SB Nation User Blog: LondonRaider

BCS - Why I'm OK that Tech Won't Be Playing

LondonRaider — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 00:30:54 -0000

I am ecstatic that Texas Tech will not be playing in the Bowl Championship Series. The reason is that, contrary to popular belief, the BCS is not a reflection of the best teams in college football. As Groucho Marx once famously observed, “I don’t care to be part of a club that accepts people like me as members.”

The BCS is instead nothing more than a convoluted system that allows the top two teams to play for the national championship while guaranteeing that certain stake-holder conferences get their chance to feed at the television trough.

The BCS is comprised of 5 bowls: The Rose Bowl, Orange Bowl, Fiesta Bowl, Sugar Bowl and BCS National Championship Game, which can only accommodate 10 teams.

Of these ten teams, 2 team play for the national championship, while 4 teams are guaranteed to play in the BCS as champions of their respective conferences.

The champions of certain conferences which are guaranteed participation, regardless of BCS ranking, include the ACC, Big 12, Big East, Big Ten, Pac-10 and SEC.

The four remaining selections are euphemistically described as ‘at-large’ (the word ‘large’ clearly stretching the definition to absurd subjective extremes).

As it currently stands the likely BCS match ups stand as follows (I’ve assigned rankings on current polls or reasonable approximations of rankings based on yesterday’s games):

BCS Rankings and Bowls

1. Oklahoma - BCS National Championship (Automatic Bid)

2. Florida - BCS National Champtionship (Automatic Bid)

3. Texas - Fiesta Bowl (Big 12 representative guaranteed)

4. Alabama - Sugar Bowl (SEC representative guaranteed)

5. USC - Rose Bowl (Pac 10 representative guaranteed)

6. Utah - Sugar Bowl (At Large)

7. Texas Tech - No BCS

8. Penn State - Rose Bowl (Pac 10 representative guaranteed)

9. Boise State - No BCS

10. Ohio State - Fiesta Bowl (At Large)

12. Cincinnati - Orange Bowl

19. Virginia Tech - Orange Bowl (ACC Representative guaranteed)

Guess which two teams seem out of place in these so-called Championship games.

By virtue of the BCS rankings Texas Tech (No. 7) and Boise State (No. 9) are excluded to make room for the juggernauts that would be the (No. 12) Bearcats of the mighty Big East and (No. 19) Hokies of Virginia Tech.

Texas Tech is particularly discriminated against due to a technicality that for some inexplicable reason restricts BCS participation to two teams per conference. This rule unduly punishes teams for doing nothing more than playing in a high caliber conference. Therefore, we are not able to participate in the Sugar Bowl, Orange Bowl or Fiesta Bowl.

Furthermore, the BCS does not allow two teams from the same conference to play again in a bowl game which does not decide the national championship. So despite our BCS ranking, Tech loses its chance to play in the Fiesta Bowl in any case and a 10th ranked two-loss team from Ohio State goes instead.

Boise State is excluded because only one team from a non-BCS conference is allowed to be represented in any given year. These conferences include Conference USA, MAC, MWC, Sun Belt and the WAC. So Utah goes bowling while Boise State stays home despite both teams being undefeated and top 10 members of the BCS.

The next most attractive bowl for Texas Tech is of course the Cotton Bowl, where we have a decided advantage with a huge fan base and opportunity to showcase the team to new recruits in the area. However, I would be disappointed if our opponent winds up being the lowly (unranked) Ole Miss Rebels. I would much rather see a match-up that pits us against fellow also rans (No. 9) Boise State. However, because the Cotton Bowl is also tied to the lecherous conference tie in system, we instead would be obligated to play - as it stands - the fourth best team in the SEC instead of (No 15) Georgia who instead will seek victory in the Capital One Bowl against a mediocre (No. 18) Michigan State team to prove - well absolutely nothing.

The solution to this dilemma in my view is not a play-off. I think the regular season has proven to be a challenging enough process that ultimately reveals who the best teams are. At this point in the season, I don’t need to see (No. 1) OU and (No. 8) Penn State to understand who the better team is. No matter what process you define whether it be the top eight teams, 16 teams or 32 teams there will be some degree of subjectivity – just as there is in the NCAA basketball selection process. Somebody always gets left out.

