Diaries

Here's a five word diary.

Bonus:

So this is it... my first diary! Thanks to those of you who requested that I get the points necessary to post this :-).

EDIT: Since photobucket was resizing my images, I changed the links over to a new site. This will look a LOT better on your monitor!

When I saw that monuMental wouldn't be posting his amazing weekly wallpapers this season, I took it upon myself to carry the torch until his triumphant return. He has since stated that he'll be creating rivalry wallpapers, so I'll take a break on those weeks. Since I've been hijacking posts to upload my wallpapers, here's a review of the ones I've created so far for those of you who've missed them:

Western Michigan "Denard vs Broncos"

Eastern Michigan "Eagle Dove"

San Diego State "Aztec Art"

...which brings us to this week's wallpaper, Minnesota's "Brown Jug Kool-Aid"

4:3 

wide

I do sort of wish that my first diary featured a better wallpaper, but I was having a difficult time adding in a background and went with the minimilistic "monuMental's penn state" look. I've noticed a lot of people commenting on the resemblance of our current 4-0 season to those of the last couple of years. Others, however, have commented on the relative down year the B1G is having and how we have a much better chance of steam-rolling through the conference than in recent years. I'm "cautiously optimistic" myself and thought we could all enjoy a big ol' jug of Kool-Aid to celebrate our success so far. Enjoy!

PS: Here's a link to my wallpaper album, if you or I miss a posting on Monday.

We all have that friend who is a 1 to 5 handicap golfer. You know, the guy you can NEVER beat. Enter the handicap system in golf. It allows players of varying abilities to play against each other on a level playing field. What does the handicap system have to do with college football? Enter the point spreads for each college football game. Besides allowing sports bettors the opportunity to wager on games, a point spread allows for a comparison talent of each team. Maybe it only provides useful stats for betting purposes or for numbers guys, like myself, but it does provide a measure of comparison.

Besides the actual records of each time, I have included the record of the team against the spread (in the first column). I have also broken down the records for each team as a favorite and as an underdog. In the event a line was zero, I considered the home team to be a favorite. This review is limited to BCS conferences and the MAC.

No picks here, look for them in the “Upset Watch: Week 5” on Tuesday.

Note: Stats referenced only include NCAA recognized games.

Big Ten

Wisconsin has been impressive on the offensive side of the ball, averaging 48.5 points per game. North Carolina State transfer Russell Wilson (1,136 yards passing 75.8% completion 12 total TD), running backs James C. White (303 yards 6.7/carry and 3 TD) and Montee Ball (360 yards 5.7/carry and 10 total TD) have been instrumental in the Badgers success this season both on the field and those favoring the Badgers in the sportsbook.

Opening Line:@ Wisconsin -9.5 Nebraska.

Michigan’s scoring defense is greatly improved from this point last year. Through four games last year, the Wolverines averaged giving up 23 points. This year, the Wolverines have given up an average of 13.67 points (13^th in all of NCAA); the Wolverines have also recovered 7 fumbles (tied for 6^th in all of NCAA).

Opening Line:@ Michigan -20.5 Minnesota.

Penn State has struggled against the spread (and on the field, to some extent), due to the lack of a starting quarterback. Matt McGloin (421 passing yards 63% completion and 3 TD) and Rob Bolden (388 passing yards 46.5% completion, 1 TD and 3 INT) have split time at quarterback, causing uncertainty leading into the Big Ten schedule.

Opening Line:Penn State -17.5 @ Indiana.

SEC

Florida will have a better idea of their expectations for this year, facing two of the top three teams in the country the next two weeks. The Gators won by similar margins over Tennessee and Kentucky last year, before Alabama teed off on Florida, 31-6. Chris Rainey (625 total yards and 4 total TD) and Jeff Demps (320 rushing yards and 4 TD) have paced the Gators this year.

Opening Line:@ Florida +4.5 Alabama.

Big 12

Baylor’s struggles on defense have continued, having given up 31 to Rice and 48 to TCU (in a first career start for Casey Paschall). With that said, through a comparable schedule through this point last year, Baylor averaged 26 points per game. The Bears are averaging 51.33 points per game this year. Robert Griffin III was 55/99 (55.55%) 703 passing 107 rushing and 5 total TD through this point in 2010. Compare that to 70/82 (85.4%) 962 passing 167 rushing and 14 total TD. RG III’s play will determine the ceiling for Baylor’s success, this year.

