Diaries

This idea was a lot more fun last week, when nobody was projecting Michigan into the TicketCity bowl.  At least CBS still loves us!

Last week, I looked at 6 sources (ESPN Blogs, ESPN Schlabach, ESPN Edwards, CBS, BTN, and CFN/Scout).  Four had Michigan going to the Cap1, CBS said Fiesta, and Rittenberg said Insight.  For reference, here is my google doc with Week 9 projections for the other Big Ten teams, as well as for BCS games.  (ignore the fact that Week 11 is already filled out - just a copy/paste so I wouldn't have to rewrite a lot of the matchups/opponents if I didn't have to). 

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Aot7bzViRlbidGFjbFF6U0ljWjRwbmdvM0MydlpsdUE

Now, on to week 10 (which covers games through this past weekend).  And yes, chart. 

   Ok, I haIn summary, Rittenberg kept Michigan in the Insight; CBS kept Michigan in the Fiesta (!); Brad Edwards kept Michigan in the Cap1; CFN and Schlabach dropped Michigan from Cap1 to Outback; and BTN dropped Michigan all the way from the Cap1 to the TicketCity bowl (screw you, Dienhart!).  And not that you can average this sort of thing, but seems like the Outback is a likely destination for our Wolverines.  And yeah, I'd be happy with that

And last week, 4/6 had Wisco in the Rose, with the other 2 having msu and Nebraska.  This week, it's 3 Wisco and 3 msu.  

Anyway, if this seems interesting, I'll do it again the next few weeks until bowl selection.  Also, let me know if there are other bowl projections out there worth adding.  I'm not doing Joe Schmo's blog or anything, but a local or national media outlet's projections might be interesting.

EDIT: source links:

Rittenberg: http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id/37700/big-ten-bowl-projections-week-10 

Schlabach/Edwards: http://espn.go.com/college-football/bowls/projections 

CBS: http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/bowls/predictions 

BTN: http://btn.com/tag/bowl-projections/ 

CFN/Scout: http://cfn.scout.com/2/557866.html 

On Twitter earlier this evening, somebody made note of something they'd read earlier this year that seemed relevant once again. "2011: The Lost Season".  When first made, the statement was tongue in cheek, impilying that so many schools had pending NCAA investigations that the entire season would be lost to eliminated records. Years from now, people would look at the college record books and wonder, "Why didn't anyone play football in 2011?"

In the wake of the PSU Sexual Abuse scandal, the phrase had taken on new meaning for the tweeter. To him, the scandals had amassed and amassed and reached a point where the 2011 season is better forgotten. The missing season is now a season in which the sport itself has gone missing, buried in a mess of too many lies. Too much hurt. Too much distrust and too much heartache. The season has spent too much time beneath a cloak wielding a dagger to be trusted.

I can't argue that point. Even though Michigan seems to have done everything right, I can't stand the abuse of young men willing to work hard and play harder, week in and week out by not following the rules, making illicit deals, or worse. It belittles the game to the point it's almsot easier to simply forget the year and hope another one like it never comes along. Right now, it hurts to be a fan of the system that creates and fosters these situations. We are very small but essential cogs in a very large machine that has corrupted its purpose. Something once as pure and simple as providing young men an opportunity to grow academically and cheer them on while they grow athletically has become very dark and sinister. It is ruled by money, unearned success and criminal behavior. And we are a part of it. It would feel a lot better to forget the whole season and pretend we support something much more pure, much more wonderful and idellyc. Right now, that's not the truth, but it would be easier.

It would be easier by far to declare this a lost season.

But to do such a thing would be to do a huge diservice to the very reason we are fans in the first place. At the heart of this broken, vile, soot-spewing machine lies the same power sources as there ever has been. Driven only by the desire for an education and the chance to play just a little bit longer, the young men at the heart of the game take the field every Saturday for joy and opportunity. Oh, some have pro-careers in mind. Some are less innocent than others, but it doesn't really matter. Not one is playing for position, wealth or illicit opportunity. Not one is playing because someone offered them a contract, or agreed to ignore and hide some wrongdoing on their part. They are playing because the NCAA told them they could earn a free education, develop themselves and maybe market themselves to football's next level, simply because they showed an apittude for it. And that, that is pure. A bit business-esque, perhaps. And certianly theres money to be made there. We can even argue about how that money is distributed, and what is fair.