The regular season is good enough provided that we remove the ridiculous guarantees to the so-called power conferences and the pointless restrictions as I have described above and allow the Top 10 finalists to play in the BCS. At the end of a long season, I think football fans across the country would rather see the 1 versus 2, 3 versus 4, 5 versus 6 and so on. If three of these teams are from the top conference in the country so be it. If two of these teams are from non-BCS conferences so be it. If the possible participation of two or more non-BCS teams proves to be too extreme a suggestion for the BCS powers, then modify the weightings to place more emphasis on victories over BCS conference teams (a measure I think would also force the BCS teams to play better non-conference opponents – ie a loss to a BCS conference team is worth more than a victory over a non-BCS team ranked outside of the BCS top 25).

Does the Orange Bowl really believe it is going to have a ratings bonanza on its hands this year? Give me a break. Let’s not be too disappointed that we won’t be attending a BCS game. With only eight of the top ten teams participating, the current BCS, hardly lives up to it billing. There are two changes which could be made to ensure that 10 of the top 10 teams make the BCS. It’s pretty clear to me what those ought to be.

Perhaps, we can start by changing the BCS to its more simplified initials BS which would be the best and most accurate description of what the process really reflects.

Go Red Raiders.

TTU-OU Number Crunching (Advantage TTU)

LondonRaider — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 15:26:13 -0000

I’ve had some time to crunch some TTU and OU numbers by comparing both teams’ performance to their six opponents in the Big 12 this year. TTU and OU have now played five common opponents (UT, NU, KSU, KU, TAM) so there is quite a bit of data to draw upon.

I have not included non-conference opponents, mainly because neither TTU’s or OU’s non-conference opponents are particularly good teams (with the exception of OU’s victory over a very solid TCU team).

I have also opted not to include national figures for defense, because they are a bit misleading. For example OU is currently ranked 51st in the country in overall defense, surrendering 354 yards per game. However, in the Big 12 to date OU is giving up 407 yards per contest. Conversely, Texas Tech is ranked 57th overall giving up 351 yards per contest . In the Big 12 rankings for defense, TTU is actually playing better defense than OU.

I did include the national figures for offense, because those production figures have remained consistent over the course of Big XII play.

The results of the analysis are fairly surprising. I toyed around with the idea of replacing Baylor with TCU, which would have made OU’s numbers worse, but to keep things simple I elected to go with the averages based on Big 12 performances only.

Key Findings

My key conclusion is that our overall chances against OU are much better than the prognosticators are predicting. In fact if this game was not being played in Norman, I am pretty certain we would be favored in this game.

Avoid Turnovers. Our main key to victory will be to avoid turnovers. OU has been extremely effective at generating turnovers, and this ability has been OU’s key to putting opponents away early and often. OU is +10 in turnover margin in its last 6 games, and has generated 4 or more turnovers in its last three victories.

OU's Defense is Vulnerable. Overall OU’s defense is weak. TTU is by far the strongest offense OU has faced this season. OU is giving up an average of over 400 yards per contest. Our advantage on offense is significant. TTU scores more points per possession and does so more frequently than OU.

OU's Offense Tends to Score Early and Often. Despite playing so well in recent weeks (it is time to acknowledge Ruffin’s success), our defense still remains our largest question mark. OU has a tendency to score early. If we are able to contain them in the opening quarters, our probability for victory should improve immensely.

Neverthless, these teams are tightly matched-up, but I think we have a chance to do something special this year. Go Red Raiders!!

Overall

Average Margin of Victory: Tie

(TTU = 23, OU = 22).

Against five common opponents (UT, KSU, KU, NU, TAM) TTU’s aggregate margin of victory is 103 points, while OU’s aggregate margin of victory is 99 points.

Defense

Total Yards Against: Advantage TTU

TTU is yielding an average of 355 yards per contest, while OU is yielding an average of 407 yards per contest.