Opening Line:Baylor -3.5 @ Kansas State.

ACC

Georgia Tech’s number two rushing offense has spurred the Yellow Jackets to success on the field and for those favoring the Ramblin’ Wreck. Through four games last year, Georgia Tech averaged 240.5 yards on the ground; this year, the Yellow Jackets have averaged 398.75 yards on the ground this year, leading to a 22 point scoring average increase from this year, as compared with last year.

Opening Line:Georgia Tech -12.0 @ North Carolina State.

North Carolina State has played two FCS opponents and failed to cover against either of them. The Wolfpack are adjusting to life without Russell Wilson, who led the team to 9 wins, last season, the most since 2002. The Wolfpack defense has averaged giving up 408 yards, placing them at 11^th in total defense in the ACC.

Opening Line:@ North Carolina State +12.0 @ Georgia Tech.

PAC-12

Stanford picked up right where they left off last year, starting off 3-0 on the field (last year, the Cardinal were 2-1 ATS, failing to cover against Sacramento State). The Cardinal are 18^th in total offense, averaging 481 yards per game, largely behind the arm of Andrew Luck (786 passing 67.1% completion and 9 total TD) and the legs of Stepfan Taylor (289 rushing 5.4/carry and 2 TD).

Opening Line: @ Stanford -21.5 UCLA.

Oregon State’s nightmare-ish season continued this past week, with a loss at home to UCLA. A quarterback controversy is in full-swing in Corvallis, and the Beavers are looking to replace Jacquizz Rodgers and hoping to get his brother, James Rodgers, healthy. Losing the twins explains the drop in points per game from 26.67 in the first three games in 2010 to 15.67 so far in 2011.

Opening Line:Oregon State +17.0 @ Arizona State.

Big East

Rutgers has put together a nice start to the season with a quality win over MAC-East favorite Ohio University and almost knocking off North Carolina in Chapel Hill. The last time the Scarlet Knights started off 3-0 ATS was 2006, when they went 10-3 ATS (11-2 straight up). Mohamed Sanu (363 receiving 10.1/catch and 4 TD) has led the Rutgers offense. Rutgers and Sanu will have their work cut out for them this week, as they have lost to the Orange the past two years, and failed to cover ATS both times.

Opening Line: Rutgers +3.0 @ Syracuse.

MAC

Temple was one play away from knocking off Penn State for the first time since 1941! Despite the 14-10 loss, Temple knocked off Maryland in College Park this past weekend, in impressive fashion. RB Bernard Pierce (496 rushing 5.7/carry and 12 TD) has led the Owls on offense. The Temple defense has been equally impressive, ranking 15^th in total defense, giving up only 273 yards per game (rushing, 12^th, 75.25/game; passing, 38^th, 197.75/game).

Opening Line: @Temple -7.0 Toledo.

Central Michigan has fallen apart the past two games. After leading Kentucky at half 13-6 in week 2, the Chips have been outscored 110-21, only outscoring Western Michigan in the fourth quarter in week 3, 7-6. Central Michigan ranks 114^th in total offense, with 278.25 yards/game (rushing, 108^th, 86/game; passing, 53^rd, 207.75/game).

Opening Line:@ Central Michigan +10.0 Northern Illinois.

Just a little bit more action this week after literally nothing happened the week prior, but there is a new feature on the rankings, per request—the "average average"—which is simply the average for each team of the four recruiting service averages. That sentence made zero sense, and may have broken the record for most times using the word 'average' in a sentence, but I think you get the idea. Action since last rankings:

9-16-11: Illinois picks up Vontrell Williams.
9-18-11: Notre Dame picks up Chris Brown.
9-19-11: Nebraska picks up Tommy Armstrong.
9-23-11: Purdue picks up Danny Anthrop.

[EDIT: I had a minor formula error in the spreadsheet I use to do these rankings that threw off the averages for Notre Dame and Indiana—those numbers have been fixed, and Notre Dame has been moved back up to #2 in the rankings.]

