The College Football Thread 2006

[DanS]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Of course you can. When you are looking at who was the better team, you figure that a team that doesn't turnover the ball much won't do it again. If they played again, the chances of OSU having 3 turnovers is very, very slim. If Michigan did end up winning, it would be a case of the worse team winning (and yes, that does happen, irrespective of the idiots who claim whatever team won was the better team simply because they won).

I agree with this, although I admit that it's an inexact science. ND gave up only 12 turnovers the whole year, but 5 were in the Michigan game. That colors my perception of Michigan as compared to USC, for instance.

That said, major props to Michigan for giving up only 10 turnovers during the season -- the best in the nation.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Though, to be fair, Dan, and perhaps it is a factor of the turnovers, but UM outgained ND by 95 yards... including limiting ND to 4 yards rushing on 17 carries. Secondly, while ND had 241 yards passing, that was on 49 attempts, for an average of 4.9 yards per pass.

Undoubtably the game would have been closer without so many turnovers, but I do think Michigan were the better team in that one.

[DanS]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Though, to be fair, Dan, and perhaps it is a factor of the turnovers, but UM outgained ND by 95 yards... including limiting ND to 4 yards rushing on 17 carries. Secondly, while ND had 241 yards passing, that was on 49 attempts, for an average of 4.9 yards per pass.

Undoubtably the game would have been closer without so many turnovers, but I do think Michigan were the better team in that one.

You can't separate the stats from the turnovers, since not turning the ball over will give you many more opportunities to make plays. And if you get down big early via turnovers, you will be primarily passing the rest of the day.

Undoubtedly, Michigan was the better team that day, but Notre Dame would have had a chance to win (i.e., within 2 scores near the end of the game) without all of the uncharacteristic turnovers.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by DanS
You can't separate the stats from the turnovers, since not turning the ball over will give you many more opportunities to make plays. And if you get down big early via turnovers, you will be primarily passing the rest of the day.

Undoubtedly, Michigan was the better team that day, but Notre Dame would have had a chance to win without all of the uncharacteristic turnovers.

That's what I said . But the stats can still tell you things even with the turnovers being taken into account. For one, ND couldn't run the ball all day. Even without the turnovers, I don't see that changing. And that, by itself, would lead to more passing.

Though, interestingly, it seems ND's problem all year has been putting the ball in the end zone. In games like against UCLA, they dominated yardage and time of possession, only to have to pull out a 4th Q comeback. I blame that on the lack of the running game, which really was not good this season.

[DanS]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
That's what I said

Well you didn't shade it quite that way.

I guess it comes down to me seeing a good possibility of winning the Michigan game without the turnovers, even though undoubtedly Michigan was the better team that day.

[DanS]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Though, interestingly, it seems ND's problem all year has been putting the ball in the end zone. In games like against UCLA, they dominated yardage and time of possession, only to have to pull out a 4th Q comeback. I blame that on the lack of the running game, which really was not good this season.

I'm much more charitable to the running game than you are. It appears that the running game is all about the number of attempts rather the total yards gained. After all, an offense could be on the field all day if it ran the ball 3.4 yards per carry. And for a 4-down coach like Weis, you really don't have to accrue many yards at all in order to be effective in your running game. See, e.g., last year's ND-USC game, where the average was under 3 yards a carry -- it's hard not to call that game a coaching masterpiece.

ND's offensive problem this year (inasmuch as it has had problems) has been 1st down. If you don't gain 3 or 4 yards on 1st down, you will be behind the 8-ball for 2nd and 3rd down. Drives are killed by unproductive 1st downs. Most teams run more than pass on 1st down, so for them indeed too many 2nd and 3rd and longs would mean that the running game is the culprit. But ND passes as much as runs on 1st down. For ND, I would look to something more general. Like inconsistent O-line play, both run and pass.

[GhengisFarb™]

I'm just happy Oklahoma got to a BCS bowl this year. Didn't think that was going to happen. I just hope I get to watch it, I only got to watch 3 Oklahoma games this season.

What does the DoD have against college football? This is the second year in a row that they activated me during football season.

[Ned]

USC is now a 1.5 point favorite over Michigan. USC essentially is at home, which would give it 3 points for homefield. That means that the oddsmakers think that Michigna is better than USC by about 2.5 points on a neutral field.

Still no odds on Florida - Ohio State. I'd say, OSU by 7. If that is the line, essentially the public is stating their belief that if Florida and Michigan would meet on a neutal field, Michigan would be favored - by about 4.

[SlowwHand]

I have 8 points!

[SlowwHand]

I don't know if it's league capable, nor do I know if it's pay, but Fox Sports has Bowl Pick 'em.

http://tinyurl.com/ybggxc

[Tuberski]

Originally posted by Ned
USC is now a 1.5 point favorite over Michigan. USC essentially is at home, which would give it 3 points for homefield. That means that the oddsmakers think that Michigna is better than USC by about 2.5 points on a neutral field.

Still no odds on Florida - Ohio State. I'd say, OSU by 7. If that is the line, essentially the public is stating their belief that if Florida and Michigan would meet on a neutal field, Michigan would be favored - by about 4.

Everything I've ever heard say that homefield is worth 3 points.

So Michigan would be favored by 1.5 points on a neutral field.

ACK!

[TCO]

Originally posted by Ned
USC is now a 1.5 point favorite over Michigan. USC essentially is at home, which would give it 3 points for homefield. That means that the oddsmakers think that Michigna is better than USC by about 2.5 points on a neutral field.

Still no odds on Florida - Ohio State. I'd say, OSU by 7. If that is the line, essentially the public is stating their belief that if Florida and Michigan would meet on a neutal field, Michigan would be favored - by about 4.

You are such a *****.

[Tuberski]

Everything you need to know about the Razorbacks:

ACK!

[Tuberski]

Although I looked up the Razorback roster and number 65 is, I swear to god, Demarcus Love.



ACK!

[Guynemer]

From what I've read, Michigan is the 1.5 point favorite over USC... ?