TTU’s best performance was holding Kansas State to 296 yards. OU’s best performance was holding Baylor to 269 yards. TTU’s worst performance came against Nebraska when the defense yielded 471 yards. OU’s worst performance came against Kansas State when it yielded 550 yards (although OU did generate 5 turnovers in that contest).

Against five common opponents (UT, KSU, KU, NU, TAM), TTU has yielded 352 yards per game while OU has yielded 435 yards per game.

In Big XII contests to date, TTU is yielding slightly less points as a defense than OU. TTU is surrendering an average of 25.2 points per game while OU is giving up about 28.3 points per game.

Turnovers: Advantage OU

OU’s defense has created 15 turnovers, averaging 2.5 take aways per game. TTU has created 13 turnovers averaging 2.2 take aways per game.

However, OU’s takeaway margin +10, while TTU’s is +5.

OU’s defense is opportunistic and dangerous. In OU’s last three victories against KSU, NU and TAM, OU’s defense created 4 turnover or more which has resulted in more possessions for OU and higher overall offensive outputs against its opponents.

Offense

Offensive Efficiency: Advantage TTU

TTU’s offense is far more efficient than OU’s. TTU is averaging 4.10 points per possession while scoring an average of 64% of its possessions. OU is averaging 3.34 points per possession while scoring an average of 50% of its possessions.

TTU’s best offensive showing came against OSU when it scored on 80% of its possessions, while its worst showing came against UT when it scored on 50% of its possessions.

Likewise, OU’s best offensive showing came against Baylor when it scored on 58% of its possessions, while its worst showing also came against UT when it scored on 42% of its possessions.

OU’s poorer offensive efficiency is partially explained by its ability to generate large leads early on in its contests, enabling it play less aggressively in later quarters.

On average OU has scored on 74% of its possessions in the first quarter; 52% of its possessions in the second quarter, 52% of its possessions in the third quarter, and just 10% of its possession in the fourth quarter. By comparison, TTU has scored on 77%, 67%, 65%, 59% of its possessions respectively by quarter.

In OU’s loss against UT, the Sooner offense managed to score on 52%, 52%, 67% and 0% of its possessions respectively by quarter.

For TTU fans, limiting OU’s scoring opportunities early could be a sign of good things to come.

In five games, OU has outscored TTU 294 points to 287. However, OU has benefited from 18 more possessions than TTU which is partially accounted by its ability to create more take aways.

So far this year, OU is ranked second in scoring with 51.4 points per game, followed by TTU which is ranked third at 47.9 points per game.

TTU is ranked second in the nation (behind Tulsa) in overall offense averaging 593 yards per game. Oklahoma is ranked third in the country at 550 yards per game.

TTU leads the nation in average passing yards per game with 433.7 yards per contest, while OU is ranked third in the nation averaging 355.5 yards per game.

OU averages 194.3 yards per game rushing, while TTU averages 132.6 yards per contest.

TTU is ranked third overall on third down conversions - converting on 57.8% of its snaps. OU is ranked 23rd nationally - converting 46.4% of its third downs.

Neither team is shy about going for it on fourth down. TTU has gone for it on 15 occassions and has converted 10 tries succesfully. OU has gone for it on 16 occassions and has converted 8 of its attempts successfully.

Special Teams: Slight Overall Edge to OU

Kick Off Returns: Slight Edge TTU

TTU is averaging 24.7 yards per kick off return. OU is yielding 25.7 yards per kick off return.

OU is averaging 26.7 yards per kick off return. TTU is yielding 22.5 yards per kick off return.

OU has allowed one kick off return for a touchdown (UT – Jordan Shipley). TTU has not allowed a kick off return touchdown this year.

Punt Returns: Advantage OU

TTU is averaging 4.5 yards per punt return. OU is yielding 0.7 yards per punt return.

OU is averaging 11.3 yards per punt return. TTU is allowing 10.9 yards per punt return.

TTU has allowed one punt return for a touchdown (UT – Jordan Shipley). OU has not allowed a punt return touchdown this year.

Field Goals: (Are you ready for this?) Advantage TTU

TTU has scored on 75% of its field goal attempts (6 out of 8 attempts). OU has scored on 50% of its field goal attempts (3 out of 6 attempts).