Chart? Chart:

*ESPN doesn't rate JUCOs, so Isaac Fruechte (Minnesota), Darius Stroud (Indiana), Steffon Martin and Devin Smith (Purdue) are exluded from their respective team averages.
^Averages are calculated based on the raw numbers and then rounded, so the numbers above may not average out exactly.

On to the full data, after the jump.

No change for the Wolverines.

The Irish pick up WR/ATH Chris Brown, who's a three-star across the board.

The Nittany Lions don't pick up any recruits, but Austin Johnson (three stars), Jake Kiley (two stars), and Derek Dowrey (three stars) get ranked by 24/7. After looking at the averages, I haven't found a good reason not to jump Penn State above Notre Dame. A mathematical messup would qualify as a good reason. Oops.

No change for the Buckeyes.

No new commits for the Spartans. Kodi Keiler picks up three stars from 24/7.

No change for the Badgers. Reggie Mitchell and Arthur Goldberg both get three-star ratings from 24/7.

No change for the Hoosiers. Darius Stroud garners three-star ratings from both Rivals and 24/7.

No change for the Wildcats. Jaylen Prater and Chris Fitzpatrick pick up two-star ratings from Scout and ESPN, respectively. Ian Park gets three stars and Connor Mahoney two from 24/7.

No change for the Hawkeyes. Connor Kornbrath earns a two-star rating from 24/7, giving Iowa an even 3.00 average across the board from the four services.

Several ratings additions from 24/7 for the Gophers, as Jamel Harbison, Jordan Hinojosa, Maxx Williams, and Drew Davis all pick up three stars while Eric Murray, Isaac Fruechte, and Barrington Morris get two stars.

The Boilermakers add Lafayette receiver Danny Anthrop.

The Huskers (finally!) add another recruit in three-star Tommy Armstrong, who has a very fitting name for a quarterback.

The Illini grab three-star defensive tackle Vontrell Williams. Elliot Faerber and Tyler Barton each pick up two-star ratings from 24/7, and Barton also gets two stars from Scout.

I've been thinking about rivalries lately, as I think they're among the most endearing features of college sports.  It struck me that there are some similarities across rivalries - often rooted in the types of schools involved - that enable a rough classification into certain types of rivalries (and the feelings involved).

These aren't perfect or complete, of course, and I'm sure that I've mislabeled a couple of the rivalries here, but just for fun...

Rivalry Type #1:  The one-game season

For some schools, a rivalry game is of such importance relative to the rest of the schedule that these season-defining games will be the one event that energizes each school’s fan base.  However, the animosity between schools is relatively mild, probably because people attend these schools for reasons other than sports.  The rivalry game affords students and alumni a fun annual foray into passionate intercollegiate athletics, but the rivalry is revered more than the rival is detested.

Examples:
-- Army vs. Navy
-- Harvard vs. Yale
-- Lehigh vs. Lafayette

Rivalry Type #2:  In-state “big brother” vs. “little brother”

If one rivalry type is inherently unhealthy for all involved, it’s that between two schools from the same state where one school seems almost objectively preferable to prospective students.  This is where the dominant school is both academically superior and more relevant on the national sports scene.  The dominant school’s attitude toward its rival, epitomized by Mike Hart’s “little brother” comments, is dismissive irritation, as the dominant school rolls its eyes at its rival’s obsession with the dominant school and delusion about the subordinate school’s national relevance.  The subordinate school’s attitude toward its rival, epitomized by Rufus the Bobcat’s premeditated attack on Brutus, is visceral hatred.  The structural danger in these rivalries is that the dominant school essentially holds a trump card – superior academics / higher admissions standards – so the subordinate school finds itself in an unwinnable battle for respect from its condescending in-state rival.

Examples:
-- Michigan vs. Michigan State
-- Texas vs. Texas Tech
-- Oregon vs. Oregon State

Rivalry Type #3:  In-state twin brothers

Similar to Rivalry Type #2 in that these rivalries often pit family members, friends, and neighbors against one another, these rivalries lack the clear hierarchy of the “big brother” – “little brother” rivalries.  The schools have similar attitudes toward one another, and the driving motivation is bragging rights, since fans and alumni of one school find themselves in constant contact with fans and alumni of the rival school.  Like Rivalry Type #2, these games tend to be much more relevant locally than nationally, but they’re true, fair battles that dominate headlines in that state as the rivalry game approaches.