It doesn't matter, really. There is no cloak and no darkness when the students take the field. They are playing for their university, and their university is educating them, and at that moment, nothing else needs enter the picture. At that moment, the machine is working. At that moment, everything is laid bare. There is no cloak and no dagger.

Two-Thousand-Eleven is a dark, dark season for college football. There have been misdeeds of every kind, and mistrust is present at every level. But so long as those young men run out of the tunnel to play for Michigan, and so long as we sing The Victors to support THEM, there will be an element of pure in a sea of filth.

This is not a lost season, because we still sing the national anthem and cheer the kickoff.

LSU field-goaled Alabama to death, with LSU remaining 1, but Alabama didn’t fall far (now #3). Boise State looks to be out of the BCS National Championship picture, as Alabama remains in front of the Broncos. The winner of Stanford/Oregon will likely be in front of Boise State, too.

For you sports gamblers out there:

The Top 25 teams were 9-11 ATS last week, with last week’s Top 10 teams going 5-5. To date, current top 10 teams are 58-31 ATS (65.2% success rate; 5-1 as underdogs) and current top 25 teams are 134-85-3 ATS (61.0% success rate; 22-17-1 as underdogs).

As typical with the Watch, we’ll review the picks from last week, noting the bad picks, and point out a few games to give the underdog some credit in, even if it is only in Vegas. We’ll also look at a sure-fire favorite and attempt to preview the Michigan game.

Be sure to check out my blog, Before Visiting the Sportsbook, throughout the week, for more content.

Recap:

Wins

@ Iowa (6-3) +4.0 Michigan (7-2). Result: Iowa 24 Michigan 16 [Props to One Inch Woody for correctly predicting Michigan would not cover].

Kansas (2-7) +14.5 @ Iowa State (5-4). Result: Iowa State 13 Kansas 10.

@ Kentucky (4-5) +1.0 Ole Miss (2-7). Result: Kentucky 30 Ole Miss 13.

@ Rutgers (6-3) +2.5 South Florida (4-4). Result: Rutgers 20 South Florida 17.

@ Oklahoma (8-1) -13.0 Texas A&M (5-4). Result: Oklahoma 41 Texas A&M 25.

Losses

Washington State (3-6) +10.0 @ California (5-4). Result: California 30 Washington State 7.

Duke (3-6) +15.0 @ Miami Florida (5-4). Result: Miami Florida 49 Duke 14.

Poster Picks

Jjlenny3 added one this week, with Houston covering (-27; 56-13).

Trebor added three wins, with Northwestern ATS (+17.5; 28-25), Oregon (-15; 34-17), and Stanford (-21; 38-13).

Picktown GoBlue also had Northwestern.

This Week

Two games for Northwest Ohio kick off Week 11, with Northern Illinois visiting Bowling Green (8:00 PM/EST/ESPN2/ESPN3) and Western Michigan visiting Toledo (8:00 PM/EST/ESPNU) on Tuesday night. The MAC takes the spotlight on Wednesday night, with Miami Ohio visiting Philadelphia, to take on Temple (8:00 PM/EST/ESPN/ESPN3). Three games on Thursday, with Ohio University visiting Mt. Pleasant, playing disappointing Central Michigan (7:30 PM/EST/ESPNU); (#10) Virginia Tech taking on (#21) Georgia Tech, in a Coastal Division battle (8:00 PM/EST/ESPN/ESPN3) (since 2006, the first year of the ACC Championship game, Virginia Tech has been in the title game four times [3-1] and Georgia Tech twice [1-1], with no other Coastal teams taking part); and (#11) Houston visiting the Crescent City, playing Tulane (8:00 PM/EST). Friday is a Big East showdown, with Syracuse hoping to become bowl eligible against South Florida (8:00 PM/EST/ESPN2/ESPN3).