Extra Points: Advantage OU

OU has scored on 95% of its extra point attempts, connecting on 42 out of 44 attempts. TTU has scored on 90% of its extra point attempts, connecting on 36 out of 40 attempts and has surrendered a two-point return on a blocked field goal attempt (-6 potential points). TTU’s kicking game, however, has improved. TTU is 21 for 21in extra points over its last three contests.

Punting: Tie

OU is averaging 35.3 yards per punt with 8 punts placed within the 20 yard line. TTU is averaging 37.0 yards per punt with 4 punts placed within the 20 yard line.

Our Defense

LondonRaider — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 18:09:49 -0000

Our Defense

As we all know, our defense continues to disappoint. The play of our linebackers and secondary has just been horrible. I am not sure how to diagnose our problems, but can only hope that the second half of the A&M game is a harbinger of better things to come. I can’t understand how our secondary and linebackers always seem to be caught out of position. Personally, I think the schemes are not effective, and the talent level is not of a high enough caliber. Having said that, I think the scheme is more important than talent, and to me so far our performance is not acceptable. To paraphrase Don Rumsfeld, you play with the team you have – but, that doesn’t excuse poor coaching.

Against A&M, the defensive line played well, but the linebackers and secondary have to do their jobs and make plays.

Our defense has surrendered 400 or more yards against Nevada (488) and Nebraska (471). We held KSU to less than 300 yards and A&M to 307 yards. It’s hard to tell what that means, other than our defense is capable of playing very poorly, but has showed some glimpses of being a solid squad.

We are giving up an average of 350 yards a game, which includes our soft preseason schedule, and ranks us at number 58 in the country between Duke and North Carolina (not exactly the best company) - just inside the top half of college football.

According to Fox Sports, we are number 12 in the country against the run (yards per game), but 104th in the country against the pass (yards per game). I think it is fair to say that our rank against the run is probably a function of our rank against the pass (why run when you can pass all day long).

We rank number 43 in points allowed per game, putting us a couple of slots down behind OU and OSU. The 31 points we allowed against Nebraska, was our highest of the year (14 points higher than Missouri allowed).

Needless to say the jury is out on our man Ruffin.

In absolute terms, our defensive numbers are not impressive. However, what the numbers tell us below is that relative to our Big 12 counterparts, our defense is not all that dissimilar in performance thus far. When seen through the lens of defensive performance, our chances of running the table - still a distant thought at this point – actually look somewhat plausible.

Kansas

Kansas is a very winnable game, more so than we may think.

In its losses, Kansas’s defense gave up 674 yards of offense against OU and 458 yards of offense against South Florida. In victories against Iowa State and Sam Houston State, they gave up 375 yards.

Kansas is a worse defensive team than we are. Kansas ranks number 65 in total yards allowed per game; number 30 in rushing yards allowed per game; number 100 in passing yards allowed per game; and number 47 in points allowed per game.

Like us, Kansas has a prolific offense, but also suffers from a weak defense.

If our defense shows up like it did against Kansas State and second half A&M, we should win this game in a walk. If we have a Nebraska-like performance, then it will be up to our offense to win a shoot out (which we are capable of doing).

I think the odds-makers are seriously underestimating our ability to win this game.

Texas

Texas’ defense gave up 435 yards against OU and 412 yards against UTEP, but held Missouri to 350+ yards and has manhandled everyone else.

Texas is ranked 39 in yards allowed per game; number 2 in rushing yards allowed per game; but 112 versus the pass – slightly higher than SMU; and 25 in points allowed

Should we beat Kansas, this is a game where there is complete asymmetry - our number one passing offense against UT’s terrible passing defense.

If our defense holds up – a huge IF at this point – this is a game we can steal.

With home field advantage, we have a better chance of winning this game than we think.

Oklahoma State

Oklahoma State’s defense has given up 400 yards plus of total offense to Houston, Troy, Texas A&M (who we held to 306 yards), and Missouri. In games versus inferior teams (Washington State, Missouri State and Baylor) Oklahoma State held their opponents to around 200 yards.

However, the defense is opportunistic. Against Troy and Missouri, the Cowboys created 3 turnovers. Against Texas A&M, they created 5 turnovers.