Examples:
-- Auburn vs. Alabama
-- Ole Miss vs. Mississippi State
-- Arizona vs. Arizona State

Rivalry Type #4:  Neighboring state public schools

With a different dynamic from in-state rivalries, public schools from neighboring states can produce rivalries that are more unifying than divisive.  Here, daily contact with rival fans is less inevitable, and local newspapers, stores, television stations, and public figures openly cheer for one side over the other.  The competition is about athletics, not academics, since in-state tuition differences and preferences for in-state schools mean that students/alumni of each school commonly will not consider the other.  School pride and state pride often become intertwined, and the best of Rivalry Type #4 comes from schools with comparably (and highly) powerful football programs.

Examples:
-- Michigan vs. Ohio State
-- Texas vs. Oklahoma
-- Pitt vs. West Virginia
-- Florida vs. Georgia

Rivalry Type #5:  Academically strong public vs. private

One notable class of rivalries involves geographically proximate stellar schools, where one is public and the other private.  Many of our oldest universities are among our best universities, so these schools typically have long histories that include extended periods during which the competing schools had exceptional teams.  Today, these rivalries are defined by a mutual respect for the other institution and distaste for the type of person who would attend it.  Even when one school is arguably better academically than the other, the schools are different enough culturally – but each strong enough academically – that reasonable people could choose to attend each school.  The distaste for the type of person in one’s rival school is most commonly voiced by the public school, which finds its private school rival stuffy, entitled, uppity, and sheltered.

Examples:
-- UCLA vs. USC
-- Cal vs. Stanford
-- UNC vs. Duke (basketball)
-- Michigan vs. Notre Dame

“Learn from yesterday, live for today, hope for tomorrow. The important thing is not to stop questioning.” 
Albert Einstein

Learn from yesterday...

Michigan is undefeated again in September and yet I am nervous for the future. Perhaps because similar starts to the last two seasons filled me with unbridled optimism for Michigan's return to the nations' elite.  Mayhap the reason is that for a second week in a row I felt like the final score did not accurately reflect the play on the field. Michigan won by a lot but didn't get much play for their reserves, Devin Gardner most notably.  I am made nervous by Denard's heavy load running the ball and seeming inability to hit the broad side of a barn down field, to the sideline, or even on screen passes.  Looking closer at each aspect of Michigan's play: 

1. Michigan's defense is the most awesome "bend-but-don't-break" defense I have ever seen so far.  Seriously, allowing 11 trips by SDSU's offense into Michigan territory and yielding only 7 points is both extremely lucky (no doubt at least partly true) and also a part of a trend at this point.  Turnovers are the key of course, coupled with keeping the play in front of them/not giving up the big play.  SDSU was the first team to win the TO battle against Michigan this season, but only because the stat doesn't include TOs on downs.  Michigan forced three of those by jumping out to a big lead and by getting big stops at points on the field where SDSU was almost compelled to go for it on 4th down.  The reason for this success is owed in large part to the longest plays given up Saturday being 30 yards, both on the ground and through the air.  This defense makes big plays, but more importantly they give themselves enough chances to make them.
2. Michigan's offense continued to slide towards one-dimensional with each poorly throw ball by Denard Robinson.  Luckily Michigan didn't need to throw much with SDSU's defense yielding over 7 yards per carry, having no answer for Denard's legs.  It was also good to see the OLine open up some running lanes for Smith and Fitz en route to 320 yards on the ground.  I fear that the level of competition and lack of SDSU size up front made the running game look better than it should have been.
3. Michigan needs Hagerup back.  Maybe Hagerup isn't the only answer.  Wile's kicks are improving it would seem, both on KOs and punts, possibly because his nerves are settling down.  Kickoffs regularly made it to the goal line and only 1 of 4 punts was returned for much while they averaged 49 yards per with a long of only 51(!).  Now if we can get him a chance at the FG duties, maybe he can be an upgrade over Gibbons (doesn't seem possible to be much worse).
4. The coaching staff continues to impress in all phases of the game, save possibly being willing to give Gardner a shot at a real drive.  Borges again went with what is known to work until Michigan had a couple of scores lead before inevitably trying to force Denard under center.  Mattison had a great game plan dialed up, containing Ronnie Hillman and rattling Lindley with constant pressure.  For the first time this year it seemed like our D-Backs were the most suspect part of Michigan's defense, as they should be, and even there we have a few rays of hope.