Only three games involving top 25 teams with week. (#12) Penn State plays host to (#19) Nebraska, both of which are coming off embarrassing weeks (12:00 PM/EST/ESPN/ESPN3) (but Penn State’s being more serious). (#15) Georgia hosts (#20) Auburn Between the Hedges (3:30 PM/EST/CBS). Gameday is live from Palo Alto, for (#4) Stanford against (#7) Oregon (8:00 PM/EST/ABC).

Upset Watch

Western Kentucky (5-4) +41.5 @ LSU (9-0). The Hilltoppers are 101^st in total offense (56^th rushing, 104^th passing); LSU is 87^th (38^th rushing, 102^nd passing). Western Kentucky is 52^nd in total defense (46^th rushing, 75^th passing); the Tigers are 3^rd (2^nd rushing, 9^th passing). LSU is 35-0 all time against Sun Belt Conference teams with an average MOV of 41. Coming off the Alabama game, since 2006, LSU is 5-0, but only 2-3 ATS (2-2 ATS against non-conference opponents and 1-1 ATS against Sun Belt). LSU is 7-2 ATS, including 5-2 as a favorite; Western Kentucky is 7-2 ATS, including 7-1 as an underdog. Les Miles is 31-1 in non-conference play with LSU; 18-12 ATS in non-conference play (7-10 since 2008). Western Kentucky became Division 1 in 2008, since then they are 9-36, but 22-20 ATS. My only reluctance on taking Western Kentucky is that they are 1-4 ATS against SEC teams since 2008. The over/under is 49½, so bettors seem to think a 46-4, or 46-3, final is about right. I’d be surprised if the ‘Toppers score more than 3, but LSU will be on an emotional letdown, and I’d be surprised if they score 42 or more. Take Western Kentucky to cover.

Kentucky (4-5) +13.0 @ Vanderbilt (4-5)The Wildcats are 117^th in total offense (79^th rushing, 111^th passing); Vanderbilt is 103^rd (60^th rushing, 106^th passing). Kentucky is 70^th in total defense (100^th rushing, 28^th passing); the Commodores are 30^th (44^th rushing, 41^st passing). Since 1997, Kentucky is 11-3 SU against Vanderbilt and 9-4 ATS (3-0 ATS as an underdog). Kentucky is 4-5 ATS this year (2-3 as an underdog, while Vanderbilt is 7-2 ATS (3-0 as a favorite). Since their bye week, Kentucky is 2-1 SU and 2-1 ATS, Vanderbilt is 1-4 SU, but 4-1 ATS, losing back-to-back conference games by a combined 8 points. Since QB Jordan Rodgers (959 passing yards, 51.1% completion 5 passing TDs, but 5 INTs) started against Alabama, Vanderbilt’s offense has averaged 24.2 points/game. In the last three games, Rodgers is averaging 241 passing yards and 53.7% completion; has 4 passing TDs, but 2 INTs. I like Vanderbilt to win, despite Kentucky having more talent overall. Take Kentucky with the points.

Miami Florida (5-4) +9.0 @ Florida State (6-3). The Hurricanes are 67^th in total offense (59^th rushing, 66^th passing); Florida State is 45^th (91^st rushing, 18^th passing). Miami Florida is 64^th in total defense (81^st rushing, 39^th passing); the Seminoles are 4^th (3^rd rushing, 22^nd passing). The underdog has won six straight in this series and the visiting team has won five straight. In the past six years, five of the six meetings have been decided by eight points or less (since 1997, 10 of the last 15 meetings have been decided by eight points or less). Since 1997, Miami Florida is 8-7 SU against Florida State and 8-7 ATS. Since 2004, Miami Florida is 33-29 in the ACC, but 26-36 ATS in conference (11-10 ATS as an underdog, 9-8 ATS as a road underdog). Since 2004, Florida State is 38-26 in the ACC, but 27-37 ATS in conference (27-38 ATS as favorite, 17-25 ATS as a home favorite). This year, Florida State is 5-4 ATS, including 5-2 as a favorite; Miami Florida is 5-4 ATS, including 2-1 as an underdog. I’ll pass on projecting a winner of this one, based on the recent history, but Miami Florida should keep it closer than the spread indicates. Take Miami Florida with the points.

