National Title game chatter because of the "weak conference schedule." That conference schedule doesn't look so bad anymore does it. The loss to Oregon State, now a top 15 team, looks better than a Florida loss to Ole' Miss to me. Not to mention an extremely tough non-conference schedule. Don't get me wrong when reading this, I am not a USC fan, I am a Longhorn fan. A bowl season like this from the Pac-10 and USC takes away from the already slim chances of a AP National Championship for Texas. But it has to be said. The BCS beat USC. (I stole that from a newspaper I cannot recall).

Earlier in the season Pete Carroll said he did not understand the BCS, the truth is he understood it completely, and simply disagreed with it. The system will not allow USC or Texas Tech, Texas, Alabama, Utah and Boise State to have a fair chance. The Pac-10 made a bigger case for playoffs in one bowl season than any press conference complaining. I cannot change the current system, but there is something small that I can do.

Dear Pac-10, I am sorry.