Oklahoma State is ranked number 47 in yards allowed per game number 35 against the run; number 78 against the pass; and number 40 in points allowed.

My final analysis is that OK State’s ranking is pretty flimsy. Like us, they have a prolific offense, but also a weak defense. In a shoot-out, I take TTU at home.

OK State’s biggest victory has been against Missouri, who should finish 10-2 - so we have to acknowledge that it’s a big win, and the reason why they are now ranked ahead of us for the moment.

OK State still has to play UT, Tech and OU (not to mention @ CU). They also play ISU. I predict losses against the first three and a loss at CU. That should take OSU down to 8-4 for the year – ranked, but not the 7th best team in the country.

This is a game we should win at home.

Oklahoma

OU has the best defense in the Big 12 South.

OU ranks number 34 in yards per game; 32 in rushing yards allowed per game; 62 in passing yards allowed per game; and 41 in points allowed per game.

In my mind, it is too early for predictions at this point. This one’s on the road, and we’ll just have to see where our team is at that point.

Go Tech!!

House of Cards?

LondonRaider — Sun, 12 Oct 2008 12:28:26 -0000

I''ve got this bad feeling in my stomach that I just can't seem to get rid of.

I have the same feeling about Tech as I did about the housing market two years ago. The record might look good, but there is something seriously wrong with the fundamentals.

Let's start with obvious, our defense.

Rah Rah Ruffin Doctrine

Is there a more impotent defense amongst the Top 10 teams than Tech's? I saw three fundamental things last night that I'm not sure are correctable.

1) Lack of talent. Our corners are incapable of covering receivers. We play 5 to 10 yards off the ball, and routinely allow 8 and 10 yard catches. There is no bump and run. No physical play whatsover. After the first five games of the season, Ruffin must have concluded that if we can't cover man to man (and risk giving up the big play) then we will keep everything in front of us. Of course our secondary can't stop the short game either.

So if we can't cover man to man, and we are not fast enough to run a shut down zone defense, where does that leave us? I'm not a defense coordinator, but what prevents the defensive line, and maybe an extra linebacker from blitzing when the secondary is playing zone? If you can't apply the rush, then all you are doing is giving the opposing team's qbs and receivers all day to find a lane, pick a spot and fire the ball. How does that package allow you to stop the running game?

2) Fear. The defense has no pride. Every close up shot I saw of the defense, showed players with either the deer-in-headlights or the emporer-has-no-clothes look in their eyes (take your pick). The last touchdown with two minutes left when Nebraska marched down our home field and tied the game showed absolutely no heart. Rah rah only takes you so far.

3) Poor Coaching. It's time to find a new defensive coordinator. Ruffin has been a disappointment since last season. Ruffin has publicly stated that he has reduced the number of packages to allow the defense to play more aggressively and instinctively. Did anyone see either of these benefits last night? Over the past six games?

Ruffin's other stated approach is to constantly rotate bodies as much as possible to the keep the defense fresh. If I'm an offensive coordinator (which I'm not), the first thing I do is run a hurry-up offense to keep the defense from rotating players (which is precisely what Nebraska did).

Defense is not just about naked aggression, it requires strategy and outthinking the offense. How many times did we get burned on misdirection plays (that is when our secondary was not being surgically picked apart by Ganz)? Imagine applying the Ruffin Doctrine against a more talented OK State and Texas team.

Did anyone have any doubt that Nebraska would go for the fake field goal down 24-10 and facing the prospect of trading field goals for touchdowns the rest of the game? How many brain cells does it take to not see that one coming. It's not just gut check time. It's brain check time too.

Clutch?

Our offense was superb, BUT I am getting a little tired of the drive-killing third down and 2,3 or 4 where we hand off the ball to Shannon Woods and he gets tackled for a 2 yard loss leading to a three and out series. With the momentum swinging to Nebraska, and the game being a difference between a three and out, and marching down the field to emphatically put the game out of reach, we call a draw play (by the way, if you routinely call the same play in the same situation enough times, I don't think it counts as a draw play anymore).