Washington (6-3) +12.5 @ USC (7-2).The Huskies are 51^st in total offense (52^nd rushing, 43^rd passing); USC is 26^th (61^st rushing, 20^th passing). Washington is 93^rd in total defense (52^nd rushing, 113^th passing); the Trojans are 56^th (18^th rushing, 104^th passing). Since 1997, Washington is 4-8 SU against USC, but 6-6 ATS (since 2005, 5-1 ATS). Four of the last six meetings have been decided by six points or less. USC Coach Lane Kiffin is 22-13 SU (13-10 in conference play), 17-18 ATS (13-10 ATS in conference play), and 11-14 ATS as favorite (7-10 ATS as a home favorite). Washington Coach Steve Sarkisian is 18-16 SU (13-11 in conference play), 19-15 ATS (13-11 ATS in conference play), and 10-11 ATS as an underdog (5-7 ATS as a road underdog). Washington is 6-3 ATS this year, including 3-2 as an underdog; USC is 5-4 ATS, including 3-3 as a favorite. This game has the potential to be a shootout, with two porous pass defenses. Washington should keep this closer than the spread indicates. Take Washington with the points.

@ Mississippi (2-7) +2.5 Louisiana Tech (5-4).The Rebels are 113^th in total offense (84^th rushing, 107^th passing); Louisiana Tech is 57^th (65^th rushing, 49^th passing). Mississippi is 98^th in total defense (110^th rushing, 57^th passing); the Bulldogs are 60^th (14^th rushing, 108^th passing). Mississippi is 8-1 all time against Louisiana Tech, but the two teams have only met once since 1993, a 2007 meeting in Oxford, with the Rebels winning 24-0. Over the nine game series, Mississippi has an average MOV of 12.8 (18.2-5.4). Louisiana Tech Coach Sonny Dykes is 10-11 SU (2-6 in non-conference play), 12-9 ATS (4-4 ATS in non-conference play), and 4-4 ATS as favorite (2-1 ATS as a road favorite). Since 2001, Mississippi Coach Houston Nutt is 76-58 SU (37-9 in non-conference play), 65-62 ATS (22-17 ATS in non-conference play), and 27-20 ATS as an underdog (7-9 ATS as a home underdog). Mississippi is 3-6 ATS this year, including 3-3 as an underdog; Louisiana Tech is 7-2 ATS, including 2-2 as a favorite. Houston Nutt has lost two non-conference games only once since 1998 (coached Boise State in 1997 – then Big West member; Arkansas from 1998-2007, and Mississippi from 2008-2011), losing two non-conference games in 2006, to USC and Wisconsin; Mississippi is 2-1 in non-conference this season. Despite Mississippi being a bad football team, Houston Nutt rarely loses non-conference games. Take Mississippi with the points, and to win.

Sure-fire Favorite

@ SMU (6-3) -8.5 Navy (3-6).The Mustangs are 49^th in total offense (97^th rushing, 15^th passing); Navy is 43^rd (3^rd rushing, 119^th passing). SMU is 35^th in total defense (18^th rushing, 81^st passing); the Midshipmen are 88^th (87^th rushing, 65^th passing). The two teams meet for the Gansz Trophy; Navy has held the trophy since its inception in 2009, and Navy leads the series 8-7. Since 1997, SMU is 1-5 against Navy, but 2-4 ATS (1-1 ATS as a favorite).

Since 2001, SMU Coach June Jones is 86-54 SU (46-25 in non-conference play), 65-65-2 ATS (24-21 ATS in non-conference play), and 35-40-1 ATS as favorite (25-27-1 ATS as a home favorite). Navy Coach Ken Niumatalolo is 30-20 SU, 24-22-1 ATS, and 11-6 ATS as an underdog (9-5 ATS as a road underdog). Navy is 5-4 ATS this year, including 2-1 as an underdog; SMU is 5-4 ATS, including 4-1 as a favorite. In six losses Navy’s average MOD is 13 (but 4 losses by a combined 8 points). Navy’s defense isn’t great, and SMU is capable of minimizing damage from the triple option. Take SMU to cover.