Live for Today…

Several Michigan players should bask in the glow of their accomplishments:

1.      Denard Robinson – With a stat line so much like last game it is spooky, Denard again dazzled with his untied shoes en route to 200 yards on the ground.  Again he couldn't seem to get in rhythm with his receivers, looking like shadow of 2010 Denard at least in terms of efficiency.  Over 20 carries/game is going to get him killed, but maybe not as much a last year.  He seems to have a better idea of how not to get lit up, getting out of bounds or to the ground before contact much more often than last year.

2.     Vincent Smith and Fitzgerald Toussaint – If these two continue to rotate in that would seem fine the way they both are playing.  Both looked tough to bring down Saturday, breaking tackles and picking through traffic for YAC.  Smith in particular looks to have that shiftiness back that excited the senses so much in 2009.  Fitz should also be the #1 choice at FB, with his tough running style, decent size, and good ball security.  

3.     Michigan Defensive Line – These guys looked great finally, creating constant pressure in the SDSU backfield and forcing Lindley into less than 50% completions.  Roh came alive, sacking and forcing a fumble.  RVB was in there making big plays, and Mike Martin was held 100 bazillion times or else he would have sent Lindley to the hospital I have no doubt.  This performance was extra encouraging since the SDSU OLine is supposedly pretty good.

4.     Blake Countess – In his first really extended appearance, this kid showed why his hype is justified.  I'm sure some completions were on his head for being out of position, but I saw him blanketing a receiver on a slant (that was completed despite great coverage) and making a great play on a fade to keep SDSU at 7 points to finish.  I look forward to what UFR has to say about Countess's play as a whole.

5.     Matt Wile – As noted above, Wile's play is improving steadily.  I wouldn't be surprised to see him keep punting again next week and hopefully get a shot at the next FG try.

Hope for Tomorrow

Last week I said:

Bask in 3-0 for now, because this team is looking to be on much the same course as last season so far.  I think that our reliance on Denard Robinson will actually help us next week against SDSU, because our offense will not look like what Rocky Long remembers a Borges offense looking like.  Then again, our run defense might get gutted by Ronnie Hillman.  SDSU will put a scare into us at least.

I think I was right on the first part (at least theoretically, does anyone really have an answer for Shoelace?) while being thankfully wrong on the second (though Hillman did rack up pretty good numbers, he didn't kill us), and now we can bask in 4-0 and another undefeated September.  So what can we hang our hopes on that this season is not doomed to end up like the last two?

I'll just stick with what I thought a week ago:

Our biggest hope for the whole season may actually be Borges's willingness to adapt to Denard's strengths as well as Mattison's willingness to use naked aggression to mask our defense's glaring flaws.  

The only caveat to this reason to hope is that we are going to need a QB that can hit is receivers in BIG 10 play.  The athletic abilities of BIG 10 defenders are going to both bottle up and punish Denard if he can't keep them honest through the air.  With Denard's struggles throwing so far, I am both surprised and made nervous by Devin Gardner's lack of playing time.  Is Gardner just not impressing enough in practice that Hoke/Borges feel it important to get him some meaningful snaps?  Is the success of the team so far goading the coaches into keeping all of the eggs in the Denard GO! GO! GO! basket?

Though it would be a knock against the coaches in my mind, I hope it is the latter.  I mean, maybe Denard lights it up in practice, completing ropes 30 yards to the sideline and hitting his TEs in stride.  At some point this is going to have to become reality in games or else the one-dimensional nature of our offense will get Denard hurt, and leave us wondering yet again what could have been.

Go Blue and stay safe.