Can you imagine, with the game on the line, Brett Favre handing off the ball to his smallest contact-shy running back? Is that what champions do? Harrell and Crabtree are All-Americans. Batch is a bull who had shown no fear about going up the middle. So that's the play we call? At what point do we not call Shannon Woods out for being soft? At what point do we recognize all of the above and stop running the same useless play?

Before the incredible 4th and 4 play call, we ran the same sort of shovel pass draw on the preceding third down (if memory serves) . That play could have been our entire season. How many times do you think we can afford to call these sorts of timid plays (not to mention heroic-but-low probability desperation heaves) and still go to a BCS game?

I truly wonder if Harrell has the killer instinct to make him a true champion. The Insight Bowl comebacks only happen when you are inconsistent in the first place. I would have expected our All American to put the game on his back with everything on the line, show leadership poise, and take command. What is behind Harrell's sudden gunslinger-to-girly-man transformations that he seems to experience at least once a game?

"Special" Teams

Corona should have cost us the game. Not on field goals, mind you, but on two extra points. I can't remember a worse kicker at Tech going back to - hell, have we ever had such a lousy kicker? The only kickers I vaguely recall being this bad were the Florida State kickers from the early nineties that cost Bowden his championships then.

Why are the snapper, the holder and the kicker not up 24 hours a day perfecting a 15 yard kick? Corona's performance would not be acceptable even at the high school level. He had the Shaquille-O'Neal-I-sure-hope to-God-this- free- throw-goes-in-look on his face everytime he kicked the ball.

Whoever the other kid is, however bad he might be in practice, he deserves a shot on the field. Corona may nail every kick in practice, but he has demostrated - amply - that he can't do the same thing during the game.

This is not the season where I want to end up having to get bailed out by the (Paulson) Poulon Weedeater Bowl.

Like the housing market over the past five years, Is our 2008 season built on nothing more than a house of cards?

Preseason is Over

LondonRaider — Sun, 21 Sep 2008 18:14:15 -0000

Looking ahead to our next few games, I’m feeling alot better this week than I was after the Nevada game.

It’s never 100% accurate to look at how your competition fared and extrapolate those results to how you might might play against the same teams, but nevertheless, I’ve always found it to be a useful indicator.

Missouri’s dismantling of Nevada still greatly concerns me, especially considering our struggles against Nevada’s inexperienced defense. Our defense surrendered 488 yards to Nevada, while Missouri’ defense allowed 362 yard. Fortunately, we won’t be playing Missouri until the Big 12 Championship game, and even Missouri is capable of having a bad day (see this week’s Buffalo game).

Kansas State lost badly to Louisville this week. Their three touchdowns, however, came on 50+ yard passing plays, so our defense will have to be sharp. We’ve shown a weakness against the big play in our first two games, and I hope we’ve gotten better in this respect.

Nebraska has done nothing to impress me just yet – pedestrian wins versus Western Michigan, San Jose State and New Mexico State. Let’s see how they do against Virginia Tech next week, before we’re really able to say anything (you might same the same thing about us, but I’d like to believe we’re a much better team).

Texas A&M just looks awful. I don’t think we’re looking at a ‘Norman Dale at Hoosiers turnaround scenario’ . They remind me a lot more of Notre Dame and Charlie Weiss.

Finally, Kansas lost a tough one to South Florida. But this week, South Florida beat Florida International (hey, didn’t we hang 70 on those guys recently?) by a paltry 17-9. Although I am still convinced that Kansas will suffer a big drop off this season, Kansas looks more beatable to me than they did a couple of weeks ago.

If we play to our potential, I think we’ve got a legitimate shot at 8-0 heading into the Texas game, but now we’re playing against ‘real’ teams, so let’s hope a lot of the kinks have been worked out of the offense (I thought the earlier post on the route running problems by the inside receivers was really interesting).

Let’s also be honest, our defense remains a big question mark. Even though they’ve played well against SMU and UMass (I would characterize the perfomance against Nevada as ‘gutsy’, but that’s different than being dominating or even solid), I don’t think we know enough still.

Go Red Raiders. Stay focused!!

(I posted this in another section, but I am not sure if it got posted, so sorry for the duplicate)