Gameday Prediction

Ron Zook is 34-48 straight up at Illinois. Coach Zook is 23-20 at home (5-1 this year), 18-35 against the Big Ten (2-3 this year), and 4-19 against the top 25 (1-1 this year). Coach Zook is 37-41 ATS and 20-14 as an underdog ATS at Illinois since 2005 (7-7 underdog ATS at home).

Brady Hoke is 54-52 straight up (13-12 at San Diego State, 34-38 at Ball State). Coach Hoke is 59-42-3 ATS and 31-17-2 against the spread as a favorite. 

Illinois’s defense is ranked 6^th (8^th passing [177.22 yards/game], 15^th rushing [102.89 yards/game]). Michigan’s offense is ranked 28^th (82^nd passing [208.10 yards/game], 14^th rushing [237.50 yards/game]).

Illinois’s offense is ranked 55^th (84^th passing [204.10 yards/game], 26^th rushing [198.44 yards/game]). Michigan’s defense is ranked 28^th (26^th passing [193.13 yards/game], 54^th rushing [142.63 yards/game]).

Since 1997, Michigan is 7-3 straight up against Iowa (4-6 ATS). Michigan has averaged 440 offensive yards (compare with 341.5 offensive yards against Iowa) with 254.6 of those being passing (compare with 220 against Iowa) and 185.4 rushing (compare with 121.5 rushing against Iowa) since 1997.

Michigan hasn’t won the turnover margin against Illinois since 2004 (2-2 in games since then).

Illinois could pass for Rodney Dangerfield; they just get no respect. Granted, Illinois’s conference foes to date are a combined 10-11 on Big Ten (remaining opponents, including Michigan, are a combined 7-8 in Big Ten), the Fighting Illini have given up an average of 20.6 points/game in Big Ten play (16 points/game in last three – 0-3 over that stretch). Since 1997, Illinois has averaged giving up 36.7 points/game to Michigan (33.33 points/game, excluding last year), compared with 27.9 to Northwestern (14 meetings), 22.2 to Indiana (14 meetings), 27.75 to Ohio (12 meetings), 32.8 to Purdue (10 meetings), and 28.9 to Penn State (12 meetings), not including this year.

The Illini have recovered 8 fumbles to date (T-36^th in NCAA) and have forced 8 interceptions (T-56^th in NCAA). With that said, Illinois has been atrocious in net punting, averaging only 33.8 yards/punt (105^th in NCAA); Michigan has been worse (32.9 yards/punt; 114^th in NCAA).

@ Illinois +1.5 Michigan.

Illinois 27 Michigan 24.

Who ya got?

What The Future Holds: Is it possible that positive turnover margins in the next 3 games will help Michigan pull out victories? Yes. Is it probable? Uh, no and here's why.

If I have learned anything over the past several years of analyzing turnovers is that turnovers are primarily performance based and not just luck! Excellent teams tend to have large positive turnover margins, poor teams tend to have large negative turnover margins, and meh teams tend to have meh turnover margins. Right now the TOM is +4 and it looks like M will end the year with a meh TOM (+/- 4).

That said, M has been incredibly lucky this year and the likelihood that any lucky streak continues is extremely small. M currently has 14 fumble recoveries on a total of just 16 fumbles by the opposition. This is an 88% recovery rate when the average recovery rate is around 50%. In fact, M has forced only 10 fumbles – the opponents have flat out dropped the ball 6 times. In the last 2 games, there have been no fumbles (forced or non-forced) by the opponent – the only 2 games that M has not recovered at least 1 fumble. M has intercepted the ball just twice in the last 6 games. M has relatively inexperienced DBs and the potential that the interception rate (ranked #89 nationally) will improve is also not likely. Unfortunately, with the current offensive scheme, the likelihood that interceptions thrown by M will decrease in the next 3 games is not good.

Illinois is ranked #93 in turnovers lost and will be our best potential for a turnover margin in our favor. Nebraska is ranked #33 and osu #8 in turnovers lost. Turnover margins for the last two games are likely to be problematic.

Synopsis for Turnovers: For the first time this year, turnovers were a significant factor in Michigan losing the game. The situational analysis of the TOs resulted in a disadvantage of 6.03 expected points for Michigan. Although the game ended with M behind by 8 points, the score was close enough that I concluded the TOs were a significant factor in the loss. I used the same reasoning to conclude that TOs were a significant factor in the win against WMU.

For the year, Michigan has lost 16 TOs (ranked #63) but has gained 20 TOs (ranked #17) for a turnover margin of +4 or 0.44 per game (ranked #31). Michigan is ranked #4 in fumbles lost but is #109 in interceptions thrown. The 14 fumbles recovered is ranked #1 and is the reason the turnover margin is excellent instead of horrible.

DRob had another interception and lost his first fumble of the year. There remain 17 different defensive players that have either forced a fumble, recovered a fumble, or intercepted a pass.

Synopsis for Expected Point (EP) Analysis: Michigan has a net of 1 game won due to TOs.

(See the Section on Gory Details below for how the adjustment for Expected Points (EP) is calculated.)

National Rankings: Remember the chart and table below includes the WMU game and will NOT be the same as the (incorrect) NCAA Rankings.

The Gory Details

Details for Turnovers: Here is overall summary for all games by player (data in yellow was affected by this week's game).

Expected Point (EP) Analysis: Basically, the probability of scoring depends on the line of scrimmage for the offense. Therefore, the impact of a TO also depends on the yard line where the TO is lost and the yard line where the TO is gained. Each turnover may result in an immediate lost opportunity for the team committing the TO and a potential gain in field position by the opponent. Both of these components can vary dramatically based upon the down when the TO occurred, the yards the TO is returned, and whether the TO was a fumble or an interception.

Here are the details for the game.

The analysis is a bit tricky because: (A) the TO may directly result in lost EP for the offense but (B) only modifies the EP for the team gaining the TO because the team gaining the TO would have gotten another possession even without the TO (due to a punt, KO after a TD, KO after a field goal, etc.). The Net EP Gain must take into account the potential EP gain without the TO. The EP gain without the turnover is based on where the field position would have been for the next possession if the TO had not occurred.

The expected point calculations are based on data from Brian Fremeau at BCFToys (he also posts at Football Outsiders). Fremeau's data reflects all offensive possessions played in 2007-2010 FBS vs. FBS games. I "smoothed" the actual data.

Here is a summary of the smoothed expected points.

The Ugly Game of the Week has deja vu all over again. So after last weeks' MAC-tion, featuring such games as Northern Illinois 63, Toledo 60  and Miami 35, Akron 3, we get another 4 midweek MAC games. I just can't do it again. You know how after you look at your monitor all day, it starts looking funny? Well, I swear I've looked at Western Michigan versus Toledo already. So instead, since the season is starting to wind down, this week starts Bad Bowl Watch 2011. Who's looking to be bowl eligible, and what does that mean for our faith in humanity? (Note to self: do not google "deja vu" at work. Or at home.) So instead I will haunt your dreams.

First off, Temple is 5-4 and 3-3 in the MAC. This week they play Miami(the hockey one). Temple has been to three bowls in their history: 1935, 1979 and 2009. They need to win at least one of their remaining games against Miami, Army or Kent State and they're in. Remember this is the same Temple that was forced out of the Big East in 2004 for a "lack of commitment to the football program from university officials." The MAC has three bowl bids, and there's a huge pileup at 5-4 vying for the 4th slot, so this is really up in the air. In MAC-land, bowl eligible != bowl bound. But the MAC gets to choose from such exotic locales as the Famous Idaho Potato Bowl, the Little Caesars Bowl Bowl, and  GoDaddy.com Bowl  featuring MAC versus someone from the Sun Belt. This is an amazing image, by the way. Look closer.

Syracuse is 5-4, 1-3 in the Big East. This week they play USF to try for their 6th win. Their bowl eligibility may come down to the season finale agsinst Pitt, who is currently 4-5. I think there is still a scenario where Syracuse can win the Big East and get a BCS bid. I'm all for this. The Big East gets five bowl bids, so Syracuse has to climb over the likes of UConn and Pitt or Rutgers to win their way into the Beef O'Brady Bowl or the Champs Sports Bowl. Whoo? Whoo. Note that "orange optical illusion" doesn't come up with much, so this is all I've got: